There are many other areas of art that you could have chosen. Now what do you think?
A portrait of Jesus in a school? Seriously?
- Thread starter Jose Fly
- Start date
There are many other areas of art that you could have chosen. Now what do you think?
PureX
Well-known member
The whole point is to show you an alternative iconographic painting, representing an alternative ideal, and why these kinds of images don't belong in public schools.
They belong in museums, where we collect these kinds of iconographic painted images and show them together, for what they are. And where school kids can see them and learn about them via the proper art-historical context.
I'm sure that was your motive. :chuckle:
yeah, we can have former educators, presidents, mlk, alumni, and tons of secular pictures that are worse, much worse. i have no problems with it
Like this?:
"I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one Nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."-recited at kindergarten, grade schools
We should get rid of that as well. But at least it is not a specific reference to a particular deity.Like this?:
"I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one Nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."-recited at kindergarten, grade schools
FFRF demands removal of Jesus portrait from Kan. school
Here's the picture....
Really? What is it with some of these school officials that they think this sort of thing is legal and acceptable? Are they that clueless about the law, or are they Christian theocrats who don't care about the law in the first place?
Either way, why are such idiots in charge of public education?
Funny, he doesn't look Jewish.
Your "at least...." is quite irrelevant-that's not his argument:
"It's an unconstitutional government endorsement of a religion."-Jose Fly
And I addressed it.
The Berean
Well-known member
What are Jewish people supposed to look like? :think:
Yeah, it was a cheap joke, but so obvious I could not resist.
Ya know.... I don't get this. I don't understand atheists getting upset over images of Jesus in a public building, nativity displays at a government building, etc.
When I was an atheist I didn't care about stuff like that.
I think you have to a total dork to get worked up over that kind of stuff.
When I was an atheist I didn't care about stuff like that.
I think you have to a total dork to get worked up over that kind of stuff.
Jose Fly
New member
Yep.
His argument is dead on, and not addressed by your post. There is no room in public education for that picture, unless it is a class in really tacky art.
Although Judge Ray Moore would probably like it in his court room.
Jose Fly
New member
Does that go both ways? Are Christians who "get all worked up" over things like kids being taught what Islam is also "dorks"? Or Christians who get all worked up over non-Christian prayers at public meetings? Or Christians who get all worked up over non-Christian holiday displays?
Sorry a "picture" of Jesus in a school is both dumb and inappropriate. Only good thing about it is that I dont live in Kansas so my tax dollars didn't go to purchasing that dreadful piece. The dreadful comment has nothing to do with the subject, just the "art" itself.
Yes, they are dorks.
After all.... they shouldn't have their kids being destroyed in a public school.
Good point, an atheist should not care at all about anything religious, as what would it matter? It may if they are political lefties, which is not necessarily inclusive of all atheists.
So you are only offended because $16 tax dollars were spent on the image?