Oklahoma town to buy statue of Jesus and place it downtown.

techs

Lifer
Sep 26, 2000
28,559
4
0
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/200..._on_re_us/jesus_statue

OK city funds 3rd attempt for public religious art

A conservative Oklahoma City suburb with a history of trying to incorporate religious art into public spaces has approved city funds to help pay for a statue of Jesus Christ to be placed downtown for Christmas, likely leading to another court fight.

The Edmond Visual Arts Commission last month approved $3,900 to help pay for the 26-inch-tall bronze statue titled "Come Unto Me." It will be placed in front of a downtown shop called Sacred Heart Catholic Gifts.

The vote was 6-2 with one member abstaining.


Just last year, the arts commission backed down from a decision to use public funds on a $17,500 statue of Moses at Edmond's First Christian Church. After public outcry, the commission unanimously agreed to allow private donors to buy the city's stake in the statue.

A decade ago, the city about 10 miles north of Oklahoma City, was forced to pay more than $200,000 in legal fees after losing a court battle to keep a cross on its city seal.

"This is the third major unconstitutional effort they've engaged in recent years," said Barry Lynn, executive director of the Washington D.C.-based Americans United for Separation of Church and State. "It's a little surprising, because normally people pause to take a breath before they violate the Constitution again."

June Cartwright, the chair of the commission and who supported funding the latest statue, said the sculpture was viewed simply as a piece of art and not a religious endorsement.

"It is a piece of artwork," Cartwright said. "It doesn't state that it is specifically Jesus. It is whatever you perceive it to be."

The Web site of the work's artist, Rosalind Cook, described the image as depicting Jesus with three children, one cradled in his arm. "Every major line leads to the face of Christ who is the focal point and apex of the sculpture," the site says.




With Oklahoma requiring that before an abortion women get ultrasounds and then requiring the doctor to describe the fetus, plus this attempt to use taxpayer money for Jesus, I just have to ask the question:

What the f*ck is going on in Oklahoma????

Well, maybe its not really Jesus, just an intelligent design?:D

 

Specop 007

Diamond Member
Jan 31, 2005
9,454
0
0
If they voted for it, whats the problem? Ohhh, YOU dont like how THEY want to spend THEIR money is that it?

Gotchya.
 

dmcowen674

No Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
54,889
47
91
www.alienbabeltech.com
Originally posted by: techs

With Oklahoma requiring that befora an abortion women get ultrasounds and then requiring the doctor to describe the fetus, plus this attempt to use taxpayer money for Jesus, I just have to ask the question:

What the f*ck is going on in Oklahoma????

Well, maybe its not really Jesus, just an intelligent design?:D

Oklahoma is just as bad as Georgia.

The southern states in General are bad apples and still the main factor in dividing America.

They should've let the south win and be a seperate Country.
 

Robor

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
16,979
0
76
Originally posted by: Specop 007
If they voted for it, whats the problem? Ohhh, YOU dont like how THEY want to spend THEIR money is that it?

Gotchya.

Church <<<< | >>>> State

That's why. Duh.
 

StageLeft

No Lifer
Sep 29, 2000
70,150
5
0
Intelligent design? Nothing smart about spending $3900 on a 26" statue, WTF
They should've let the south win and be a seperate Country.
Some of the south is so messed up I think that if that happened it would just attack the North again, so it's best to keep them in the mix and disorganized.
 

yowolabi

Diamond Member
Jun 29, 2001
4,183
2
81
Originally posted by: Specop 007
If they voted for it, whats the problem? Ohhh, YOU dont like how THEY want to spend THEIR money is that it?

Gotchya.

Because when it comes to the constitution, it takes more than a townwide 51% vote before you can overrule it.
 

jackschmittusa

Diamond Member
Apr 16, 2003
5,972
1
0
24" tall.

"It is a piece of artwork," Cartwright said. "It doesn't state that it is specifically Jesus. It is whatever you perceive it to be."

They'd save a lot of money and grief if they would buy a garden gnome at K-Mart. They could then perceive it to be Jesus if they wanted.
 

cliftonite

Diamond Member
Jul 15, 2001
6,899
63
91
Originally posted by: Specop 007
If they voted for it, whats the problem? Ohhh, YOU dont like how THEY want to spend THEIR money is that it?

Gotchya.

So quick to defend the 2nd but even quicker to piss on the portions of the constitution that you dont support?
 

Mursilis

Diamond Member
Mar 11, 2001
7,756
11
81
All the more reason the gov't shouldn't be in the arts business anyway. That money would be better spent being returned to taxpayers. Instead, the town will get an expensive legal fight. But gov't knows best, eh?
 

fleshconsumed

Diamond Member
Feb 21, 2002
6,486
2,363
136
Private funds, sure, no problem, however public shouldn't be funding something like this.

And also "Come unto me"? I can only imagine the punts possible...
 

dphantom

Diamond Member
Jan 14, 2005
4,763
327
126
There is no such thing anywhere in the Constitution about separation of Church and State. What it says is the government not establishing a religion. Religion and Christianity specifically were tightly interwoven into our early government. Our Founders had a firm belief in the role of religion and were intenet on ensuring nothing like the Church of England would happen. What they did not intend is to promote the secularization we see today which in actuality is simply another religion anyway. One where man is predominant and not our Lord.

That is what the fight is over.
 

IronWing

No Lifer
Jul 20, 2001
72,376
32,949
136
I guess the voters there like to waste their tax dollars on pointless litigation. Allows them to feel like martyrs instead of the dumbasses they really are.
 

manowar821

Diamond Member
Mar 1, 2007
6,063
0
0
Originally posted by: ironwing
I guess the voters there like to waste their tax dollars on pointless litigation. Allows them to feel like martyrs instead of the dumbasses they really are.

That's the fun part about religions fundamentalists, if they loose a fight, they think they won something. :D
 

umbrella39

Lifer
Jun 11, 2004
13,816
1,126
126
Originally posted by: cliftonite
Originally posted by: Specop 007
If they voted for it, whats the problem? Ohhh, YOU dont like how THEY want to spend THEIR money is that it?

Gotchya.

So quick to defend the 2nd but even quicker to piss on the portions of the constitution that you dont support?

Shhh. Don't clue him in.
 

Kirby

Lifer
Apr 10, 2006
12,028
2
0
Originally posted by: fleshconsumed
Private funds, sure, no problem, however public shouldn't be funding something like this.

And also "Come unto me"? I can only imagine the punts possible...

Jesus plays football? :p
 

halik

Lifer
Oct 10, 2000
25,696
1
0
ACLU will sue, they will lose again and maybe the idiots that live there will realize that the citi council is a bunch of fucktards?
 

halik

Lifer
Oct 10, 2000
25,696
1
0
Originally posted by: Specop 007
If they voted for it, whats the problem? Ohhh, YOU dont like how THEY want to spend THEIR money is that it?

Gotchya.

If they vote to build separate drinking fountains for whites, is that their money also? Just illustrating the enormous flaw in your argument...
 

AstroManLuca

Lifer
Jun 24, 2004
15,628
5
81
They should instead build an overpass and wait for automotive fluids to leak down and create an image of the Virgin Mary.
 

halik

Lifer
Oct 10, 2000
25,696
1
0
Originally posted by: dphantom
There is no such thing anywhere in the Constitution about separation of Church and State. What it says is the government not establishing a religion. Religion and Christianity specifically were tightly interwoven into our early government. Our Founders had a firm belief in the role of religion and were intenet on ensuring nothing like the Church of England would happen. What they did not intend is to promote the secularization we see today which in actuality is simply another religion anyway. One where man is predominant and not our Lord.

That is what the fight is over.

1)You managed to contradict yourself in the first 2 sentences.


2)You're completely wrong in your argument - Thomas Jefferson (you mentioned the founding fathers...) was the person that came up with the notion of separation of church and state. Learn some history before you talk out of your rear end.
 

bamacre

Lifer
Jul 1, 2004
21,029
2
61
Originally posted by: Skoorb
Intelligent design? Nothing smart about spending $3900 on a 26" statue, WTF
They should've let the south win and be a seperate Country.
Some of the south is so messed up I think that if that happened it would just attack the North again, so it's best to keep them in the mix and disorganized.

Attack the North again?
 

Robor

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
16,979
0
76
Originally posted by: dphantom
There is no such thing anywhere in the Constitution about separation of Church and State. What it says is the government not establishing a religion. Religion and Christianity specifically were tightly interwoven into our early government. Our Founders had a firm belief in the role of religion and were intenet on ensuring nothing like the Church of England would happen. What they did not intend is to promote the secularization we see today which in actuality is simply another religion anyway. One where man is predominant and not our Lord.

That is what the fight is over.

Public funds should not be spent on any religious activity, yours or other.
Not practicing an organized religion is *not* a religion.
That's *your* lord. Not *our* lord.
 

AstroManLuca

Lifer
Jun 24, 2004
15,628
5
81
Two common misconceptions, dphantom.

1. "The founding fathers were deeply religious": Some were, but more were deists (they believed in God but did not follow any religious traditions). They did not think religion had any place in government. Jefferson even created his own version of the Bible that removed every reference to the supernatural and focused entirely on the moral lessons it taught. He also coined the term "wall of separation" between the government and the church, in the early 1800s.

2. The first amendment prohibits "respect[ing] an establishment of religion." It doesn't just prohibit the establishment of religion, it prohibits the government from respecting one over another.
 

fleshconsumed

Diamond Member
Feb 21, 2002
6,486
2,363
136
Originally posted by: nkgreen
Originally posted by: fleshconsumed
Private funds, sure, no problem, however public shouldn't be funding something like this.

And also "Come unto me"? I can only imagine the punts possible...

Jesus plays football? :p

I doubt it, but I can't rule out the possibility :D
 

BigDH01

Golden Member
Jul 8, 2005
1,631
88
91
Originally posted by: fleshconsumed
Originally posted by: nkgreen
Originally posted by: fleshconsumed
Private funds, sure, no problem, however public shouldn't be funding something like this.

And also "Come unto me"? I can only imagine the punts possible...

Jesus plays football? :p

I doubt it, but I can't rule out the possibility :D

He's also a Longhorn fan.
 

AstroManLuca

Lifer
Jun 24, 2004
15,628
5
81
Originally posted by: BigDH01
Originally posted by: fleshconsumed
Originally posted by: nkgreen
Originally posted by: fleshconsumed
Private funds, sure, no problem, however public shouldn't be funding something like this.

And also "Come unto me"? I can only imagine the punts possible...

Jesus plays football? :p

I doubt it, but I can't rule out the possibility :D

He's also a Longhorn fan.

http://p-userpic.livejournal.com/27809812/2966487