Join 3,512 readers in helping fund MetaFilter (Hide)


So gratuitously offensive that only the most depraved would defend them.
April 27, 2006 1:01 AM   Subscribe

Jesus with Erection. In its March edition, the Insurgent (link down), an "alternative" student paper on the Eugene, Ore., campus printed 12 hand-drawn cartoons of Jesus as a response to rival paper the Commentator having published the controversial cartoons of Muhammad originally published in Europe that sparked Muslim riots worldwide. William Donohue, president of the Catholic League, called it "one of the most obscene assaults on Christianity I have ever seen." Hey now!
posted by three blind mice (89 comments total) 1 user marked this as a favorite

 
Special Offers:

Shock a Muslim – with the truth!

The Life and Religion of Mohammed: Learn the ugly truth about the founder of the world's most violent religion

God speaks on video in 'astounding' new Bible

Criminalizing Christianity: How America's founding religion is becoming illegal.

NOTE: When shopping in WND's online store you have the option of paying with either a credit card or a check.
posted by Jimbob at 1:09 AM on April 27, 2006


I'm not offended by anything anymore. I think it became official long before this, however, when I first saw Tub Girl. Why do people take religion so seriously is all this made me wonder?
posted by gagglezoomer at 1:10 AM on April 27, 2006


"Unlike the Danish cartoons, the Insurgent drawings seem intended to simply incite controversy for controversy's sake rather than making specific social commentaries."

Ahhh, so the Danish ones were ok? Reprint all you like?

The Student Insurgent is not owned, controlled or published by the University of Oregon and is funded with student fees. Therefore, the University cannot exercise editorial control over its content.


Haha, bad luck. At least noone died when these were printed.

But seriously, Im not sure the best way to make a commentry on offensive religious cartoon is to make your own offending other religions. I am sure there are smarter ways...
posted by Meccabilly at 1:10 AM on April 27, 2006


Is it wrong to think about God when you masturbate? Is it?
posted by loquacious at 1:12 AM on April 27, 2006


Why don't you ask Him?
posted by Jimbob at 1:12 AM on April 27, 2006


But seriously, Im not sure the best way to make a commentry on offensive religious cartoon is to make your own offending other religions.

Maybe it was a test to see if those who claimed that the Mohammed cartoons were worthy of First Amendment protection were really being sincere or whether they just don't like Islam. I'll be shocked if there is any consistency in most pundit's responses.
posted by Falconetti at 1:16 AM on April 27, 2006


Yeah, I don't think it was a commentary on the Mohammed cartoons so much as a commentary on the commentators.
posted by rxrfrx at 1:25 AM on April 27, 2006


Okay, so the Danish cartoons depicted radical Muslims' embrace of violence etc. and that is why they had at least had a bit of merit. The effect was like swatting a hornet pinata. Whoopee.

These cartoons, on the other hand, are they intended to imply the sexuality of Jesus, or are they simply going for the pinata without any versimilitude in the broader world? (Lord knows the radical right ain't climbing over themselves to see Brokeback Mountain). If they are to test the limits of free speech, we all know they will pass - no matter what Pat Robertson might have to say about it. So what's the point?

What, there isn't one? Crazy college kids.
posted by crowman at 2:03 AM on April 27, 2006


Why don't you ask Him?

I did. I went out to the meadow and knelt in the dandelions and asked Him. I asked earnestly and fervently for many days and nights.

After a long time on a day long forgotten behind a foggy fugue of hallucinatory endurance and overexposure, a great rainbow burst forth over a strangely scuddering twist of clouds that had been just previously sleeting on me, bridging over the meadow in a great arc.

Those oddly moving clouds briefly but distinctly melted together to form the words "Whatever, Man. Whatever twirls your tassels. Everyone is always calling out my Name over and over anyway. Besides, I'm the sassiest of all y'all everywhere and you wack MCs know it."

For my devotion and candor He then gifted me with the ability to heal sickly unloved autoharps with a mere laying on of hands and no tuning forks or pitch pipes, and a small glowing stone Touched by Him that granted +20 Charm Llama when dipped in fresh guacamole.
posted by loquacious at 2:17 AM on April 27, 2006


Love the tags.
posted by Cyrano at 2:23 AM on April 27, 2006


crowman : Lord knows the radical right ain't climbing over themselves to see Brokeback Mountain

Must erase mental image of (naked, aroused) James Dobson "climbing over" (naked, restrained) Fred Phelps "to see Brokeback Mountain - yeah, yeah, that's what I was doin', wasn't it? Yeah, that's the ticket"
posted by kcds at 2:50 AM on April 27, 2006


This witness would like to PROCLAIM to the world that --->
I have at long last found Jesus!

Turns out the fucker was hiding behind the couch the whole time.
Y'know, it's always the last place you look

posted by hypersloth at 3:20 AM on April 27, 2006


Here is the Open Letter from William A. Donohue, Ph.D. to Oregon legislators.

As president of the nation’s largest Catholic civil rights organization, it is my job to combat anti-Catholicism. Unfortunately, one of the most flagrantly anti-Catholic incidents I have seen in some time recently occurred at the University of Oregon. The president of the university issued a response that was sorely inadequate, and that is why I am writing to you.

Enclosed find two obscene and blasphemous depictions of Jesus Christ. I am sending them to you because words cannot sufficiently convey the vicious nature of these graphics. They were published in the March edition of the Insurgent, a student newspaper that is funded by the Student Government; up until the March edition, the Insurgent was also allowed to use the university’s non-profit bulk-mail permit.

posted by three blind mice at 3:35 AM on April 27, 2006


Meanwhile the world is full of this religious bullshit, but as usual it is distracting from far more important economic, scientific and social (read poverty, destruction of rights and rule of law, denial of scientific method) issues

A few interesting examples

Jasmina Tesanovic (better known for being Sterling's wife) writes about The Serbian Jihad on Boing
Good Friday: my daughter goes to buy some ham. The guy in the shop refuses to sell ham because on Good Friday one should fast. He tells her she is ignorant and primitive. He feels he should enlighten her and he is not even a priest.
But wait there's more , do you think Rush "Oxycotin" Limbaugh is batshit insane ? No he is not he is an hypocrite asshole (remember drowning drug addicts down a river ? well Rush is still alive, why didn't he jump in the river as he prescribed ? ) the batshit insanes moved to Radio Maryja a religious catholic station which is spreading hate against jews
posted by elpapacito at 3:53 AM on April 27, 2006


So Matt Stone and Trey Parker depict Jesus pooping on George W. Bush and the U.S. flag and these college kids are getting all the attention? That has to suck.
posted by Space Coyote at 4:12 AM on April 27, 2006


First link is borked.
posted by CRM114 at 4:17 AM on April 27, 2006


Jesus on the cross with an erection? What's the big deal, at least he isnt floating in a jar of piss. (Not that theres anything wrong with that.)
posted by R. Mutt at 4:33 AM on April 27, 2006


Ahhh, so the Danish ones were ok?

No. Offending people is rude.

Reprint all you like?

Yes. Freedom of expression is important.

William Donohue, president of the Catholic League, called it "one of the most obscene assaults on Christianity I have ever seen."

And yet he doesn't even set fire to anything...
posted by hoverboards don't work on water at 4:58 AM on April 27, 2006


If your religion is really correct, it can survive some parody.

Insecurity seems to be a strong common theme here.
posted by Malor at 4:59 AM on April 27, 2006


IMHO, it's bloody hilarious.
posted by bubblesonx at 4:59 AM on April 27, 2006


It's settled... people really just have nothing better to do. It's rather sad actually. The amount of time people waste these days trying to make a point (where there really isn't any to be made) or test the limits or whatever you want to call it, is deplorable.
posted by Witty at 5:08 AM on April 27, 2006


Y'know, it's always the last place you look

I've always been puzzled by that phrase. Surely you're not going to look anywehere else after you've found the thing you're looking for?

###

Anyways, Jesus is hottt. Seriously. Good personality, intelligent; lean, tanned body from travelling. Maybe comes on a bit strong sometimes with the religion but he is at least tolerant. I'll bet he had lovely eyes. And erections.
posted by Drexen at 5:16 AM on April 27, 2006


It's settled... people really just have nothing better to do. It's rather sad actually. The amount of time people waste these days trying to make a point (where there really isn't any to be made) or test the limits or whatever you want to call it, is deplorable.

Your favourite post sucks!
posted by Drexen at 5:17 AM on April 27, 2006


My comment is referring to the actual content of the post, not the post itself, if I'm understanding your comment correctly Drexen.
posted by Witty at 5:26 AM on April 27, 2006


So did you say the same thing about the Mohammed cartoons, Witty?
posted by Malor at 5:31 AM on April 27, 2006


Related.

(Seller is no relation to me, though.)
posted by gimonca at 5:32 AM on April 27, 2006


I'll bet he had lovely eyes.

Dig it.
"And The Nazz talkin' about how pretty the hour, how pretty the flower, how pretty you, how pretty me, how pretty the tree. Nazz had them pretty eyes. He wanted everybody to see with pretty eyes and see how pretty it was."
posted by octobersurprise at 5:34 AM on April 27, 2006


Witty: My bad, then! I agree that this is just another fairly silly step in a stoopid controversy.
posted by Drexen at 5:35 AM on April 27, 2006


So did you say the same thing about the Mohammed cartoons, Witty?

What is your point Malor? Am I supposed to? First of all, the two sets of cartoons weren't born out of the same intentions and are therefore completely different situations. I'm not offended by these Jesus cartoons, nor am I trying to defend anything. I just find the effort to keep the pot nice and stirred up for the sake of stirring, pathetic and a waste of everything.
posted by Witty at 5:37 AM on April 27, 2006


Well.

Speaking as a practicing Roman Catholic, I really don't let stuff like this get to me. I even shrugged off the "Bloody Mary" episode of South Park. I understand what "satire" means, and if that's what people feel the need to express, well......whatever.

I know the difference between someone who trashes my religion because they think it's funny, and someone who does it because they hate me.=)
posted by spirit72 at 5:53 AM on April 27, 2006


Can't they excommunicate William Donohue already? The Catholic church is well organized and they are smart enough to not respond to this kind of thing. Too bad the same can't be said for their lunatic fringe.
posted by smackfu at 5:57 AM on April 27, 2006


Doesn't the erection help to emphasize that Jesus was human? The idea is that he was both human and God. The part about him being human seems to be focused on very little. It's not like the picture showed him stabbing someone or committing a sin. It showed him having a human function. Granted, it is pretty unlikley that he had an erection on the cross, but an erection is a human function.

I wonder what the reaction would be if we saw baby Jesus coming out of his mother at the moment of birth or if we saw a topless Virgin Mary breastfeeding him.
posted by flarbuse at 5:59 AM on April 27, 2006


I wonder what the reaction would be if we saw ... a topless Virgin Mary breastfeeding him.
posted by TedW at 6:07 AM on April 27, 2006


again, sex is the new violence
posted by Substrata at 6:09 AM on April 27, 2006


These cartoons are yet another example of why it is always in bad taste to graphically insult peoples' religious beliefs.

The Danish cartoons were directed specifically at the Muslim taboo against the creation of pictures of the Prophet, PBUH, blasphemously set against the backdrop of him as sponsor of violence. These are directed specifically against the Catholic taboo against sex, blasphemously set against the backdrop of the Atonement on Calvary. Each set is the equivalent of deliberately shouting "Fire!" in a crowded theater: unwise, unfunny, and unacceptable to persons of good will, whatever their creed.

As a Catholic myself, I think William Donohue should spend more time worrying about the effect of clerical misconduct on the future of the Church and less about bad art.
posted by rdone at 6:13 AM on April 27, 2006


Nowhere in the bible is it professed that Jesus died a virgin.
posted by shnoz-gobblin at 6:14 AM on April 27, 2006


When nobody takes mortal offense to sacrilege against Christianity (or any other non-Islamic religion), all this shows to radical Muslims is that Christians don't believe as seriously as Muslims do (which is appropriate, since Christanity is bogus, QED).
posted by gregor-e at 6:16 AM on April 27, 2006


Isn't one of the ironies of Donohue that many times he ends up attacking some of his fellow Catholics over their portrayals of religious figures?
posted by KirkJobSluder at 6:30 AM on April 27, 2006


Death erection.
posted by rleamon at 6:30 AM on April 27, 2006


Whoa. He is risen.
posted by Astro Zombie at 6:32 AM on April 27, 2006


Of course Gregor-e, when Muslims take extreme offense at sacrilege against Islam, all this shows to fundamentalist Christians is that they are far less secure in their faith than Christians are (which is appropriate, since Islam is bogus, QED).

Maybe God ought to put himself on top of the refrigerator and send them both to their rooms.
posted by Kid Charlemagne at 6:36 AM on April 27, 2006


It would be great if we could channel all of the religious antipathy world-wide into a cartoon war...MeFI could be the judge...
posted by sfts2 at 6:39 AM on April 27, 2006


Is it bad that this thread has made me think of Michaelangelo's sistene chapel painting.

But with cocks instead of fingers.
posted by seanyboy at 6:42 AM on April 27, 2006


I was waiting for it. Someone ought to finally make fun of t-e-h baby Jesus to analyse the answer. And suddenly, we're looking at 'our' own indignation...
posted by Sijeka at 6:46 AM on April 27, 2006


As a Catholic myself, I think William Donohue should spend more time worrying about the effect of clerical misconduct on the future of the Church and less about bad art.

Wishful thinking ! Criticizing "bad" art and blaming others is an easy and convenient way of generating victimization outrage while the alternative of moralizing the moralizers is like asking a rich to become poor.

I know the difference between someone who trashes my religion because they think it's funny, and someone who does it because they hate me.=)

trash my religion ?
posted by elpapacito at 6:50 AM on April 27, 2006


Whoa. He is risen.

Dude, you are so taking ar ride on the "down" escalator for that one...
posted by kgasmart at 7:03 AM on April 27, 2006


I know this isn't the same thing--because it was done out of reverence rather than blashpemy--but it's interesting that the fundies have chosen to ignore it:

The concept of ostentatio genitalium --imagery dwelling on the genitals of the Christ child (see here) or on the dead Christ--goes back to the 15th century. (Although the Jesus-with-a-boner imagery is thought to be an attempt to realistically portray the physical results of flagellation and crucifixion.

I wonder what the reaction would be if we saw baby Jesus coming out of his mother at the moment of birth or if we saw a topless Virgin Mary breastfeeding him.

Better yet, there are paintings of Christ "breastfeeding" people from his wounds.
posted by veronica sawyer at 7:04 AM on April 27, 2006


all this shows to fundamentalist Christians is that they are far less secure in their faith than Christians are

Arn't all fundamentalists just a bit lonely - don't they all just want to be loved. Go give them a hug. Actually both groups frown on intimate physical contact. Give them a respectfull nod and walk away quickly.

(which is appropriate, since Islam is bogus, QED)

That's the most offensive thing I've read all day. Whatever religion you are is equaly as bogus I would suggest.
posted by Meccabilly at 7:24 AM on April 27, 2006


Jesus loves me,
that I know.
His erection
tells me so.
posted by CynicalKnight at 7:33 AM on April 27, 2006


William Donohue is a media troll now.
posted by mathowie at 7:33 AM on April 27, 2006


Not the first time the Catholic League has set it's sights on our fair burg. I participated in this. We had no idea that it would create such a stink.
posted by Danf at 7:37 AM on April 27, 2006


um, scroll down to Sept. 16 in the above link.
posted by Danf at 7:37 AM on April 27, 2006


Insecurity seems to be a strong common theme here.

It surely does.
posted by Kirth Gerson at 7:49 AM on April 27, 2006


What mathowie said.
Donohue is the Ann Coulter of Catholicism.
Sure to be on any TV show where pedophiles gather.
posted by nofundy at 7:55 AM on April 27, 2006


"Doesn't the erection help to emphasize that Jesus was human? The idea is that he was both human and God. The part about him being human seems to be focused on very little."

And to show that he was godly, his cock should be at least 16 inches long.
posted by klangklangston at 7:59 AM on April 27, 2006


I just wish they were as funny as Astro Zombie's comment.
posted by Alvy Ampersand at 8:01 AM on April 27, 2006


For some reason, it made me think of this natalie dee comic.
posted by FunkyHelix at 8:18 AM on April 27, 2006


Doesn't the erection help to emphasize that Jesus was human? The idea is that he was both human and God. The part about him being human seems to be focused on very little

That was my first thought as well. Actually the fundamental Christians I know seem to ignore all the human attributes of Jesus and focus entirely on the divine, which makes little sense to me. God created Jesus to be a real, suffering human so that humans could connect to God.

But who wants to think about Jesus pooping or farting? Who wants to think about Jesus lusting after a woman or losing his temper? In fact to focus on his humanness is to commit sacrilege to some people. Look how much loathing there was for "The Last Temptation of Christ" simply because the film maker had Jesus fantasizing about a normal life during his last few moments on the cross.

I suggest that Jesus' humanity makes him more important to the Christian faith. Jesus was tempted but resisted temptation. Jesus was crucified and felt every moment of pain. If he was too holy to get erections then maybe that whole cross thing was meaningless-- just God showing off.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 8:32 AM on April 27, 2006


Ostentatio genitalium provides, I think, a good illustration of the role that imagination can play in a virtuous mind trying to think about the Mystery of Incarnation. The revelation of the Child’s sex belongs to a theology of Incarnation.

Certainly ! Yet, still no cure for cancer.
posted by elpapacito at 8:33 AM on April 27, 2006


ooh, look what I found, it's always those pesky Danes:
In Denmark, while a law prohibiting blasphemy exists under Section 140 of the Danish Penal Code, it has not been used since 1938. The Danish Penal Code also contains a provision (Section 266b) against expressions that threaten, deride or degrade on the grounds of race, colour, national or ethnic origin, belief or sexual orientation. That provision, however, has never been used against statements offensive to religion.

In 1984 a local art club asked an artist, Jens Jørgen Thorsen, to create a "happening" on the wall of the local railway station. The work displayed a naked Jesus with an erect penis. The work caused considerable controversy, and was eventually removed, but no legal charges were ever brought.

In 1992, a film made by the same artists was shown in cinemas all over Denmark. The film portrayed Jesus as sexually active and the clergy as corrupt. Though the film caused debate, no legal measures were taken and no charges were laid.
I was actually looking for this:
Apart from its physical importance as a relic, the Holy Foreskin is sometimes claimed to have appeared in a famous vision of Saint Catherine of Siena. In the vision, Jesus mystically marries her, and his amputated foreskin is given to her as a wedding ring. However, this has not been traced any earlier than a seventeenth-century anti-Catholic parody, and as such is of dubious credibility.

During the late 17th century, Catholic scholar and theologian Leo Allatius in De Praeputio Domini Nostri Jesu Christi Diatriba ("Discussion concerning the Prepuce of our Lord Jesus Christ") speculated that the Holy Foreskin may have ascended into Heaven at the same time as Jesus himself and might have become the rings of Saturn, then only recently observed by telescope.

Voltaire, in A Treatise of Toleration (1763), ironically referred to veneration of the Holy Foreskin as being one of a number of superstitions that were "much more reasonable... than to detest and persecute your brother". [1]
posted by funambulist at 8:33 AM on April 27, 2006


Whenever I allow myself to be engaged at all by these stories I just feel like a stupid mark. It's sheer manipulation, and its only aim is to provoke knee-jerk partisan reaction, and my how it succeeds. Is no one else sick of being recruited as ideological pawns in these staged battles of mawkish archetypical polarities?
posted by nanojath at 8:34 AM on April 27, 2006


I'm a Zen buddhist and I'm really feeling left out. Would someone please draw and publish some cartoons showing Siddhartha fucking an enso, or perhaps the monks from the "carrying a woman across the stream" koan engaged in homosexual relations? I'd even settle for the Buddha stuffing a lotus flower up his ass.

Thanks, and gassho!
posted by Kickstart70 at 8:37 AM on April 27, 2006


MetaFilter: Being recruited as ideological pawns in these staged battles of mawkish archetypical polarities.
posted by Zozo at 8:42 AM on April 27, 2006


I'd even settle for the Buddha stuffing a lotus flower up his ass.

A katartic diarrohoic even would ensue, finally settlying ataraxia from flowers up the bung !
posted by elpapacito at 8:47 AM on April 27, 2006


Virgin Mary Condom (w/ Bonus Jesus Erection!)
posted by filchyboy at 8:54 AM on April 27, 2006


Holy Foreskin, Batman!

I am surprised that Voltaire would, even as humor, posit that foreskin veneration and "to detest and persecute your brother" were mutually exclusive.
posted by Kirth Gerson at 8:54 AM on April 27, 2006


MetaFilter: Being recruited as ideological pawns in these staged battles of mawkish archetypical polarities.

This is why I always lose caption contests. Not pithy enough.

(Mirriam Webster Online definition of pithy: tersely cogent. Is that not a poem in itself?)
posted by nanojath at 8:58 AM on April 27, 2006


http://www.jesuspenis.com/

A Holy Testament to Our Lords Massive Member.
posted by Joeforking at 9:01 AM on April 27, 2006


I have to say, I thought the Jesus erection was funny at first, but in retrospect, I love the idea of how it highlights his humanity like that. Particularly in light of the "death erection" link...which means that it's even historically accurate! Those images are absolutely NOT comparable to the Mohammed cartoons because they are NOT misrepresenting Christianity in any way. In fact, they're well in keeping with the faith. Noble? No. But isn't that the whole point of the crucifiction? It wasn't meant to appear noble. Even if you see it as an utter humiliation, that's the whole point, that's what Jesus went through for you. (If you consider yourself a Christian, that is.)

I'm very impressed with the commentary here about how radical Christians have opted not the wholly acknowledge the humanity of Jesus. That's an interesting point and one that really resonates with me.

I don't think the Piss Christ thing is all that offensive either, for the same reasons. Actually, the photograph of the Piss Christ is really beautiful, so I don't know what everyone's complaining about.
posted by Hildegarde at 9:19 AM on April 27, 2006


Nothing beats religion
to stir emotions up hot
Ah, silly people
posted by edgeways at 9:19 AM on April 27, 2006


As president of the nation’s largest Catholic civil rights organization, it is my job to combat anti-Catholicism.

Who died and made that bigoted fuckhead Pope?

Crappy cartoons, though: why not a three-pane Chick parody discussing whether Jesus woke up to sticky sheets or thwapped one off to lighten the load?
posted by holgate at 10:37 AM on April 27, 2006


was Jesus gay?
posted by todbot at 10:47 AM on April 27, 2006


I was about to write a little article on this last night, but the alleged student paper website was some abandoned thing from six years ago with nothing anywhere about Jesus cartoons.

The outrage starting smelling artificial to me. It was the campus conservative paper claiming this terrible art crime had happened, and WND is in the neighborhood (they're based in Grant's Pass, OR).

Then again, the Danish cartoon scandal was pretty fake too, wasn't it? Ultimately boring ... compared to the Gospel of Judas with all its gnostic UFO action!
posted by kenlayne at 11:09 AM on April 27, 2006


Worldnet daily has a ton of good links. Take for instance these hilliarious christian t-shirts.

As an aside does anyone here think the "I love boys, who love Jesus" shirt would fit me in 2XL?
posted by matkline at 11:16 AM on April 27, 2006


William Donohue and Jack Thompson are pretty much the same guy. PLEASE PUT ME ON YOUR SHOW SO I CAN BE OUTRAGED I WROTE A LETTER
posted by Optimus Chyme at 11:17 AM on April 27, 2006


was Jesus gay?

Hmmm. Early 30's, slim/fit, not married, hangs out with 12 other men; enjoys washing others' feet, makes fabulous wines out of water and serves up an impromptu feast of fish and bread. Not that there's anything wrong with that.
posted by ericb at 11:20 AM on April 27, 2006


Perhaps it was a pogo stick?
posted by Smedleyman at 11:27 AM on April 27, 2006


Can anyone find some jpg's of the rest of them?

Damn you Insurgent for not having your issues online!
posted by frecklefaerie at 11:54 AM on April 27, 2006


Meanwhile religions are still interfering with concept like "obscenity laws" ordering adults to have only certain sexual behaviors between consenting adults ; if this is not ridicolous enough, try sheriffs wasting time and taxpayers money confiscating adult toys and videos from adult-only stores. The war on porn, another fine distraction from much more pressing issues 1) denial of scientific method 2) increasing poverty 3) outsourcing of production to competiting countries
posted by elpapacito at 12:05 PM on April 27, 2006


Next time I have an erection, I'm going to ask myself: What would jesus do?
posted by Skygazer at 1:35 PM on April 27, 2006


What do these people expect? Just because he was a virgin birth, he had no reason to presume that his kids would be as well.
posted by poweredbybeard at 1:49 PM on April 27, 2006


I guess if God and Jesus are harmed by the fooling around of a few callow college kids, then they can't be much of a Supreme Being (s).

Last I heard, the penis was designed and installed onto males by God. So I guess people are ashamed of God's work and in the final anyalsis I guess people don't have much respect for Him and his work and are ashamed to be designed by Him. I guess people know better than God.

Fuckin' hypocrite morons.
posted by Nicholas West at 2:10 PM on April 27, 2006


oh god...yes....oh god....oh my god......(breathing heavily)....oh, oh, oh....thank you jesus!
posted by whimsicalnymph at 2:38 PM on April 27, 2006


Pussies. If they think that tame shit constitutes one of the most obscene assaults on Christianity they've ever seen they should hear me after a few pints. Or even before a few pints.

Very weak people, those who think their fondest beliefs should be ring-fenced and not subject to mockery. Very, very weak people. Why, you'd almost believe that deep down their reaction was some sort of pathetic over-compensation for the subconscious knowledge that their precious beliefs are a crock of arse. But that would obviously be a crazy thing to believe, wouldn't it? As opposed to Christianity.
posted by Decani at 3:59 PM on April 27, 2006


Can anyone find some jpg's of the rest of them?

Seriously.
posted by mrgrimm at 5:19 PM on April 27, 2006


So are the embassies on fire?
posted by Krrrlson at 7:59 PM on April 27, 2006


I think the question of Jesus' erection is a red herring, a distraction from the real issue:

Is god a man, or is She a woman?

If He/She is neither, then do we pray to "it"?

If She's a woman, the bible is plainly wrong.

If He's a man, then He must have the attributes that come with malehood - testicles, penis, testosterone.
And if He's got a penis and testosterone, then He gets erections (unless He's impotent, and we all know He's omnipotent).
Since He is everywhere, he can see, for example, Sarah Michelle Gellar when she's in the shower.

So He's a perv.
posted by spazzm at 3:38 AM on April 28, 2006


Ghastly's ghastly comic has the best jesus cartoons. It mocks anime the rest of the time. NSFW
posted by jeffburdges at 5:38 AM on April 28, 2006



(via smalldeadanimals, originally printed in the University of Saskatchewan Sheaf)
posted by angrybeaver at 11:25 AM on April 29, 2006


« Older This game sucks....  |  Testicular Cancer and Testicul... Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments