Bigotry Versus Truth. Christians horrified by students art

[The Apollonian Systems]

who made you the art police?

Well, I might not be an expert, but am I not still entitled to my own opinion? I am not sure what kind of benefit edgy content like this has for society. Indeed, I think it has more potential to incite religious hatred, which is not exactly a desirable social outcome.

Let me know when Christianity is an oppressed minority in America and this my actually bear weight.

[Necroghastia]

There's not a single piece of artwork you could point to, bar some child's drawing of their family up on the fridge, that would not likely offend someone somewhere.

You really need to take this up with the people that use Christianity to further bigotry.

It's a lack of belief, though.

Why? What about it is offensive to you, personally and specifically? Are you going to deny that there is a large amount of people who use Christianity as a cudgel for bigoted ends? Why do you seemingly take more umbrage at the reminder that these people exist and have damaged many people, than with those so-called Christians themselves? Why are you seemingly more angry with people expressing their trauma through art - in an exhibition specifically meant for that, no less - than with those who caused the trauma? Shouldn't those be the ones causing offense? Being offended at the art is, when you get down to it, victim blaming.

I entreat you to read what I am writing. Did I say the point of art was to cause hatred? Or did I say something else entirely?

So a painting of a marble would offend someone? That is essentially what you are saying.

Probably, yeah. Y'ever see how many people get up in arms over Duchamp's Fountain, or the works of Jackson Pollock?

It is a belief that there is no God or Gods. Every opinion is a belief. Saying that we exist is a belief, almost every sentence, if not every sentence, is a belief.

What defines a religion, to you?

I believe that God forever loves us and that he will never abandon us. The teachings of the Bible go hand in hand with the idea that God saved us from our sins via Jesus. You can express trauma respectfully, in other words respectful of a religion. And I am intrigued by what prompted this trauma.

I notice that you fail to respond to the main crux of my post.

Why? What about it is offensive to you, personally and specifically? Are you going to deny that there is a large amount of people who use Christianity as a cudgel for bigoted ends? Why do you seemingly take more umbrage at the reminder that these people exist and have damaged many people, than with those so-called Christians themselves? Why are you seemingly more angry with people expressing their trauma through art - in an exhibition specifically meant for that, no less - than with those who caused the trauma? Shouldn't those be the ones causing offense? Being offended at the art is, when you get down to it, victim blaming.

They are using the art for hatred, as you appear to be stating.

Where did I state that?

Art is not for the expression of hatred of a religion. I don't care what you say or what you do, there is nothing that justifies disrespecting a religion.

Art is for whatever the artist wants. But if you don't care what I have to say, then there is no point in posting.

[Heldervin]

So a painting of a marble would offend someone? That is essentially what you are saying.

Probably, yeah. Y'ever see how many people get up in arms over Duchamp's Fountain, or the works of Jackson Pollock?

It is a belief that there is no God or Gods. Every opinion is a belief. Saying that we exist is a belief, almost every sentence, if not every sentence, is a belief.

What defines a religion, to you?

I believe that God forever loves us and that he will never abandon us. The teachings of the Bible go hand in hand with the idea that God saved us from our sins via Jesus. You can express trauma respectfully, in other words respectful of a religion. And I am intrigued by what prompted this trauma.

I notice that you fail to respond to the main crux of my post.

Why? What about it is offensive to you, personally and specifically? Are you going to deny that there is a large amount of people who use Christianity as a cudgel for bigoted ends? Why do you seemingly take more umbrage at the reminder that these people exist and have damaged many people, than with those so-called Christians themselves? Why are you seemingly more angry with people expressing their trauma through art - in an exhibition specifically meant for that, no less - than with those who caused the trauma? Shouldn't those be the ones causing offense? Being offended at the art is, when you get down to it, victim blaming.

They are using the art for hatred, as you appear to be stating.

Where did I state that?

Art is not for the expression of hatred of a religion. I don't care what you say or what you do, there is nothing that justifies disrespecting a religion.

Art is for whatever the artist wants. But if you don't care what I have to say, then there is no point in posting.

How would a marble painting, a painting of a classic item, offend anyone?

A religion is a set of beliefs regarding the concept of God and a set of values that typically are commanded to be obeyed.

Then what is the main crux?

"...then I can only assume that they don't like the callout of using something that ought to be about love and community for the goal of hatred and division."

I am simply stating my thoughts and opinions, this is a thread for debate for heaven's sake!

[The Apollonian Systems]

There's not a single piece of artwork you could point to, bar some child's drawing of their family up on the fridge, that would not likely offend someone somewhere.

You really need to take this up with the people that use Christianity to further bigotry.

It's a lack of belief, though.

Why? What about it is offensive to you, personally and specifically? Are you going to deny that there is a large amount of people who use Christianity as a cudgel for bigoted ends? Why do you seemingly take more umbrage at the reminder that these people exist and have damaged many people, than with those so-called Christians themselves? Why are you seemingly more angry with people expressing their trauma through art - in an exhibition specifically meant for that, no less - than with those who caused the trauma? Shouldn't those be the ones causing offense? Being offended at the art is, when you get down to it, victim blaming.

I entreat you to read what I am writing. Did I say the point of art was to cause hatred? Or did I say something else entirely?

So a painting of a marble would offend someone? That is essentially what you are saying.

It is a belief that there is no God or Gods. Every opinion is a belief. Saying that we exist is a belief, almost every sentence, if not every sentence, is a belief.

I believe that God forever loves us and that he will never abandon us. The teachings of the Bible go hand in hand with the idea that God saved us from our sins via Jesus. You can express trauma respectfully, in other words respectful of a religion. And I am intrigued by what prompted this trauma.

They are using the art for hatred, as you appear to be stating. Art is not for the expression of hatred of a religion. I don't care what you say or what you do, there is nothing that justifies disrespecting a religion.

Art is for whatever purpose the artists wishes it to be. Grow up.

[Heldervin]

So a painting of a marble would offend someone? That is essentially what you are saying.

It is a belief that there is no God or Gods. Every opinion is a belief. Saying that we exist is a belief, almost every sentence, if not every sentence, is a belief.

I believe that God forever loves us and that he will never abandon us. The teachings of the Bible go hand in hand with the idea that God saved us from our sins via Jesus. You can express trauma respectfully, in other words respectful of a religion. And I am intrigued by what prompted this trauma.

They are using the art for hatred, as you appear to be stating. Art is not for the expression of hatred of a religion. I don't care what you say or what you do, there is nothing that justifies disrespecting a religion.

Art is for whatever purpose the artists wishes it to be. Grow up.

Do please tell me, what am I supposed to interpret that as? Specifically the last part, pray tell?

[Persnia]

i think Christianity is a good religion but many people use it for bad

[Necroghastia]

Probably, yeah. Y'ever see how many people get up in arms over Duchamp's Fountain, or the works of Jackson Pollock?

What defines a religion, to you?

I notice that you fail to respond to the main crux of my post.


Where did I state that?

Art is for whatever the artist wants. But if you don't care what I have to say, then there is no point in posting.

How would a marble painting, a painting of a classic item, offend anyone?

People find reasons to be offended. Why were people offended about the things I mentioned?

A religion is a set of beliefs regarding the concept of God and a set of values that typically are commanded to be obeyed.

So not something atheism fits. There are no values ascribed to God, nor are there a set of values or commandments.

Then what is the main crux?

...I quoted it, dude.

Why? What about it is offensive to you, personally and specifically? Are you going to deny that there is a large amount of people who use Christianity as a cudgel for bigoted ends? Why do you seemingly take more umbrage at the reminder that these people exist and have damaged many people, than with those so-called Christians themselves? Why are you seemingly more angry with people expressing their trauma through art - in an exhibition specifically meant for that, no less - than with those who caused the trauma? Shouldn't those be the ones causing offense? Being offended at the art is, when you get down to it, victim blaming.

"...then I can only assume that they don't like the callout of using something that ought to be about love and community for the goal of hatred and division."

The "they" there I thought rather obviously referred to people using religion to further bigotry. Not the artist.

[Page]

"Edgy Nonsense" is the worst way to describe this.
You and some others seem to just be defending the school board, which is disgusting.

I don't approve of homophobia, but I think it is understandable that many people see this art work as being offensive and hostile to Christianity.

Christianity is hostile to us.

[The Apollonian Systems]

Art is for whatever purpose the artists wishes it to be. Grow up.

Do please tell me, what am I supposed to interpret that as? Specifically the last part, pray tell?

Do you just lack basic reading comprehension? I’m not saying. That the art wasn’t hateful towards fundamentalists. I’m saying that art can in fact be hateful. That’s an entirely legitimate reason to make art. Art is not tied down into certain types of acceptable meanings. And there are things that justify disrespect. Respect is earned, and frankly the Abrahamic religions at the least don’t deserve it.

I told you to grow up.

[Rosartemis]

"There is no hate like Christian love," after all. "Jesus loves you" - except when you decide to live true to yourself. This is the rhetoric you often find in anti-LGBT Christian circles, who view LGBT individuals as utterly irredeemable, condemning them to a one-way ticket to hell. It is an absolutely absurd belief. The teacher censoring the art is only proving the point, religion is often hijacked by extremists to control and destroy the lives of queer people. This is nothing new.

Funnily enough, I don't see the art as speaking out against God. I feel that it's speaking out against the people claiming to bring His word. God loves you, but not enough to save you. Is this really the God who created Heaven and Earth? Or is this the will of bigots who feel they are acting in His name? Why must people be killed for being themselves? Why is it so sinful to be a boy who loves a boy? Or a girl who loves a girl? Or to be a girl born in a boy's body? Or a boy born in a girl's body? Or be both or even neither? Is it such a crime to live your truth?

I have a friend who is transfemme and a devout Catholic. She believes deeply in God and seeks His guidance in times of need. However, she is terrified of the people who follow the same God. Given the chance, these so-called loving Christians would mock, ostracize, and, God forbid, harm her. She has overheard the vile things "loving Christians" say about queer people - that they're unnatural, sinning, or sexual deviants. All she wants is to live as herself. When she was told that her feelings were unnatural, she was advised to pray and ask for forgiveness. But what guidance can you seek from a God you love when you've been taught He hates you? For what do you clasp your hands in prayer?

The pain she feels - and that I know many other queer people feel when confronted by a cross - is fear. Fear of rejection by peers, fear of isolation. These are not abstract anxieties but real, lived experiences. She clasps her hands in prayer, but there’s a nagging voice at the back of her mind that says, "Love? Acceptance? When was I ever given that?"

It is a cruel irony that the faith meant to offer solace and love instead becomes a source of dread and exclusion for so many. The hypocrisy of those who claim to follow Christ’s teachings while spreading hatred cannot be overstated. They weaponize faith to inflict harm, twisting the message of love into one of condemnation and cruelty. This is the brutal reality faced by my friend and countless others in the LGBTQ+ community. They are forced to navigate a world where their very existence is condemned by those who profess to embody God's love. It is a fight for the right to exist without fear, to live authentically, and to find genuine love and acceptance. The question that lingers, the question my friend grapples with every day, is how to reconcile her faith with a community that seems determined to reject her.

So why the fuck is this the case?

Why can't people just be accepted for who they are?

It is genuinely disgusting to me. This is why, throughout my life, I have avoided religion and spoken out against it. My grievance has always been, "If they cannot accept others for who they are, then they do not believe in the God they say they believe in." Of course, there are genuinely loving Christians out there who accept queer people, and I love these blessed souls. But there are far too many people in power who do not. I can't tell you just how much anger I feel whenever I hear someone say, "But this is what God gave you, why don't you be satisfied with it?" It's awful, monstrous, and quite frankly, it makes me want to kick their teeth in.

The hypocrisy is infuriating. These so-called faithful preach love and acceptance from one side of their mouths while spitting venomous hate and bigotry from the other. They hide behind scripture to justify their prejudice, twisting the teachings of their faith to fit their narrow-minded views. It’s a perversion of what religion should stand for - compassion, understanding, and unconditional love. Religion should be making people move towards it, not away from it, but with how they treat people who don't conform the norm, I'm not surprised at all in the slightest.

I never went through this kind of religious pain growing up. Even though I am a cis woman who came out as lesbian at the age of six, my parents did the standard, "That's not normal, the Bible says so," but I didn't care, didn't ask, and got a girlfriend at eleven. You can't make this up, I live in an extremely religious country. The disparity is that I had plenty of friends around that time who were similarly not straight (or at the very least didn't fit the traditional mold), and they were chastised and forced to deny what they felt. Around eighth grade, I watched one of my male friends get yelled at by his mother for the grave crime of... wearing something with a bright color. It's insane.

Even though he was straight, he was still told that it was bad to be gay and that he was going to burn in hell because of it. Needless to say, he stopped wearing color. It was absolutely disgusting to see a "loving" mother say that to her child.

In the same way, it is what many queer people grew up with, they are taught that if they don't conform, they're sinners. If they don't want to burn in hell, they must beg for forgiveness from a God they were taught hates them. The art shown here, "God loves you, but not enough to save you," carries such an amazing message because it rings true. If not for a few pages written by old, dusty, hateful men several centuries ago, maybe people wouldn't be scared to live as themselves. But no, we just have to pick up the pieces and put up with bigots in the highest seats of government.

Pray that all people would be loved for who they are. LGBT rights are human rights. As mankind, we must dismantle the structures of hate and replace them with foundations of love and acceptance. Only then can we hope to build a truly just and inclusive society, where everyone is valued for who they are, not condemned for who they love. God willing.

[Emotional Support Crocodile]

Just try to remember to hate the religion and not the believer. Then it's all dandy.

[Decapoleis]

Imagine you are a queer person raised around Christianity. You've been told that you'll "go to hell"
Multiple times.

A school art display is going to happen soon, and the theme is "Trauma"... And you make a art peice based around your religious trauma.

A girl at a school created a art peice involving just that. In the background, there are many bible pages with rainbow fluid leaking from them. In the foreground is praying hands holding a bloody rosary, with dark crimson words stating "God loves you, but not enough to save you"

Problem is, her school board found it offensive and are now trying to censor it out of the art show.

In my opinion, this is disgusting. They prove the point made in the art. When she calls out their bigotry, it is censored instead of being shown to the public. She did an amazing job and conveying the message and showed the truth, but bigots will deny truth. Bigots will be bigots. In the end, this school board ended up proving her message with their actions.

Not all parents are happy to show their children blasphemous works. It's a question of freedom of education, which is why I much prefer public schools to public ones: don't like your child's school choices? Send him to another one, the market is free!

[Rosartemis]

Imagine you are a queer person raised around Christianity. You've been told that you'll "go to hell"
Multiple times.

A school art display is going to happen soon, and the theme is "Trauma"... And you make a art peice based around your religious trauma.

A girl at a school created a art peice involving just that. In the background, there are many bible pages with rainbow fluid leaking from them. In the foreground is praying hands holding a bloody rosary, with dark crimson words stating "God loves you, but not enough to save you"

Problem is, her school board found it offensive and are now trying to censor it out of the art show.

In my opinion, this is disgusting. They prove the point made in the art. When she calls out their bigotry, it is censored instead of being shown to the public. She did an amazing job and conveying the message and showed the truth, but bigots will deny truth. Bigots will be bigots. In the end, this school board ended up proving her message with their actions.

Not all parents are happy to show their children blasphemous works. It's a question of freedom of education, which is why I much prefer public schools to public ones: don't like your child's school choices? Send him to another one, the market is free!

Being LGBT is hardly blasphemous, and your usage of freedom of education is equally flawed. Your school is prohibited from discriminating against you based on religious beliefs, as clearly outlined in the First Amendment. It's the school that would be in violation, not the so-called "blaspheming" artist.

[Decapoleis]

Not all parents are happy to show their children blasphemous works. It's a question of freedom of education, which is why I much prefer public schools to public ones: don't like your child's school choices? Send him to another one, the market is free!

Being LGBT is hardly blasphemous, and your usage of freedom of education is equally flawed. Your school is prohibited from discriminating against you based on religious beliefs, as clearly outlined in the First Amendment. It's the school that would be in violation, not the so-called "blaspheming" artist.

I was not talking about LGBT, the promotion of which is anti-biblical anyway, so I would understand if LGBT art were banned in a context where all or most people were Christian. By blasphemy I meant the blood-stained rosary.

And I'm not American, so I don't know about American amendments.

[Rosartemis]

Being LGBT is hardly blasphemous, and your usage of freedom of education is equally flawed. Your school is prohibited from discriminating against you based on religious beliefs, as clearly outlined in the First Amendment. It's the school that would be in violation, not the so-called "blaspheming" artist.

I was not talking about LGBT, the promotion of which is anti-biblical anyway, so I would understand if it were banned in a context where all or most people were Christian. By blasphemy I meant the blood-stained rosary.

And I'm not American, so I don't know about American amendments.

The art itself symbolizes religious trauma, particularly that experienced by queer individuals. The only scenario in which it could be deemed "anti-biblical" would be if it depicted a burning Bible or something along the same vein, which clearly it does not, and I doubt that was the artist intention either. The blood-stained rosary also lacks any hint of blasphemy. What I find troubling about your post is the mentality that suggests, "You don't like your child's school discriminating against them? Tough luck, nobody cares, just switch schools." It's hardly a compassionate response.

Regardless of whether you are American or not (I myself am not American and don't live anywhere near the U.S.), the situation occurred in an American school.

Supporting the school faculty's attempt to censor the art on "religious grounds" is equally reprehensible. It's not blasphemy, and labeling it as such spits on the message of the art. It's ironic how people often end up proving the art's point - religion is too often used to justify hate.

[Neu California]

Imagine you are a queer person raised around Christianity. You've been told that you'll "go to hell"
Multiple times.

A school art display is going to happen soon, and the theme is "Trauma"... And you make a art peice based around your religious trauma.

A girl at a school created a art peice involving just that. In the background, there are many bible pages with rainbow fluid leaking from them. In the foreground is praying hands holding a bloody rosary, with dark crimson words stating "God loves you, but not enough to save you"

Problem is, her school board found it offensive and are now trying to censor it out of the art show.

In my opinion, this is disgusting. They prove the point made in the art. When she calls out their bigotry, it is censored instead of being shown to the public. She did an amazing job and conveying the message and showed the truth, but bigots will deny truth. Bigots will be bigots. In the end, this school board ended up proving her message with their actions.

Not all parents are happy to show their children blasphemous works. It's a question of freedom of education, which is why I much prefer public schools to public ones: don't like your child's school choices? Send him to another one, the market is free!

You prefer public schools to public schools?

[The Xenopolis Confederation]

Imagine you are a queer person raised around Christianity. You've been told that you'll "go to hell"
Multiple times.

A school art display is going to happen soon, and the theme is "Trauma"... And you make a art peice based around your religious trauma.

A girl at a school created a art peice involving just that. In the background, there are many bible pages with rainbow fluid leaking from them. In the foreground is praying hands holding a bloody rosary, with dark crimson words stating "God loves you, but not enough to save you"

Problem is, her school board found it offensive and are now trying to censor it out of the art show.

In my opinion, this is disgusting. They prove the point made in the art. When she calls out their bigotry, it is censored instead of being shown to the public. She did an amazing job and conveying the message and showed the truth, but bigots will deny truth. Bigots will be bigots. In the end, this school board ended up proving her message with their actions.

Not all parents are happy to show their children blasphemous works. It's a question of freedom of education, which is why I much prefer public schools to public ones: don't like your child's school choices? Send him to another one, the market is free!

That sounds good in theory, but one of the problems with religious private schools is the case described in the OP. That girl didn't seem to experience much freedom when her artwork was censored.

[Risottia]

Trolling bigots is fun, but you shouldn't act surprised when they expel you from their club.

[The Xenopolis Confederation]

Trolling bigots is fun, but you shouldn't act surprised when they expel you from their club.

The question is, how much choice did the girl have, in finding herself attending that club?

[Deblar]

Here are some links to the story itself since OP didn't provide any;

1. https://www.advocate.com/news/virginia- ... rd-gay-art

2. https://ffrf.org/news/releases/ffrf-def ... xpression/

Damn. That's powerful - and actually cool too. And this is coming from a Christian

[Pale Dawn]

The art seems fine, i suppose the only question is did it conflict with the schools code of conduct or the parameters of the gallery?

[Zancostan]

if you where part of a religion and somebody mocks it you would be offended too

"You would pretend to be offended while simultaneously feeling like a self-righteous martyr too."

[Zancostan]

Just try to remember to hate the religion and not the believer. Then it's all dandy.

The believers are the ones doing the trauma to you.

[Haganham]

So a painting of a marble would offend someone? That is essentially what you are saying.

Probably, yeah. Y'ever see how many people get up in arms over Duchamp's Fountain, or the works of Jackson Pollock?

Not great examples. Both are deliberately controversial.

[Zancostan]

If you think about it the people who are doing the offending are whoever inflicted the religious trauma on the student.