Flattop Jesus divides religious community

Photograph: Lech Muszynski/EPA

First can I just say that the sight of Jesus missing the top slice of his head is grotesque and disturbing?  Of course once the statue is deployed, Christ’s brain case won’t be visible from below to the new source of revenue (pilgrims) that the Catholic priest Sylwester Zawadzki unabashedly hopes to lure to the deformed statue.  Pilgrims will be drawn, he hopes, to this particular statue in the Polish town of Swiebodzin because it will be the new tallest statue of Jesus found anywhere on Earth, outstripping the famous Cristo Redentor, in Rio de Janiero by 6 meters.

I don’t find religious statuary particularly interesting, especially when constructed from composites rather than artfully rendered from wood or stone, but I do find this story noteworthy because this project is not uniformly supported by local Catholics.

The project has split Polish society with some expressing pride, others derision, and with many practising Catholics calling for it to be abandoned. …

Waldemar Roszczuk, editor of the local newspaper Gazeta Swiebodzinska, has been leading a campaign against the structure, which has been compared to the type of communist-era icons that once commanded squares and public places.

“It’s a monster of a statue which has nothing to do with Christian teaching,” he said. “It’s making us a laughing stock in the whole country.”

The project has also been fraught with safety problems, charges of shoddy preparation of the foundation said to doom the statue within 20 years, and disturbing reports of convict labor organized by Zawadzki and a local prison warden.

This story so beautifully illustrates how religiosity or respect for people who are religious doesn’t necessitate withholding legitimate criticism of religious-based endeavors.  It is encouraging to see that the people of Swiebodzin, Catholics among them, understand this and aren’t afraid to express their opinions.
Pam’s House Blend – Front Page

—  admin

Poll: Vindictive Iowa For Freedom campaign unnecessarily divides state

A Des Moines Register poll turns up completely non-shocking yet thoroughly frustrating findings in regards to the state’s upcoming judicial retention vote:

Forty-four percent of Iowans who plan to cast a ballot in the retention election say they will vote “yes” to all three justices. Forty percent will vote to remove all three, and 16 percent say they want to retain some.

More than one-fourth of all likely voters are either undecided or plan to leave the retention boxes blank, according to the poll.

Senior citizens, Republicans, men, tea party supporters, born-again Christians, low-income voters and those with only a high school education were more likely to vote “no” to all the justices, the poll found.

Iowa Poll: Retention of justices a tossup [Des Moines Register]

We say not surprising, because the three justices up fro retention are essentially sitting ducks. The so-called “Iowa For Mob Rule” “Iowa For Freedom” coalition, working hand-in-hand with the National Organization For Marriage and the American Family Association, is waging an incredibly expensive campaign of disinformation against the justices for no reason other than their marriage 6A00D8341C503453Ef0134869C87C4970Cequality decision. So whereas in other years this vote would be among the more benign and non-politicized, the anti-gay social conservatives have turned it into a rally cry for the state’s fellow foes of marital fairness. A chance to blow off steam. A religious catharsis. An attempt to get some form of retaliation against “activist judges™.” How are the non-campaigning, non-fundraising, non-partisan justices supposed to match that? The odds are against them, unfortunately.

We say totally frustrating, because these poll results show exactly why this campaign is so dangerous to our fair and independent judiciary. The poll shows a seismic divide along party lines, faith views, age, education, and a whole host of other issues that are so commonly exploited for the sake of disinformation. Wven if you take marriage equality and gay rights out of it: The almost more concerning point of discussion is the way that partisan, faith-based, out of state special interests groups have taken it upon themselves to enrage a fired up mob with muddied notions of what is and is not the judiciary’s proper role in determining civil rights matters. It’s a threat that goes way beyond marriage. Hell, it’s not even something that’s going to directly affect the Varnum decision. But it is something that threatens a co-equal branch of American government: A precious entity that we’ll surely miss when it’s gone.

Good As You

—  John Wright