The Pope & President Bush Blamed for Crucifying Teen Girls
Jens Galschiot will be moving his controversial sculpture, “In the Name of God” from the Lutheran Cathedral in Copenhagen to the World Social Forum in Nairobi to protest on “the Christian fundamentalists’ crusade against contraception.” The sculpture is supposed to be the artist’s interpretation of what religious fundamentalism has done to teen mothers. He hopes it will help in the fight for the rights of teenage girls to be provided with contraception and sexual education and blames President Bush and the Pope as a major part of the problem by forcing women and teenagers to bear the brunt of the disastrous consequences through the ban on condoms based on ´Christian´ morality.
Since I don’t recall President Bush ever having a specific policy on contraception, I will make a short comment on the Pope’s influence on the decision making process of contraception in the secular world. What goes through the mind of most, young and unmarried women (and men for that matter) who consider having a sexual encounter outside of marriage? Whether catholic or not, are we to believe she makes the conscious decision to omit ALL of the morality issues of the Church that concerns consenting to an illicit sexual act, EXCEPT one - contraception? I challenge anyone to find a case where a chaste teen became pregnant or transmitted a sexual disease. I would love to hear how the artist’s logic makes any sense at all.
How many blank stares do you think you would get if you went around the world and asked any teen to explain the views of contraception as they relate to the Pope and President Bush? If one uses plain common sense, the biggest culprit in the propagation of the AIDS epidemic, abortion rate and unwanted pregnancies is no other than the failed policies of the secular world. They don’t believe or take into account that we live in a fallen world, and when combined with the immature frontal lobe brain development of adolescents and young adults (which leads to impulsive, risk taking behaviors) who are not protected by the graces and appropriate guidance of responsible adults; all the contraception and sex education in the world won’t change the hearts and minds of our sexually active teens. I find it difficult to find a more irresponsible and immature approach to solving one of the most serious issues of our times than to search out and blame two of the most hated men in our present day?
.jpg)
You know, in looking at the image itself, it seems to me that it can read in a couple of different ways. I agree with you, of course, David - the artist’s own stated meaning and goal of his artwork is nonsensical.
But to my eye, the image the artist has created tells more of his mind than he realizes: He’s crucifying a pregnant woman, the most powerful symbol of life there is. He wants that child dead - he wants that life to die - and if the woman (her fertility, her womanliness) die too, well, all the better. He’s demonstrating exactly what contraception does, what the artist wants contraception to do.
His insanity is evident on a lot of levels.
Comment by Kathleen Lundquist — January 15, 2007 @ 12:27 pm
GWB does not have a specific policy re contraception.
BUT–he funded “abstinence-only” programs, optional for school districts.
God forbid that the little darlings should HEAR the word “abstinence.”
Comment by dad29 — January 15, 2007 @ 1:27 pm
My heartfelt thanks to Kathleen for her penetrating insight. I now have a better sense of the sadness that overwhelmed me in meditating on that sculpture.
Comment by jack flannery — January 16, 2007 @ 2:28 pm
>I challenge anyone to find a case where a chaste teen became >pregnant ….
It’s a tiny minority of pregnancies, but there are cases in which women (some of them teenagers, no doubt) become pregnant through forcible rape. Such a girl would be the chaste victim of another’s lust, but the rapist is the one to blame, not the Holy Father or the President.(The baby conceived in such terrible circumstances would be another victim of his male progenitor’s crime. )
Comment by Donna Marie Lewis — January 16, 2007 @ 7:46 pm
Excellent point. I have yet to meet a teenager or young adult that had sex without a condom because the Pope said it’s a sin.
Comment by Travis — January 24, 2007 @ 2:57 pm
I just saw this “crap” for the first time on Flickr today. I am shocked that this disgusting psuedo-art is being praised as something good. I don’t care what point he trying to make, this is blasphemy.
In the slave days, whites would string up disobedient negroes by thier testicles butt naked and stab them to death upside down.
I consider myself a militant black man. I am very “pro-black”. However, if some nut wanted to make a 30 foot statue of this for some “HISTORICAL” reasoning, I would be just as repuled. Freedom of speech can be abused by ding-bats like him that use art as a twisted manifestation of his subconcious dysfunction. There are more decent and moral ways to make this point.
This is just as bad as people getting butt naked and riding bikes across country to get attention to animal cruelty.
IN BOTH CASES…..
Good cause…..immoral means.
Comment by Kevin — August 28, 2007 @ 4:15 pm
Oh and BY THE WAY……
Most people that agree with the point of this statue; however, they let thier “Intellectual Ego” convince them that if they disagree with the artist’s delivery method, then they are stupid and that they somehow “Don’t Get it”.
It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to see that this statue is a hell spawned and repulisve way to make a very noble point!
In my humble opinion, it makes the whole thing bad.
Comment by Kevin — August 28, 2007 @ 4:20 pm