What is Digg?310 Comments
- SurrealDream, on 10/12/2007, -12/+97"Mmmmm....Sacre-licious"
[EDIT] It appears anti-bollocks below got there before me.
Digg me down to the bowels of chocolatey hell!
[EDIT2] Can't resist but..."May Contain Nuts" - vann, on 10/12/2007, -12/+96Well, they're lunatics too, but I fail to see how the degree of their lunacy has any bearing on Donahue's. Donahue is petty, infantile, and belligerent: "You're a loser," "Well, I have a job and you don't," "If I were as mean as the Taliban I'd cut your head off," etc.
Even if the statue amounts to sacrilege can any proper Christian condone Donahue's behavior? IMO, it not only violates the usual rules of civil discourse, but runs contrary to the way Jesus told Christians to behave. Blessed are the meek and the peacemakers, not the belligerent talking heads who like to mock artists. The eighth beatitude even tells Christians to bear persecution for justice' sake. So, even if this statue is indeed sacrilege, can you really tell me Donahue behaved as a proper Christian in that interview?
The way I see it, responding so zealously to such a minor sleight (who else would have known about this statue were it not for the national news coverage?) is a sign of a weak faith, not a strong one. When Muslims flip out over cartoons we don't admire their zeal, we wonder why they're so insecure. Surely if Islam is religion of the One True God then a few lame cartoons won't convince the truly faithful to stray? The same goes for this silly chocolate statue. No real Catholic will have their faith shaken by it.
So, yes, I think Donahue is a lunatic. The fact that he nearly wishes violence upon the artist and even gives away the address of the place where this would be exhibited (nudge nudge, wink wink) is a little frightening. Donahue, the president of a powerful Catholic political organization, is trying to use his power to intimidate a single artist. Blessed are the bullies, for they show those (*&#@$ing losers their place. - smcavoy, on 10/12/2007, -14/+87Naked Chocolate Jesus: BAD
Gory Jesus movie: GOOD
ugh. - vann, on 10/12/2007, -12/+84The artist's opening line about his intentions -- "to celebrate this body of Christ in a sweet, delicious, tasteful way" -- made me laugh out loud.
- Platysquirrel, on 10/12/2007, -4/+71That's why I like Pastafarianism, our savior is already delicious.
- nixonrichard, on 10/12/2007, -10/+68Christians got pissed off and created a chocolate Muhammad but, alas, it turned out to be bitter-sweet.
- gstuartj, on 10/12/2007, -9/+61I honestly have no problem with this. Art is meant to be interpretive, and means various things to different people. To me, this sculpture is a commentary on the commercialization of the Easter holiday (what with the chocolate bunnies, and such.) What's wrong with that?
Also, even if some Christians are interpreting it as a mockery of Jesus, what do they expect they'll be able to accomplish? At the end of the day, the outcry for censorship will only get more media coverage for the work, and will make the Christians look like even bigger fools in the media. Great. - micaray, on 10/12/2007, -12/+59If Christ's blood is usually grape juice..what the problem with his body being chocolate?
(MMmmmm creamy nugat stigmata....) - graystar, on 10/12/2007, -5/+37Don't catholics eat jesus' flesh every time they have communion?
- Zippo, on 10/12/2007, -4/+34Now you can have your Saviour and eat it too.
- Paroparo, on 10/12/2007, -3/+33You people devour my God every time you have spaghetti! Why shouldn't I have yours in chocolate?!?!
- vann, on 10/12/2007, -10/+38"I'll put it another way. When the cartoons came out and all hell broke loose, did you head an article titled, Mohammed Cartoons: Sacreligious or Absolutely Hilarious?"
I don't see what this has to do with anything. I have no control over what other people do or do not write. What's more, I don't see how the Muslim response to the cartoon situation is relevant to Donahue's response to the chocolate Jesus situation. Is his absurd, overzealous response any less offensive because some Muslims did worse things when they saw the cartoons? I think they're both religious lunatics and that if Donahue had his way, such art exhibits would be censored outright.
This statue was, in his words, "one of the worst assaults on Christian sensibilities, ever." Really? After two thousand years of Christianity, the chocolate Jesus is what's going to do you in? Really? His outrage is either totally manufactured or so out of line that, yes, I think he's a lunatic.
"You see, no one was bothered by the cartoons either until a bunch of radical Imans toured the ME lying to create a riot."
Again, so? What does that have to do with Donahue?
"He pointed out the hypocrisy, worrying about sensitivity toward one group, while not giving a rats behind about another."
Huh? Whose hypocrisy is this, exactly? Donahue could be accused of the exact same thing vis-a-vis Islam. I, personally, think both overzealous Muslims and overzealous Catholics are equally deserving of scorn. It just so happens that it was Donahue saying something mind-numbingly stupid this time rather than some Imam. - Rockout, on 10/12/2007, -5/+29We don't eat chocolate rabbits to celebrate his birth. That would be silly. We decorate trees in our houses and exchange gift cards on his birthday. We eat the rabbits to celebrate his resurrection.
- illiteratebeef, on 10/12/2007, -5/+25and forevever may this day be known as... zombie jesus day.
- vann, on 10/12/2007, -12/+31Yeah, Donahue is one of the biggest defenders of the Passion of the Christ, which is basically bloody Jesus porn. I have a feeling his offense is generated more from the perceived political inclinations of the artist rather than the art itself. That would explain why he has no problem with Michelangelo's Crucifixiton or Passion of the Christ but thinks the chocolate Jesus is, in his words, "one of the worst assaults on Christian sensibilities, ever."
- AntiBollocKs, on 10/12/2007, -8/+23mmmmmmmm....... sacrelicious
- Blastrogath, on 10/12/2007, -4/+19Just because some Muslims behaved worse doesn't excuse Donahue's behavior in the least. The moral standard a Christian is supposed to aim for is based on God not men.
- deanpence, on 10/12/2007, -4/+18You're really confusing the issue here. The issue is this: Religions don't get to make others play by their rules. Some Muslims got very upset when Mohammed was pictured contrary to Islamic Law. Well, guess what? They don't get to tell us infidels how to live. They can try to convert us. That's it. There's no other moral option. Christians like Donahue also get upset at such sacrilege that seems to defy their own rules (though I'm not exactly sure what Christian law or commandment covers this one), but guess what, Donahue: You don't get to tell the rest of us how to live--or even prevent us from mocking your religion, even its parts you consider most sacred. Unbelievers are not bound by your revealed laws. The only law we must all live under is that of non-coercion.
- PaulRay, on 10/12/2007, -7/+21These "People of Faith" can't stand to have their "faith" challenged in any way. I'm so tired of this. "Faith" is Supposed to be about believing in your chosen dogma without sway or doubt. Every time someone questions their "faith" these idiots react with violence and hate.
Jesus was Supposed to represent Love and Kindness. What ever happened to "Turn the other Cheek"? If your "Faith" can't stand up to a Chocolate sculpture, it's time to find something to believe in that isn't so easily shaken.
Even if science, reason and life experience hadn't made me an atheist, this sort of total nonsense would. Grow up people, believe what you believe, let others believe what they believe and stop being offended at every Artist who makes you uncomfortable. Art is Supposed to make you uncomfortable, so the artist is just doing his job. - Muyoso, on 10/12/2007, -11/+24I love how Christians can deal with a chocolate naked version of their Lord and savior in a calm rational manner, but the Muslims go on killing sprees when a CARTOON is drawn of their prophet.
- kjcdude, on 10/12/2007, -4/+17that's the first time i've actually seen a back and forth on cable news, it's nice to see peoples raw emotions and answers to questions
- howzitgoin88, on 10/12/2007, -6/+17Next the artist has plans for a full size Jesus statue made entirely from candy. The piece is to be entitled: "Jesus Christ, King of the Jubes"
- bajesus, on 10/12/2007, -11/+22I believe the body is supposed to be bread. Maybe fondue would work.
- wageslaven, on 10/12/2007, -2/+13Dont worry, its only a matter of time before they find him at a Porn Shop, or in vegas with a pile of drugs and a (gay) prostitute.
As we all know, homophobia is the self-loathing reaction to feelings of same-sex attraction. While this chocolate-jesus isnt a exactly cut-and-dry case of homophobia, I posit this; that showing Jesus's PENIS is the real issue.
Men (the church's version of hyper-heterosexual men) cannot tolerate anything that may subvert the "healthy man on jesus love" they actively cultivate.
See, its acceptable to "love" jesus -- another man -- but *ONLY* jesus. All those feelings of same sex attraction (that you deny and subsiquently react with outward homophobia) are given a nice church condoned healthy image...
The muscular, attractive, flowing-haired, virtually naked Jesus. Hands covered in body fluids. For *you* just *YOU*.
If you show his penis, it breaks the spell and causes cognative dissonance amoungst the "flock". Cant have that. The thinly veiled homoerotica must remain intact. - tekrat, on 10/12/2007, -6/+17I want to see an exact replica of chocolate Mohamed, 53 years old, and his wife A’isha, 9 years old, on his wedding day. Now that would be interesting.
- drouk1556, on 10/12/2007, -4/+13What if we all stepped back and looked at chocolate as a medium of sculpture rather than a tasty snack? Not quite a fiasco anymore, is it?
And Donahue's a blockhead. - Blastrogath, on 10/12/2007, -4/+13Donahue isn't showing faith. Read the bible and then look at his actions: you'll notice a discrepancy.
He's objecting to the statue on a purely emotional level with no backing I can see in theology. That's why he has to use such bombastic and, even more tellingly, non-SPECIFIC accusations. The man was speaking violence instead of scripture. - Skeptic1970, on 10/12/2007, -2/+10@blastograph
Europe does not live under Islamic law. So there is nothing illegal about print pictures of Mohammad. In post enlightenment western societies there is such a thing as religious freedom, tolerance and freedom of speech. And if that is incompatible Islamic law or church law, move back to the middle ages where you belong.
Superstitious Duochebags like Donahue and the radical Imams can pound sand - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9"The artist looks absolutely crazy"
how does this guy look crazy? because he has long hair and a beard?
wow. - NeoCortex, on 10/12/2007, -4/+12Sweet Baby Jesus!
- hokies4life, on 10/12/2007, -10/+18how is making a giant piece of choclate in the image of jesus any worse than celebrating his birth by eating a ton of chocolate rabbits?
- wageslaven, on 10/12/2007, -2/+10Actually, you eat chocolate rabbits because it is the Vernal Equinox and they are a sign of the earth-reborn of spring and the return to plenty.
Christians: Get your own religious holiday, and stop co-oping Vernal Equinox rituals. - Isidore, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7Almost all news media have shown a photograph of the offensive item, and did so without a second thought about personal safety.
Yet with the Muhammad cartoons very few dared show even a sample of the cartoons.
Double standard? Why?
Those who genuinely believe in free speech should be troubled by this double standard and ask the media who showed this picture but not the Muhammad cartoons about their double standard. - jktstance, on 10/12/2007, -5/+12Digg for the title :)
- Rooster99, on 10/12/2007, -4/+11But its ok to make sculptures of Christ out of other materials (wood, iron, brass etc). What is their actual problem? It does not depict him in any form of disrespect, and it gets people talking about a variety of issues (such as the commercialization of easter as mentioned above). I think these hardcore fanatics are just going to live in a perpetual cycle of being pissed off at something!
- Ecowarrior, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7Ohh... I would buy a chocolate Buddha!
That would great... chocolate enlightenment!
I could give them to my kids... what a great idea! - fober, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8I'm thinking the chocolate Buddha would probably be the most expensive.
- Blastrogath, on 10/12/2007, -3/+9Coincidentally, while chocolate Jesus is hard to pin down as real sacrilege, easter rabbits actually could be considered sacrilegious.
The Easter Bunny as a symbol originated with the pagan festival of Eastre. The goddess, Eastre, was worshipped by the Anglo-Saxons through her earthly symbol, the rabbit. So: easter rabbits could easily be considered pagan idols. - Boshow, on 10/12/2007, -5/+11I don't know what the big deal is. Rite Aid sells chocholate crucifixes at easter time every year. They're actually quite good.
- premedios, on 10/12/2007, -4/+10the artist chose dark chocolate because it's healthy.
- kotatsu, on 10/12/2007, -7/+12Why? Jesus, if he ever existed would haven been dark skinned. But then that isn't acceptable to the racist christian nut cases in the west is it? I mean how could they worship a black guy? It was only a few hundred years ago when the church still helped out with slavery.
- superbonbon, on 10/12/2007, -3/+8Does anyone else find intentionally provocative art to be boring?
- radical2, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7The thing is, people like Donahue offend me. I am a Christian, and I admit that I am wrong. ALOT actually. But its the 1% like Donahue who give a bad name to the 99% of the rest. Me, I don't like parts of Christianity. My friend had a shirt, one that read, Music is my religion, Jesus is my Savior. Which is true. Religion just muddles thing up, the Church needs to focus on the teachings of the bible, on giving back to the community, not some jerk in suit's opinions about morals.
Also.
To anyone that has been hurt, in anyway or form, by anyone that has used Jesus, or God, or some sort of religion as justification, I would like to apologize. What they did is wrong, and not the true way Jesus would do things. On behalf myself, and Christians, I am sorry.
BTW. Chocoloate Jesus? I'm down with it. The nudity, not so much. not because it it Jesus, but because its a guy. who is naked. a naked guy. gross. - ryancalderoni, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6there is a big difference between Christians and people who claim to be
- ChrisGranger, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7I find it a little bit ironic that you're suggesting the artist cover Jesus' nakedness while you have a Playboy bunny for an avatar.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7digg me down
- Blastrogath, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7@wageslaven
The idea that all the worlds problems can be attributed to religion is childish oversimplification. It's hubris to assume if everyone agreed with you that everyone would get along. We condemn, fight, and kill each other because that is a part of human nature.
If we weren't fighting about religion we'd just find something else to fight about. - coolspray, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5"digg me down"
Don't tell me what to do! - wageslaven, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5@razorsharp
Oh wow are you clueless. "is that the artistic mediums in Cathedrals last for thousands of years. The point of art is to make something timeless, not something that will melt at 50 degrees. That's why if you take an appreciation of the arts class you'll never study chocolate sculpting (or food sculpting of any kind). Are the chocolate bunnies I get on easter works of art?"
PLEASE tell me you took an"appreciation of the arts" class. Was it at pat roberston university? - flink405, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4I don´t follow your line of thinking.
One does not have to be religious to make art. One does not have to have an agenda or pushing one religion over the other to make art.
I would like to see a Muslim artist make a chocolate Mohammed (or out of anything). Or a Buddist artist make a Mohammed or Christ out of chocolate.
Or an atheist artist make renditions of religious figures out of chocolate or spam or whatever.
Where does it say that the artist´s religion or lack there of have anything to do with the art they are creating?
However the bottom line is there is no death threats or the artist hiding for fear of death if he makes a artisitic interpretation of a Christian religious figure, but if it were Mohammed the Muslim in the art when the artist signs his name to the art he is signing his death warrant. -
Show 51 - 100 of 298 discussions
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is