Posted on 05/30/2015 2:28:26 PM PDT by Biggirl
Bet he thought a crucifix in a jar of urine was brilliant and edgy.
The Declaration of Independence was a purposely provocative document.
And the expressed outage by this Democrat mayor over dung or urine coated Christian icons occurred when?
Right; double standards, the only standard liberals have.
Can you imagine the outrage these liberals would have had were protesters to burn the Koran instead of simply drawing cartoons of a child molester 15 centuries dead?
Mayor Greg Stanton just lost a bunch of votes.
Of course, people shouting that Bush, Cheney, et al., should be killed is perfectly fine.
I hope Sal Diccio (spelling?) runs for mayor.
As he approached the Selma, Alabama Bridge, Martin Luther King was “purposefully provocative” too. He KNEW there would be a fight and did it anyway.
Boston Tea Partiers KNEW there would be a fight when they attacked the British and threw all the tea into Boston, Harbor.
The Black Lady that sat at the front of the bus was “purposefully provocative”.
The federal government was “purposefully provocative” at the Bundy Ranch and Ruby Ridge and Waco.
The mayor is full of bs and needs to go take some remedial history classes or just shut up, which is much preferred.
since when did Phoenix become islamic?? Does this mayor pander to muslims on other issues as well!
Good point. On target.
If it’s okay to have Piss Christ, and we tell Christians to tolerate this patently offensive display, then it’s okay to draw Mohammed, and tell Muslims that they have to tolerate that display.
Freaking hypocrites!
I don’t agree with the mayor but he has a right to free speech too.
Art is often provocative, that’s one of its functions.
Divisive? Maybe. That’s legal too.
Purposely provocative. Uh Yeh! I think that’s the idea.
From an Internet source
When New York artist Andres Serrano plunged a plastic crucifix into a glass of his urine what he was unknowingly doing was illustrating what Tony Perkins, The Family Research Council, Ted Cruz, the Tea Party, the Koch brothers and the Republicans would actually do to the name of Jesus some 30 years later. Serrano photographed his urine-soaked Jesus in 1987 under the title Piss Christ. He said he was making a statement on the misuse of religion. Controversy followed the work and reached a peak on Palm Sunday, 2011, when it was attacked with hammers and destroyed after an “anti-blasphemy” campaign by French Roman Catholic fundamentalists in the southern city of Avignon. Thus, ironically, the destruction of the work proved the artists’ point: Stupid Christians defending Jesus are really the ones attacking him. - See more at: http://www.patheos.com/blogs/frankschaeffer/2013/10/tony-perkinscruzshutdownvalues-voter-summit-is-the-new-piss-christ/#sthash.navSJjLU.dpuf
"attacked with hammers" -- not the "artist", the picture. (Offended Christians are really attacking the artist. Prosecute them! Threatening people and destroying property are crimes!)
Now turn to offended Islamists..
"attacked with hammers" -- not the picture, the artist.
"Americans attacked by Islamists and they deserved it, the Americans provoked it. They should not provoke religious folks. Prosecute them!"
Today's America -- it don't make a lick of sense except that people fear the Islamists will attack them with hammers, guns, knives . . . .
Time to talk internment for the Islamists?
Another hand-wringing wimp wets his pants. Mommy of mayor! You’re needed to change the little boy’s diapers.
A Freeper in another thread said it very well: When politeness is interpreted as submission, the only proper response is offense.
Close as I can remember.
I find someone telling me I can’t draw a picture of something to be purposely provocative and divisive.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.