Is this a bad gallery?

[MountainGoat]

In the course of my day to day, I happened to be redirected to this gallery, by a webmaster who I am building some pages for.

This is the address: http://www.nenablue.com/webmasters/colecciones/coleccion_63/index.html

I have never seen anything like this, and to say that I was shocked, was a little of an understatement. I am not religious, but this could, to me, be overstepping the boundaries of what erotica is and isn't.

I think it would make for an interesting talking point, to say the least.

Have a look and please say what you guys think to it, and whether it is morally correct, or incorrect to depict a religious icon in this manner.

[Ramster]

I wouldn't do it but people do it on occasion.

[bluemoney]

While I believe in freedom of religion and freedom from religion, I tend to stay away from things that may inflame or defame one’s religion. I would pass on it myself.

**This is of course just my stupid opinion**

[Greenguy]

...morally correct...You do realize that you're a pornographer, right? :D

It's all a matter of personal preference.

[Useless]

Have a look and please say what you guys think to it, and whether it is morally correct, or incorrect to depict a religious icon in this manner.Christians aren't supposed to idolize icons anyway. They shouldn't care, but they would (and yes, I understand why). We heathens would think that such sacrilege is sort of kinky though. Who doesn't wish they could screw in a church? Being that you aren't marketing to hardcore Christians, I wouldn't be overly concerned.

[ArtWilliams]

I'd rather look at that than an episode of MeatHoles.

[Lemmy]

I think the chick should be allowed to worship the Lord in any way she sees fit without us passing judgement.

[LD]

Damn, sombody get her a tampon!

[digifan]

It's awesome... I love the site.

[Bobc01]

We all have our "crosses" to bare i suppose.

[tickler]

Kinda of reminds me of the Exorist!

[Agent]

I'm not Christian but I'm offended on their behalf.

[Greenguy]

|buddy| says |thumb |thumb

[Preacher]

As a man of the cloth I am thoroughly disappointed with this gallery.

Those links are blind and there is NO reason for that header to be a swf!

[horney]

I've known religious bigots who would get off on that shit. A finger to the sky shouting hell and damnation, with his dick crying out for discreet masturbation. That's what hypocracy is all about, isn't it?

Good or bad? I'm agnostic on that one.

[tyre71]

I just hope that cross isn't made of wood. The splinters could be a bitch

[MountainGoat]

You do realize that you're a pornographer, right? :D

It's all a matter of personal preference.

As a freelance web designer, I would think that the terminology in my case would be more of a whore... I work for whoever pays!

[nenablue]

Hi guys!
29/01/08 11:44

I would like to say that we are aware that this gallery could be seen as an offence for people who are religious, but we are talk about art... Nude art. The only goal is to take an icon (in this case Jesus) and explore a new context in the adult world. I think we must read deeper inside the concept; more than just the pictures. |headbang|

If you want to contact nenablue: nacho@nenablue.com

[Bobc01]

Can yer do a girl holding a teddy bear that's wearing a t-shirt with Mohamed on it?

[nenablue]

Really good idea Man!!

Let me check it..... |bananna| |bananna|

[Receptor]

Hi guys!
The only goal is to take an icon (in this case Jesus) and explore a new context in the adult world.

I thought Jesus was a guy.

[MountainGoat]

I thought Jesus was a guy.

Yup, me too...

[NY Jester]

pretty interesting..Im not so disturbed by the fact that shes portraying Christ...its the scene itself..its disturbing in Passion of the Christ, and just as disturbing with a hot naked chic depicting it...But by all mean express whatever you wish artistically...

[Useless]

I thought Jesus was a guy.Hence, "explore a new context". Making him into a hot naked chick would be a pretty new context.

If I had Photoshop skills, I'd take one of these pics, put it in frame, and place it on the wall behind Foxy Angel in that scene where she's getting her cock sucked while dressed like a nun. Push the boundaries...

Also, I'd stay away from anything Mohammed-related. There's a big difference from possibly angering religious folk who may picket outside your office and pissing off people willing to kill you for mis-naming a stuffed animal.

[Bobc01]

Also, I'd stay away from anything Mohammed-related. There's a big difference from possibly angering religious folk who may picket outside your office and pissing off people willing to kill you for mis-naming a stuffed animal.


Don't be such a pussy, they'd kill you just for being an American, whether you piss them off by insulting their religion or not.

[Useless]

Don't be such a pussy, they'd kill you just for being an American, whether you piss them off by insulting their religion or not.I'm not one of those guys who'd tell them, "I'm American and proud. What you goin' do 'bout it?"

It would be more like, "I'm Canadian, eh."

[Bobc01]

Makes no difference, Canadian, British, you are a westerner and we're all infidels to them.

Show your fear of them and that's exactly what they're aiming for.

[Useless]

Show your fear of them and that's exactly what they're aiming for.That's not true. They're after OUR oil. The problem is, all of OUR oil is under THEIR feet. :D

[Bobc01]

That's not true. They're after OUR oil. The problem is, all of OUR oil is under THEIR feet. :D

lol It's not like they'll ever need it is it.


On a serious note, if you look at all the anti American, British propaganda by these fuckwits with pics of dead coalition sodiers with their faces blown off or blown up, on comparison showing a naked girl with a mohamed teddy is nothing compared.

I was flicking through a load of WP blogs the other day looking for inspiration for themes, it's surprising the amount of these extremeist blogs there are.

I was gonna post a few urls but i think it would be far to offensive to people on here.

[spacemanspiff]

As long as you don't post any pictures of cows, or people dancing, or people dancing with cows. I don't have a problem with it.

[Trixie]

Pretty fucking gorgeous and ambitious work, I think. The site owner probably doesn't realize it totally violates their payment processor's terms, though, and that they couldn't care less about whether or not it's art.

[Bassmaster]

In the course of my day to day, I happened to be redirected to this gallery, by a webmaster who I am building some pages for.

This is the address: http://www.nenablue.com/webmasters/colecciones/coleccion_63/index.html

I have never seen anything like this, and to say that I was shocked, was a little of an understatement. I am not religious, but this could, to me, be overstepping the boundaries of what erotica is and isn't.

I think it would make for an interesting talking point, to say the least.

Have a look and please say what you guys think to it, and whether it is morally correct, or incorrect to depict a religious icon in this manner.
Wow, I know we are in the porn business, but to me that is un-acceptable! I believe in the free speech, etc etc, and I know the response here will be, "just don't look at it then" and that is correct, however, I don't see the need to even go there. I am ready for the haters to start the attack!!!|huh

[KG Gary]

I am ready for the haters to start the attack!!!|huh
For the most part it's religious folks who are the haters.
So much pointless hatred and most of it comes from polluting childrens' minds with religious poison so they grow into screwed-up adults.
|banghead|

I like the photos. They're sexy.

[[BV]]

CCBill will can that shit in a heartbeat.

[WoodStock]

Damn, sombody get her a tampon!

haha

[Motorhead]

Actually, the gallery is nothing new. The concept was derived from the band, Cradle of Filth. Their artwork on posters and t-shirts consisting of half-naked nuns masturbating with crosses, crucified in expressions of sexual ecstasy and a famous t-shirt that stated Jesus was a Cunt. Their live stage shows, at one point, were even more explicit and sacrilegious. Hell, even Sam Kinison was on a cross, asking if anyone had a hammer!

[webpimp]

In a funny coincidence, I was just having a conversation with someone about this same issue (except my example was the virgin mary getting banged). My views:

Yes it is distasteful and offensive to many.
Yes we should have the freedom to look at it if it turns us on.
It's still porn, just because it has shock value doesn't make it art.

[Beaver Bob]

I think its great :D thanks for sharing, I have a blog thats perfect for it |headbang|

[KCat]

I think the chick should be allowed to worship the Lord in any way she sees fit without us passing judgement.

|thumb

It's a beautifully shot gallery and obviously meant to be provocative. I'd recommend plastering it all over the place hoping to get a ton of traffic from the controversy, but the site would likely lose its processor. CCBill would see the blood, not the art.

[AdultSiteWorks]

Doesn't meet my personal taste

RB

[Simon]

It's still porn, just because it has shock value doesn't make it art.
True...but many also believe that art which does not disturb is merely decorative.

I'd much rather see more images that push the edges of things like this, instead of more and more boring images of young girls being made to vomit all over the cocks they're so obviously being paid to suck.*

Unfortunately most charge processors have little artistic sensibilities when it comes to imagery.


--
*Note: For clarity I should add that I think it's hot as hell when someone who really wants to
swallow your cock gags on it a bit when she's trying to get the last inch or two to go down.