volinbham
VN GURU
- Joined
- Oct 21, 2004
- Messages
- 69,176
- Likes
- 60,249
I just watched a Discovery Channel HD program about Brazil (side note - if you don't have HD, sell whatever you have to including your kids to get it).
Anyway, they had a segment about the "Christo" statue that is such a landmark of Rio and it got me thinking about the comments about the convocation at the UT game (that offended some Cal fans) and the cross at Mt. Soladad (sp?) in San Diego.
Would the same people that are demanding the cross at Mt. Soladad come down and that are offended by the convocation feel the same about Christo if they lived in Brazil?
Maybe a Christo could never be built now but isn't it part of the history? The same with Mt. Soladad? The Sphinx in Egypt? When does being offended go too far?
Why do these symbols threaten otherwise tolerant people to the point that they demand they be removed (e.g. God in the pledge, cross at Mt. Soladad, etc.)
Anyway, they had a segment about the "Christo" statue that is such a landmark of Rio and it got me thinking about the comments about the convocation at the UT game (that offended some Cal fans) and the cross at Mt. Soladad (sp?) in San Diego.
Would the same people that are demanding the cross at Mt. Soladad come down and that are offended by the convocation feel the same about Christo if they lived in Brazil?
Maybe a Christo could never be built now but isn't it part of the history? The same with Mt. Soladad? The Sphinx in Egypt? When does being offended go too far?
Why do these symbols threaten otherwise tolerant people to the point that they demand they be removed (e.g. God in the pledge, cross at Mt. Soladad, etc.)
