BF2S Forums My Sweet Lord (Chocolate Sculpture of Jesus)

Hurricane wrote:

Dezerteagal5 wrote:

See this is why religion is gay. There all pussies. No one can handle a little fun. How could you not see the coolness in a chocolate statue of your savior.

Word. If someone made a chocolate statue of me I'd be honored, unless they weren't faithful to EVERY organ of my body =p

Here, here!

...and let there be a chocolate Mohammed for all the crazies to riot about.

I'm Christian and I think it's very offensive. However, I'm over it. You won't see me running through the streets screeming and beating my chest. You wont see me starting riots or cutting anyones head off. I hope someone comes out with the choco muhamed.

i dont see what the big deal is. so what if hes made of chocolate, if no one eats it it has no difference than wood or stone basically. its actually alot more like clay.

The only thing better than the great man himself is a chocolate version of him!!!

The chocolate figure is not on a cross. The body is arranged like it would be on a cross but there is no cross there. I don't know if that makes a difference to anybody.

Also, my understanding is that the church's main objection was to the penis. I think it was going to be in a window on the street and the church was concerned about children and other passers-by seeing a penis. That's not a crazy objection--you generally don't see exposed penises on the street. It doesn't seem like a religious objection though.

The sculptor joked that he was going to let viewers take a bite but that was only a joke.

If they made a chocolate Mohammed there would be riots and death threats.

rawls2 wrote:

I hope someone comes out with the choco muhamed.

lol

Volatile_Squirrel wrote:

JahManRed wrote:

Would love to eat some Jesus cock...........................mmmmmmmm chocolate.

Ha, I wonder if I would be considered blasphemy to bite off peices.

MMmmmm....sacrilicious.....

TrollmeaT wrote:

Funny stuff, this shows how warp religion is, faith instead of reason bah.

But, then, pure reason leads to eugenics...

TrollmeaT wrote:

No, reason would bring you to a conclusion that selective breeding would be racist which is just a lower form of collectivism.

Agreed...

TrollmeaT wrote:

No, reason would bring you to a conclusion that selective breeding would be racist which is just a lower form of collectivism.

Sorry to break it to you, but everyone must be racist then. Every man and woman selects a mate based on eugenics, even if they don't realize it. It's the correlary to natural selection and it's called sexual selection. It explains evolutionary changes that natural selection can't. So, assuming reason leads one to what is natural, pure reason would lead one to eugenics.

Turquoise wrote:

Scorpion0x17 wrote:

TrollmeaT wrote:

No, reason would bring you to a conclusion that selective breeding would be racist which is just a lower form of collectivism.

Eugenics is not 'racist' as such. In it's most rational form it treats all humans as a single race. The traits selected for or against being those that exist in all humans. Eugenics has been distorted by numerous people in the past as a means to a racist end, but the purely rational eugenic theory is not in and of itself racist. Whether it's morally right? Now that's a different matter.

Well, if you're saying that eugenics is a matter of people mating with regards to desirable traits (no handicaps or deformities), then yes, reason can lead to this version which has nothing to do with race.

Precisely, yes.

Turquoise wrote:

However, what keeps humans from truly behaving with pure reason is culture.  We put up walls between each other due to cultural values that are often irrational.

Indeed. Indeed. We also tear down walls between each other due to cultural values that are often irrational. For example, one could argue, from a purely rational eugenic point of view, that any so called 'undesirable' traits should be heavily discouraged through controlling who gets to mate. However our cultural moral standpoint generally states that the disabled and deformed have as much right to children as the able bodied, 'normally' formed of us.

Turquoise wrote:

Hurricane wrote:

Dezerteagal5 wrote:

See this is why religion is gay. There all pussies. No one can handle a little fun. How could you not see the coolness in a chocolate statue of your savior.

Word. If someone made a chocolate statue of me I'd be honored, unless they weren't faithful to EVERY organ of my body =p

Here, here!

...and let there be a chocolate Mohammed for all the crazies to riot about.

I am roman catholic and i dont' see anything wrong with a chocolate jesus. its not insulting him is it? I mean Easter is a roman catholic holiday and alot of people i meet dont' even know why are we getting a day off from school. Sure it would be weird if one person was going to "eat" chocolate jesus on one sitting. But i think its cool, a priest could bless it and catholics can eat it instead of the wafers for easter mass.
and as for chocolate mohammed ...ZOMG the idea made my laught oOUT load. you need a +1 for that. Omg. can you imagine that on the news? "MUSLIM WORLD ERUPTS IN ANGER! Over chocolate Mohammand"

while

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

Jesus would've probably liked chocolate.

Jesus probably would've liked milk chocolate. Fuck off with your regular kind.

Anyway, the scuplter said he made the statue trying to depict a happier light of the church.

I personally find no offence to this statue as a catholic, anyone who is, give me one valid reason why you are offended.

Otherwise. Shut the fuck up unless you can do better.