Posted on 10/07/2010 4:54:46 PM PDT by Free ThinkerNY
LOVELAND, Colo. (AP) -- A piece of artwork denounced as obscene by church members and allegedly ripped up by a Montana woman using a crowbar won't be returned to display because of safety concerns, city officials said Thursday.
"The incident yesterday was very troubling and also very impactful on the city staff, volunteers and the public at the venue," said Rod Wensing, acting city manager.
(Excerpt) Read more at hosted.ap.org ...
Mission Accomplished
I don’t think she should have torn it up, but I don’t think the city (using her taxpayer dollars) should have been displaying it in the first place.
Note, they did not put a Fatwah out on the “artist” or bomb the museum. I wish I knew who she is. I would like to send her a gift!
wonder if they’d display a pic of mohammed having sex?
With a 9 year old?
The INCIDENT was troubling and impactful to all those folks? How about the piece itself, wasn't that troubling and impactful?
Child pornography?
Bestiality?
Perhaps the artist should try putting Mohammad into a collage next time and then giving the same excuse to the jihadists...
...The work that was damaged, "The Misadventures of the Romantic Cannibals," is a 12-panel lithograph that that includes comic book characters, Mexican pornography, Mayan symbols and ethnic stereotypes. It is part of an 82-print exhibit by 10 artists that have worked with Colorado printer Bud Shark that opened in mid-September...
I'd be willing to bet there was at least one or two ethnic stereotypes missing from this collage.
‘”It will be a loss for everybody, not just for me, but for everybody that believes in the First Amendment,” Chagoya said. Suppression of art and ideas is something that happens in totalitarian regimes, not this country, he added.’
************
I guess he has never tried to pray in the school where he teaches, or he would know otherwise.
The work of this “artist” looks like it was done by a schoolchild, and has the depth of a mudpuddle.
Why don’t you know who she is?!?
Agreed, if they used federal dollars. She isn't from Loveland.
Well, it was paid for by somebody’s tax dollars, and a lot of local residents objected to it too. And I am sure the museum gets federal monies of one kind or another.
As I said, I don’t think she should have done it. But the city museum had no business putting it in their show.
“impactful”?
Gimme a break.
The First Amendment doesn’t give you the “right” to have the city use taxpayer dollars to display your offensive social commentary.
The First Amendment also applies to prior restraint, not to people being upset by what you say after the fact. Obama’s essentially preventing that minister (a private individual) from burning the Koran is prior restraint and a violation of the First Amendment.
This was just an act of vandalism because she obviously felt that the city was unresponsive to other complaints.
Wars are won by using all sorts of different tactics and stategies.
This ‘in your face’ tactic seems to have work quite well.
Is that the same first amendment was was denied to the minister in Florida who sought to burn the koran?
That first amendment?
“wonder if they’d display a pic of mohammed having sex?”
Or having a dog hump Allah’s leg! LOL!
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.