Kevin Jennings Sponsored Anti-Christian, Obscene ‘Art’ Exhibit

By Bob Ellis on October 22nd, 2009

Ad from Act Up, included in the exhibit

Ad from Act Up, included in the exhibit

Newsbusters reports that your favorite Education Department official and mine, Kevin Jennings, has been involved in still more reprehensible activity.

MassResistance has done a little investigating and found that in addition to all the other morally repugnant things Jennings has done, he helped fund a grossly obscene homosexual “art” exhibit at the Harvard Art Exhibit in Cambridge, Massachussetts.

In case you haven’t been tuned in, Kevin Jennings is President Barack Obama’s appointee to be Assistant Deputy Secretary of Education and head of the Office of Safe and Drug Free Schools, or the “Safe Schools Czar.”

Before being appointed to this esteemed position in the department responsible for the education and well being of America’s public school children, Jennings was the founder of the pro-homosexual Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network (GLSEN) organization which pushes acceptance and normalization of homosexual behavior in schools across America.

Jennings also tells the story of his rather enjoyable use of drugs in Hawaii, and of the time when he was a teacher and a high school sophomore told him he had gone home with a man from a bus station the night before.  Instead of notifying the police as any responsible teacher would, Jennings instead advised the youth that he should have used a condom.

Jennings has also shared with us that one of his most inspirational heroes was pedophile and NAMBLA (North American Man-Boy Love Association) advocate Harry Hay.  In case you’re not familiar with Harry Hay, you can find out all you want to know and more about him here.

Also, Jennings has stated that he finds heterosexuality abnormal.

Now I realize that at this point you’re still thrilled to have Kevin Jennings involved in your child’s education while they’re away from your supervision for eight hours a day, but I really must get back to that “art” exhibit Jennings funded.

It shows sex organs (not just drawings or illustrations, but actual photos of male and female sex organs), uses some of the most extreme profanity,  shows homosexuals kissing and touching each other sexually and more.

I was a cop for too many years, and took my own vacation in the gutter for too many years to be innocent of exposure to sexual depravity, but if your heart and mind are still relatively untarnished, you probably don’t want to look at any of this.  Just rely on this description from Newsbusters:

According to a Harvard Art Museum press release, “important and commemorative exhibition” “shows the critical intelligence that artists bring to bear when it comes to movements for social change.” That, and filthy pictures. In one, a Catholic Bishop is juxtaposed with a used condom. Photos of male and female genitals, homosexual activity, posters targeting Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush as murderers and pieces glorifying sadomasochism are included. (Presumably, the S&M won’t be part of any Safe Schools initiatives.)

Yes, it’s that bad.

So far, President Obama (even if he was ignorant of all this before he appointed Jennings) has not seen fit to remove this man from the Education Department. Congress has also not seen fit to call for his removal.  And the “mainstream” media–outside that evil Fox News–has not found any of this worth reporting to you, the American taxpayer and parent.

Note: Reader comments are reviewed before publishing, and only salient comments that add to the topic will be published. Profanity is absolutely not allowed and will be summarily deleted. Spam, copied statements and other material not comprised of the reader’s own opinion will also be deleted.

  • Digg
  • Yahoo Buzz
  • Reddit
  • Yahoo Bookmarks
  • Delicious
  • StumbleUpon
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Windows Live Favorites
  • Technorati Favorites
  • NewsVine
  • Share/Bookmark

Categories: Commentary
Tags: , , , ,

  • elvisnixoncom
    ELVISNIXON.COM:
    PLEASE Think this through-Suppose you had neighbors who said that they were raising their child to become a homosexual. Would you respond with "open minded" enthusiasm or sheer disgust?


    I hope that you would recognize that horrible child abuse was going on.


    Why?


    Because our collective moral intuition is outraged by this unnatural and immoral life choice.


    Let's delve further.


    How would this neighbor go about this experiment?


    The only way is to expose a child at an early an age as possible to adult sexual appetites.


    Adult sexuality is an inappropriate subject matter for kids. Western Civilization has always recognized the inherently exploitive nature of adult-child activities of this nature and has universally condemned them.


    Seeing that this is axiomatic (an argument that is beyond question), ask yourself another question.


    Why do we allow government schools to do this with OUR tax dollars?


    That is the entire point of "GLBS (gay, lesbian, bi, straight) Alliance" groups on California campuses.


    That is the entire point of the ACLU suing the Boy Scouts of America to force them to expose little boys to adult male homosexuals as "Scout Masters."


    That is the entire point of homosexual groups seeking to LOWER age of consent laws (as they have succeeded to do in Canada, the UK and much of Europe).


    And THAT is the entire point of the Schwarzenegger-signed "Harvey Milk Day" law.


    Why would you be horrified and outraged if your neighbor did that, but oblivious if the local kindergarten, elementary school and other taxpayer funded "educational centers" do it?
    ELVISNIXON.COM
  • DCM
    OK, let's be a little more realistic here. Homosexuality is not simply a "lifestyle choice" and people who end up homosexual aren't generally "raised" that way. Rather, homosexuality is a form of what could be termed "sexual addiction" that comes about due to a combination of natural disposition and environmental factors (including sexual abuse & certain family dysfunctions). Tendencies toward heterosexual promiscuity (such as my ex-wife's) or porn addiction (such as my own) have similar causes.

    But the kind of thing you're concerned about would be that homosexual activity is being sold as "normal" and "OK," and kids who might have any tendencies in that direction are being encouraged to explore them. This in itself may not radically increase the number of those who identify as homosexual, given what the causes of that are, but increases acceptance of & practice of the unnatural is never a good thing.
  • DCM
    Art, schmart. The point remains, why is this person still in the position he's in? It reflects REEEEEEALLLLY badly on Obama. The sad things is, Obama seems either not to know or care.
  • WXRGina
    How well-said and schmart of you.

    I did not intend for this to be a discussion of art. I was just pointing out that our society's degeneration goes hand-in-hand with bad 20th Century "art." Of COURSE, this sinister Jennings guy needs the boot, and so does pretty much the entire administration! Obama darned sure knows, and cares very much... that their evil agenda is being fulfilled.

    The bottom line is that we're in big trouble, period.
  • brianrutledge
    Doom and gloom prognosticators are usually wrong. Read some of the comments during FDR's days and the same things were said. Claims of socialism, 'end of America' as we know it etc were common and low and behold men like Eisenhower , Nixon and Reagan prevailed.I still don't understand how we can be headed towards a socialist and a fascist state. One is extreme left ideology and the other is right. The two are opposite. Which is it ?
  • WXRGina
    All the good Germans in the mid-30s said the same thing.
  • WXRGina
    Okay, I've already hammered out my thoughts on homosexuality in other posts that probably offend a lot of people. Now, I will hammer out my thoughts on art. After three different colleges and ten years (I was a bum), I finally got my little bachelor's degree in "fine art." I've had a talent and an understanding of art all my life. In school they make us study art history. Let me tell you something. The decline of our culture in the twentieth century coincides with the decline in standards of art. The evil powers of the world desire to deconstruct everything good and true and beautiful, and especially all that is of God. What is art? True art should highlight truth, and the beauty of God's creation (but, it's a tricky thing when you think of idols and images; that's another topic). The forces of evil have, for much of the twentieth century, actively promoted garbage and called it art. Many of the people considered "masters" of art last century could not paint their way out of a paper bag. They have been mostly immune to criticism because of their relativistic declarations like, "Who are you to say what someone considers beautiful, or art?" This kind of statement shuts down most debate, because most people are not "artists," and are a bit intimidated by their own perceived lack of knowledge about art.

    I could go on and on and even write an essay, but this is just a comment section, so I need to shut up. I guess you can see where my point is leading. Here is another example of trash perversion on display and illegitimately called "art." This guy Jennings really takes the cake. I don't mean to make Ms. Carrie scold me for being so negative, but these leftists have been worming their way into ALL our institutions, basically unchecked, for decades, and now they're all in place. Since this unknown foreign-national guy has been installed in the White House, and his staff has been appointed, I believe we have just witnessed a "bloodless" revolution that has taken over our country. Our Constitution is on death row, and I don't know if it will be granted a stay of execution.

    Gina Miller
  • brianrutledge
    Art inherently has nothing to due with religion. It is a skill that represents someones creative imagination and expressing that skill by creating through a medium. You may prefer religious art and that's your personal taste and right, but art itself is a creative process that is not limited to a particular subject matter.Some early Christian art that depicts Hades as gruesome and repulsive with snakes ans brimstone, reside only in the imagination of the artist because no one has a clue what Hades is like.

    Because it doesn't fit my moral beliefs doesn't mean it isn't art . That would be called censureship and discriminatory thinking. Even the artists who have painted Jesus had no clue what-so-ever what He looked like so they have completely and falsely represented Him. Yet many tend to think they know what Jesus looked like because of these paintings. It is false imagery.
  • WXRGina
    Dr. Rutledge, you make one of my points, and you misunderstand my definition of art as well.

    I don't like "religion." I believe "religion" is deadly. I did not say I like "religious" art. And, you're right about ignorant depictions of Jesus - I think they are abominations and are mostly found in the Catholic arena (don't get me started on Catholicism, because I will offend millions with my rebuke of it).

    My basic point in that little missive is that there IS such a thing as BAD ART. And, I don't care if some pervert says it's his idea of marvelous beauty. This is a very tricky subject, and I knew I would get a rise from someone because of my post. If you want to go back to the beginning of time, well, we don't have enough time to discuss it all. But, surely you can agree that this Harvard display that Jennings sponsored is an example of very, very bad "art." If not, well, there's nothing I can discuss with you, friend.
  • brianrutledge
    If what you mean by 'bad art' is that you find it morally repulsive, then i do understand the reason you would feel that way. I don't particularly like the subject matter, but not sure it is bad per se. I don't think art is bad or good but that each individual has a right to decide whether they like it or not or wish to call it good or bad.

    Many people in the Victorian times found Michelangelos David 'bad' because it showed his private parts.
  • WXRGina
    Again, you make one of my original points about people throwing out the relativism card.

    If you say that something morally repulsive may not be "bad per se," then you and I are in different universes. There are a million intelligent and informed conversations I can have about art, because I've studied it all my life and am quite qualified to speak on the subject, but I know the futility of attempting to converse with a moral relativist about anything, much less art.

    My original post presented pretty much the whole of my point, and it ended up being a declaration of the sorry state of our country, bottom line. That last sentence in my original post is much more important than my opinion that ancient, nude "art" is just another form of pornography in marble and oil.
  • brianrutledge
    Well I am an optimist by nature and think our country will be fine. When FDR was President and a decade before when people were rebelling against the Victorian era and flappers and lewdness were "in" , many people were saying, like you, that the U.S. would never regain its moral standing, but the pendulum did swing back- 40's, 50's, Reagan etc.

    I think that to say that nude statues are pornography is a type of moral relativism pecular to your own beliefs because as I remeber it, God created us naked and we were to remain that way until Adam and Eve messed up. God felt the human body beautiful and we shouldn't feel shame about it. So, wouldn't thinking a nude statue is pornography be moral relativism specific to a personal belief and time( the Puritan influence in Americas case) . The God given universal truth is that the body is beautiful and we shouldn't feel it shameful much less pornographic if done with taste and respect which most agree David is.
  • WXRGina
    My point is not that America has lost its moral bearings, which it has. We're now in a whole new ballgame that has never been played in the entire history of our country. America is on a the brink of becoming a fascist dictatorship - that's what I'm talking about. This is a place we have NEVER been in our 233 years.

    As far as clothing, Adam and Eve were probably clothed with the glory of God in the beginning, and when they sinned, that glory left them naked. The Bible talks of robes being given in heaven to the saints to wear. Jesus is clothed in heaven. The Bible talks about our "nakedness" as being shameful, not beautiful. No, God does not indicate that it's lovely for us to walk around in the nude or admire images of the nude human body.
blog comments powered by Disqus
« »