Opinions and musings on religion, philosophy, science, politics, and life from a conservative Catholic neurosurgeon.
Student stands by “controversial” mural that shows life of a man ending in marriage and fatherhood
Utterly horrifying!LOLGlad the school reversed this idiocy. What a climate of hysteria, eh?
"Glad the school reversed this idiocy."Exactly what was "reversed". No one told this student to change the mural. Some people complained. The school said they didn't think the mural was a problem. Where was the reversal?For that matter, who called the mural "obscene"? Critics complained that the mural was not inclusive. It isn't. The school decided that a non-inclusive mural was okay.
Inclusivity means excluding the nuclear family. Got it."The school decided that a non-inclusive mural was okay."Freedom survives another day. Phew. Yeah, so I guess we should all just shut up now. Right? TRISH
Oh, and you're wrong on the facts. Again. "The section of the mural featuring the family was ordered painted over by school officials. Bierendy said she was notified prior but she was still “pretty upset.” The Superintendent of Warwick Schools Peter Horoschak has since stepped in and asked that the student be allowed to finish the mural however she sees fit."Link: http://630wpro.com/goout.asp?u=http://www.630wpro.com/Article.asp?id=2430285&spid=38784Here's what happened from what I can gather from news stories. High school student Liz Bierendy submitted her idea for a mural to school administrators who approved it. She painted it. Some people complained to the vice principal who then had a talk with Liz about it being non-inclusive. Administrators ordered that it be painted over. A local radio station brought the story to light and people reacted with outrage. The superintendent called the vice principal and told him to allow the mural. So yes, the idiocy was reversed. The nuclear family was deemed offensive, and...after much whining from people who despise family, someone with some sense told the whining censors to shove it. Great. TRISH
Cheers, Trish. That is, in fact, what I meant by reversal. I guess anon did not understand the 'offensive' section of the rings was to be covered up (one story I had read said it was, and then later uncovered). As for being 'inclusive', I am the son of a single parent - now married for 18 years and with two kids - who sees NO problem with the mural. Strange how the people who want our children explicitly educated on such adult topics as homosexuality and abortion in grade school take offence to a mural depicting marriage in a High-school, isn't it? I reminded of Stoker's Dracula when he is exposed to light, garlic, a cross, or holy water. Only with these folks it is any form of traditional morality...That and they generally don't dress as well as the Count.
Also, here's a quote from the artist:She says that school administrators told her“that it may be offensive to some people because it is not how society views a family anymore because some people may not grow up with a mother and the whole marriage type thing may be a religious symbol.”Heterosexual marriage is now "a religious symbol" How long before this becomes a separation of church and state issue? "I'm being oppressed by your depiction of a married couple and child on the wall! Waaaaa!"Yes, the family is changing. Not naturally, but because some people are making it change. And as we become more "tolerant" of "different kinds of families", they become less tolerant of ours. You can't paint THAT! Some people are raised by single moms! Some people are raised by two moms! How dare you! Paint over it! That's a religious expression! Intimidation and censorship were attempted in this situation and they failed. But they will be back again, and again, and again. Be vigilant. Fight back (figuratively and non-violently, of course).TRISH
"Exactly what was "reversed". No one told this student to change the mural."No, they told her that they were going to paint over her work in progress. Totally different. Here's a rule of thumb I like to follow. Don't get your facts from liberals. They usually carry out analysis with a false set of premises.JQ