The Passive Persecution of American Christians

According to R. Emmett Tyrell, Jr. at The American Spectator, the Andy Warhol Foundation is threatening to pull it’s funding from the Smithsonian. Their complaint is that the Smithsonian caved to Republicans and the Catholic League over “hosting a video showing ants crawling over the crucifix entitiled “Fire in My Belly.”

As Tyrell says, the double standard that the liberals operate on is fundamental to their mindset. It’s okay, justified and in fact, righteous to disturb the peace of those who disagree with them but when the public at large doesn’t want their ‘art’, it becomes an issue of social injustice, bigotry, civil rights violations and hate crime.

“If the ants were swarming all over the Koran it would clearly be a hate crime and out it would go without the Andy Warhol Foundation for the Visual Arts having a leg to stand on.”

Not only would the Foundation not have a leg to stand on but they would be in the front lines demanding religious tolerance and decrying the bigotry of holding such an exhibit — but only for Muslims.

The Foundation’s argument is one of censorship. “For the Arts to flourish,” writes Joel Wachs, president of the Warhol foundation, “the arts must be free, and the decision to censor this important work is in stark opposition to our mission to defend freedom of expression wherever and whenever it is under attack.”

No one has censored this particular video or the entire exhibit for that matter. This video is available at another New York City museum for those who are so inclined to view and support it. No one is stifling the ‘art’ of anyone. Taxpayers just don’t want to pay for it. All art should be paid for by those interested in supporting it;  that’s where private foundations and patrons come in. Raise your own money for this “very important” exhibit.

Don’t be mistaken, this is not about freedom of expression or censorship. The liberals would love to paint that picture but it’s simply not true.  This is about religious persecution of those who are not Muslim or those whose religion is not fashionable to the artsy, elite left.  This particular assault on Christianity by the left is passive and insidious compared to the persecution they are suffering worldwide. Pope Benedict highlights this in his World Peace Day missive:

“Sadly, the year now ending has again been marked by persecution, discrimination, terrible acts of violence and religious intolerance,” Benedict lamented […]

Benedict singled out the “reprehensible attack” on a Baghdad cathedral during Mass in October, killing two priests and more than 50 other worshippers, as well as attacks on private homes that “spread fear within the Christian community and (create) a desire on the part of many to emigrate in search of a better life.”

[…]

“At present, Christians are the religious group which suffers most from persecution on account of its faith,” the pontiff asserted, and cited Christian communities suffering from violence and intolerance particularly in Asia, Africa, the Middle East and the Holy Land.

“This situation is intolerable, since it represents an insult to God and to human dignity” as well as “a threat to security and peace,” Benedict wrote [. . .]

It’s time that Christians fought back. If that means fighting in court, then so be it. The First Amendment guarantees us that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” No one or entity, including the government or a private foundation, have the  right to stifle the free exercise of religious worship and religious assembly. But the left has hijacked the government and the courts and is passively (without violence) persecuting and stifling the practice of religion by Christians in America.

We see this passive religious persecution in America every day, from Chase Bank refusing to allow their banks to decorate for the holidays to schools that no longer allow Christmas trees.

If the left objects to paying, with tax dollars, for a Nativity scene on the courthouse lawn, then there is no problem with the religious objecting to pay for an exhibit of ‘art’ that depicts Christ or Christianity in an abusive, illegitimate and dishonest way.

As Governor Christie said (on another topic): the double standard ends now.  Christians have to stand up and object as loudly, and if necessary as obnoxiously as the left has.

NPR, Smithsonian running scared as the Republican t-AXE man cometh

It’s becoming fun to watch the taxpayer funded arts, entertainment and ‘news’ entities in this country run scared from what they believe will be the Republican axe come January.

Right on the heels of the firing of Juan Williams and the public demands to cut tax dollars to NPR, several weeks ago PBS cut a segment of Tina Fey’s acceptance speech at the Kennedy Center. (You can watch the entire thing here, but her disparaging comments about Sarah Palin and conservative women starts at around 12 minutes.)

“And, you know, politics aside, the success of Sarah Palin and women like her is good for all women – except, of course –those who will end up, you know, like, paying for their own rape ‘kit ‘n’ stuff,” Fey said. “But for everybody else, it’s a win-win. Unless you’re a gay woman who wants to marry your partner of 20 years – whatever. But for most women, the success of conservative women is good for all of us. Unless you believe in evolution. You know – actually, I take it back. The whole thing’s a disaster.”

This week, the Smithsonian followed the Corporation for Public Broadcasting lead by putting the cabosh on part of it’s homoerotic exhibit “Hide and Seek: Difference and Desire in American Portraiture.”

As a warning, this is extremely disturbing and graphic, both sexually and violently. I was hesitant to post it. But this is what Christians, the general public and children can see at the National Portrait Gallery:

Bowing to pressure from the Catholic League and fears of cuts in tax funding by the Republicans, the powers at the National Portrait Gallery (part of the Smithsonian Institution) have pulled an “art video” depicting an image of Christ on the cross, covered in ants. William Donohue, president of the Catholic League calls this hate speech (a term I personally hate) that is meant to offend and insult Christians. Congressman John Boehner’s spokesman, Kevin Smith, called this exhibit a “misuse of taxpayer dollars.”

“American families have a right to expect better from recipients of taxpayer funds in a tough economy,”  Smith said. “While the amount of money involved may be small, it’s symbolic of the arrogance Washington routinely applies to thousands of spending decisions involving Americans’ hard-earned money.”

In defense of it’s decision to display this homoerotic exhibit, the National Gallery is quick to point out that the $750,000 in funding came from private donations, not taxpayer dollars. But if the gallery itself, which IS funded by taxes and the employees that are also paid with that same money, didn’t exist, neither would this exhibit.

Chris Edwards, director of tax policy studies at the Cato Institute and a former senior economist on the congressional Joint Economic Committee, told CNSNews.com, “If the Smithsonian didn’t have the taxpayer-funded building, they would have no space to present the exhibit, right? In my own view, if someone takes taxpayer money, then I think the taxpayers have every right to question the institutions where the money’s going.” (CNSNews.com)

Keep in mind that this exhibit is open to the public and in fact,  the National Gallery had a family weekend this fall, encouraging parents to bring their children and engage in hands on activities after their tour. (As an aside, this does give new meaning to the term “hands on.”)

This is part of what children got to see:

Another piece in the exhibit is a 1994 photograph (from a triptych) entitled “Brotherhood, Crossroads, Etcetera” by Lyle Ashton Harris. The “Hide/Seek” catalog says that Harris created the piece in collaboration with his brother, Thomas Allen Harris.

“In this provocative center image, the brothers exchange a passionate kiss as Thomas presses a gun into Lyle’s chest–conjuring the original biblical story of Cain’s treachery toward his brother, Abel,” states the catalog description (p. 265) of the piece. (also from CNSNews.com)

I’ve taken my kids to countless exhibits and museums over the years. They’ve had the privilege to see Picasso, Michelangelo and Rembrandt, as well as many other great artists. Really, I don’t have a problem with this stuff. I take that back, I do have a problem with this stuff, now that I’ve seen that video. This is more outrageous and disturbing than I first thought.

I do not advocate censorship, except where it pertains to my parental rights. As a parent, I have the right of censorship over what my young kids saw, heard and read. And I chose to pay for what they saw, heard and read.

The distinction here is that I am paying for art that I do not want to pay for: art that I would not want my kids to be exposed to: art that, in the words of Donohue, I find offensive and insulting.  And why is it okay to insult Christians? The liberal art cliche would never be exhibiting art that is offensive to Muslims – mainly out of fear of physical harm and not because it’s simply inappropriate, immoral and unacceptable.  And why do this during the Christmas season?

I do think that Bill Donohue is on to something here. As much as I hate the term “hate speech” because it smacks of censorship that I think should only be limited to individual choices and not government intervention, this is the way to fight this kind of thing. Again, this is an insulting and offensive exhibit to a great many American taxpayers, including me and this is not where I choose to spend my money.

Tax payer funded institutions like the Smithsonian and NPR, are not in a position to decide what is acceptable and appropriate to the public – the public makes that decision because the public is funding them. If they want the freedom to exhibit whatever they want – pornographic, anti-Christian, whatever – then they should not be funded by the American people. There is plenty of private funding out there that they can secure.