It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by wascurious
Nice to know there is no reason to take you seriously ever again.
You say Obama is clamping down on free speech in a thread blasting Obama for NOT CONDEMNING FREE SPEECH.
Yeah, that was slick.
Originally posted by karen61057
reply to post by Swills
Is it the White house's place to comment on religion or art? What are people waiting for from Pres. Obama ? If he comments wouldnt that be out of place?
Originally posted by bobs_uruncle
reply to post by seabag
Maybe it would be less offensive if they used real rather than fictional people for their art. We should have a piss Hillary, piss Obama, piss Harper, piss Pelosi, etc. art contest at ATS!
Cheers - Dave
Originally posted by Intelearthling
Originally posted by bobs_uruncle
reply to post by seabag
Maybe it would be less offensive if they used real rather than fictional people for their art. We should have a piss Hillary, piss Obama, piss Harper, piss Pelosi, etc. art contest at ATS!
Cheers - Dave
So what you're saying is that Jesus Christ is a fictional character. If this were true, there wouldn't be any evidence that He actually walked on Earth. What you're saying is that the Holy Bible and Koran is wrong as well as other scripts that's been found to have His name written on them.
Do you deny the Holocaust ever happened?
Originally posted by DaTroof
OMG, is Fox News really digging out Piss Christ?
I feel like I'm being time-warped back to ignorant Reagan/Bush/Quayle years...
upload.wikimedia.org...
Oh, how vulgar!edit on 22-9-2012 by DaTroof because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by votan
reply to post by jimmiec
so in order to get attention or be relevant in the art world they had to resort to controversy instead of their talent
Originally posted by beezzer
Originally posted by wascurious
Nice to know there is no reason to take you seriously ever again.
You say Obama is clamping down on free speech in a thread blasting Obama for NOT CONDEMNING FREE SPEECH.
Yeah, that was slick.
*applause* for taking something so out of context that your skills in interpretation are obviously apparent.
Brilliant!
Originally posted by CynicalDrivel
reply to post by poloblack
Separation of Church and State only works if you're equally separated from all of them. The problem is that people are complaining about a disparity in the separation.
Originally posted by wascurious
reply to post by NavyDoc
What makes this state sponsored religion?
I am curious if my Haloween decorations that have cross shaped tombstones are also religious?
Originally posted by NavyDoc
According to the principle that anything deemed to be pro-religious (such as ten commandments in the courtroom) shall be removed from governmental bodies then, in order to be logically consistent, anything that is anti-religious should be removed as well. If the NEA gave a grant to a Christian artist who made art that promoted his religion, there would be objections. The inverse must also be true in order to maintain the idea of government neutrality towards religion.
Originally posted by buddhasystem
Originally posted by NavyDoc
According to the principle that anything deemed to be pro-religious (such as ten commandments in the courtroom) shall be removed from governmental bodies then, in order to be logically consistent, anything that is anti-religious should be removed as well. If the NEA gave a grant to a Christian artist who made art that promoted his religion, there would be objections. The inverse must also be true in order to maintain the idea of government neutrality towards religion.
You are not very good at logic. Separation of church and state does not entail separation of state and purely secular line of thought and action. You see, one can say that protected s3x is manifestly anti-catholic. Should the government prohibit protected s3x?