The Neosecularist

I Said That? Yeah, I Said That!

Archive for the tag “Anti-Christian sentiment”

Controversial Art By Student Disgusts, Nauseates Rhode Islanders (Worse Than Porn And Piss Christ Combined)

Sometimes art is not art.  And sometimes art for the sake of art is simply pornography in disguise.  That is the case with one piece of, shall we say “art”, drawn by one public school student and displayed on her school wall.  Only there is no disguising the message of, or behind, this mural.  Its vivid starkness glares down at us, as we look up at it.  Its candid gratuitousness mocks our everyday norms and standards, belittles and ridicules us in horrible, torturous ways, and makes us as uncomfortable as a bug caught in a glass of formaldehyde.  How can we possibly get a wrong impression of what this “art” represents?

It was one thing to have the Virgin Mary covered in elephant dung.  It was also one thing to have Christ submerged in urine.  These works of ‘art” were meant to be and represent the powerful anti-Christian, anti-religious message sweeping across America at the time; the bold new artistic form millions of Americans fell in love with and still defend to this day.

But sometimes, some people take things too far.  Sometimes an artist comes along and interjects a message so controversial, so obscene, so blatantly pornographic and devoid of any value, artistic or otherwise, the people are obliged to throw up their hands in utter and absolute disgust and vomit in rage.  That has happened in Rhode Island, and with just and moral cause.

Liz Bierendy, a 17-year-old artist who attends Pilgrim High School in Warwick, R.I., has had to defend her artistic vision for a mural to cover a wall of the high school.

“Defend” is putting it mildly.  What this child has done to her school, her community, her state has set real art back hundreds of years.  What is worse is that, although her school originally covered up the mural, (the controversial part anyway) it has since been uncovered and Liz has been allowed to finish it as she saw fit.  This final product, this vision of hers has cast a dark shadow over her school and until the good people of Rhode Island stand up and demand it be permanently trashed, anyone viewing it will get extraordinarily peculiar ideas in their heads, foreign ideas, outdated and antiquated ideas of Rhode Island and which the good people of Rhode Island thought they had finally put behind them once and for all.  The past is coming back to haunt Rhode Islanders, and it is all the fault of one very deranged girl who should have had sense enough to know how much damage her “art’ would cause.  Where were this child’s parents?  View this “art” for yourself and see what “choice” words you might have for her parents.

What are any parents supposed to do, now that this mural is on full display for their impressionable children to see as they walk down the school hall from one class to the next?  These students will see this “art” every day, and somehow have to live with themselves.  How are parents supposed to explain to their children the meaning behind the mural without throwing up?  How do teachers, administrators and staff explain why this “art” was allowed to remain, knowing that students will be compelled to look at it, talk about it – and perhaps even admire it, and copy it?

That is the worst part.  Students who look at this “art” might just copy it.  Rhode Island has worked hard, for decades, to instill certain values in their students, and to remove other, old-fashioned values that are relics of America’s historical past.  If only Liz had defecated on a Bible or a picture of the Pope in protest of the priest pedophile scandal, or over the Catholic Church’s stance on contraception and birth control and submitted that as art.  Liz would have been a national hero and icon.  She didn’t do that.  She took a more extreme measure that has the “art” world turned upside down.  Recover?  Good luck!

Judge for yourself, but be warned – it’s not for the squeamish.

What kind of message does this instill in our children?  This repulsive, inhumane drawing depicts the life of a boy as he grows into a man, eventually marrying a woman and having a child.  (Both wife and child are at his side in the last image)  Can you understand, now, why this mural is so controversial in the State of Rhode Island?  Can you understand, now, why school officials originally wanted it removed?  Can you see the controversy staring down at you?

About these ads

“Homosexuality Is Wrong” Is The Newest Swear Word

Texas School Punishes Boy For Opposing Homosexuality | Fox News.

Ever since the brutal and despicable murder of Matthew Sheppard in1998, a gay college student from the University of Wyoming, there has been a push in America to ban any speech that might offend, be offensive, or might be construed as anti-gay, in the work place, in the public square and in public schools.

Young Dakota Ary learned this lesson the hardest way possible one day when he uttered that phrase at school in his German class.  His teacher happened to overhear the statement.  For Dakota’s lack of understanding and compassion toward what has essentially come to be a government protected, and coddled, class of people, he was sent to the principal’s office where justice was done upon him, much to the horror and disbelief of his mother, in the form of a one day in school suspension, plus two days of full suspension.  (That was later dropped after an attorney with Liberty Counsel intervened on Dakota’s behalf.)

Dakota is not alone.  Many other students have endured such a fate as he, and this type of over reactionary measure awaits anyone, nowadays, who would dare to have an opinion that seeks to upend the liberally controlled public school system.  Even within the work place and the public square itself – the epitome of free speech, hate crimes advocates and lawyers are closing in and narrowing the definition of free speech.

Naturally it is one thing entirely for a public school, and a teacher in that public school, to want to enforce rules and standards, and to be actively monitoring what children are saying in his/her classroom, looking out for inappropriate speech or speech that might lead to the physical injury of another person.

But let’s be realistic.  If Dakota had been learning about Christianity, say that of the 16th or 17th century, how religious dissension in that era had plunged Europe into many wars and struggles, and after hearing about all the blood shed and death of so many people, had he formed an opinion from that lecture, turned to his class mate and said, “Christianity is wrong”,  does anyone really believe that, in today’s public school, Dakota would be punished with school suspension, or punished at all, for his lack of sensitivity toward Christianity?

Check out the “Bong hits for Jesus” t-shirt controversy.  Denigrating Christianity in public schools is far more protected, far more commonplace (and more common coming from teachers themselves rather than the students) and upheld by judges as free speech, than a simple, albeit, perhaps unintentionally hurtful remark, as “I think homosexuality is wrong”.  It was a private thought Dakota made to a classmate not in any way meant to be hurtful or to promote an agenda.  Rather, it was an aside that his teacher overheard and took way out of context.

In this same article it is stated how this very teacher of Dakota’s had once put up a picture of two men kissing on his classroom wall.  Very clearly, then, it is Dakota’s teacher, not Dakota himself, who is pushing an agenda.  But if it is a pro homosexual agenda then that is protected.

We have seen the vitriol, controversy and the double standard every time a proposal is brought forth to put up the Ten Commandments in a public school.  The people who cry bigotry for what they perceive to be anti-gay rhetoric are the same people who are quick to oppose the Ten Commandments in any public school out of a manufactured fear of insensitivity to the other students who might not be Christian and therefore offended or belittled by having to walk past such a religious placard.

But this is just more of the same anti-religious runaround that has wedged itself into the public school system for the passed fifty years.

Public schools should not be places where children are made to feel ashamed of who they are, whether they are gay or Christian.  Nor should they be places where children are indoctrinated by their teachers who have ulterior agendas and motives counter to the purpose of public education and to that of their community at large.

Rather, school should be a place where children are properly instructed in facts; historical, scientific, mathematical, grammar, etc.  They should also be a place where students are free to form opinions and ideas on their own, even if they might be uncomfortable to others, including homosexuality and religion, so long as these opinions and ideas are of a constructive, not a destructive, nature.

Just as a public school would never demand a student check their homosexuality at the door before they enter, neither should they demand a student check his or her religion at the door.

Right now, in America, as is evidenced in this latest anti-religious fervor involving Dakota Ary, we have a long way yet to go in ensuring that all students have the same rights, not just a select few.  And until local communities are better able to take back their own public schools from errant school boards and rogue teachers, gain more control and secure more of a say in these institutions which their property taxes are funding, it will continue to remain an uphill battle.

Post Navigation

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 60 other followers

%d bloggers like this: