Welcome to ASFN Fan Forums! We're glad to have you here. Please feel free to browse the forum. We'd like to invite you to join our community; doing so will enable you to view additional forums and post with our other members.
Registered Members don't see these ads. Register now it's free!
In this case, it seems the biggest snafu was that it was being shown in a church-sponsored museum. If that had been Mohammed in a mosque, many people would have died. I'm guessing there's a big difference there.
Only because we better educated and tend to take our anger out in the courts.
The feelings are the same
Registered Members don't see these ads. Register now it's free!
What I was meaning is that both religions have boundaries beyond which they feel is an offense to their religion.
Both religions have exremists who will threaten and act on these things violently. In the west we are mostly more educated and civilized so the % of belivers who react that exremely is much smaller but they do exist.
But many here do react to perceived insults to their beliefs just not violently for the most part.
Not at all, just if one is offended by this then I would think that it is possible to understand why Muslims would have been offended.
Being offended is understandable. The actions you take after being offended make all the difference in the world!!! Those Catholics that are refering to killing the artist are no better than the pond scum Muslims who wanted to cut throat of Mohammad artist.
__________________ All Hell is breakin loose!!!!!
An unarmed person is a subject. An armed person is a citizen.
The person who allowed the painting to be displayed should be fired. Becoming a platform for someone to use shock imagery under the guise of art only casts the entire museum/gallery in a bad light.
These are the kinds of instances people bring up when they discuss cutting the public funding of art.
Moon Lander Champion!
All Hell is breakin loose!!!!!
Linear Mode
