-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Vatican threatens legal action after artist photographs gay couples kissing in church
- Thread starter GK86
- Start date
- Status
Cpt.Underpants
Member
Depends on the location
There's a mosque in France for gay people, dunno if there are any participants though
CornBurrito
Member
What would you want to happen?
peaceiscloser
Member
I kinda side with the Church here. The chapel isn't a public forum.
What? Two people kissing each other? We hate love!
About the kissing...have you ever been to a wedding?
Yeah, at least the church isn't involved in the political scene!
About the kissing...have you ever been to a wedding?
It is what it is, it is what most of its 1.2 billion followers want it to be.
I'm afraid a small amount of voices wishing for changes to its doctrine are drowned out by that massive number.
Partial Gamification
Banned
I agree, its not clear to me if the gallery censorship, as the artist puts it, was soley for the content. It probably played a part but Spanish artist Gonzalo Orquin was intending on just showing these pictures or selling them too? Is there a policy the Vatican has regarding the use of images that are going to be monetized? I have no problem with the art but it wasn't done in the right way, they could have asked. Probably could have gotten away with it after if refused and they [would want] to make a scandal of it. There are details that seem left out.
It's a big touristy church, you think they wouldn't get beaten/worse in some churches?
Partial Gamification
Banned
Won't somebody think of the monolithic church's feelings?
I understand choosing controversy but I just think its effect could have been more positive, overall, if it was done differently. Maybe it is just part of the historical trends of bigotry this institution has maintained. Perhaps the project could have had less backlash, likely less exposure, and an overall more positive reception by the public at large. Guerrilla art, to call this that, is best when it does no harm. Maybe that is not possible, but with what I have read I doubt the effort was made to minimize offense for the sake of tabloid shock. There is more to the story. The Vatican is a private forum, I don't know enough about it to be completely certain with my position. What I do think, abstractly, is that its better to advocate for something than it is to argue against the opposite (especially counter the Monolithic Church); simply, its the "winning more flies with honey..." saying. The Pope has been very progressive and I'm sure there is internal debate within the Holy See about that somewhat radical direction and what it means to the vast body of Church members. If the artist was just trying to stir-up shit for a cheap five minutes in the lime light, that's one thing; if it was a malicious anti-gay censorship act, that's another. A little of both perhaps, I don't know.
timetokill
Banned
Sounds like the guy is getting the controversy he wanted
NathanMcMahon
Banned
They look like it because they are.
Partial Gamification
Banned
He also might not get the acclaim he could have deserved.
Raonak
Banned
hahaha, goddamn!
What possible harm could this be causing besides the hurt feelings of a few religious bigots? It's humorous to see such strident defense of the churches actions when the offense is so minor. If this is too "offensive" and "tabloid" grabbing for church defenders, then there really is no hope for the catholic church to come to terms with modernity.
CarpeDeezNutz
Member
I said aside from a wedding breh. Take that shit outside a church is a place of worship.
Lol
LOL
Gotta love that Religion of Love***
***Not really
Pollux in here defending the Vatican yet?
Why? These pictures are clearly not meant to be irreverent, just a celebration of love. A place of worship seems a completely appropriate place for this.
Dat Catholic deflection
"We're homophobic but not as homophobic as those Muslims!"
CornBurrito
Member
I don't see how kissing is disrespectful in a place of worship. I mean if you do it during a sermon and do it really loudly then yeah. I mean it wasn't like he was filming hard core porn in a church.
CarpeDeezNutz
Member
Baby steps mang. I know what they are trying to do and I think ya'll do too. I am pro gay btw but to do that at a church I dunno. Does not sit right with me.
CornBurrito
Member
Do what in church? Kissing? Or specifically homosexual couples kissing? If it isn't during a sermon I see nothing wrong with it. It is like how eating during services is considered rude, but eating in a church/temple after services isn't rude.
Both. And the fact that it is homosexuals kissing just adds fuel to the flame.
Why doesn't it sit right with you? I can't think of any reason besides homophobia that a celebration of love would be discouraged in a place of worship.
This.
People who think the complaint is because of the actual act of kissing are desperately in denial.
The photographer could have gotten pics of homosexual couples holding hands in a church and the Vatican would be reacting the same way.
Partial Gamification
Banned
Hurt feelings are at one end and galvanizing hatred is on the other. The Vatican is slow to accept change. If it were not for the recent announcements by the Pope, I'd probably agree with you. Pope Francis seems like a decent human. There are private spaces that don't have to be respected but if you don't you can come off like an asshole. I might piss on the Vatican figuratively but I wouldn't literally do that.
Pollux
Member
Not going to defend them on this one. This is just silly.
An artist taking pictures to suit his agenda is not a celebration of love, these pictures where not spontaneous and where meant as a means of agitation and to make a statement.
How does the artist expect to help influence change within the church which is not just the Pope, Cardinals or priests ....... it is a worldwide congregation of over 1 billion people ........ pulling these cheap stunts only puts peoples backs against the wall.
What is the hope for this action, for the church to changes it's beliefs on homosexuality or to try and damage the church?
CarpeDeezNutz
Member
Kissing in general.
CornBurrito
Member
Ok. So like what's the actual problem with kissing in a church if it isn't during a service?
You and the church need to get some perspective if you think the goal of this is galvanizing hatred. And comparing this to desecration is so absurd I don't even know how to respond.
You can imagine some secret agenda to hurt the church if you want. If you read the article he makes his intentions clear. The only reason we have a more moderate pope right now is because things like these that make the church confront reality.
It's a place of worship and it is up to those who hold it as a special place to decide what is a problem and what is not.
I agree it is a silly thing to sue this artist, but it was stupid of him to believe anything constructive would come of this except for it looking like a cheap attempt to engineer outrage.
I really do believe that the homosexual community need to be clear as to what they want to change within the church and for what reason, do they wish to participate within the church or do they just want to change its doctrine only or do they only wish to attack it for its past and current homophobic opinions.
My belief is that to help create that change then it can not be done through stunts like this in places that are held dear by the people, it only hardens their will against change.
CarpeDeezNutz
Member
Now I feel like a prude haha. Seems inappropriate to kiss in a church I think.
Things like these have nothing to do with the current choice of pope, to believe so is to be really naive.
What is the end game in regards to the church and homosexuality?
What is the result people wish to see?
They also shouldn't be free from criticism when the only coherent reason they can give for their disapproval is biblically mandated homophobia.
If something this benign considered some kind of extreme, unacceptable stunt likely only to harden opinion against homosexuals then there is no hope for the catholic church.
What you consider to benign might not be the same as others and if you want to try and get people to change and meet in the middle then dictating to them will not achieve this.
Unfortunately in this instance it is homosexual people that are looking for the change to happen, not the church nor most of its members as its ability to exist and their ability to worship are not diminished as things stand now.
In that regard it is unfortunate but true that homosexual people need to try and accommodate the feelings of those that need to change, when it should be vice versa.
Devolution
Member
Their ability to worship won't be diminished by any gay acceptance.
I agree, but neither is it diminished now.
I just don't see how acceptance is achieved by things like this.
Devolution
Member
Forcing people to deal with your existence versus hiding it. Which do you think has a greater impact?
I have to disagree. I think unending criticism and social stigmatizing of anti-homosexual behavior is the best way to change things. People need to know that their beliefs don't automatically deserve respect simply because they are religious in nature. Catholics should be shamed and embarrassed into acceptance.
- Status