Why no ant-covered Mohammad?

(CNSNews.com) -- The federally funded National Portrait Gallery, one of the museums of the Smithsonian Institution, is currently showing an exhibition that features images of an ant-covered Jesus, male genitals, naked brothers kissing, men in chains, Ellen DeGeneres grabbing her breasts, and a painting the Smithsonian itself describes in the show's catalog as "homoerotic."

The exhibit, “Hide/Seek: Difference and Desire in American Portraiture,” opened on Oct. 30 and will run throughout the Christmas Season, closing on Feb. 13.

“This is an exhibition that displays masterpieces of American portraiture and we wanted to illustrate how questions of biography and identity went into the making of images that are canonical,” David C. Ward, a National Portrait Gallery (NGP) historian who is also co-curator of the exhibit, told CNSNews.com.

The Smithsonian Institution's National Portrait Gallery will remove a four-minute video feature that contains an image of Jesus on a crucifix covered in ants, its director said in a statement released on Tuesday.

Martin Sullivan, director of the museum, said the video by David Wojnarowicz shows images that "may be" offensive to some.

"I regret that some reports about the exhibit have created an impression that the video is intentionally sacrilegious," the statement read. "In fact, the artists's intention was to depict the suffering of an AIDS victim. It was not the museum's intention to offend. We are removing the video today. The museum's statement at the exhibition's entrance, 'This exhibition contains mature themes,' will remain in place."

Earlier Tuesday, the museum was under fire for hosting the exhibit that also includes depictions of homoerotic art and an image of Ellen DeGeneres grabbing her breasts. The exhibit outraged conservative leaders and prompted some Republican lawmakers to call for a congressional investigation.

“Absolutely, we should look at their funds,” Georgia Rep. Jack Kingston, a member of the House Appropriations Committee, told Fox News.

SheikBen wrote:Fascinating stuff, Keli. Justice Breyer has said that burning a Koran might be akin to yelling fire in a crowded theater, which amounts to a government preference for Islam over Christianity, as there will be no riots or killings over the blasphemous piece you cite above. I wonder if liberal churches will be as outraged over THIS as they were over the Florida pastor burning Korans.

Cato wrote:

SheikBen wrote:Fascinating stuff, Keli. Justice Breyer has said that burning a Koran might be akin to yelling fire in a crowded theater, which amounts to a government preference for Islam over Christianity, as there will be no riots or killings over the blasphemous piece you cite above. I wonder if liberal churches will be as outraged over THIS as they were over the Florida pastor burning Korans.

One side of me really feels that since lefties and the like prefer islam, maybe they ought to live under it for awhile and then tell us how bigoted we are for being concerned over stuff like this.

It is not to prefer any religion to advocate for the U.S. and its citizens to not be the instigator of acts that inflame religious emotions that breed terrorism against America.

ziggy wrote: I don't know any "lefties and the like" who prefer Islam. It is not to prefer any religion to advocate for the U.S. and its citizens to not be the instigator of acts that inflame religious emotions that breed terrorism against America

ziggy wrote:

Cato wrote:

SheikBen wrote:Fascinating stuff, Keli. Justice Breyer has said that burning a Koran might be akin to yelling fire in a crowded theater, which amounts to a government preference for Islam over Christianity, as there will be no riots or killings over the blasphemous piece you cite above. I wonder if liberal churches will be as outraged over THIS as they were over the Florida pastor burning Korans.

One side of me really feels that since lefties and the like prefer islam, maybe they ought to live under it for awhile and then tell us how bigoted we are for being concerned over stuff like this.

I don't know any "lefties and the like" who prefer Islam. It is not to prefer any religion to advocate for the U.S. and its citizens to not be the instigator of acts that inflame religious emotions that breed terrorism against America. Just as we finally became civilized enough to not burn crosses in the yards of black people and Jews, we should be civilized enough to not burn religious books when we know the result will be to inflame those who already hate us for our meddling in middle eastern and other worldly affairs which are none of our legitimate business.

SamCogar wrote:

ziggy wrote: I don't know any "lefties and the like" who prefer Islam. It is not to prefer any religion to advocate for the U.S. and its citizens to not be the instigator of acts that inflame religious emotions that breed terrorism against America

How many like yourself do you know that are scared shitless at what the Islamic fundies will do to you iffen you insult their Religious beliefs?

SheikBen wrote:Ziggy,

Indeed the effects of religion are different in the here and now and in the sweet by and by. If Christians are wrong as you suggest, the effects you need be concerned about are limited to this world. Yet, in your post, you flippantly compare the ultimate truth claims of Christianity and Islam, lumping them into the category of supernatural religion and self-aggrandizing proponents, forgetting that you have the right to be blasphemous specifically because you are in a tolerant nation that is majority Christian.