> Back when sacred meant something I agreed with you.
> Now xtians no longer know the meaning of the word sacred.
> They wear "Gods Gym" t-shirts styled after the Gold's Gym logo.
> I just saw a take on the "Keep on Truckin" image by Crumb done as "Keep
> on Trustin" (Jesus) that some kid was wearing.
> Xtians blaspheme against their own sacred images every day so getting
> their panties in a wad over someone else doing it strikes me as hollow
> and hypocritical. Something xtains are very good at and have been for
> some time.
> Years ago when I was a xtian I would been shocked to see the blasphemy
> that is so accepted by todays xtians.
> If you wish others to respect your sacred imagery you must first do so
> yourself. If not, it's more than all fair game. It practically requires
> that we roll these images in the gutter in the most capricious and
> gratuitous manner possible.
> Xtians made it a cheap commodity themselves and they stripped the sacred
> from their icons with no help from infidels.
>
> As an artist I lament the loss of sacredness in images but what has been
> done cannot be undone.
John's comments came closest to addressing my concern. I guess I'm not convinced (yet) because it seems to me that this hokey trivializing of Christian imagery by Christians themselves isn't yet a broad enough phenomenon. On the contrary it seems to be confined to exceedingly lame Protestants under 30.
(BTW: my favorite two examples of this are 1) a play off the "Air Jordan" logo that says "Air Jesus", and 2) a play off the Reese's peanut butter cups logo that says "Jesus" instead of "Reese's" and below "sweet savior, king of kings" blegh!)
Let me turn to a portion of the Stanley Fish piece I attached to my original post:
------------------------------------ Strongly held faiths are exhibits in liberalism's museum; we appreciate them, and we congratulate ourselves for affording them a space, but should one of them ask of us more than we are prepared to give -- ask for deference rather than mere respect -- it will be met with the barrage of platitudinous arguments that for the last week have filled the pages of every newspaper in the country.
One of those arguments goes this way: It is hypocritical for Muslims to protest cartoons caricaturing Muhammad when cartoons vilifying the symbols of Christianity and Judaism are found everywhere in the media of many Arab countries. After all, what's the difference? The difference is that those who draw and publish such cartoons in Arab countries believe in their content; they believe that Jews and Christians follow false religions and are proper objects of hatred and obloquy.
But I would bet that the editors who have run the cartoons do not believe that Muslims are evil infidels who must either be converted or vanquished. They do not publish the offending cartoons in an effort to further some religious or political vision; they do it gratuitously, almost accidentally. Concerned only to stand up for an abstract principle -- free speech -- they seize on whatever content happens to come their way and use it as an example of what the principle should be protecting. The fact that for others the content may be life itself is beside their point. ----------------------------
One could argue, as it appears Doug and Andie would, that the advertisement in question is really an artistic expression playing on the undeniable fact that Catholicism has some sort of relationship with BDSM.
I just don't buy it. This is an advertisement, after all, and it looks to me that it was not published "in an effort to further some religious or political vision." Rather, it was published "gratuitously, almost accidentally" for no other reason than that people would find it cute or provocative or blasphemous (despite Andie's wonderful lawyerly argument that the ad isn't blasphemy since the Catechism doesn't expressly forbid kink) . If the ad is a statement beyond 'come to the Folsom Street Fair' that statement seems to be nothing more than '!!!ha, look how provocative I am!!!'
Let me be clear: I think the Folsom Street Fair looks like a rollicking good time, and if I was in the area I would love to sample some of Dennis's lbo scotch and take in the scenery. I just continue to take issue with the advertisement -- although I readily acknowledge that maybe I shouldn't.
-WD