Over at the good Smithsonian Institute, there's a lovely gallery heavy on the blasphemous images, and heavier on the sex obsessed libido focused priorities of our modern culture. The gay supremacy part doesn't surprise me. In a country floundering economically, where millions may lose their financial lifelines, and treaties with nuclear superpowers are in jeopardy, our glorious media seems most concerned about making sure gays can serve openly in the military. Homosexuality is, for the post-modern Left, the single most important issue after all. So I'm fine with my tax money going to such an important cause.
But did they have to add images that are offensive to Christians? After all, we all know that when folks are offended, that should mean that the particular expression that caused the offense is hereafter deemed off limits. Right? Anyone? Or does it only matter if you are the right type of person who is offended, with others not being that important? There are so many things worth noting in a story like this: The hypocrisy of the Left, the shallow and subjective meaning of 'hate speech' and 'offensive speech', the dismal failure that was the SCOTUS's 1948 decision that brought Separation of Church and State into our mainstream national identity, but just enjoy the article. It speaks for what our country will be when final resistance has been eliminated and the post-liberal Left has achieved control.
Well there is offensive then there is beyond offensive. Just can't believe how far it is going.
ReplyDeleteTell me about it. It's so nice to see our tax dollars at work. This, as much as anything illustrates the fundamental flaw in Seperation of Church and State thinking. In short: a picture of Jesus could never receive tax funding as a religious icon (especially if it was by a group that *horrors* didn't support something like homosexuality). But piss on it, and suddenly it's government sponsered art. Pretty easy to see the problem there.
ReplyDelete