This Religious Conservative finds this outrageous!

bassjones · Post by **bassjones** » Mon Oct 02, 2006 12:07 pm

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/30/educa ... nted=print

this dude · Post by **this dude** » Mon Oct 02, 2006 12:36 pm

Cheese and Rice!

Perhaps a Texas sized helping of-

???

WBOB · Post by **WBOB** » Mon Oct 02, 2006 12:40 pm

Sounds like an adminstrator should be ripping into
this "flip floppy" principal.

QWETTY · Post by **QWETTY** » Mon Oct 02, 2006 3:04 pm

the princepal is an ass... the parents are asses... The teacher did nothing wrong.

bassjones... based on your title, i still have no idea what your opinion is on this or why it has to do with how religous u are...

Oliver's Army · Post by **Oliver's Army** » Mon Oct 02, 2006 3:11 pm

By the title I would say his opinion would be "Outrage"

And any one who defines himself with the terms "Religious and Conservative" are probably heavily both.

He could of just as easily said "I".

Just a thought.

bassjones · Post by **bassjones** » Mon Oct 02, 2006 3:40 pm

Perhaps I need to speak (type) more slowly and clearly for you? Let me clarify...

A. I am a religious conservative - at least on some levels, although as far as the State and moral issues I'm a Libertarian.

B. Any parent who would complain about their child seeing Michelangelo's David or one of the famous Madonna paintings because of the nudity is most likely a fellow religious conservative, most likely one of the ones that makes people think we're all like that...

C. I am generally opposed to censorship, although I favor limiting the access of young children to pornography and extreme violence.

D. The above mentioned works of art would not fall into any sort of pornography category in the minds of 99% of people...

Had this been a featured show of one of the shock 'artists' or something like that, then the teacher certainly deserved some sort of disciplinary action - IMHO. This, however appears to be a museum of classic, historic works of art.

Somebody's mommy needs to get laid again. And shame on the prinicipal for caving to one (according to the article) whiney parent.

Post by **cwallace** » Mon Oct 02, 2006 3:44 pm

99%? More like 99.99999999999999999999999999999999999999999999%

This country is going to hell quick...

Chris

QWETTY · Post by **QWETTY** » Mon Oct 02, 2006 4:57 pm

bassjones wrote:Perhaps I need to speak (type) more slowly and clearly for you? Let me clarify...

A. I am a religious conservative - at least on some levels, although as far as the State and moral issues I'm a Libertarian.

B. Any parent who would complain about their child seeing Michelangelo's David or one of the famous Madonna paintings because of the nudity is most likely a fellow religious conservative, most likely one of the ones that makes people think we're all like that...

C. I am generally opposed to censorship, although I favor limiting the access of young children to pornography and extreme violence.

D. The above mentioned works of art would not fall into any sort of pornography category in the minds of 99% of people...

Had this been a featured show of one of the shock 'artists' or something like that, then the teacher certainly deserved some sort of disciplinary action - IMHO. This, however appears to be a museum of classic, historic works of art.

Somebody's mommy needs to get laid again. And shame on the prinicipal for caving to one (according to the article) whiney parent.

ok thanks and i agree with what you said, but you dont have to be an ass about it... ass.

QWETTY · Post by **QWETTY** » Mon Oct 02, 2006 4:58 pm

Oliver's Army wrote:By the title I would say his opinion would be "Outrage"

And any one who defines himself with the terms "Religious and Conservative" are probably heavily both.

He could of just as easily said "I".

Just a thought.

outrage doesnt state where his opinion is. He could be outraged that a teacher would bring her students there, or outraged that parents got mad... ass.

Grindspine · Post by **Grindspine** » Mon Oct 02, 2006 6:43 pm

Bassjones, I HAVE to call you out on this.

You consider yourself a religious conservative and find this outragious, great...

You finding this outragious at least proves that you can think.

However, it was conservative cardinals in the Catholic church that had leaves painted over the nude portions of Michaelangelo's "Last Judgement" in the Sistine chapel.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Last_J ... langelo%29

wikipedia wrote:The Last Judgment was an object of a heavy dispute between Cardinal Carafa and Michelangelo: the artist was accused of immorality and intolerable obscenity, having depicted naked figures, with genitals in evidence, inside the most important church of Christianity, so a censorship campaign (known as the "Fig-Leaf Campaign") was organized by Carafa and Monsignor Sernini (Mantua's ambassador) to remove the frescoes.

So, Jones, get over yourself in the title...please.

You finding something outragious that was supported by neoconservatives doesn't change the rest of your views. Ever heard the phrase, "Thou protest too much"?

Al Quandt · Post by **Al Quandt** » Mon Oct 02, 2006 11:20 pm

oh goodness.

bassjones · Post by **bassjones** » Tue Oct 03, 2006 8:40 am

no matter what I say... forget it, I'm not even going to bother to respond to Chuck anymore...

=^-..-^= · Post by **=^-..-^=** » Tue Oct 03, 2006 10:35 pm

I have utmost respect for you most of the time, Mr. Jones, but this time you kinda' walked into it.

What happened in this story should offend us all AS HUMAN BEINGS, regardless of our political/religous leanings.

You kinda' baited the opposition unneccesarily with the words 'this religious conservative.'

bassjones · Post by **bassjones** » Wed Oct 04, 2006 8:21 am

Well, okay then...

A. I'm not Catholic. Never have been, never will be.

B. I was pointing out that not all, nor even most, Religious Conservatives would agree with this

C. In response to Chuck's point about the Cistine Chapel - it was their building. They were paying the artist to paint the ceiling. They had every right to "censor" parts of it and require the painting of leaves over genitalia. That's a far cry from firing a teacher for taking students to an art museum and letting them see "David" or one of Mary's boobs. I think it was unnecessary and silly of them, but they were within their rights as the commissioners of the work. This too is a far cry from those of us who are upset that our tax money is used to fund the works of "artists" whose contributions to the arts consist of placing a crucifix in a jar of urine or throwing cow poop on a painting of Mary...

WBOB · Post by **WBOB** » Wed Oct 04, 2006 9:21 am

Here's a somewhat opposite case right over in Defiance.

Teacher shows a "NC-17" film in Spanish class with sexual
bondage scenes. "Tie Me Tie Me Down"

Religious,Political views aside...are these kind of methods not
more disturbing vs the case Bassjones brings up.

Teacher loses teaching certificate for (5) years.

http://toledoblade.com/apps/pbcs.dll/ar ... 6/0/NEWS10