Comments on: The Pope & President Bush Blamed for Crucifying Teen Girls

By: Kevin

Kevin — Tue, 28 Aug 2007 21:20:32 +0000

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.

By: Kevin

Kevin — Tue, 28 Aug 2007 21:15:05 +0000

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.

By: Travis

Travis — Wed, 24 Jan 2007 20:57:02 +0000

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.

By: Donna Marie Lewis

Donna Marie Lewis — Wed, 17 Jan 2007 01:46:22 +0000

>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. )

By: jack flannery

jack flannery — Tue, 16 Jan 2007 20:28:23 +0000

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.

By: dad29

dad29 — Mon, 15 Jan 2007 19:27:31 +0000

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.”

By: Kathleen Lundquist

Kathleen Lundquist — Mon, 15 Jan 2007 18:27:07 +0000

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.