|
In Memory of Erick Manny Chocolate Jesus? Mmmmmmm Chocolate! Cheney and Obama kissing cousins? Is Fred Thompson bending the rules? War Supporters....Here's your chance! ...but we already knew this, didn't we? We all knew Senator Ted was corrupt... Pope Attacks Freedom of Speech "Forget Big Brother".....Every one else is watching. The Bush Administration is destroying records.... May 07 June 07 July 07 August 07 September 07 October 07 November 07 December 07 January 08 February 08 March 08 April 08 May 08 June 08 July 08 August 08 September 08 October 08 November 08 December 08 January 09
RSS 2.0![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Share! |
|
|
Chocolate Jesus? Mmmmmmm Chocolate!
Naked chocolate Jesus rises again
Wed Oct 17, 2007 12:38pm EDT By Daniel Trotta NEW YORK (Reuters) - A life-size chocolate sculpture of a naked Jesus will finally be displayed in New York starting in late October, seven months after an outcry by Roman Catholics forced a different gallery to cancel its exhibition. The chocolate Jesus will be joined by sculptures of several fully clothed saints, but the Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights said it will not protest because, unlike before, there are no plans to put the "anatomically correct" Jesus in public view during Holy Week. The Proposition gallery in Manhattan's Chelsea neighborhood will present "Chocolate Saints ... Sweet Jesus," an exhibition timed to coincide with All Saints' Day on November 1. The show will run October 27 to November 24. Back in March, the chocolate Jesus by artist Cosimo Cavallaro was to be exhibited in a street-level window of the Roger Smith Lab Gallery in Midtown Manhattan, giving casual passers-by a view of Jesus's private parts. Protests, including a call to boycott the affiliated Roger Smith Hotel, forced the gallery to scrap the showing. "We still don't approve but the conditions have changed," said Kiera McCaffrey, spokeswoman for the Catholic organization. The new exhibition will take place indoors in a neighborhood full of art galleries, she said. Images on the Proposition gallery's Web site (http://www.theproposition.c...) show the work suspended in air, depicting Jesus as if on the cross. A gallery statement said Cavallaro was raised as a Catholic altar boy and questioned church precepts but always held a fondness for Holy Communion. "Remembering the mystical/transcendental quality and rushes of memory associated with the Catholic wafer received during Holy Communion, he recalls equating that ritual of ecstasy to his own experience of chocolate," the statement said. The flap recalled another New York clash between art and religion. In 1999, then-Mayor Rudolph Giuliani tried to withdraw a grant from the Brooklyn Museum of Art over a painting depicting the Virgin Mary as a black woman splattered with elephant dung and adorned with cut-outs from pornographic magazines. © Reuters 2006. All rights reserved. Republication or redistribution of Reuters content, including by caching, framing or similar means, is expressly prohibited without the prior written consent of Reuters. Reuters and the Reuters sphere logo are registered trademarks and trademarks of the Reuters group of companies around the world. Reuters journalists are subject to the Reuters Editorial Handbook which requires fair presentation and disclosure of relevant interests. 113 comments from 12 users
posted by
GotREALITY
on Oct 18, 2007 at 12:34 PM
posted by
robbwillis
on Oct 18, 2007 at 12:47 PM
posted by
sagefever
on Oct 18, 2007 at 01:33 PM
posted by
TSM
on Oct 18, 2007 at 01:58 PM
I wonder if the Catholic church would complain if it were a chocolate Jesus molesting an alter boy. Or would they just want it covered up?
posted by
blognroll
on Oct 18, 2007 at 02:14 PM
posted by
GotREALITY
on Oct 18, 2007 at 02:20 PM
posted by
randomfactor
on Oct 18, 2007 at 02:21 PM
That's exactly the right amount, BLT. Are you saying religions should get a break no other group does out of the starting gate? Why? If I wanted to put forth a theory that human beings are actually Martians who've been banished from the home planet, are you obliged to repect those opinions without a shred of proof? The mockery comes because religions still insist on the unearned respect. . Is there something inherently disrespectful about chocolate? posted by
robbwillis
on Oct 18, 2007 at 02:28 PM
And that cat's not going back into the bag either unless those that want a theocracy are successful. Of course, religions could throw out the obvious whoppers that make such easy targets for mockers, but that wouldn't be much fun. A recent letter to the editor up here was wondering about the bananna slugs indigenous to Humboldt County. When Noah gathered all the animals for the ark, did the two slugs have to crawl all the way to the Middle East and back again?
posted by
blognroll
on Oct 18, 2007 at 02:36 PM
It's about being sensitive to those who might be offended even if you are not offended by the same things they are. The attitude now towards anybody who is offended by these types of images is "SCREW YOU!" Yet the same people who have no problem offending Christians or Catholics throw a fit if you wish them Merry Christmas before first consulting with them on whether or not they share the same faith. If you expect others to be tolerant and respectful of your sensitive issues, then aren't you obligated to show the same sort of sensitivity to those whom you disagree with? posted by
randomfactor
on Oct 18, 2007 at 02:43 PM
Hence the proposal to put the "In God We Trust" posters in every classroom--a big "screw you" to those of any other faith. . You are, indeed, entitled to the respect you show others. If wished a Merry Christmas or told they're praying for me, I thank people. If forced to help pay for a religious display on public grounds, I oppose. posted by
blognroll
on Oct 18, 2007 at 02:48 PM
posted by
robbwillis
on Oct 18, 2007 at 03:54 PM
posted by
JesusSmokedABowl
on Oct 18, 2007 at 04:06 PM
What about a painting of Jesus smoking a bowl?
posted by
randomfactor
on Oct 18, 2007 at 04:19 PM
Too late on the latter, Robb. . "Compromise" does not apply to civil rights. "Taken into consideration" does not mean "brushed aside by the majority." posted by
blognroll
on Oct 18, 2007 at 04:25 PM
All I am saying is that if somebody is offended by something, don't automatically dismiss that person as "looney," but, at the very least, listen to that person's point of view with an opened mind. Is that asking too much? More than anything else, these days, people just need to be listened to and validated. You don't have to agree with somebody to make a statement that expresses validation. posted by
woofwoof
on Oct 18, 2007 at 04:36 PM
I don't care if it rains or freezes, long as I got my chocolate Jesus, on the dashboard of my car. Ok it was "plastic" in the song sung by Paul Newman in Cool Hand Luke, but just the same... Now, listen to Heywood Banks singing, Big Butter Jesus....youtube.com/watch   posted by
robbwillis
on Oct 18, 2007 at 04:41 PM
posted by
randomfactor
on Oct 18, 2007 at 04:45 PM
BLT, if that person has decided I am "a tool of the devil," I have already opened my mind sufficiently in their presence. . In my America, everyone gets a voice in deciding things. But the first time anyone says "it says in the Bible..." or "the Martian thought-broadcasts told me..." they get relegated to the kiddie table. Amplification: The Bible is a fine work of poetry, and quoting it to frame an argument is perfectly legitimate. But "we must do it this way because the Bible says so" gets you the folding chair with the paper plates while the grown-ups do the real turkey-carving. posted by
randomfactor
on Oct 18, 2007 at 06:36 PM
posted by
johnburnssucks
on Oct 18, 2007 at 07:57 PM
What about a painting of Jesus smoking a bowl?
Is there one? My sister works at the Getty; a few years ago they had one of Renoir's "B-grade" paintings on loan for a year. It was worth $18 million. Maybe they'll consider displaying a toking "son of man." A stoner Jesus might draw some big crowds! posted by
ChicoEsquela
on Oct 18, 2007 at 08:33 PM
Give it up Blognroll. It makes them feel "superior" to make light of the mere plebian 'believers" you are not an "intellectual" of course they are self ascribed "intellectuals" its the only place they can attain such an appellation talk about intellectual incest recessive idea-genes personified they are an intellectually enclosed society and cannot see the error of their ways Luddites revisted posted by
GotREALITY
on Oct 18, 2007 at 10:27 PM
posted by
ChicoEsquela
on Oct 18, 2007 at 10:33 PM
posted by
ChicoEsquela
on Oct 18, 2007 at 10:38 PM
of course not they could get beheaded the Libs are deathly afraid of the Muslims you see, the Muslims will act out Christians are afraid the neo-luddite anti-tech Algore socialist types will get us back to the 19th century as quick as they can and let the Muslims have them all in Burkas and Prayer Rugs.............. (all under the guise of being "progressive" -- haha -- nothing could be further from the real truth!) posted by
ChicoEsquela
on Oct 18, 2007 at 10:45 PM
libs are afraid of Muslims they cannot control them within the current rubric of political correctness they have created plus they know the Muslims are essentially and fundamentally violent in defense of their faith currently Christians and Jews are passive posted by
GotREALITY
on Oct 19, 2007 at 07:33 AM
posted by
Hardliner4freedom
on Oct 19, 2007 at 07:39 AM
Well, everyone needs to remember that these blogs are open to the mentally ill, which is why one should always limit the amount of personal information posted. Our friend has already created an array of new screen names, because he already sees him getting himself booted from this one. Suggestion to the blog programmers: Add the ability to ban people by confirmation email address. It still won't stop the unstable types forever, but it adds the extra work of creating a new email address for each new name. posted by
ChicoEsquela
on Oct 19, 2007 at 08:27 AM
progressives are really regressives there GotR you can't seem to grasp your own Orwellian doublespeak concept perhaps that is because it is your own MO. But you have shown your abilities at basic logic before Thats primarily why it is difficult to believe you teach at CSUB and as for "hard"?liner ? To the truly ignorant (try as they might to be viewed as an "intellectual") their superiors will always seem mentally ill. Its like a chimp contemplating differential equations or fluid dynamics concepts. I'm sure they would conclude "its just crazy!" posted by
randomfactor
on Oct 19, 2007 at 08:31 AM
Chico, there was once a computer program called Parry which was designed to simulate the limited thinking of paranoid patients. He was more interesting than you, because his programmers were more skilled than yours. posted by
ChicoEsquela
on Oct 19, 2007 at 08:34 AM
posted by
randomfactor
on Oct 19, 2007 at 08:36 AM
posted by
GotREALITY
on Oct 19, 2007 at 08:41 AM
Why is it that you persist with the ad hominem attacks chico, queets, or whatever your name is? I really don't care whether you believe it or not. For now on I will chuckle every time I enter the classroom. [edit] "progressives are really regressives there GotR" ~now who is "double speaking." Nice one senor baboso posted by
johnburnssucks
on Oct 19, 2007 at 08:42 AM
...praying that the global warming won't uncover Noah's ark
Maybe it will also uncover the town of Whoville, and, who knows, maybe even Fred and Wilma Flintstone's house! posted by
ChicoEsquela
on Oct 19, 2007 at 08:43 AM
Your students will too GotR (chuckle as you enter that is -- they already have been, you are just too OTL to know it) posted by
randomfactor
on Oct 19, 2007 at 08:44 AM
posted by
GotREALITY
on Oct 19, 2007 at 08:48 AM
posted by
ChicoEsquela
on Oct 19, 2007 at 08:49 AM
I never knew that CSUB would become: An EMPLOYER OF LAST RESORT GotR Its really too bad. At one time it had a chance to be something other than a joke as an institution of higher learning. Some decent geologists and accountants have come out of there I doubt you teach in either of those disciplines though they require the ability to actually understand concepts and actually be accountable for applying them posted by
randomfactor
on Oct 19, 2007 at 08:49 AM
posted by
randomfactor
on Oct 19, 2007 at 08:51 AM
posted by
GotREALITY
on Oct 19, 2007 at 08:51 AM
posted by
robbwillis
on Oct 19, 2007 at 08:52 AM
I bet the Church will take a dim view of global warming if and when some missing links thaw out of the ice instead of Noah's Ark. Wouldn't be surprised to hear them call Al Gore satanic if they haven't already.
posted by
GotREALITY
on Oct 19, 2007 at 08:54 AM
posted by
randomfactor
on Oct 19, 2007 at 08:55 AM
Chico, you know perfectly well that the Employer of Last Resort is, in fact, the United States Military. Alas--it was not always so. . Of course, there's that danger of being sent into the middle of a civil war by a sociopath and then having your promised benefits cut by said sociopath... . Countdown until Cheek tries to twist the above into a "Random doesn't support the troops" Rushmeme in three...two...one... posted by
GotREALITY
on Oct 19, 2007 at 08:56 AM
posted by
ChicoEsquela
on Oct 19, 2007 at 08:56 AM
I'm sure you and your "colleagues" (refer to contemplation statue above) are laughing "our arses at you" [sic] you're truly a genius buddy I'm glad you were able to become gainfully employed teaching greased underwater BB stacking or whatever it is you teach (plug the three prong plug into outlet closest to buffer..........) posted by
ChicoEsquela
on Oct 19, 2007 at 08:59 AM
As Gotr continues his Argumentum ad ignorantiam Give it up buddy Your IQ is showing and its room temp at best posted by
GotREALITY
on Oct 19, 2007 at 09:00 AM
"I'm sure you and your "colleagues" (refer to contemplation statue above) are laughing "our arses at you" [sic]" Oh you truely are a gem! Don't have much of a vocab do ya? Here, free of charge: ROFLMAO! posted by
robbwillis
on Oct 19, 2007 at 09:01 AM
posted by
randomfactor
on Oct 19, 2007 at 09:02 AM
posted by
ChicoEsquela
on Oct 19, 2007 at 09:04 AM
Gotr since you are too dumb for words I'll explain it wasn't the word arse it was you forgot to insert the word "off" as a modifier laughing your arses (or asses) at someone is not a complete thought Well, maybe for you and your "colleagues" (again refer to statue above) posted by GotREALITY on Oct 19, 2007 at 08:51 AMYou just can't make this stuff up. GotR, you obviously have a head impediment. I cannot help you....... BAKERSFIELD.COM HOT TOPICS:Advertisement |