Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

6 Bumps

Have you heard about the woman who destroyed the "art exibit" of religious icons in sexual acts? adult content

A Stanford University teacher drew pictures of various obscene acts by religious icons, including Muhammed on his knees in front of pig hookers, and Jesus getting a BJ. The town didn't want the exibit, but hiding behind freedom of expression they put it up any way. So a woman who had had enough stormed into the gallery and used a crowbar to smash the glass encasing the drawing, then she tore the picture to bits. Now she's been arrested.
I ask you.... where does free speech end?
I personally believe that if you make remarks or any other form of self expression that is for the purpose of pissing people off to make a name for yourself, then that is NOT covered under freedom of speech. In the real world, if you use fighting words (or in this case pictures), you deserve what you get.

 
brandyj

Asked by brandyj at 4:18 PM on Oct. 8, 2010 in Politics & Current Events

Level 21 (10,228 Credits)
This question is closed.
Answers (136)
  • I have heard about the woman destroying the so called "art" but i hadn't heard specifically what the "art" was! that is sick and wrong IMHO...and i do agree with you that the exhibit was basically made JUST to piss people off and it obviously worked... i feel bad for the lady but i heard last night on the news that an anonymous donor paid her bail :) I think Freedom of Speech is one thing but doing/saying/making something just for the sake of proving that you have the "freedom" to do it is just wrong, that's not what our forefathers intended the bill of rights to be used as >:(
    DreainCO

    Answer by DreainCO at 4:25 PM on Oct. 8, 2010

  • Disagreeing with someone's art doesn't give you the right to smash it up. You have the right not to look at it, or stand outside and tell everyone you think it sucks. But you don't have the right to destroy other people's property because you don't like it.
    SuperChicken

    Answer by SuperChicken at 4:35 PM on Oct. 8, 2010

  • jesse, no you just don't like Muslims and I do have proof of that before you ask


    You....have....proof....of what???? I have never, ever, once said I don't like Muslims. And, I never said you were attacking me. Now, maybe you just can't let things go, but I did say I missed what you pointed out. You may not understand that I admitted my mistake, but you surely can't have proof of any kind that I hate Muslims. I was going off a radio interview that I listened to. Now, you may need to go take a time out and settle down. I will say it again.....I missed that. But, you wouldn't understand this since you never make a mistake and post something that makes absolutely no sense at all do you now, delilah.

    jesse123456

    Answer by jesse123456 at 5:17 PM on Oct. 8, 2010

  • I thought Mohammad was excluded as well. I have no desire to see any of the pictures. IMO that isn't art, it is drama seeking. I guess the artist got the uproar he was looking for.

    I think the woman was in the wrong though.
    yourspecialkid

    Answer by yourspecialkid at 7:05 PM on Oct. 8, 2010

  • Del, other news stories HAVE omitted the word "mohammed" from the reports. Momo, made that point clear. So for jesse to say, "I didn't hear this PART", (meaning 'mohammed" not included in news stories) is a perfectly legit observation based on the OTHER news reports (MSNBC, Fox, Report Herald)... NOT just Fox.. LOL.. Del, I think your over sensitive emotions have gotten the best of you... LOL
    grlygrlz2

    Answer by grlygrlz2 at 9:41 PM on Oct. 8, 2010

  • I didn't hear about this part. I did hear that Muhammad is strangely abscent from the number of religious figures being depicted. I guess they are afraid there will be some kind of retaliation if he is shown.
    jesse123456

    Answer by jesse123456 at 4:34 PM on Oct. 8, 2010

  • I personally believe that if you make remarks or any other form of self expression that is for the purpose of pissing people off to make a name for yourself, then that is NOT covered under freedom of speech.
    ------------------------------------------------
    Really? So if we know our opinion is going to piss someone off or offend the oversensitive, we shouldn't be allowed to have the right to say it? What is your opinion of op-ed pieces in the newspaper? Commentators on the news channels?

    What the woman did was criminal. She destroyed someone else's property for the simple reason SHE didn't like it. It was something a two-year-old throwing a temper tantrum would do. An adult would write a letter to the paper. Maybe start a petition to have the town tell the artist to take it down.

    Just b/c YOU don't like something doesn't give you the right to decide that no one else should see/read/watch it.

    Proceed with the down votes!
    SpiritedWitch

    Answer by SpiritedWitch at 9:57 PM on Oct. 8, 2010

  • Wwo dull, I did not drag anything in and people do it to me ALL the time. I simply said if she asked I had proof. It really bothers me how she along with many others on here treat Muslims. Sorry.


    Ok, now, you need to stop right there. You have no idea how I treat any person I come in contact with. You provide me some tangible proof right now about anything I have said on this forum that "proves" I "hate" anyone at all or you back off. I have never said anything that is hate oriented. I may not agree with issues, but that isn't hate. I haven't mistreated anyone, anywhere, or anytime. I resent the implication that you somehow know me by some threads on a post. Put your money where your "mouth" is or shut the hell up!

    jesse123456

    Answer by jesse123456 at 10:21 PM on Oct. 8, 2010

  • ok...THIS article says Mohammad was NOT depicted.


    http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/10/04/outrage-art-exhibit-depicting-jesus-sex-act-boosts-gallery-visits/


    Going to look for another one...does any one habe one that DOES say he was in it TOO??

    momof030404

    Answer by momof030404 at 6:38 PM on Oct. 8, 2010

  • 1).YOU didnt spell out momor030404 sooooooo not sure where you have a leg to stand on THERE.


    2) You can bet your BUTT if he HAD been it WOULD have been covered.


    3) YOU were the one that was saying YES he WAS because the OP said so.......

    momof030404

    Answer by momof030404 at 8:44 PM on Oct. 8, 2010

close Join now to connect to
other members!
Connect with Facebook or Sign Up Using Email

Already Joined? LOG IN