Some Truths

READ THIS WHOLE THING. IT'S SO DAM TRUE*
1. At least 2 people in this world love you so much they would die for you.
2. At least 15 people in this world love you in some way.
3. The only reason anyone would ever hate you is because they want to be just like you.
4. A smile from you can bring happiness to anyone, even if they don't like you.
5. Every night, SOMEONE thinks about you before they go to sleep.
6. You mean the world to someone.
7. If not for you, someone may not be living.
8. You are special and unique.
9. Someone that you don't even know exists loves you.
10. When you make the biggest mistake ever, something good comes from it.
11. When you think the world has turned its back on you, take a look: you most likely turned your back on the world.
-- Found on the Internet

Artistic Freedom or Religious Disrespect

This is in reference to the recent incident in Vadodara where an art student was arrested for painting obscene pictures of Hindu godesses. Just to brief you about the incident, there was an art "exhibition" (kindly refer to the dictionary for meaning) going on in MS University in Vadodara. Some of the exhibits painted by a young artist were extremely objectionable to some people, who later ransacked the college premises. The police arrested the young artist, who was later released on bail. The Vice Chancellor suspended the HOD for supporting the art student. A lot of "intellectuals in the field of art" condemned the artist's arrest stating that this was an example of artistic freedom and the young artist's arrest was a politically motivated act.

WHAT ON EARTH ARE WE TALKING ABOUT HERE?

Everyone would agree that an artist should have the freedom to express his view points through art, but is there not a limit to this freedom. It is no artistic freedom when it hurts the religious freedom of millions of people. I feel this is artistic perversion, misuse of freedom. If this is artistic freedom, then why do we need censor board to remove explicit visuals from movies, why cant we treat this as artistic freedom of the Director of the movie. Some people argue that the sculptures of some of the ancient temples in Khajuraho and some other temples are sexually explicit, and so we should also bring them down for being sexually explicit. This is the most absurd argument to justify their point. If ancient scriptures say that the practice of 'Sati' is correct, should we follow suit?

RELIGIOUS BIAS: There is one serious flaw in the way the so-called "intellectuals in the field of art" look at things in general. The same is the case with many of the political parties, which follow gross religious bias in matters like these.

1) I am not sure how many of you would remember the incident where a Danish painter had painted some objectionable paintings about Prophet Mohammed. There was a strong reaction from the entire Islamic community across the world protesting against these paintings. The Indian Government had gone on record condemning this as an act that hurts the religious sentiments of Muslims.

2) Now the most recent incident where a photo of the head of the Dera Sacha Sauda being dressed like His Holiness Guru Govind Singh. The entire Sikh community was united in the reaction condemning the act. If you really look close, one might argue that there was no insult to anyone, but the entire community felt offended that another sect Guru was dressed up like their Guru. Again there was strong political reaction to this.

3) Now coming to the Dan Brown movie Da Vinci Code. Again there was strong reaction across the country and the movie was banned in some of the states because religious sentiments were hurt.

Why is it that the religious sentiments of Hindus are always taken for granted? Everybody expects the Hindus to practice tolerance and UNDERSTAND THE ARTISTIC FREEDOM of the people practicing sexual perversion in the name of art. Why can't artists draw something that could be enjoyed by everyone who sees them. There are so many beautiful things in nature, yet people can see only a naked women, often godesses stripped of their clothes. This shows what is actually going on in the minds of these desperate artists.

But like they say, a butcher will not kill if there is no one to buy meat. The same applies here too, no artist would bother to draw these perversive paintings, if he knows it would not sell. As long as there are perversive buyers, there would be scope for these perversive artists who will cater to their perversive wants.