:smack:
I figured it was a reference to a hymn I didn’t know. Which, of course, would be all of them
I can see how some people could take offense to it (of course, some people can find offense in anything).
I’m just pissed because I gave up chocolate for Lent. :eek:
Thanks for the tip-off.
BTW as mentioned before it’s not the Church per se that’s making the bigger stink, but the Catholic League, who have no life and exist to get outraged.
During the weekend I caught a few reports on this over the networks, and it struck me that in the series of soundbites from the CL spokeswoman about the issue, she spoke the phrase “exposed genitals” three times… now, I know it was the news editor’s handiwork in this being how it ended up aired, but it is telling that she, who should be knowledgeable of the Ways of the Flack, used the phrase often enough that the guys in the newsroom could make it the leitmotif of her interview. I kept thinking to myself… “um… DOES she know that people WERE crucified naked?”
Oh, and of course, she rhetorically asked “would he dare to do a chocolate Muhammad with exposed genitals”. Well, lady, if people feel safe offending mainstream Christians, I feel that would be a CREDIT to mainstream Christianity. A religion that can do no worse against me for defying it than gentle admonition, a call to repentance, and at worst a boycott, looks pretty darn good, by historic standards.
Hee!
applause
The little drama queen got exactly the result he wanted.
I wonder, would the Catholic League also be horribly offended by the chocolate nativities often seen on Spanish baker’s windows at Christmastime, or is it okay so long as the Holy Groin is covered?