Is nothing held sacred or is nothing revered any more?


Perhaps I am just plain out of touch with the reality of the modern world. Every day we seem to hear of people doing whatever with no social boundaries. The news tonight featured the story of Erykah Badu and her guerrilla videotaping of her singing and stripping in downtown Dallas in front of the Texas Book Depository in Dealey Plaza on March 17. For those of you too young to remember, this is where President Kennedy was shot in November of 1963. The area was turned into a national monument. Thousands of people visit the site yearly. It is almost always crowded. The day was slightly cool. I am sure there were dozens of witnesses. She claims she prayed that no children would be traumatized. In the video when she finishes stripping, a gunshot is fired and she falls naked to the pavement. Then she ran like hell.

She obviously did not apply for a permit. Unless the police can find a witness to testify to what she did, they cannot arrest her for this misdemeanor charge even though they showed the video on TV, blocking a few obvious areas of her body.

In her words, a guerrilla videotaping is “one take, no closed set, no permits, two minutes and run like hell.” This taping took place in the middle of the afternoon in front of children who were visiting the plaza. Supposedly she was making a statement against “groupthink” whatever that may mean.

It doesn’t matter what  you thought about President Kennedy. The first wave of baby boomers were seniors in high school when he was assassinated. To many, the 1960s are ancient history. Some people today still were happy the day he was killed. That is not the point. My point is that I question, “Have we lost all sense of decency? Do we not hold anything worthy of esteem?”

In a similar act, the theater group at Tarleton State planned to perform  a play, Corpus Christi,  that portrayed Jesus as a homosexual man. This play was not meant for the public. It was an in-class project. The public was somehow  informed, and it stirred up a controversy that caused the professor to stop the production. Before all the dust settled, there were even threats of bodily harm. It kind of reminded me of the cartoons of the Muslim Prophet in Denmark. Some people just don’t really know how to judge the depth of people’s feelings when it comes to straying from the Written Word in portraying Holy Men around the world. (edited 3/31…originally it was for viewing by more than just the class. When I became aware of it, it was to be a private showing. Please explore the link for more information.)

Tarleton State was planning to allow the play to be presented in the acting class. They stated free speech amendments as a reason to let the play continue. Now I’m all in favor of free speech but where does common sense come in? You just don’t play around with the image of Jesus in this overcrowded bastion of Christianity called Texas.

Texans have a motto, “Don’t mess with Texas”. An unspoken addendum in this neck of the states is “Don’t mess with Jesus”. I know first hand where that can lead. When the DaVinci Code was released, I was exploring the idea of Jesus being married to Mary Magdaline. To me it was an idea of interest. It doesn’t change my idea one bit about Jesus whether he was married or not, gay or not. I made the error of inviting a Baptist friend of mine to a workshop where the idea of Mary as the Holy Grail (mother of Sarah) was being explored. She went ballistic on me. She couldn’t even begin to entertain the idea. Unfortunately,I haven’t socialized with her since that conversation. She wrote my off as a friend after about ten years of friendship.

The same thing holds true for portraying Jesus as a homosexual. Some people just can’t tolerate that idea. In the name of Jesus, they’d just as soon smite those who might even suggest such, in their eyes,  an abhorrent aberration.

Now in my opinion if certain Christians don’t cotton to that idea, they don’t have to watch it. It would have been over and done with in one day. All their protesting just raised the consciousness of the situation and showed them as the intolerant beings that they are. It was a private class. Even if it were a public performance, Jesus has been a big enough guy for 2,000+ years to withstand the slings and arrows of outrageous fortunes in the past. We’ve seen many such plays and movies come and go in the past and I don’t think many Christians were corrupted in the long run. It is more difficult to corrupt those with closed minds.

But when one is dealing with beings that are held sacred, and places that are revered, I think it is best to be conservative and consider the people around you. There are just some things you’d be better off not messing with in Texas. Jesus and Kennedy’s Dealey Plaza are two. The first is considered sacred, the second is revered. It is best to tread lightly. Namaste. Attic Annie

6 Comments

Filed under Casual conversation, diary, general topics, musings, relationships, spirituality, Uncategorized

6 responses to “Is nothing held sacred or is nothing revered any more?

  1. freedomactionnow

    It’s amazing to consider the stance of the Left – insisting on “politically correct” (i.e., we mustn’t offend anyone, anywhere, anytime) – and yet their followers (like the ones you mention) haven’t the slightest qualms about offending us.

    The Tarleton State play isn’t a single isolated example.

    In other news, a few students at Trinity University (San Antonio) want the university to drop the words “Year of Our Lord” from their diplomas. They don’t realize that whenever we write a year number, we mean “A.D.”

  2. atticannie

    Who is “us”? Political correctness should, in my opinion, be a standard of behavior that shows we deeply respect all “others” even when we may disagree with them. I grew up in a time when little moron jokes http://www.jokesnjokes.net/funny.jokes.amusing. humor.laughs/Polincorrect/dimwit001.htm
    were told on a daily basis followed closely behind by “Polack” jokes. It was a time to lear and wolf whistle at women. Examples could be listed for pages.
    There will always be those among us who desire change from the status quo which makes them “them” while we remain “us”.
    If political correctness is used with moderation, to me it simply means we are acting in a manner which is respectful of the rights and feelings of others. That should be the game on both sides of any aisle that separates us.

  3. The only problem I have with ‘political correctness’ is that POLITICS aren’t supposed to be CORRECT.
    Politics in the context of this discussion are defined by Websters as “4 : the political opinions or sympathies of a person”

    How can an opinion or sympathy be judged as correct or not?

    You may find something offensive, but I may find the very lack of that same thing offensive. Who is right?

    I think you have the right to shun someone who does or says something you don’t like. However, I certainly DO NOT think you have the right to tell them they can’t do or say them.

    If instead of banning thought, action or speech, we simply allowed it yet ignored what we don’t like, I think you will find that most unpopular speech would atrophy in your life. Mainly because those you disagree with or ignore would probably wander off in search of more willing audiences.

    • atticannie

      I agree with you. My only thought is what is the total definition of politics? I found a definition of “office politics” as social relations involving intrigue to gain authority or power; the “office” can be expanded to any public place where authority or power come into play. Perhaps ‘politically correct’ should simply be boiled down to having empathetic thoughts for the feeling of others. It’s been said for my entire lifetime at least, “walk a mile in his shoes”.
      I also totally agree that POLITICS should be alive and well with the practice of dialoguing. I would hate to see us becoming a nation of only one thought and one mind. That is scary. Discussion should be vigorous in that arena we call POLITICS.
      As far as that play Corpus Christi being performed in that acting class, I support the idea. Those in the class whose beliefs would not allow them to view it could have been excused. It would have happened, lived and died, within less than an hour. I don’t think the media or other spokespeople should have ever been involved. But such is life in America. AA

  4. freedomactionnow

    “Who is “us”?”

    “That should be the game on both sides of any aisle that separates us.”

    I think we’re the same “us”.

    “Political correctness should, in my opinion, be a standard of behavior that shows we deeply respect all “others” …”

    I think that’s a good point – but “PC” is the extreme form of “respect” – PC insists that no-one be offended – except, of course, Christians.

    And there are more than a few “others” who do not deserve our respect. Murderers, gangs, dope-dealers, politicians who sell their votes to the highest bidder, international organizations whose purpose in life is to destroy this country, …

    PC is really just a form of mind control. “You mustn’t say that – you mustn’t think that.”

    I don’t think anyone doubts what the result would be if the play had been one suggesting that Mohammed was a homosexual.

    I grew up in that same time. Two radio shows that I remember stand out: “Life With Luigi” (Luigi was a hapless innocent, newly immigrated from Italy – and played to perfection by an actor who wasn’t Italian); “Amos and Andy” (I’ve heard quite a few of those, and I have yet to find an instance where that show made fun of, or disparaged blacks. One of their Christmas shows was a beautiful and moving account of the holiday (or holyday)).

    It’s sort of like flag-burning. I’d like to see us be a country where anyone could burn the flag without fear of reprisal, but also a country where nobody would ever want to.

    I have no use for “performance art”. These things are usually done by people with no recognizable talent, and usually done simply to annoy other people.

    “If political correctness is used with moderation,…”

    I agree wholeheartedly. The problem is that it isn’t.

  5. atticannie

    I agree and am glad you agree. BTW, the ones who want “in the year of our Lord” removed from their diplomas, according to the facts I found, are Muslim. They attend a religious school and want to make their own rules. I don’t think so. That’s like being offered meat in the cafeteria and objecting because one is a vegetarian. Don’t go to the cafeteria. AA

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s