I put a link to the article in my post, it was very much real, commissioned this May and finalized and unveiled in November.... only after a few weeks people started to spread pics of it online and of course since it has a priest offering his loaf to a kids face it wasn't long before.... like most things of this nature in the catholic church.

It was covered up, a real good sign for the church and how they handle these things, you can be happy in the knowledge that it's still going on under there, but now with a sheet over it!

Apparently the "mistake" happened because when the statue existed as a 2d image it was less..... dick like and the kids 2d position would have been beside the priest, the statue maker just bought that to life in 3d and aye, the loaf became far less innocent.

So the correct way to organize free speech is through power relations? I don't you understand free speech that well. Any minority can at least demand respect.

They covered it up because they realized it was indecent. Luckily much of what went wrong in the church with the child abuse scandals has been adressed. They've taken a much more proactive stance and they have resolved to actually process reports of abuse themselves.

Eh... I think the statue says a lot more about the mindset of the viewer than anything else.

We are obsessed in our fears.

I think you're a bit confused about what free speech means. Any entity is free to put a movie that paints in any light they see fit any topic. It's actually the OP's suggestion that free speech should be limited by what he/she perceives as offensive.

So please clarify your point, otherwise I'm not sure exactly what you're arguing for.

Voicing discontent is also free speech. I didn't say anything should be censored, but your comment came off quite rude. Anyhow, Hollywood isn't exactly in the position to morally criticise the church.

I don't think he's arguing against free speech (though I could be wrong) but against bias in hollywood.

Religion has been the source of much destruction throughout human history. The Catholic Church isn't the only offender in this regard -- not by any stretch of the imagination -- but it has played a prominent role, because of how successful it has been. It is no wonder that the Church catches flak in movies, especially given the (relatively) recent scandals involving pedophilia.

The argument for a "necessary being" is funny to me. Besides "begging the question," it seems to make no claim as to the nature of this supposed "being," apart from any other singular event or phenomenon (not even to the point of being sensibly described as a "being" in the first place). When pressed on the subject, WolfpackN64 says, "I never said it had to be sentient, interpret being in a wide sense here." Well, if we're not discussing a sentient being -- if we allow ourselves "wide sense" enough to encompass the Big Bang -- then we're no longer discussing the concept of God in any meaningful manner, let alone some specific God like Yahweh. The defense of the argument reduces to "the argument contends nothing in particular," so...

Though I am curious as to how things would have been worse during the Middle Ages without the Church...

No it isn't. If someone provides a God with a specific and unique definition then it can be tested.

Again, there's no reason why this argument is giving the 'necessary being' all of these traits. It's giving the being these traits just because it can. 

But even if we go ahead and say that this philosophical idea is fact, And this being of infinite power of time and space and knowledge of every atom in the universe (jeez) existed, the idea it was doing things for 9 billion years then made this rock, and waited 5 billion years to make some special monkeys and require us to have a pope and wear these special robes and rituals and can only have sex in a certain position etc etc because???? You also have to follow this or bad things will happen..

To go back to your original response this is why I show little respect to Catholicism/religion because the fact that people can read that and their bullshit meters don't go off and not see it's just a system to control people's actions just blows my mind.

My stance is not that God does not exist, but that I'm not going to believe in any god until they're proven to exist. However, I can say with almost 100% certainty that the Abrahamic God as described by the holy texts cannot exist because of the contradictions that exist within the writings.