Jesus Christ on a stick!
The story’s been around for a few days, but I thought it was one worth sharing with you, in case you haven’t seen it. The Daily Mail is one of the papers that have it, as you would expect.
“In an unsolicited letter, Havering council in East London made it clear it would accept pictures of any subject – except churches,” says the Mail, which continues:
Many artists could not understand why images of Christian buildings were banned, but those of other religions were welcome.
Jo Delaney, the council’s arts development officer[,] wrote to art groups in Havering about hanging paintings in Queen’s Hospital, Romford.
She wrote: “Whilst the building is spacious, it has many plain black walls which are crying out to be brightened up!
“The matron of patient environment is keen for local artists to use the space as a gallery.
“The hospital has asked artists not to submit paintings of churches as they have to be mindful of all religious denominations.’
Just more kowtowing to the beliefs of non-indigenous religions. It’s bad enough when Christianity is appeased for no good reason, but at least it’s the established religion of this country, whether we nontheists and secularists like it or not. As a historical phenomenon, it’s part of our culture.
And churches are more than places for talking to invisible people: they’re often historical buildings. This hospital would not have, for instance, a painting of St Paul’s Cathedral. It’s totally pisspottical.
No comments:
Post a Comment
We welcome lively and challenging comments. However, please try to stay on topic, be polite and do not use abusive, racist or sexist language, and do not incite your readers to violence or other antisocial behaviour, or your comment will be deleted. This isn't censorship: it's a case of staying within the bounds of decency and having an eye to the law, although we realise the law will be different in different countries.
We do not bar anonymous comments at the moment, but we would prefer that those commenting play fair and use their name or at least a regular nom de plume. It does show a confidence in your convictions. We know, too, that it's easy to use a false name and be effectively anonymous, but, again, we appeal to your sense of good practice. Even a wacky nom de plume is better, since at least readers will come to know that contributor and maybe remember her or his previous comments.
Blatant commercial advertising will be removed.
Comments should not be construed as necessarily the policy or opinion of the Pink Triangle Trust.
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.