Have you seen Poleteismo?

[cromagnon]

---

How about an art exhibit of children stuffing pen*ses in their mouths?

Or an art exhibit showing children having s*x with older men in various positions?

It's still a form of expression.

Would the Cruz defenders defend it?

bantay bata nana , o porn ...

[cromagnon]

kung sundon nato ang law sa government - wla man cguro ni sa bala-ud na pde hilabtan ni ang artist work

wala lay labot ang law of god ..

pero kung tao/person that exist ang binuangan , naa nay bala-ud ana . ..

kung mag vadalism cla sa art work , against na sa law.
kung minumora nila ang artist , nag pa ila lng cla ..

ug labaw sa tanan , nganu gud tawng pa hawa-on nila ang mga CCP sa ilang trabaho na wla mana nang hilabut ang pagka hilas nlng jud aning mga tiguwanga , feel na kaau nila ang power .
tanan mabuhat nla in the name of god ..

daghan naman ng in the name of god ....

[rodsky]

Obviously, the word of the day is "LEGAL".

Clearly, this thread shows that some iStoryans have MUCH to learn about what is LEGAL and what is NOT LEGAL, and often mistake "morality" to mean "legality". Why? Because in their minds, the church has NOT separated from the state.

-RODION

[sushiro1988]

The issue here is not about LEGAL, MORAL or any other technicalities that you guys are trying to make pilosopo with.

The issue is not even about Catholic versus Protestant versus Atheist versus CBCP versus Gloria Arroyo versus SUV Bishops or whatever.

The issue here is that the sensibilities of the people were hurt. Period.

And blame not the CBCP. This art exhibit was first featured in GMA and/or ABS-CBN and then it got people rousing, the CBCP included.

Whether or not having an exhibit of a child having s*x with older men is LEGAL or ILLEGAL, MORAL or IMMORAL, the fact is it will hurt the sensibility of other people pretty much with how the exhibit depicting Christ with a pen*s in his face has also hurt many people.

In the first place, there is nothing in the 1987 Philippine Constitution that says that there should be no exhibit of children having s*x with men, pretty much as there is nothing in the said constitution that says that there should be no exhibit of Christ with a pen*s.

But there is a generalized law which says that we must respect one another. But respect can also mean many ways. Can this mean that we should respect the right of a person to hurt another person? Or respect the right to trample on another religion? Or respect the right to pornography?

So this is now where our morals come in -- your conscience. This isn't written in the law books but all of us are guided by this based on how we were raised/reared by our parents and the kind of society that all of us live in.

So even if some of us will think that the art exhibit depicting Christ with a pen*s is OKAY, but if we look at our conscience, if we think outside the box of whether it will hurt other people or not, WOULD IT STILL BE OKAY?


If you think that having a gory art exhibit of Christ with a pe**is and other things is okay, then go on. After all, we all deserve the kind of society that want.

Since the exhibit serves as a precedent, soon enough there will be people who will be putting up exhibits of children having s*x with men and/or any other exhibits that will come out of their wild imagination and they will argue with all the technicalities and legal loopholes in the world just to have it.

And soon enough we will have a pretty much decayed society. Soon enough a society where marijuana will be made legal, prostitution made legal, abortion made legal, and everything else made legal just to make people happy and contented.

[jumper_stage]

..adto palang sila ma artwork sa imperno, apilon nila pag design mga ikogan didto..

[rodsky]

The issue here is not about LEGAL, MORAL or any other technicalities that you guys are trying to make pilosopo with.

The issue is not even about Catholic versus Protestant versus Atheist versus CBCP versus Gloria Arroyo versus SUV Bishops or whatever.

The issue here is that the sensibilities of the people were hurt. Period.

And blame not the CBCP. This art exhibit was first featured in GMA and/or ABS-CBN and then it got people rousing, the CBCP included.

Whether or not having an exhibit of a child having s*x with older men is LEGAL or ILLEGAL, MORAL or IMMORAL, the fact is it will hurt the sensibility of other people pretty much with how the exhibit depicting Christ with a pen*s in his face has also hurt many people.

In the first place, there is nothing in the 1987 Philippine Constitution that says that there should be no exhibit of children having s*x with men, pretty much as there is nothing in the said constitution that says that there should be no exhibit of Christ with a pen*s.

But there is a generalized law which says that we must respect one another. But respect can also mean many ways. Can this mean that we should respect the right of a person to hurt another person? Or respect the right to trample on another religion? Or respect the right to pornography?

So this is now where our morals come in -- your conscience. This isn't written in the law books but all of us are guided by this based on how we were raised/reared by our parents and the kind of society that all of us live in.

So even if some of us will think that the art exhibit depicting Christ with a pen*s is OKAY, but if we look at our conscience, if we think outside the box of whether it will hurt other people or not, WOULD IT STILL BE OKAY?


If you think that having a gory art exhibit of Christ with a pe**is and other things is okay, then go on. After all, we all deserve the kind of society that want.

Since the exhibit serves as a precedent, soon enough there will be people who will be putting up exhibits of children having s*x with men and/or any other exhibits that will come out of their wild imagination and they will argue with all the technicalities and legal loopholes in the world just to have it.

And soon enough we will have a pretty much decayed society. Soon enough a society where marijuana will be made legal, prostitution made legal, abortion made legal, and everything else made legal just to make people happy and contented.

At the end of the day, your points are beer-fodder, and the law, will remain the law. You're basically saying that talking about the law is useless and just "pilosopo" talk. Well, I've got news for you--I'M a member of your society too, and I ALSO do not tolerate your being Christian/theist. BUT whether we both like it or not, its the law (and not the church) who will take care of who's pushing who.

Your kids, without religion or "morality" may indeed grow up to be abortionists, or marijuana addicts, and the kids in my world will grow up to be rational, free-thinking individuals who are sharp, critical thinkers and molders of a new and improved society, free from mysticism and superstition.

-RODION

[assitch008]

Say that again?

You're actually comparing the "pain" you felt when you saw a clump of papier mache that offended you, to the injury that one can receive PHYSICALLY via assault? Sa ato pa, if someone physically assaults this artist on the street, it's a JUSTIFIED ACT? In the eyes of THE LAW that is inexcusable, and is a CRIME. Unsa ka, bata? Manumbag kay gi-binuangan? Mao lagi nga ing-ani ang NASOD nato karon--daming mababaw, at kamao lang ang kayang iganti. Now mas nakasabot na ko nganong idol ninyo si Manny Pacquiao.

what i mean is ayaw lang ka hibong if naay mo bokbok og kalit nimo if mao na imong paga buhaton. of course i wont be the one nga mo bokbok kay wa man koy paki anang ingon ana nga klase sa taw pero dako possibility nga naay mo tira or mo harrass if mao na imong pagabuhaton. daghan man gyud ang maglagot unya maypagka sensitive baya ning mga pinoy. pero wala ko ga sulti nga sakto pod na ha

[assitch008]

Because it's the LAW. Learn to respect it, because by stepping in here, which is PRIVATE PROPERTY, you have acknowledged to abide by it. Don't like it? You're free to leave.

-RODION

yeah i know. parehas pod na sa kultura diri sa pilipinas. dapat maghinay2x pod nang mga taw nga walay respeto sa mga sacred images. dili tuod na crimen pero daghan ang mag lagot tungod sa kultura nato.

[assitch008]

The artist would've been daft if he never considered that people will not agree with his work. But beating an artist just because you don't agree with his work is stupid. If memory serves me right, assault is still against the law.



Semantics. You're just proving that oil and water will ONLY mix using an emulsifying agent. So technically, oil and water really don't mix.

wa ba diay na ni mix? kinahanglan lang og tabang. di diay na pwedi? permi man gud kong maka dungog nga bisan kuno unsaon dili kuno magsagol ang oil og water

[rodsky]

Terrorists | BusinessWorld Online Edition (by Luis V. Teodoro)

Great quotes from this article:


“This Christianity-as-comforter mind-set helps explain the resort to threats and violence by people who call themselves Christians: they can’t argue their case rationally.”

"...the CCP board’s decision to yield to the threats is disturbing, constituting surrender to censorship, and establishing a precedent that could very well be used to apply to anything else in the future that any group may consider offensive to its tastes and beliefs. What’s next, a novel or short story, a film or a sculpture? Perhaps a public lecture? An editorial cartoon, an essay, a poem, a column? "

To all freethinkers in this country, now is the time to stand your ground, if only to prevent the prediction as told in the last few lines of this article.

Even if you feel alone in this struggle, don't worry--we all stand alone, together.

-RODION