[Osx-nutters] Egyptian Two-Fer: Racism and Misogyny in One Cartoon

[David Cake]

At 5:42 AM -0700 25/2/07, Chris Gehlker wrote:
>On Feb 25, 2007, at 4:48 AM, David Cake wrote:
>
>>>
>>>Creating and displaying piss christ, etc. were acts of incredible 
>>>stupidity and arrogance. We don't need any more like that.
>>
>>	I don't have such a big issue with stuff like that. Its in an 
>>art gallery, you have to go out of your way to see it. If your 
>>offended because you read about how it was done in art shows 
>>somewhere far away, your going to get offended by something.
>
>It was in a prominent, publicly funded art gallery which was a large 
>part of the controversy. I honestly think that that had it been 
>installed in some obscure loft somewhere it would not have been such 
>an issue.

	Of course it wouldn't. All manner of vile sacrilegious filth 
gets displayed in obscure lofts all the time. And from time to time 
on Comedy Central.
	The problem was the public funding. Not because its wrong, 
but because it made it something the 'culture warriors' of the 
political Right felt they could take a legitimate interest in.

>
>>	And we DO need more like it. For the body politic to be 
>>reminded that the right to blasphemy is important (its one of those 
>>demarcation lines that shows there is a separation of church and 
>>state), that right needs to be used occasionally - and being used 
>>in art work shown in a gallery context is a pretty reasonable way 
>>for that to happen, making the point without thrusting it in 
>>peoples faces.
>
>It seems one could argue for the display of the the 10 commandments 
>in court houses to 'remind the body politic' of  their right to 
>worship.

	One could. The counter arguments would likely overwhelm that 
extremely dubious argument, though. I can see from here that it has a 
suspiciously straw like consistency.
	And I'm not arguing that blasphemy and/or sacrilege should be 
particularly discouraged. Merely that it will happen from time to 
time when artists are free to make art, and its necessary to point 
out that it is useful to the body politic to be reminded of the 
principles from time to time, rather than cautiously compromise again 
and again.

>I don't see how spending public funds to attack a particular 
>religion is any more 'separation of church and state' than is 
>spending public funds to promote one.
>
>Now if the Baptists want to get together in their private church and 
>urinate on to Koran and the Torah I'm still going to think that's 
>stupid and vulgar but I will defend their right to do that.

	Oh, I agree. Defend their right to do it, while at the same 
time arguing it was a stupid and morally worthless act.
	Cheers
		David