FOX: Smithsonian to Remove Ant-Covered Jesus on Cross Video From Exhibit Read more: http: - Polidicks

[B] FOX Smithsonian to Remove Ant-Covered Jesus on Cross Video From Exhibit [/B] [release]The Smithsonian Institution's National Portrait Gallery will remove a four-minute video feature that contains an image of Jesus on a crucifix covered in ants, its director said in a statement released on Tuesday. Martin Sullivan, director of the museum, said the video by David Wojnarowicz shows images that "may be" offensive to some. "I regret that some reports about the exhibit have created an impression that the video is intentionally sacrilegious," the statement read. "In fact, the artists's intention was to depict the suffering of an AIDS victim. It was not the museum's intention to offend. We are removing the video today. The museum's statement at the exhibition's entrance, 'This exhibition contains mature themes,' will remain in place." Earlier Tuesday, the museum was under fire for hosting the exhibit that also includes depictions of homoerotic art and an image of Ellen DeGeneres grabbing her breasts. The exhibit outraged conservative leaders and prompted some Republican lawmakers to call for a congressional investigation. “Absolutely, we should look at their funds,” Georgia Rep. Jack Kingston, a member of the House Appropriations Committee, told Fox News. “If they’ve got money to squander like this – of a crucifix being eaten by ants, of Ellen DeGeneres grabbing her breasts, men in chains, naked brothers kissing – then I think we should look at their budget.” The video, “A Fire in My Belly,” is included in the National Portrait Gallery’s exhibit titled, “Hide/Seek: Difference and Desire in American Portraiture,” which is scheduled to run through the Christmas season. National Portrait Gallery historian and exhibit co-curator David C. Ward told CNSNews.com, [url=http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/smithsonian-christmas-season-exhibit-fea]which first reported the story,[/url] that “A Fire in My Belly” reflects the “violent, disturbing and hallucinatory” aspects of the AIDS epidemic. “'Fire in My Belly' is an example of political engagement in artistic form with the AIDS epidemic by an artist deeply concerned with the exploration of our response to that medical and societal calamity,” Ward said. “That it is violent, disturbing, and hallucinatory precisely replicates the impact of the disease itself on people and a society that could barely comprehend its magnitude." Kingston saw it differently and called it, “in-your-face perversion paid for by tax dollars.” And incoming House Majority Leader Eric Cantor, R-Va., called it an "outrageous use of taxpayer money and an obvious attempt to offend Christians during the Christmas season." "When a museum receives taxpayer money, the taxpayers have a right to expect that the museum will uphold common standards of decency. The museum should pull the exhibit and be prepared for serious questions come budget time,” Cantor said through a spokesman. The exhibit also drew the ire of Catholic League President Bill Donohue, who said it is “hate speech.” “This is clearly designed to offend,” he told Fox News. “What concerns me is that the government is underwriting this assault on Christian sensibilities calculated to offend during the Christmas season.” The Smithsonian declined numerous opportunities to comment on the controversy. Spokeswoman Linda St. Thomas told the New York Post that it does not comment “on people’s opinions on art.” She also told the newspaper that while the museum receives funding from Congress, the exhibits are funded through private donations. But Kingston refuted that assertion. “For them to say this is not tax-funded is absurd,” he said, noting that 65 percent of the Smithsonian budget comes from taxpayers and that the National Portrait Gallery receives $5.8 million in tax dollars. “If the art community wants to do it, they should do it on their own nickel, but they are doing it in a building that is paid for by the public, with staff that is on the federal payroll,” he said. Kingston said he was not sure what form a congressional investigation would take, but he said some options included “calling them up in front of the Appropriations Committee, asking for some resignations, auditing all their budget – all their books.” “We need to move in that direction,” he said. “As stewards of the tax dollars in these very difficult times, we don’t have the money to squander like this.”[/release] source: [url]http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/11/30/smithsonian-remove-ant-covered-jesus-cross-video-exhibit/#ixzz16oYkwrVV[/url] Really, the Smithsonian had to pull this stunt? And near (and through) Christmas too? UGH. There is a screen cap of the video in the source if you really want to see it.

That IS kind of fucked up. Doesn't even belong in a museum.

[quote]Earlier Tuesday, the museum was under fire for hosting the exhibit that also includes depictions of homoerotic art and an image of Ellen DeGeneres grabbing her breasts. The exhibit outraged conservative leaders and prompted some Republican lawmakers to call for a congressional investigation. “Absolutely, we should look at their funds,” Georgia Rep. Jack Kingston, a member of the House Appropriations Committee, told Fox News. “If they’ve got money to squander like this – of a crucifix being eaten by ants, of Ellen DeGeneres grabbing her breasts, men in chains, naked brothers kissing – then I think we should look at their budget.”[/quote] [quote]Kingston saw it differently and called it, “in-your-face perversion paid for by tax dollars.” And incoming House Majority Leader Eric Cantor, R-Va., called it an "outrageous use of taxpayer money and an obvious attempt to offend Christians during the Christmas season." [/quote] Don't get you panties in a bunch now Kingston [editline]30th November 2010[/editline] [QUOTE=Glaber;26416158] the smithonean [/QUOTE] The who?

Anyone else sick of idiots getting offended over the tiniest little things?

[QUOTE=stewe231;26416210]That IS kind of fucked up. Doesn't even belong in a museum.[/QUOTE] [IMG]http://i.imgur.com/cA5MS.jpg[/IMG]

[quote]FOX: Smithsonian to Remove Ant-Covered Jesus on Cross Video From Exhibit [highlight]Read more: http:[/highlight][/quote] what is this bullshit

Something I thought I removed as you were posting. The whole read more thing is something Fox News' websites does to direct people to the article when they copy parts of it. Can a moderator please fix the title?

Woah woah woah, back up for a second. [quote]When a museum receives taxpayer money, the taxpayers have a right to expect that the museum will uphold common standards of decency.[/quote] Please someone enlighten me on what "common standards of decency" are. Seriously, this is art. People need to stop being so hypersensitive. It's a piece of art. If you don't like it, don't look at it. Furthermore, it's not as if this is such a big deal. It's not as if the museum is displaying 2girls1cup or anything.

[QUOTE=Glaber;26416603]Something I thought I removed as you were posting. The whole read more thing is something Fox News' websites does to direct people to the article when they copy parts of it. Can a moderator please fix the title?[/QUOTE] That's what you get for copying the title exactly. [i]That's what you get[/i]

what would have happened if the pope endorsed orkin?

Why did they even add the image if it was about AIDS victims? Did Jesus have AIDS or something?

Because it's obviously that straightforward. It could be the artist felt that the piece reflected how the church has oppressed people with AIDS and this contributes to their suffering. It could be anything.

Why was this in a museum exactly? Not trying to sound like smartass but does it have any historical value at all or what?

[QUOTE=Lambeth;26416747]That's what you get for copying the title exactly. [i]That's what you get[/i][/QUOTE] Would you rather not be able to find the article should I forget to include the source?

[img]http://a57.foxnews.com/static/managed/img/U.S./604/341/crucifix.jpg[/img] I think it's kind of a cool picture. [quote]“If they’ve got money to squander like this – of a crucifix being eaten by ants, of Ellen DeGeneres grabbing her breasts, men in chains, [i]naked brothers kissing[/i] – then I think we should look at their budget.”[/quote] Because it's only "artistic" and "deep" if it's a man and a woman kissing :colbert:

I think the ants make it awesome looking

[QUOTE=Leaf Runner;26417469][img_thumb]http://a57.foxnews.com/static/managed/img/U.S./604/341/crucifix.jpg[/img_thumb][/QUOTE] I bet that's how Jesus would really feel if he knew how much the church had abused his name over the past 2000 years.

The ants seem to add a lot to Christ's suffering, almost augmenting the pain and gore imbued in the crucifix itself

Social conservatives. /thread.

Art? Being offensive/questionable? How dare they! Why, their entire gallery should consist of wholesome, good Americana art and nothing else. We should leave those disgusting perversions that make us think to the liberal socialists in the Louvre Also, 2 things. 1: [quote]The exhibit also drew the ire of Catholic League President Bill Donohue, who said it is “hate speech.” “This is clearly designed to offend,” he told Fox News. [/quote] The real christmas miracle here is that anyone still listens to this blubbering shithead. He has literally never said a single thing of worth in the public forum. 2: [quote]Kingston said he was not sure what form a congressional investigation would take, but he said some options included “calling them up in front of the Appropriations Committee, asking for some resignations, auditing all their budget – all their books.” “We need to move in that direction,” he said. “As stewards of the tax dollars in these very difficult times, we don’t have the money to squander like this.” [/quote] Someone's dreaming if they think this is worthy of investigation at all. And god forbid we waste money on something creative and thought-provoking, we need more money to pour into the defense budget.

With the "They're spending out tax dollars on this shit?", would you tell the military they aren't allowed to use any money for aiding the locals because you don't approve of it? You give them money to provide a cultural preserve for all works of art, not just the ones you like. Got a problem with it? How about you create some works of art that you like that are worthy of being in the Smithsonian? I don't think that's likely to happen though because the highest level of artistic expression by these kind of uber-conservatives are Country songs and Political cartoons.

Good riddance, ants are scary.

Ant covered jesus on a cross....okay.

[QUOTE=Leaf Runner;26417469] Because it's only "artistic" and "deep" if it's a man and a woman kissing :colbert:[/QUOTE] True art only depicts heterosexual incest.

I don't see the part where they say their replacing it with maggots.

[QUOTE=Explosions;26417790]I bet that's how Jesus would really feel if he knew how much the church had abused his name over the past 2000 years.[/QUOTE] Made you a Christmas avatar: [IMG]http://i52.tinypic.com/2wrdtmu.jpg[/IMG]

[QUOTE=Pantz76;26418730]Made you a Christmas avatar: [img_thumb]http://i52.tinypic.com/2wrdtmu.jpg[/img_thumb][/QUOTE] Merry Christmas!

[b]THAT'S SO FUCKING METAL! :rock:[/b]

Cause they want to fucking Christianize everything oh my god.

Sacrilegious art? Say it ain't so!