Thursday, September 27, 2007

Miller Time



Bill Donohue of the Catholic League is mad about Miller's corporate sponsorhip of the upcoming Folsom Street Fair in San Francisco and I can't blame him.

I won't show the sadomasochistic parody of DaVinci's "Last Supper" that started the whole mess, but it is available via this link, along with graphic images from last year's Folsom Street Fair:

National Boycott Of Miller Begins; Over
200 Religious Groups Contacted.


Why do they pick on the Catholics? Because we don't behead you for despicable images like the Dung Madonna and the crucifix in the vial of urine.

I hope Miller comes to its senses... meanwhile there's Anheuser Busch.

14 Comments:

At September 27, 2007 5:31 PM, Blogger cube said...

No takers?

 
At September 27, 2007 8:46 PM, Blogger Brooke said...

I'm on time delay. ;)

Miller is a big covert supporter of all things gay.

They also like to support illegals.

We stick to microbrews.

I'd drink Bud if it didn't taste like monkey whiz.

 
At September 28, 2007 1:38 AM, Anonymous Kathy said...

It is an absolute disgrace cube!

Those pictures just made me want to puke!

That people can accept such vile (public) behaviour and displays, disturbs me greatly!

The world is going to hell in a handbasket!

"Jesus weeps"

 
At September 28, 2007 8:58 AM, Blogger cube said...

brooke: BTW the first link was about Anheuser Busch, not Miller. I don't have a problem with Bud targeting the homosexual market in gay periodicals. That's just good business.

Miller, on the other hand, is supporting a disgusting public spectacle. And, as you pointed out, illegal immigration.

No more Miller for me until all of the above changes.

 
At September 28, 2007 9:03 AM, Blogger cube said...

brooke: I drink micros too, but when I'm trying to cut back on carbs Bud Light isn't bad. I also like Michelob Ultra.

 
At September 28, 2007 9:11 AM, Blogger cube said...

kathy: I agree with you. Our culture is coarsening at an alarming rate and there seems to be no end to the amount of shocking behavior we are facing daily.

Those Folsom Street Fair revelers should be ashamed of themselves, but, sadly, shame is an old fashioned concept.

 
At October 03, 2007 12:20 PM, Blogger nanc said...

when you get a moment, see the links i've left at my post at longrange - prepare to be ill.

 
At October 08, 2007 9:42 AM, Blogger Dora said...

Shame is a very Catholic concept, don't you think?

What about free speech? Should the Folsom Street Fair go ahead at all? What would you do if it showed up in your city or town?

 
At October 08, 2007 9:58 AM, Blogger cube said...

dora: Catholic or not, shame does seem to be out dated concept.

What about free speech? Um, I'm for it, aren't you?

If the FSF came to my city, I wouldn't attend it. I'd stay home and listen to Rush ;-)

 
At October 08, 2007 10:14 AM, Blogger Dora said...

re: free speech, I'm just askin'. You mentioned Piss Christ and the Dung Madonna, there were protests against it, Giuliani threatening to withdraw funding for the Brooklyn Museum of Art over the exhibit. I am not sure whether it was hi prerogative, but I don't approve of a city mayor threatening to withdraw funds from a museum for exhibiting works that are clearly protected by the first amendment, but that the mayor personally finds offensive.

I'm just making sure we're on the same page.

As for shame, it's an outdated concept because it inherently appeals to a fixed set of shared personal standards that we no longer share or agree on. So, if you want to achieve the same effect as invoking shame would have achieved previously, you have to explain why what the person is doing is shameful.

I personally don't see anything shameful in this street fair, especially considering the common human need for "dress-up" as traced through the history of mankind.

 
At October 08, 2007 10:51 AM, Blogger cube said...

dora: Tax money shouldn't fund "art" that groups find objectionable. If the museum funds it with public funds, then so be it.

I think the photos from the FSF speak for themselves. I may not be able to agree with you on a definition of obscenity, but I know it when I see it.

 
At October 08, 2007 11:39 AM, Blogger Dora said...

dora: Tax money shouldn't fund "art" that groups find objectionable. If the museum funds it with public funds, then so be it.

So you're saying that tax dollars should only fund art that no one finds objectionable?

You know, non-profit status is an indirect tax funding, because it allows non-profits to pay fewer taxes, so you and I have to pay more taxes to make up for that shortfall. Perhaps non-profit status should only be granted to those organizations that no one finds objectionable?

I think the photos from the FSF speak for themselves. I may not be able to agree with you on a definition of obscenity, but I know it when I see it.

I don't really see what is wrong with this festival. No one is forced to go there, no one is even forced to look at the photos on the website, the people attending it seem happy, I really don't see where the harm is to anyone. Seriously.

 
At October 08, 2007 11:59 AM, Blogger cube said...

dora: I didn't say tax dollars should only fund art that no one finds objectionable. I said, "Tax money shouldn't fund "art" that groups find objectionable.

There's a difference.

Perhaps non-profits would do well to remain apolitical.

 
At October 08, 2007 12:42 PM, Blogger Dora said...

I didn't say tax dollars should only fund art that no one finds objectionable. I said, "Tax money shouldn't fund "art" that groups find objectionable.

There's a difference.


What do you mean by "groups"? Religious groups? Racial groups? Political groups? Ideological groups? Etc.?

 

Post a Comment

<< Home






















C-List Blogger




Who links to my website?

I adopted a virtual Squillion from the Cat Blogosphere!


Pop Culture Blogs - BlogCatalog Blog Directory





Most Accurate Clock Ever This is the most accurate clock ever and it looks good too.


Blog Directory - Blogged

I'm # 409 Get listed at www.millionbloglist.com