Avatar image for felixlynch777
felixlynch777

1787

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#1 felixlynch777
Member since 2008 • 1787 Posts

Here is a list I found which showcases some 'blasphemy' cases against religion.

http://timesonline.typepad.com/faith/2007/10/the-blasphemy-c.html

I was wondering what other people make of this and should there be restraints against offensive art works.

I personally think that while some of them are very bad taste, people should be allowed to say and do whatever they want with art, even if people get offended.

Avatar image for sleepychicken5
sleepychicken5

1224

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#2 sleepychicken5
Member since 2005 • 1224 Posts
I think laws regarding "blasphemous" works should be lax, but not completely removed. As the last few pieces in the article show, sometimes art can cause major civil unrest, and harn can come to innocent unrelated people. In cases where civil unrest ends up as a result, the government should be able to at least censor the art.
Avatar image for Draconis
Draconis

2790

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#3 Draconis
Member since 2002 • 2790 Posts
I agree with felix in that people should be allowed to say and do whatever they want with art. If I don't like something I'm not going to go see it. Many times when people protest these things they just are basically giving free advertising and making more people curious to go see it.