This seems to be getting a little ridiculous!
Krupa wrote:"It's understandable that the Catholic League is wary of another sex scandal, but the sex we're talking about pertains to dogs and cats,"
Wait, what? No.
M00ndragon69 wrote:Why are they so offended? Isn't there nudity in alot of Catholic art?
I think the problem is the fact that she's using their holy symbol to cover up her unmentionables, and also the fact that its a form of exploiting it commercially.
R.I.P Chef for realz this time
( chef joined the sith so why don't you?)
R.I.P Billy Bonka
M00ndragon69 wrote:Like Peta is the first group to exploit the symbol of the cross. The cross was pagan to begin with, and now that it is Christian, and over exposed, I can think of a lot of other ways it is exploited, that are in much worse taste. Like these cheap ass ugly shirts I have seen in the Walmart men's department that have black, somewhat gothic looking crosses on them. There are a lot of examples of ugly, cheap ass sh*t, that is on the market simply because whoever made it figured that someone would buy it because there was a cross on it. If that isn't exploiting a religious symbol comercially, then what is? Shouldn't that be offensive to religious people?
I agree, but maybe I used the wrong word. I meant they should get fussy over the fact she's posing with a cross to further the effectiveness of the advert. Now before you all jump on me for being a bible-thumper, I am not crazy with church and the like. I'm just a guy with Christian values. (I have a feeling I misworded that as well)
I have also taken art, and art history. Life drawing was a part of this, and in that class, naked chicks would come into our classes and we would draw them. In the art history classes, I remember seeing some examples of Christian art that had nudity in it. I have also seen other examples of this outside of class. Because of having at least some background in art, I know that nudity doesn't always equal pornography, and I think even some Christians don't have a problem with nudity in art either.
Besides, wouldn't you think angels would be naked?
Captain__fag wrote:Can't we just say all Catholics are fags and move on?
Awesome username/post combination.
I could see the Catholic League getting upset if the cross were actually a crucifix, but it's just a cross, and the League would wonder why there isn't more outrage about it in the Christian community.
M00ndragon69 wrote:Besides, wouldn't you think angels would be naked?
Probably. We're just used to seeing them in robes unless they're baby cherubs, with or without exposed genitalia.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest