Woman goes crazy over gay Jesus

[General Zod]

Not just for Muslims anymore!

LOVELAND - Witnesses say a woman used an 18-inch crowbar to break a piece of Plexiglas inside a museum and destroy a controversial piece of artwork depicting Jesus on Wednesday afternoon.

A man who was inside of the Loveland Museum/Gallery says he saw the woman looking at the artwork by California artist Enrique Chagoya around 4 p.m.

The City of Loveland has identified the woman as 56-year-old Kathleen Folden , a truck driver from Kalispell, Mont.

The piece of artwork that has caused the controversy is called "The Misadventures of Romantic Cannibals." A part of the painting shows a man who appears to be Jesus Christ engaging in a sex act with a man. Many have called it "smut" and asked that it be removed. Supporters say it speaks about the Catholic Church's sex abuse scandal.

Mark Michaels, an art dealer, says he saw Folden break the glass. He says she then grabbed the artwork and he tried to stop her.

"We were just coming in and were standing at the door and I heard a large - like a thump, and somebody yelled, 'Oh no!' And I looked up and I saw this lady with a nail-puller-type crowbar slamming the Plexiglas case several times until she broke it. And I ran over there and by the time I got there she had reached in and grabbed the print and was ripping it up so I pulled her away from the print and put her in the corner," Michaels said, "and then the police came."

Michaels says Folden was screaming "How can you desecrate my lord?" as she broke into the case.

Michaels says the woman destroyed the lithograph.

"I just took her away from the case. I didn't know she'd gotten the print already. She was ripping up the paper when I was holding her," he said.

Loveland Police responded to the museum and the woman was taken into custody.

Sgt. Jan Burreson with the Loveland Police Department says the woman threw the lithograph on the floor after ripping it up.

"I've been here 16 years and never heard of [anything like this]," Burreson said. "We do have our fair share of controversies, but nothing that's gone this far."

A spokesperson for the City of Loveland says Folden cut herself when she broke into the display.

"It's a very unfortunate incident," Loveland Mayor Cecil Gutierrez said. "There is no place in our city for behavior like this."

Folden is in custody on a charge of criminal mischief, a felony. If she is convicted, the fines range from $1,000 to $2,000.

Police originally got reports of gunfire at the museum, but the city believes it was noise from the banging of the crowbar against the glass to break it and no firearm was involved.

The Denver Post spoke to Chagoya on Wednesday and he said the lithograph that was destroyed was one of 30 prints in a limited-edition run.

"It's sad and upsetting," Chagoya told the Post Wednesday night by phone from California. "I've never had this kind of violent reaction to my art. Violence doesn't resolve anything."

The artwork was the focus of a packed Loveland City Council meeting on Wednesday, where many people asked that it be removed from a publicly-funded gallery. Instead of removing the art, the council asked that a warning be posted in the museum to let people know about the content of the art.

"I think it's very important that we remember that it's an isolated incident. Cooler heads will prevail through this whole process," Gutierrez said.

Tax money did not go toward funding the exhibit because the museum received it for free.

"I tend to be leaning on the side with the freedom of speech and if you don't want to go see it, don't go look at it," Michaels said.

"My work is about critiquing institutions and politics." Chagoya told the Post. "I wasn't trying to portray Christ; it's a collage of cutouts from different books."

Chagoya added that he has received multiple hate e-mails and that protesters have the right to their own opinion too, but, he said, "these things shouldn't escalate."

Bud Shark, the man who assembled the museum display, released a statement on Wednesday evening:

"The destruction of the Enrique Chagoya 'The Misadventures of the Romantic Cannibals' at the Loveland Museum/Gallery today is the direct result of the inflammatory and false descriptions of the piece in the press and by those protesting it's inclusion in our exhibition. The controversial image has been demonized as 'pornographic,' 'obscene' and 'depicting Jesus in a sex act' when none of this is true," Shark wrote. "I deplore the violence and intolerance of this act and call upon those organizing the protests against this piece to restrain their angry mob at once."

Too hilarious to not post.

[ShadowDragon8685]

I really, truly hope for more - a lot, lot more - incidents like this, to show the world what kind of retards and bigoted fucking fundie morons this country is blighted with.

[FSTargetDrone]

"How can you desecrate my lord?"

Good question. How, indeed, is it possible for a mere mortal to offend any omnipotent being such as her lord? Is he so thin-skinned (metaphorically-speaking, of course)?

Whether it's people like this, or other religious extremists getting all hot and bothered at perceived insults to their all-powerful deity, be it from bad art (piss-drenched Jesus) or crude cartoons, I'm always amused (so to speak) at their reactions.

Why does your god need you to defend him from such rudeness? Can he not cope?

Why would he care?

[PhilosopherOfSorts]

I really, truly hope for more - a lot, lot more - incidents like this, to show the world what kind of retards and bigoted fucking fundie morons this country is blighted with.

The rest of the world already knows this, Shadow. I'd be happier if shit like this (and worse) didn't happen so often, as I would like my country to not be a laughing stock someday.

[PeZook]

"How can you desecrate my lord?"

Good question. How, indeed, is it possible for a mere mortal to offend any omnipotent being such as her lord? Is he so thin-skinned (metaphorically-speaking, of course)?

Whether it's people like this, or other religious extremists getting all hot and bothered at perceived insults to their all-powerful deity, be it from bad art (piss-drenched Jesus) or crude cartoons, I'm always amused (so to speak) at their reactions.

Why does your god need you to defend him from such rudeness? Can he not cope?

Why would he care?

It's amusing: I've seen people liken art like that to "making a picture about your mother smeared in shit. Would you like to see that?". The failure to note that God is supposedly immortal, omnipotent and all-knowing, unlike my mother (who also happens to be a real person, of course) is hilarious.

Of course, it's somewhat less hilarious that getting outraged over mockery of religion is acceptable ; Whereas getting outraged over atheists being called amoral potential Stalins is frowned upon.

Funny world...

[ShadowDragon8685]

I really, truly hope for more - a lot, lot more - incidents like this, to show the world what kind of retards and bigoted fucking fundie morons this country is blighted with.

The rest of the world already knows this, Shadow. I'd be happier if shit like this (and worse) didn't happen so often, as I would like my country to not be a laughing stock someday.

Sorry, I misstated what I meant.

I hope that more incidents like this will continue to happen, so as to rub the rest of the country's nose in it as often as possible. We all like to pretend these jackholes don't exist, or are somewhere 'else'. They're here, they're fucking psycho, they're just waiting for a catalyst to feel that it's okay to act on their crazy urges, like seeing someone else do it and get off with a slap on the wrist.

[Themightytom]

I kind of want to know what the image was before I form an opinion beyond "if provocative art provokes a response, the artist did what he wanted to"

[Temujin]

"How can you desecrate my lord?"

Good question. How, indeed, is it possible for a mere mortal to offend any omnipotent being such as her lord? Is he so thin-skinned (metaphorically-speaking, of course)?

Whether it's people like this, or other religious extremists getting all hot and bothered at perceived insults to their all-powerful deity, be it from bad art (piss-drenched Jesus) or crude cartoons, I'm always amused (so to speak) at their reactions.

Why does your god need you to defend him from such rudeness? Can he not cope?

Why would he care?

Yeah, you think if the deity in question was upset he'd personally take action, even if in some "mysterious way". Though people like her sometimes rationalize their behavior with the "I'm God's instrument" crap, or "I'm acting on behalf of the Lord"; as if Jesus really needs to outsource his work to Large Marge.

This article has a rather large image of the work.

[Ilya Muromets]

Well, that's not really surprising. I'm just glad she limited her rage to destroying one piece of artwork instead of blowing it up or attacking the artist(s).

Man, kinda makes me wonder how she'd react to that "Rock Me, Sexy Jesus" number from Hamlet 2.

[Kanastrous]

I hope someone is constantly at her elbow to remind her that by (a) creating this publicity and (b) destroying one of a limited series of lithos, what she has *really* accomplished is promoting the artist's work, drawing the spotlight to it and making the remaining prints in the series that much more valuable, to the enrichment of the artist and/or anyone who chose to purchase a print.

Way to go, lady trucker! Strike a blow for Jeebus!

*EDIT* How much would anyone care to bet that people who do this sort of thing are at least to some degree fearful that they're not sufficiently right-with-the-Lord, and that by actions like these they accumulate merit? Hey, Saint Peter, you can move me to the head of the line! *I'm* the lady who took care of that nasty ol' lithograph for you, a few years back!

[SVPD]

What would be even more amusing is pointing out to her that no one knows what Jesus actually looked like. He's not described in the Bible. That's generally taken to mean AFAIK, that he looked like a pretty nondescript Jewish man of his time and place.

Surprise, lady! The artist didn't, if I understand this correctly, actually say this was supposed to be Jesus. Therefore, it could be almost any man from his day and age.

[Kanastrous]

I always like to imagine that he looked - and sounded - like Jackie Mason.

[Simon_Jester]

It's amusing: I've seen people liken art like that to "making a picture about your mother smeared in shit. Would you like to see that?". The failure to note that God is supposedly immortal, omnipotent and all-knowing, unlike my mother (who also happens to be a real person, of course) is hilarious.

To be fair, even if your mom was all-powerful, all-knowing, and immortal, and she had decided not to say anything... I bet you still wouldn't like it.

People have a right not to like stuff like this, and to think it isn't funny or impressive, that it lacks artistic merit, and so on. Those are perfectly reasonable aesthetic judgements.

They just don't have a right to commit breaking and entering, is all.

[General Zod]

It's amusing: I've seen people liken art like that to "making a picture about your mother smeared in shit. Would you like to see that?". The failure to note that God is supposedly immortal, omnipotent and all-knowing, unlike my mother (who also happens to be a real person, of course) is hilarious.

To be fair, even if your mom was all-powerful, all-knowing, and immortal, and she had decided not to say anything... I bet you still wouldn't like it.

People have a right not to like stuff like this, and to think it isn't funny or impressive, that it lacks artistic merit, and so on. Those are perfectly reasonable aesthetic judgements.

They just don't have a right to commit breaking and entering, is all.

The most obvious problem with whether or not I'd "like to see something" is that it's such an incredibly vague and subjective term as to be worthless. I wouldn't like to see it because I think smearing most things in feces is incredibly lame, as opposed to finding it offensive and being some arbitrary binary condition.

[Molyneux]

I must say, I'm quite surprised that she had a crowbar handy. Is this a common activity for that woman?
For anyone interested, pictures of the work itself can be seen here. It's not just Jesus getting oral sex from a man - it's Jesus with tits! I'm not sure if that would be less offensive (it's not gay, after all...) or more so to idiots like Little Miss "oh no someone made FUN of my RELIGION!" over there.

[Simon_Jester]

The most obvious problem with whether or not I'd "like to see something" is that it's such an incredibly vague and subjective term as to be worthless. I wouldn't like to see it because I think smearing most things in feces is incredibly lame, as opposed to finding it offensive and being some arbitrary binary condition.

What do you mean "worthless?" Why can't someone disapprove of a piece of art purely because it is self-evidently intended to mock something they like or care about?

How is it worthless to say "I wouldn't like to see that?" That strikes me as being unambiguous. I mean, we have..

"I" meaning me personally. "Would" because it's a hypothetical case. "Not like" because it would in fact displease me, I would not like it. "To see" because that's the relevant verb when we're talking about pieces of art. "That" being the work of art in question. If I "wouldn't like to see" a piece of art, then I would not like to view the piece of art, I would not like to have it brought to my attention, I most likely would not like to think about it, and so on.

How is that vague? Seems quite clear to me. Granted it's just my opinion, but I still have a right to aesthetic opinions. "This is bad because it is a mockery of X and mocking X isn't funny" is a perfectly reasonable aesthetic opinion.

I mean, that's how I feel about "My kid beat up your honor student" bumper stickers. Do I not have a right to think those are stupid?

[General Zod]

The most obvious problem with whether or not I'd "like to see something" is that it's such an incredibly vague and subjective term as to be worthless. I wouldn't like to see it because I think smearing most things in feces is incredibly lame, as opposed to finding it offensive and being some arbitrary binary condition.

What do you mean "worthless?" Why can't someone disapprove of a piece of art purely because it is self-evidently intended to mock something they like or care about?

How is it worthless to say "I wouldn't like to see that?" That strikes me as being unambiguous. I mean, we have..

"I" meaning me personally. "Would" because it's a hypothetical case. "Not like" because it would in fact displease me, I would not like it. "To see" because that's the relevant verb when we're talking about pieces of art. "That" being the work of art in question. If I "wouldn't like to see" a piece of art, then I would not like to view the piece of art, I would not like to have it brought to my attention, I most likely would not like to think about it, and so on.

How is that vague? Seems quite clear to me. Granted it's just my opinion, but I still have a right to aesthetic opinions. "This is bad because it is a mockery of X and mocking X isn't funny" is a perfectly reasonable aesthetic opinion.

I mean, that's how I feel about "My kid beat up your honor student" bumper stickers. Do I not have a right to think those are stupid?

Don't be so pedantic. If someone says "I don't like something" that doesn't actually say anything useful. In Pezook's context up above, "I don't like" means "I find it offensive", while other contexts could mean any number of things from "I think it's silly" to "I think it's boring" to "I think it's ugly". I really shouldn't have to explain something so basic. Unless you give more criteria beyond why someone would like something the specific reason is wide open to interpretation.

[Alyeska]

The City of Loveland has identified the woman as 56-year-old Kathleen Folden , a truck driver from Kalispell, Mont.

*sigh*

My home town. I will see if I can find follow up information on this stupidity.

[Akhlut]

I must say, I'm quite surprised that she had a crowbar handy. Is this a common activity for that woman?

Well, she is a trucker from a rural area, so I was not the least bit surprised she had one on her person. A lot of truckers are going to be carrying a large number of tools anyway, and some of them have second jobs in other manual labor employment too. So, it's not really unusual for her to have a crowbar, no.

[Themightytom]

This article has a rather large image of the work.

Geez it's not even that good, its probably only in the gallery BECAUSE its controversial...

Seriously we have better work in "Terrible political cartoons"

[PeZook]

To be fair, even if your mom was all-powerful, all-knowing, and immortal, and she had decided not to say anything... I bet you still wouldn't like it.

Thing is, she'd still be a real person, and as you correctly noted, that wouldn't give me the right to bomb the building the picture's in, or push for legislation that people who made the picture are not allowed inside the country anymore, or beat up people who say the picture is a provocative piece of art, rather than a lame attempt at smearing.

[Kanastrous]

All fine and well except that people like Crowbar Trucker Lady are quite convinced that their Big Sky Daddy is as real as any person you'd care to name. And since they act upon that conviction the rest of us are stuck having to take their BS into account.

[RedImperator]

I really, truly hope for more - a lot, lot more - incidents like this, to show the world what kind of retards and bigoted fucking fundie morons this country is blighted with.

You'd like to see more art destroyed to show the world what anyone with a working brain already knew? Because I'm pretty sure if you didn't get that message the first time an abortion clinic was bombed, you're a hopeless case anyway.

[Simon_Jester]

Don't be so pedantic. If someone says "I don't like something" that doesn't actually say anything useful. In Pezook's context up above, "I don't like" means "I find it offensive", while other contexts could mean any number of things from "I think it's silly" to "I think it's boring" to "I think it's ugly". I really shouldn't have to explain something so basic. Unless you give more criteria beyond why someone would like something the specific reason is wide open to interpretation.

All right, let's carry on with that then.

I believe that being offended by a piece of art is a reasonable response if it mocks something I like, believe, or simply think isn't a subject for mockery. The locally fashionable "ha ha stupid fundie" response aside, how are people who are simply offended by something like this* in any worse a position than people who find "my kid beat up your honor student" bumper stickers obnoxious and annoying?

*NOTE: There is a difference between "is offended by" and "commits crimes to get rid of."

[General Zod]

Don't be so pedantic. If someone says "I don't like something" that doesn't actually say anything useful. In Pezook's context up above, "I don't like" means "I find it offensive", while other contexts could mean any number of things from "I think it's silly" to "I think it's boring" to "I think it's ugly". I really shouldn't have to explain something so basic. Unless you give more criteria beyond why someone would like something the specific reason is wide open to interpretation.

All right, let's carry on with that then.

I believe that being offended by a piece of art is a reasonable response if it mocks something I like, believe, or simply think isn't a subject for mockery. The locally fashionable "ha ha stupid fundie" response aside, how are people who are simply offended by something like this* in any worse a position than people who find "my kid beat up your honor student" bumper stickers obnoxious and annoying?

Then good for you? Who gives a shit if someone's offended by something? The whole point of this train of thought earlier was to point out the hypocrisy of their actions.

*NOTE: There is a difference between "is offended by" and "commits crimes to get rid of."

I'm not sure why you feel the need to keep pointing this out since nobody's arguing otherwise.