I'm finding myself annoyed by people posting religious posters with little if any artistic merit, apparently just to put forth ther personal proselytic message in text. This just doesn't seem like the appropriate place for it. I don't mind art with a religious connotation from any relegion becuse we are after all a community of artists who might well appreciate ecclesiastical art. I certainly do. But posters beating a message into our heads to me is inappropriate and often offensive. Remember we are a very large community made of Christians, Jews, Moslems, Hindus and many other faiths so I feel we should honor that and not subject community members to religious propaganda. I propose that religious images be acceptable, but religious message posters be disapproved of. I know I'm going to get a lot of grief on this, but it's really how I feel.

Kind of agree with you there, but if just one person out there finds the image appealing and wants it for their desktop then who are we to argue. There are other images on this site with little artistic value that have no religious content. I don't think we should start to seperate these images because of meaning, but let the natural process of selection for the permanent galleries do it's job.
Do what I do, bite your lip, suck it up and kick the cat!
By the way can you add Jedi Knight and Benroyism to your list so i'm kind of included:)

Cheers.............

I appreciate the input...that seems to be the general attitude around here, but I think it would be fine to draw a line. We don't allow nudity...we could just say no religious posters with text. I might like to have a nude desktop that might be in poor taste, but I'm not going to find it here...and that is as it should be. We could do the same for text message religious posters. I think we should in fact. Thanx a lot for commenting BTW.

Now you've put it that way I see your point slightly more. Not everyone is offended by nudity but it's completely not allowed. Not everyone is offended by religious posters, but some are, so why should this be allowed?
As a person who has never shown any interest in religion what so ever these things just pass me by, but if i did maybe i would be offended.........mmm! now you've got me thinking:)
I don't think there's any easy answer to this. The same could be applied to politics, although I don't recall many nonartistic political posters here.
In theory I agree, but practically I'm not sure how it could work. There's always going to be the argument "you may not find it artistic but I do".

Cheers...........

Hey Peter...
I also think you have a point here...I mean, OK I accept that there will be some very powerfully religious people that may want to express their feelings or spread the message...but Caedes really isn't the place for it, especially if - as you've said - the images being posted have no real artistic qualities.
I also agree that it may cause offence to other religions - which may not be intentional but we wouldn't want it any conflict on this lovely site now, would we? ^_^
Though on the other hand - not being a very religious person myself, I don't suppose I can really understand why people choose to do it...but your comparison between nudity and religious messages is very true and though I don't particularly mind religious art, I do think the text I have seen demonstrated in some works can be a little oppressive...I suppose it kinda reminds me of advertisers who try to con or force people into buying their products...If people choose to be religious then that's their decision, but I wish they would not tell others what is wrong or right...everyone should be their own boss...

I'm offended by frogs, and ducks. Let's do away with those also.

Oh...and flowers.... are so very offensive....let's get 'em outta here too!

Dixie, flowers and ducks are not messages. You missed my point entirely. I too am tired of plain old flower shots, but I seriously doubt you are offended by frogs and ducks. If you are, you're a minority of one. Religious Posters from any religion push the idea that "My way is the best or only way." This is going to offend people and understadably so. Frogs don't usually push a message, nor do flowers or ducks for that matter. I hope you can step aside from your own personal religious feelings for a second and see my point. Thankyou.

Sorry D....I'll never step away from my creator. After all....it was He whom created the frogs, ducks, and flowers. No offense my friend.

Peter, as much as I like and appreciate you, I can't help but offer some friendly words in disagreement...as you are aware, I know of at least one image to which you are referring, and while I see your point to some extent, I still maintain the thoughts I expressed on that image at the time, which were, tolerance should be the name of the game...yes, we are a diverse group here and it should come as no surprise that among us are many different faiths, beliefs, political views etc...regardless of my own personal beliefs, I honor all religious views in the best way I know how... with tolerance and respect, not censorship...so, as long as we can be tolerant in the principle of differing views I see no reason to exclude those images...having said that, I would also add that I WOULD take acception to an image where the text made some kind of blanket statement that theirs was the ONLY truth, the ONLY right way...not that it would bother me personally, but in that case I CAN see where it might be inflammatory or offensive to others and divisive on the site...I do not believe the image that you and I viewed a few days ago went that far, nor do I recall ever seeing any that did...as for artistic merit, as Benroy aptly pointed out, time, the popularity of the image, and the final word of the image mods will take care of any deficiencies there anyways...where nudity is concerned, I am not sure it is a fair analogy as that would likely have much more visual impact on younger viewers of the site and likely the main reason for its' exclusion...so...are we still on friendly terms, Peter, despite my opposing views?...if so, and I hope so, then that should demonstrate my point.:Pat.

Mesmerized, I appreciate your view, and I can see your point. I disagree that nudity is rough on kids. My 3 year old grand daughter loves to get naked and finger paint in the Kitchen. Obscenity yes, but not nudity. Our culture seems to have nudity taboos that don't exist many other places in the world. Artistic nudes can be very lovely to all ages. I believe it's the prohibition of nudity that causes the problem, but that's a personal view. I'm not particularly tolerant of religious views being pushed at me from any direction. It offends me to have someone use a place like Caedes to push their point of view on that. I am tolerant of art...to a point. But there comes a moment when you realize a piece of "art" falls below just about every standard you can think of to classify it as art. I'm going to have to look up the definition of art, but I feel it should have some appeal or redeeming value from an aesthetic point of view. Just because someone posts here doesn't meant it's art. I don't see it as censorship, I see it as that we are a private group and can set standards for behavior and acceptability. I'll go along with the nudity ban but I would appreciate a ban on religious message posters of any sort. BTW, from my attitude, you'd never guess what my religious beliefs are<grin> And on the last bit...I totally appreciate your view and your willingness to share it. I respect you very highly and I will think about your points.

Peter, I agree with you to a certain extent regarding not artistic religious postings, but not with your reasoning or conclusion. I believe I know of the images which you are referring to. You seem, however, to equate having a religious message or content with the position that their particular religion is the only way about it as mesmerized pointed out. If, however, the religion being promoted was one that espoused hate and violence I might not be so tolerant. Anyways, I just thought I'd briefly share my two cents. I appreciate the discussion.

BTW, I don't understand why this is posted in this forum (Request for Comment)...?

I couldn't think of a better place. Appreciate your views.

hi newbie here
why not simply have a separate section for religious postings one that ppl have to specifically choose to visit ... dont even have them appear as new postings but only in the _quarantine_ area ;)

this would suit me fine ... I'll NEVER visit it

hard I know but I'm a confirmed atheist and I'd prefer to avoid it if I can

Now now boys. More wars have been started in the name of God than any other cause...I doubt that God if he or she exists would approve of such bickering. I am not an athiest, but I would never visit the relegious postings gallery either because I still don't feel they are appropriate here...and generally I find them offensive.

Hmmmmmmmmm. Just read over the posts in this thread. If I understand you correctly, Peter, you're referring to images that consist of TEXT that is expressing a particular religious viewpoint. Or are you also referring to images in a pictorial sense that depict religious content (i.e. Jesus Christ, a cross, the star of David, etc?) If you're questioning the "artistic merit" of TEXT images, that's one thing, but, if you're questioning whether this site should allow religious content in a more general sense, that's quite another. I gotta agree with those who compare the offense you seem to express toward religious expression (if I'm understanding you correctly) to political or philosophical expressions of a variety of viewpoints. I'd hope that this site is as open to FREEDOM of expression as possible, with the exception of pornography or other highly perverted images.
Wen

I don't think there is anything wrong with someone posting an image that has to do with their religion, but since this site does have, and is known for its art then you have a point, the images that express a religious belief in an artistic form should be allowed to be uploaded on the site, as long as it doesn't downgrade another religion, get what I'm saying?

I agree, as long as there is no hate mongering, I fail to see a problem.

Everyone sing along!!! "Why can't we be friends, why can't we be friends, why can't we be friends..."

I have to say that if there's any type of art that I LOVE, it's religious and mythological because of how much I can learn from it.

But what DigitalFX is refering to is not "Art", they infact are messages trying litterally to convert people with blatant words plastered across it like "FIND JESUS" etc. Even though I am a catholic, I am actually offended by them because it isn't the way that we were supposed to convert. Now having a crucifix or something of the like which involves symbolism is perfectly fine in my oppinion, but adding in words that obviously is there just to try and coerce people into joining christianity is wrong, and is definately not intended to be a desktop wallpaper.

Just to add my view, I don't really like religious wallpapers but I don't see how you could ban or control them. And after all members have also posted political images that strongly express their views so I guess you would have to ban them too? Personally I think that the voting system and the comments are there for us all to express our views; if you don't like an image, just vote low on it and leave a comment saying why if you like. If the concensus is that the majority don't want to see them, then they will get low scores and this might discourage the member from posting something similar again.

I think Sam is right. Just like a blurry snapshot or a by the numbers render, the lack of skill involved should take care of the image in the long run. I believe I know which posts you are referring to and I don't think they will make the permanent galleries by a long shot. Radjehuty also has a point. If someone wants to post a religious or political view then they need to show some effort and thought in the image. A while back I posted a political view that received a ton of comments but since the image had some thought and symbollic meaning I think people respected it as a legitimate post even if they didn't agree with the meaning.

........................

......................

I think that this kind of community based site is no place for any kind of propaganda message postings - whether they are religious, racial or political for that matter. Whilst I would agree that it is fine to post an image that represents any of these things in a positive and artistic manner and not at the expense or derision of other points of view, I would also agree with Peter that posting an image that consists purely of typed messages isn’t really appropriate as it is, in general, neither creative nor holds any artistic merit. If you feel sufficiently passionate about something like this why not just express it creatively instead of copying and pasting text from somewhere else?

Ok Peter I am a little unclear on the type of image that you are discribing is it something like mine here titled "Corporate Religion" it has a strong title that could be viewed poorly because a person could see it as pushing the Catholic religion

http://www.caedes.net/Zephir.cgi?lib=Caedes::Infopage&image=Jeffo-1124062571.jpg

If this isnt the type of image that you are discribing then could you send me the link of one that is

No, that image is perfectly acceptable.. the images Peter is talking about are ones with a religious phrase on a simple background.

Well I forget who made it and where it is, but just picture an entire image that is just a solid color with an embossed border with the word "JESUS" in it. It's not a poem or anything midly creative, it was soley on the intentions of converting.

We aren't saying any ol' religious image is bad. Infact, religious art is one of my favorites. We are just talking about the type of upload that is religious and was uploaded without the intent for it to be looked at as a work of art, but rather as a clear cut message.

When you see one, you'll know it.

Ya know, I backed off of this discussion because discussions on religion often get heated, but I'm going to reenter for a bit. It is very hard to infer the "intent" of an artist. To say that, because someone places the word "Jesus" on an image with very little ado means that their intent to to "convert" people, is an assumption, not a fact. It's bad enough that Christians are increasingly forbidden to display religious symbols in so-called "public" (government funded) facilities. I thought "artists" were relatively open to free expression. I'm surprised by some of the comments in this thread. How does it hurt ANYONE here that someone uploads an image with the word "Jesus" on it? If you don't like it, give it a poor rating or ignore it, but I would hate to think that such images would be censored on a site such as this. My two cents..........
Wen

Such images that are being discussed have little or no artistic value; being simple three word phrases on a relatively plain background. Perhaps the artist(s) did have the intent of expressing themselves, but to some of us it comes across as simple propaganda, as Peter said. I have ignored it in the past, but since it was brought up i might as well give my two cents.

Here we go again judging which images "have artistic value" and which don't. How many variations on this theme are needed? Fact is, some of the most effective "propaganda" is that which is more subtle. If art tries to communicate and send a message, why does it bother you so much that someone is so into Jesus that they express it in what THEY view as art? If you don't think something has "artistic value," do what we all do when we see images that we don't think are very "artistic" - - give it a poor rating or ignore it. If the majority AGREE with you, the image won't be here very long and will go quietly into the night. Again, I'd hate to think that a site like this would start censoring religious expression.
Wen

I agree with you Wenpeder that the system will take its course. I am a Catholic and I am actually shocked that people try to convert in that way. I don't want to get in to all that, but if you saw the images we were talking about, I'm sure you could agree that the true intent of the artist was definately not to show off their artisitic "talent".

There's multiple ways of expressing yourself or your ideas. Art is one way, writing a sentence is another. The form of expression those images used was writing a sentence, saving as an image file, and uploading for all the caedes community to read.

It's not that I don't think they will eventually be removed, and they obviously will be, it's just that in the immediacy of the moment, it can be quite offensive to many people, including myself.

I've seen the images you're talking about, Dave, and, again, my thought has been that they will go quietly into the night. Just about every piece of art has some kind of "message." Bottom line...let's be careful about censoring religious messages. Sorry, but, again, I don't see why seeing the word Jesus on an image of questionable artistic merit is so offensive to people. It certainly does not alter my own spiritual/religious views in the least. If you're offended by what you view as poor quality images, that's one thing, but if your offense is tied to the fact that someone who is highly religious makes colorful letters to spell out "Jesus" and uploads it here, I just can't relate to that.
Wen

Well we are different people Wen.

Well..I'm no church goin' guy but I am interested in several different manners of theoligy. I remember some of these images I think and I don't think they were the best compared to most of what I see on this site but being a site that professes to make avalible desktop wallpapers I can't see where things like that can be banned. Someone might like things liek that and has not the skills ot make it but they know how to right click and set as wallpaper.

One persons offence is anothers strong belief. I've seen a lot of images that I just scratched my head and said to myself "How did this get here?" but I can easily back away from that image and move to another one..Problem solved. The test of time will solve the problem anyway. There are a lot of real talented artists that will get spots in galleries that less "qualified art" will not.

The true question would be could one post an image that says that there is no God? and if so would this be concidered offencive? I'd say it would be to anyone that is not an atheist.

Bottom line is that any message that one does not agree with is propaganda and those thatone does agree with would be a message. Weather or not it's art is in the eye of the one looking at it. The back button on my keyboard and on my browser work pretty well for those images that I don't care for. I also dohn't waste the time looking at them in full size.

It all boils down to what ti art. I think a well made pistol is a work of art while some would see it as an instrument of death and has no worth whatsoever. ...lol..I'll not post any gun pics though..I do have them on my desktop at the moment though :-) I don't think any of these "message" images will take anything away from the sites integrity and don't see where they are offencive. If they are not" art" to the person that happens across it then move on. There sure as hell is a lot of really good art to see around here.

Well I think Lou has posted some good home -spun Kentucky wisdom. Well stated...I'm not sure what he meant about athiests, but I'm sure there are plenty of them around here and if we agree with Lou's observatons, then posters loudly proclaiming that "God is only a myth in the minds of feeble souls fearful of facing life without an excuse." would be perfectly acceptable...as he said, his "Back" button works just fine on these sorts of messages. I'm starting to feel a little guilty about my attitude. I still find blairing relegious messages offensive, but I can live with them if the rest of you can. My "Back" button works too.

Nothing wrong with finding certain images offensive, Peter....the issue, in my view, is whether they should be censored. You're just as free to be offended as others are to be gung ho about their faith. Sorry if I implied otherwise. My concern is with the idea that taking "offense" should lead to censorship. There are a lot of different world views out there. It's doubtful that I will be comfortable with all of them. At the same time, I don't think my offense should force others in the closet, unless they're doing something that infringes on the rights of others.
Wen
Wen

Sorry to disagree with you Wendy, I don't think they should be censored, I totally disagree with censorship, off-line or on-line, music, movies, talk shows, everything is being censored, bringing that onto the site is a mistake and will probably soon bring to more rules banning certain images, although, some images should be banned from being upload, like those of converting religions or downgrading another religion. Censoring would be a mistake, my personal thought on that.

I believe Wendy's argument is to not censor.

Ya'll realize, of course that if Caedes decides to censor or not to censor it will not be because of what is posted here. I believe the standard used is similar to what the U.S. supreme court has defined as "obscene".

Oops sorry about the disagreement Wendy, I agree with you, I read your comment wrong.

Well I don't think of these things as so horribly offensive that it would stop me from coming to this site. They are just an annoyance and a space taken up in the new images gallery to me

Agreed, not a real problem since I don't see them very often.. I'll just ignore them.

lol@ Ky wisdom..I worry about censorship is where I was going I just went around it a little odd I reclon. It wouldn't bother me at all to see a post stating ones disbelief. Everyone has their ideals about theology and for whatever reason many like to put it out for all to see. I'm not sure why but that's their thing. I tend to keep my beliefs rather close to the vest being I really don't like the heated talks about ones beliefs. I admit I catch a lot of hell here in the Bible belt for not believing that one needs to "witness for God" but those that knock on my door get to hear..lol..no back button there. I always imagined people do it trying to find that person on the edge that needs something in life that they are not getting elsewhere....maybe it works..I really don't know.

The question is though is it art? I don't really think so but I didn't like Warhol's Campells Soup can either and many think it's great. Soo I'll sit here in my old Kentucky home and I really don't care what one posts. It it makes it past the image mods then time will do the rest.

Well the campbells soup can is a bit of a different concept and not really related to the images we were talking about.

I respect other's religious ideals and their beliefs, but it gets annoying when they don't respect ours and decide to post things that blatantly TELL rather than leave open for interpretation. It just bothers me less to have an oppinion expressed and left open for interpretation lol

I'd just like to point out the the use of the word "censor" in this discussion is a bit out of place. It wouldn't be censorship if I painted a pro-Scwartzeneger message on your home and you decided to remove it. =)

Point taken :-) caedes. I will try ot choose my wording a little better in the future

I was just usung the Warhol thing as a point of reference. no it's nothing like what is done around here but it is concidered art where I personally think it's a can of soup and not art. I agree with you that these blatent message images are noty really artistic in my opinoin but I'm not one that controls what is and is not allowed. I guess if it was a rule that a user could not post such images as there are other paramaters on this site for images I'd more than likely not notice their absence nor would I rally to have them allowed. Are any of these images you are refering to making their way into perm galleries? To be honest I've not really hunted them down. If this is the case I can see where you would be upset. I understand the getting equal rank for a sub par image. But the thing is are people voting for these images and keeping them around? If that's the case then someone must like them.

Please don't thing I'm trying to argue a point I just wanted to add some opinions and ask questions. I'm not big wheel on this site and don't what any enimies. I thought that was the point to these threads and I am trying to contribute in any way that I can.

lol..I'm not near the artist that most people here are yourself included Radjehuty. I've seen your work and I can see that you take your time and you post great tihngs. I can't see a sub par image taking anything away from the more expierenced users here. Maybe the thoughts from DigitalFX do apply, the premise that has this site evolved to be more than a desktop wallpaper site and is now more a site for a more pure form of art. I'm not the one to answer that. I found this site when looking for wallpapers and found that I could try my hand at it and give something back. I believe that others are of the same mind-set and some of them must be a bit more into their religon than others

Religion is a touchy subject...infact I tried to upload something that would prove a point and it got rejected :D

Wonder why the other one wasn't rejected...It was exactly the same concept....hmmmm

I know the type of 'images' that are being discussed. Simple images with a tedious quotation on them. Although I find them rather unimaginative and not to my taste, I agree that one can always hit the back button (and give them a vote that relects the merit of the image).

<Grin> I'm sure glad I posted this discussion. I'm enjoying it. We are a private community and so Caedes can set any rules he likes for what goes here. I'm just glad he's a guy with level head and common sense. It is through his creative wisdom that we have become such a vital community. Obviously he is tuned in to these discussions and considers these things in making policy.

Also, don't know how he manages to get such great Mods either. It's a thankless job and time consuming. Thanx Jerry, we appreciate your efforts and hope you find our discussions both entertaining and perhaps...sometimes... pursuasive.

lol.It has been an interesting discussion to say the least. I am pleasently suprised it didn't get more heated. I'm sure we've all seen some doosies along the lines of this topic :-)

Agreed Devils, I'm amazed at the high quality responses and thoughtfullness of most posters. They certainly have made me think...much like my discussion of good and bad art...my gosh that one has generated a LOT of responses.
-P-

I haven't thoroughly read through this - but quickly scanned down the comments. What an interesting discussion. I can imagine something like this discussion going on during the consitutional convention in the late 18th century in the US, when discussing the role of religion and government.

Perhaps some well thought guidelines posted on the site as to what is and isn't acceptable would help. Like all things, there's a line where something turns from art to obscenity, proselyting, etc.. The difficulty is clearly defining the line in such a way that the majority of participants agree with. I could talk about some federal funding of what I'd consider obscene art, but won't. So when does artistic license cross the line to becoming proselyting? I think some ideas have been shared in this thread that could be the start of a definition.

I'm a man with strong religious convictions, and my personal and moral values are based in those convictions, some of which you've seen in some of my comments and titles - although I've not been proselyting - these are just my belief structure showing through. My apologies to everyone if anything I've done here has offended. It was not meant to do so.

no you definately didn't offend me at all...you didn't plaster blatant messages like some of the others we were talking about... lol

yes this definately could become one if not several other discussions..

I didn't find any of the images offensive, even the blatant ones... I just think there is a place that sort of thing and this probably isn't it. Just as it isn't the place for huge banners promoting political parties, or minority groups etc. Whether I agree with what they are promoting or not, caedes just isn't the right venue for that sort of thing...

Ok......on the count of three...everyone SMILE!!!

When does it become a blatant pounding into your head? When does it turn from a piece of art into a propoganda tool, as you might call it?

I have seen some pictures on here that might be called the same, but not for christianity, so they are vaunted or ignored.

When does a religious or christian posting become propoganda or relentless hate-mongering or banging as you call it?

When it starts to make you question the meaning of life? When it begins to prick your conscience and make you wonder- "Maybe I've been living my life wrong?" ?


Just a simple question. I'm not even sure if this post is still going.

If you take particular umbrage to an image, please utilise the complain feature to notify a moderator of your grievances.

I've seen some image descriptions that have quite a bit of pro-religion propaganda in them. From my perspective, it's not the image that could be offensive, it's often the description. Non-religious/Atheist people don't have to download a religious image. I never check out the Places of Worship gallery as I wouldn't want those on my desktop.

Well - you can complain about the description too if it is offensive or in breach of conduct guidelines.

Caiden, blatant political images with no artistic merit have no more place here than blatant religious images with no artistic merit.

You guys crack me up,everything offends someone.

especially when old threads are repeatedly dragged up for no other reason than to apparently provoke argument and dogmatic chest beating.

"Aaaaaaaa-eeeeee-aaaaaaa-eeeeee-aaaaaaa" (Tarzan yell - dogmatic chest beating). A worthy topic, but I think this one is due for the elephant graveyard - unless something productive can come of it.

Target for Elephant Gun

oooooo
oooOoooo
oooooo

We wouldn't need an elephant graveyard if people just let them die on their own!!!! *glares fiercely*

I just read over all the messages here and I remember a time when I brought up a subject that was not "fitting" to this particular area in Discusssion, and I was told by 'the boss' that he would move it to a better spot, I wonder why he hasnt done that with this as yet, or if he has even read this. But in any case, to give my "two cents worth" I have a strong faith of my own, and no one would guess what it is either Peter...lol...but I also dont mind religious things on photos etc but I do very strongly mind when there is a message that is trying to convert everyone. It seems mankind is bent on thinking each of their religions are the only and the right one. If anyone has read the Bible, they could go back to when the Tower was built by Nimrod and how the languages were confused at that time due to the bad things people were doing at that time. And when the languages were confused, so were the religious "beliefs". People went every whichaway and brought about their own beliefs and began to try and convert others to theirs. Humans all seem to feel each of their beliefs is the right one. One thing we can learn from this is that we all seem to have an inbuilt need of some sort of religious faith. So, we go to the freedoms we all have, the USA says so in their constitution, yet in reality many of these freedoms are just not exhibited. Freedom of speech and freedom of religion are there, yes, but they are either destroyd or put on a pedestal many times if people do try to work this. So I dont think its fair or right to have words on these photo postings. We all have way too many things influencing us all, what ever happened to us reasoning things out with our own brains instead of allowing others the right to influence each of us and try to sway us to become part of their beliefs??!! People do NOT take the time to think and reason on their own merits now. So I say "down with the words on religious posters and photos"...and let each person decide for themselves, and so we can allow art to be art and not a dictatorship of what someone wanting to get yet another message across!...ok, I guess I said how I felt..for whatever thats worth...but thank yu Peter for opening up this discussion, it's nice to find something of substance here, and I do hope it gives everyone a chance to voice their own reasonings and then come to a interesting and logical solution..Verena

ook?

Here… have a banana…

ook.

I've seen those images too. I just go on to the next pic. Although I would suggest that maybe there should be an "abstain from voting" button for people who don't want to vote on such images, if they come up in the voting booth.

Oh come on!

I'm not the slightest bit religious, but just because i don't agree with the lifestyle and artistic preferences of a fellow artist I'm not going to make a disscussion topic about it! Grow up.

play nice or don't play at all kiddies

I'm mostly a strong atheist, but a bit agnostic, and I don't think there's a definition for "superior" in the religious field, so all beliefs should be given equal respect, including non-religious beliefs.

About the religious posters, I don't check them out as they are meant for religious people. It's the same way with people who have different tastes, like a photography fan wouldn't check out the fractal gallery. However, I wouldn't like an image implying that one religion is superior over all others in any way.

There are few images that don't reflect some kind of world view . . . Isn't that what art is? A way of expressing thoughts, feelings and beliefs? I'm not the least bit offended by religious art and thank God that people care enough about their beliefs to want to share them. I'm not compelled to believe or see things as another artist is, but art is often a pathway to reflection and I must say that I wonder why some seem so threatened by the beliefs of others. Some artistic messages are subtle and some are more obvious, but I've not seen art here, with or without text, that forces beliefs on others. Wen