Obama silent over calls to denounce “Piss Christ” “artwork.” “Religious groups are blasting President Obama for not condemning an anti-Christian art display set to appear in NYC…” Well, thethe Empty Chair did say “We reject all efforts to denigrate the religious beliefs of others.” And he means it… sometimes.

if he pissed on a cross, he'd still be in bed

41
Leave a Reply

Please Login to comment
16 Comment threads
25 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
19 Comment authors
Piss Christ On Display « David's Commonplace BookDefHarryMelonBonfire of the AbsurditiesGhostntheMachineThatGuy Recent comment authors
  Subscribe  
Notify of
trackback

[…] Obama silent over calls to denounce “Piss Christ” “artwork” (ihatethemedia.com) […]

ThatOtherGuy
Member
ThatOtherGuy

In bed, he would have gotten a public grant.

trackback

[…] post: Obama silent over calls to denounce “Piss Christ” “artwork” Tags: new format Category: 2010 Elections You can follow any responses to this entry via RSS. […]

PsychoDad
Member

And what is SO outrageously infuriating right now — hear about Sock Puppet’s remarks at the UN?

“The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam. Yet to be credible, those who condemn that slander must also condemn the hate we see when the image of Jesus Christ is desecrated, churches are destroyed, or the Holocaust is denied.”

http://twitchy.com/2012/09/25/obama-future-must-not-belong-to-those-who-slander-the-prophet-of-islam-says-video-more-than-terrorist/

He is vile and shameless.

Alien
Member
Alien

Should we not condemn the desecration of Jesus Christ’s image? I don’t get it. PissChrist is an abuse of free speech. I’ll say it.. of course the artist still has a right, but he’s a shitheel lacking in honor or respect

flashingscotsman
Member

The “artist” does have the right to produce whatever “art” he wants to produce. He doesn’t have the right to have it funded by us, through federal taxes.

Alien
Member
Alien

yeah I don’t get the NEA. I’d vastly prefer that money go to NIF or NASA

Angry Southerner
Member
Angry Southerner

Time’s like this I ask myself: What would Terry Jones do?

deepthinker
Member
deepthinker

Of course the muslim in chief is silent. It attacks Christianity and therefore it’s just fine with him. It only degrades Christ and not the pedaphile muhammad. It would be infringing upon the so called artist 1st Amendment Rights. Lord knows we can’t do that

Dan
Member
Dan

Ya’ll need to go easy here now…based on what n0bama heard in the Right Reverend Jeremiah Wright’s Church – there is little doubt to me that n0bama has never even heard of Jesus Christ – much less of His crucifixion.

poppajoe49
Guest
poppajoe49

I wonder how Obama would react if someone put a picture of him in a jar filled with urine, and called it “Piss Obama”.
Would that still be protected speech?

TheBad
Member
TheBad

Yes.

flashingscotsman
Member

By law, yes. By Obama, no.

Big Al
Member
Big Al

This guy is lucky that he is not a “White Hispanic”.

Progressive Hemrrhoid
Member
Progressive Hemrrhoid

Like “Dear Leader” cares about anything but golf and getting reelected.

Joe
Member
Joe

I’ve typed like 6 different thoughts on this, then deleted them all. We just gotta vote him out in November, then we don’t need to worry about crap like this anymore.

Mitts feet need to be held to the fire, or he will become another Republican Statist that does nothing to stop Tyrannies advance, only slow it for a few years. If we ever elect another Republican that says “I’ve abandoned free-market principles to save the free-market system” we are in trouble.

Alien
Member
Alien
flashingscotsman
Member

That’s an interesting set of pros and cons, Alien. Although the con side of the argument was almost 100% bullshit.

Alien
Member
Alien

i don’t know what happened, this was supposed to be in Tips. I swear i wasn’t high.. I’m always impressed when conservatives make a genuine libertarian argument against MJ prohibition. Everything rings true to my mind

GhostntheMachine
Member
GhostntheMachine

Gotta light?

MDLION
Member
MDLION

Conservatives and Republicans should say: “We want him to condemn this as aggressively as his administration did the movie trailer.” No way he’ll do it and risk upsetting his base who didn’t want “God” in the Democratic platform. And then Republicans should role it into the contraceptive mandate/religious liberty issue and try to pull some Hispanics, Catholics, and evangelicals who would either not vote or vote Democrat. There is at least one poll that says Obama’s support is cratering among Catholics.

TheBad
Member
TheBad

Finally, Zero gets it right. Absolutely correct not to denounce this. Absolutely incorrect to denounce any other expression of free speech as he has so incorrectly done.

PsychoDad
Member

There’s a difference between voicing an objection and asking for common courtesy, and hauling someone away in the middle of the night while blaming him for riots burning a continent on the other side of the world. Also one of the main objections to the work in question now was that it was funded by taxpayers.

Sorry pal, equivalency does not apply here.

TheBad
Member
TheBad

Wow, thumbs down, eh? You want the president to condemn free speech you don’t like? I’m not fond of the whole “Piss Christ” thing, but it is not my place, nor the president’s to condemn. It’s free speech.

I agree that Zero was totally wrong to condemn the free speech of a filmmaker as well. His response to the video should have been the same as it was here: nothing.

Free speech must be free in all directions, folks.

PsychoDad
Member

Re-read my above, very carefully.

hisham
Member
hisham

Mr. TheBad, you’ve got this whole free speech thing totally out of whack. Libtards have obfuscated this issue for so long in this country that you’ve fallen “hook-line-and-sinker” for the popular but suspect interpretation of the First Amendment. These rights have limits up to which you can go before you fall afoul of the repercussions of having stepped over the line. Purposely long jumping over the line and expecting the Constitution to protect you like a net protects someone in a high wire act isn’t quite the same thing. There are limits and they are set by the limits of prudent judeo-christian charity and that’s why you don’t have large swathes of the American christian community rioting every time some fricking idiot decides it’s his turn to jab a stick into our eye-sockets with his or her newest and lowest insult to Christ and to Jews and Christians in general. Try that crap with Islam if you want to show the rest of us just how tough you are…I double dare ya’…cowards! There are limits to your rights and they end at the doorsteps of those you would malign with impunity. When you actually break into a man’s house, (you know, like pissing on an image of Christ and calling it art), then you’re on your own. At that point the Constitution is like the lawyer the state will provide for your defense…too late and underpaid to do you any good. The Judge will tell you that you should have thought of the consequences before you did the deed! However, I’m sure this current administration will provide a fine law firm for this coward shill of an ‘artist’ and he’ll never have to contend with the damage he causes…in this life. His retrial in the hereafter will not be quite so sympathetic! Before you say something totally caustic and uncharitable, you should stop and not say it.

Alien
Member
Alien

Condemnation is free speech as well.. I think you agree with this, but draw the line at anything that smacks of intimidation (arrests, even for parole violators, and military brass making calls..)

Note, however, that the administration was jeered at for condemning the film before news of either acts of intimidation occurred (at least as I recall)

TheBad
Member
TheBad

PsychoDad: my reading comprehension is just fine, thank you. Perhaps you might wish to re-read what I have said and think about it. More below.

hisham: two things. First, in response to:

“When you actually break into a man’s house, (you know, like pissing on an image of Christ and calling it art), then you’re on your own.

Breaking into someone’s home is not even remotely in the same ballpark as pissing on an image of Christ and calling it art. It’s not even the same sport.

“suspect interpretation of the First Amendment.”

Wow. Read slowly and move your lips while you do so if it helps you:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Look, I had the same thing to say when Zero was out condemning a filmmaker instead of the murderers. The same applies here. However, it sounds to me that some here feel as though free speech should apply to those who make statements against islam but not to those who make statements against their beliefs.

One word describes this: hypocrite.

Alien
Member
Alien

i take the view from the other side, but i believe i avoid hypocrisy.. i condemn both pissChrist and the anti-muslim film, both on general principles of douchebaggery. And i will defend to the death my right to condemn douchebaggery.

GhostntheMachine
Member
GhostntheMachine

But the other douchebags have no sense of humor.

poppajoe49
Guest
poppajoe49

Sorry TheBad, it’s not free speech when we are paying for it.
Once we subsidize someone, they will then have to submit themselves to our rules. You don’t get to take my money and then insult me. That’s why I want to see an end to foreign aid also.

RKae
Member
RKae

For a fun read, here’s a spiffy novel about an “artist” who tries to shock a small town by dumping animal crap on a Nativity scene on Christmas:

http://www.amazon.com/Umbrella-Gardeners-House-story-Christmas/dp/0976808862/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1348539341&sr=8-1&keywords=the+umbrella+of+the+gardener%27s+aunt

The author’s from my home town of Tacoma, so it’s a civic pride thing with me. (He’s also damned brilliant, if that matters.)

Kip Hooker
Member

Sounds awesome from the book description.

GhostntheMachine
Member
GhostntheMachine

Wow, think that’s the first time I’ve ever seen spiffy used in a sentence. Well played, Sir.

Kip Hooker
Member

Typical. Some animals are more equal than others.