Your strongest belief

Ashe · #1 09-30-2002, 03:02 AM

Hello everyone. Is there anything that you really believe in strongly. Something that you would risk your life for or would stand by no matter what. It doesn't matter what it is, it can be related to your religon, life philosopy, love, views or anything else that you might strongly believe in.

For me I strongly believe that all people should be treated equally no matter what their race, religon or what they look like. I think that we humans should all accept each other and be more accepting of others beliefs.

Joshy · #2 09-30-2002, 07:55 AM

i believe that i should become the sole ruler of the world. And peace should be everywhere.

***Alcar*** · #3 09-30-2002, 08:01 AM

Summoner Yuna, you summed up exactly what I stand for

Alcar...

Jacob · #4 09-30-2002, 03:37 PM

Ugh, i cant stand that mindless drivel about equals and peace and stuff. It really makes me ill, i have no idea why though...At school i was always the first one there when a fight erupted...People said it was because i fed off the hatred...which isn't far from the truth...Anyway, there are no beliefs that i would defend...No point really. All beliefs have flaws.

SeaRex · #5 09-30-2002, 06:33 PM

My strongest belief is that all forms of art and media should be viewed uncut, unaltered, and in the exact form the creator intended. If art is censored, it is no longer the artist's vision. I think this applies to all art, whether it be a painting, music, or even a light-hearted TV show...

paramiteabe · #6 10-01-2002, 11:13 AM

I strongly balieve in your own free will. To say what you want when you want. And the freedom of haveing freedom it's self. To go where ever you want.

sO fReAkIn oDd · #7 10-01-2002, 07:02 PM

I believe that humans are a flaw in God's plan.

Jacob · #8 10-01-2002, 07:44 PM

:

I strongly balieve in your own free will. To say what you want when you want. And the freedom of haveing freedom it's self. To go where ever you want.

I believe this aswell, so long as they're not lower beings...

***Nate*** · #9 10-02-2002, 03:02 AM

:

Originally posted by SeaRex
My strongest belief is that all forms of art and media should be viewed uncut, unaltered, and in the exact form the creator intended. If art is censored, it is no longer the artist's vision. I think this applies to all art, whether it be a painting, music, or even a light-hearted TV show...

Define art. I don't think that we should be so accepting of some of the stuff 'artists' do. Some pretty terrible and insulting things have been done in the name of art.

If someone takes a photo of a crucifix in a bucket of urine, is that art?
If someone places a huge condom on the virgin mary, is that art?
If someone throws manure all over a copy of the new testament, is that art?

I'm not christian but I feel sorry for anyone who's beliefs are ridiculed in this way.

SeaRex · #10 10-02-2002, 07:37 PM

:

Originally posted by Nate_dog_woof
Define art. I don't think that we should be so accepting of some of the stuff 'artists' do. Some pretty terrible and insulting things have been done in the name of art.

Art is however you describe it. Everyone has their own definition of art. Mine is rather loose, as it could be any form of media where the artist expesses him/herself in a creative way.

:

If someone takes a photo of a crucifix in a bucket of urine, is that art?
If someone places a huge condom on the virgin mary, is that art?
If someone throws manure all over a copy of the new testament, is that art?

Yes. To me it is. Just because its offensive, doesn't mean that it doesn't count as art.

sO fReAkIn oDd · #11 10-02-2002, 09:08 PM

As offensive as those things are, I believe that they are indeed art. Those represent someones beliefs and way of expressing their beliefs, who am I to judge how they convey their point.

Jacob · #12 10-03-2002, 04:21 PM

*Grooves to the music*

***Nate*** · #13 10-04-2002, 01:37 AM

Okay, I don't think I made my point very well.

Yes those things are art, but I don't think that they should be publicly exhibited as they are offensive and verging on racism (if christianity was a minority group, it would be called racism).

SeaRex · #14 10-04-2002, 06:40 PM

:

Originally posted by Nate_dog_woof
Yes those things are art, but I don't think that they should be publicly exhibited as they are offensive and verging on racism

Well, what do you suggest be done? This is a free country, and you can't just reject art because it can be offensive. Or you shouldn't... art is banned and censored all the time. If you have a problem with it, than don't look at it.

Statikk HDM · #15 10-07-2002, 04:05 PM

No good thing dwells in anyone.

Statikk HDM · #16 10-07-2002, 04:09 PM

And on the art thing, I would like to quote Dennis Miller "Sure, 99 percent of art is pure and utter crap but that other 1 percent makes you glad to be a human." Or something like that. And I will definately agree with the first part of that statement. Anyway aren't these kind of shocking things rather child like and the very opposite of what art stands for?

rikkypop · #17 10-07-2002, 05:37 PM

i belive that somewhere, out there, there is a cheat for halo

***Xavier*** · #18 10-07-2002, 05:39 PM

for me: you can't have 100% liberty and 100% équality

***Nate*** · #19 10-07-2002, 10:04 PM

:

Originally posted by SeaRex
Well, what do you suggest be done? This is a free country, and you can't just reject art because it can be offensive. Or you shouldn't... art is banned and censored all the time. If you have a problem with it, than don't look at it.

What if Osama Bin Laden started calling himself an artist with pyrotechnical ambitions, or Saddam Hussein decided to make a sculpture out of the skulls of a few hundred thousand Kurds?

Sometimes we need to place limits on art

glukkon_daniel · #20 10-07-2002, 10:53 PM

"Anyway aren't these kind of shocking things rather child like and the very opposite of what art stands for?"

You have a very specific view of what art is, Statikk. Art stands for whatever the artist intended it to stand for. If you think it's childish to put a condom on the Virgin Mary, then great. I'd have to agree with you there. But I'm sure sure there are people out there who appreciate it, and their opinion is just as valid as yours.

"Yes those things are art, but I don't think that they should be publicly exhibited as they are offensive and verging on racism"

Offensive? Verging on racism? I think you just narrowed all art down to nothing and... nothing.

I got an idea: How about you turn on your TV (if you have one) and watch it for about two minutes. The 1950's have passed, buttercup. Get over it. EVERYTHING is offensive to someone.

glukkon_daniel · #21 10-07-2002, 11:19 PM

"What if Osama Bin Laden started calling himself an artist with pyrotechnical ambitions, or Saddam Hussein decided to make a sculpture out of the skulls of a few hundred thousand Kurds?"

That would be some pretty disturbing ART.

"Sometimes we need to place limits on art"

No we don't. We REALLY don't... You know, in some countries, you can't even express your own opinion. And this is all because of what one person or group of people thinks is right. Well, what if they did put limitations on art? There would be a LOT of pissed off people, that's what. "Sorry, your opinion is too harsh. I'm gonna have to not allow that." Then we would just be one of those countries with asshole governments whose opinions are right, and yours are wrong. We would be no different than Saddam.

SeaRex · #22 10-08-2002, 06:14 PM

Ah, thank you, Danny boy. You saved me from quite a bit of typing.

***Nate*** · #23 10-09-2002, 02:17 AM

Okay, I understand your points about artist being able to express themselves but sometimes they do offensive stuff just to be offensive, or get a reaction - not because there is some deep message. That is what I have a problem with.

ZombieX · #24 10-09-2002, 03:30 AM

I believe the Truth is Out There.

Statikk HDM · #25 10-09-2002, 03:55 PM

How can thes sacrilegious sentiments respectablly be called art?
Not only that, a lot of money is wasted(taxpayer, mind you) on these puerile pieces of crud. And on a similar note, a so called "artist" recently sold his own excrement to the Lourve at twice the going rate of PURE GOLD. I kid you not.

***Xavier*** · #26 10-09-2002, 04:14 PM

6 x 9 = 42

***Wil*** · #27 10-09-2002, 06:09 PM

I believe I can fly. I believe I can touch the sky.

Et cetera.

SeaRex · #28 10-09-2002, 06:33 PM

:

Originally posted by Nate_dog_woof
Okay, I understand your points about artist being able to express themselves but sometimes they do offensive stuff just to be offensive, or get a reaction - not because there is some deep message. That is what I have a problem with.

And you have a right to. Artists like that are bastards. It's a good thing that they're aren't many artists like that out there. Unless, of course, the meaning of the art was the very reaction of the audience. Sort of a "living canvas" so to speak. Stuff like that is always nice. Anyway, just remember that things seen as offensive to someone may seem inspirational to another. Some deeply moving art can be offensive as well. Besides, what is art without emotion? You want the audience to have some sort of reaction...

ZombieX · #29 10-09-2002, 11:41 PM

Hold onto your dreams...
For dreams do come true.

glukkon_daniel · #30 10-10-2002, 01:12 AM

"How can thes sacrilegious sentiments respectablly be called art?"

By not being a closed-minded asshole, and actually taking a fucking second to realize that what you think is not a fact.

You're not the only person on this planet who can interpret art; and I don't give a shit what your opinion is, it's still art. It might be bad art to you, but it's art nonetheless. Also, guess what: Not everyone is Christian. What is sacreligious to you is just fine and dandy to someone else.

"Not only that, a lot of money is wasted (taxpayer, mind you) on these puerile pieces of crud."

Some people are proud to be paying their tax money for these puerile pieces of crud. And I bet some of the same people do not want their tax money going towards churches, because they don't believe in God. You think the art sucks... Fine. They don't believe in God... Fine. But I don't think anyone's going to quit using tax money for either of them.

"And on a similar note, a so called 'artist' recently sold his own excrement to the Lourve at twice the going rate of PURE GOLD. I kid you not."

Well, if Joe Black-Wearer wants to pay money to see some nutjob's shit, then more power to him.