How many times must we relive the foolishness of art curators being "shocked" that people don't like paying for art that attacks Jesus and Christians?
The
curator elites at the Smithsonian's National Portrait Gallery were
happily abusing the trust of the American taxpayer, with radical gay
activists pushing a gay agenda, replete with the religiously bigoted,
sadomasochistic and homoerotic fare, all under the auspices of "art."
Then something happened. The public complained. Now these radicals are
shocked - shocked! - that the "censors" are out to destroy their
"artistic freedom."
It's like a bad rendition of "Groundhog Day." How many times must we relive this foolishness?
The sponsors tell us that "Hide/Seek" is "the first major exhibition to
examine the influence of gay and lesbian artists in creating modern
American portraiture," and how these gay and lesbian artists have made
"essential contributions to both the art of portraiture and to the
creation of modern American culture."
But that isn't enough. Theirs is a political message as part of a
political agenda. To quote from their program, they want to strike a
blow for "the struggle for justice, so that people and groups can claim
their full inheritance in America's promise of equality, inclusion, and
social dignity."
"Social dignity?" I suspect those are not the first words most
Americans would use to describe a video that was part of the exhibit
that featured images of ants crawling over Jesus Christ on a crucifix.
It is simply imperative that any "art" display by gays insult, in the
deepest way possible, the sensibilities of Christians.
But
apparently this gay and lesbian "art" needs to push more, more,
evermore. So we have depictions of homoeroticism, including images of
male genitalia on display; pinups of naked men, and paintings of two
brothers, buck naked, making out. Still there must be more, so we have
sadomasochistic themes, like imagery of mummified human remains and a
portrait of a man devouring himself. Each has a "deep" meaning, see.
Each is "art."
And you, American taxpayer, you are making it
possible. Your $761 million annually to the Smithsonian, and $5.8
million annually to the National Portrait Gallery makes it possible for
these gay activists to pitch their tents inside, put up their displays,
call it "art," invite the world - even children on "Family and Friends
Day" on November 21 - and then scream bloody murder when someone
complains.
Yes, there were complaints, with the Republican leadership in the House
condemning this abuse of taxpayer funds. (The Democrats continue to be
silent, no surprise.) The curators conceded there were an avalanche of
complaints. So many that they finally agreed to remove the offensive
video with bugs on Jesus Christ.
Horrors! Censorship of the highest order! Stop the madness! Washington
Post art critic Blake Gopnik protested that in America, no religious
group "gets to declare what the rest of us should see and hear and
think about. Aren't those kinds of declarations just what extremist
imams get up to, in countries with less freedom?"
It's mind-boggling that the same people who so quickly screech at the
first sign of a religion near a government building don't get the point
that it should be equally wrong to have a sign of anti-religion in a
government building.
And don't they see the richest irony of them all? There is that which
they find offensive - a creche with the Baby Jesus on government
property, and that which they celebrate and defend as "art" - a
sacrilegious defamation of Jesus Christ, crucified. If it's wrong to
promote the Christian religion with tax dollars, isn't it many times
worse to trash the Christian religion with tax dollars?
Like the public broadcasters, the public gallery operators hunger to
rise above the dreary, pedestrian tastes of those rubes in middle
America who revere Jesus and aren't captivated by the "creative
resistance" of the gay artistic vanguard. They demand "equality" and
"inclusion" for the gay lobby, but there is no inclusion for the rest
of us when it comes to what art they will declare advances the cause of
"justice." Curators ought to be wise enough to know there are limits of
government-funded art.
So the curator announced finally that he was pulling the video of ants
walking over the crucifix. But he offered no apology. In fact, he
insisted that contrary to allegations, this "art" was not "meant to
offend." That's simply dishonest. Anyone with an IQ greater than that
of a potato chip knows this was precisely what they intended. This to
them is the Christmas spirit.
