from: http://www.zolatimes.com/V4.17/laura_mary_dung.htm Click Here: <A HREF="http://www.zolatimes.com/V4.17/laura_mary_dung.htm">Dr. Laura, the Virgin Mary, and Elephant Dung, �</A> ----- Dr. Laura, the Virgin Mary, and Elephant Dung by James A. Cooley First, let me put two recent news items together to highlight the serious Dr. Laura problem that needs to be resolved: New York City Mayor Rudolf Guliani is about to hand an extra $5.8 million to the Brooklyn Museum of Art over the matter of artistic dung. He doesn't want to do it, but it is part of a lawsuit settlement. As the truly-informed may recall, Guliani was notably displeased over the museum's "Sensations" exhibit, which displayed, among other bad modern art, Nigerian Chris Ofili's portrait of the "Holy Virgin Mary." Ofili's work featured a black Madonna, complete with lumps of elephant dung and pasted-on cutouts of pornographic images. Guliani�not known for doing things halfway�had ordered a hold be put on the museum's funding, threatened to evict them from their city-owned building, and just for good measure, a removal of the entire board of directors. Of course, this all went to court. U.S. District Court Judge Nina Gershon, in a ruling whose reasoning was seemingly channeled from another dimension, stated the city was absolutely obligated to pay for an exhibit a goodly number of Catholics find, in the words of Guliani, to be "sick" and "perverted." "There is no federal constitutional issue more grave than the effort by governmental officials to censor works of expression and to threaten the vitality of a major cultural institution," Gershon gushed, while obviously overcome with judicial hyperbole. The Essential Aesthetics of a Good Lynching On wonders: Would this judge have ruled the same way if the museum put up an 'art display' from the members of the Aryan Nation that glorified the Holocaust and clearly advocated finishing the job? How about a photo montage from the KKK on the essential aesthetics of a good lynching? Maybe it is time for an artistic consideration of the hidden benefits of child sexual abuse. Extreme examples? Sure. But where exactly is the line to be drawn these days? To be consistent with Gershon's logic, it appears nothing can ever be deemed too sick or perverse to be unworthy of subsidy by the citizens of New York. It is anything goes�or else. OK, so we have now officially established that censorship is bad. Not just sort of bad, either. It is really, really bad. This is the case even if we, as taxpayers, are forced to pay for materials that offends, reviles, insults, nauseates, or just plain disgust us. Now, contrast this free-speech-or-else scenario with the ongoing protest efforts by the Gay Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation to pressure Paramount Television to scrap its plans to produce a TV show for radio talk-show host Dr. Laura Schlessinger. Here is what GLAAD says about this on their web site (http://www.glaad.org/): "Don't mistake it as a censorship issue: there is a difference between opposing viewpoints and a defamatory expression of those views which encourages prejudice and discrimination. The former is crucial to an open exchange of ideas. The latter is unacceptable." So, would the act of smearing dung on a symbol of a major religion be considered a "defamatory expression" that "encourages prejudice and discrimination" against the members of that religion? Or am I missing something here? What is GLAAD's solution to Dr. Laura being on the tube? Here it is in a nutshell: "Paramount: It's your turn. We're listening. Where's your voice? Accept your responsibility and drop this show." Here GLAAD puts it more bluntly: "If she can't be controlled, she must be stopped." I ask: Have we reached a juncture in our culture where the slimy and exploitive Jerry Springer is just fine for our family living rooms, but Dr. Laura is simply too dangerous. A dunged-up virgin is worthy of mandatory public dollars, while a conservative talk show host must be chased from the airwaves. Consistent? I don't think so. But, when have liberals ever had to show consistency? However, I have an answer to the Dr. Laura dilemma that can work for everyone involved. Dr. Laura at the Brooklyn Museum of Art I propose that Dr. Laura's new TV show be filmed at the Brooklyn Museum of Art. It will be billed as new form of cutting-edge performance art. Once officially classified as 'art,' Dr. Laura will be above criticism for anything she says or does. As an artist, she will be expected, even obligated, to offend. Anyone who objects to her 'artistic expression' is simply a misguided rube and a potential censor. Judge Gershon will be waiting in the wings to protect Dr. Laura's rights and ensure the City of New York helps pay for all this. Better yet, the crowd of loud lefties currently howling would then have to show support for the Dr. Laura show. This is their conditioned response to any tax-funded controversy. Look for a quick reversion to the "we don't personally agree with it, but it must be protected" mantra. To do otherwise is to appear to agree with Guliani that standards should exist regarding what so-called 'art' the general public is obligated to subsidize. This is, of course, an unthinkable option. It will work. Trust me. If dried feces can be defended as speech, then Dr. Laura should expect no less. Oh, and anyone who disagrees with me must be full of [censored]. Sorry, I meant to say dung. It seems the print media still has some standards left. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ James A. Cooley is a Senior Correspondent for The Lone Star Report, a weekly newsletter on Texas politics. His homepage is located at http://www.io.com/~jacooley/. -30- from The Laissez Faire City Times, Vol 4, No 17, April 24, 2000 ----- Aloha, He'Ping, Om, Shalom, Salaam. Em Hotep, Peace Be, All My Relations. Omnia Bona Bonis, Adieu, Adios, Aloha. Amen. Roads End <A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/">www.ctrl.org</A> DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER ========== CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substance�not soap-boxing�please! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'�with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright frauds�is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. ======================================================================== Archives Available at: http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html <A HREF="http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html">Archives of [EMAIL PROTECTED]</A> http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ <A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/">ctrl</A> ======================================================================== To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
