U.S. taxpayers fund ant-covered Mohammed art exhibit at the Smithsonian

By Tom Quiner

Did that headline get your attention? It’s not totally accurate.

In fact, the nationally-funded National Portrait Gallery, a part of the Smithsonian Institute, IS featuring an exhibit with an important religious figure covered with ants. Only it’s not Mohammed.

It’s Jesus.

It is politiically-correct to desecrate Christ with tax-payer money. It is not politically-correct to desecrate Mohammed in the eyes of the liberal elites who fund anti-Christ art.

For the record, it is not respectful to desecrate Mohammed either … or any beloved and sacred religious figure. Who would ever want to do such a thing?

In this case, the co-curator of the exhibit, dubbed “Hide and Seek,” is David Ward. He has used our dollars to create an exhibit that not only includes the desecrated Jesus, but also naked kissing brothers, genitalia, and Ellen DeGeneres grabbing her breasts.

There’s more.

You’ll enjoy two halves of a loaf of bread being sewn together in an artsy video clip along with a man’s bloody mouth being sewn shut.

This IS art in the eyes of liberal elites. Specifically, it is gay art, according to Mr. Ward:

“‘Hide/Seek’ chronicles how, as outsiders, gay and lesbian artists occupied a position that turned to their advantage, making essential contributions to both the art of portraiture and to the creation of modern American culture.”

Are you okay with helping to pay to desecrate Jesus and celebrate homoerotic art?

Some readers of Quiner’s Diner will say yes, some no. But in this case, you have no choice. These are your tax dollars at work.

If the exhibit included a comparable desecration of Mohammed, Muslim terrorists would kill those responsible, an unjust response to an unjust use of taxpayer dollars.

Since Christians don’t murder Jesus desecrators, anti-Christian artists are comfortable in creating and promoting this kind of art with the support of liberal elites and taxpayer money.

Is this kind of art obscene? It depends on who you are.

My best guess is that practicing Christians, Muslims, Republicans, Tea Party supporters, and anyone with common sense (which immediately excludes the liberal elites) say yes.

That taxpayer money directly or indirectly supports art so repugnant is in itself obscene.