The latest ads are an assault on Christianity in general, and Catholics in particular:
People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals has done it again with their "Be An Angel For Animals" campaign that features celebs as angels. Coming so close to Christmas, the latest ad featuring Playboy's Joanna Krupa naked but hidden behind a well-placed holy cross has sent the Catholic League into battle mode.You can read the rest of Krupa's statement at the link.
League President Bill Donohue sent out a release saying that PETA has "launched a Christmas campaign that exploits Christian symbols. It features Playboy queen Joanna Krupa: before Thanksgiving it showed a side angle of her naked from the waist up holding a dog and a rosary; she is adorned with angel wings and a halo. The inscription below reads, "Be an Angel for Animals: ALWAYS ADOPT. NEVER BUY."
In his note, which referred to previous stories about animals dying in PETA's care, he added, "PETA is a fraud. It also has a long and disgraceful record of exploiting Christian and Jewish themes to hawk its ugly services. Those who support this organization sorely need a reality check. They also need a course in Ethics 101."
Through PETA, Krupa emailed this to us: "It's understandable that the Catholic League is wary of another sex scandal, but the sex we're talking about pertains to dogs and cats. As a practicing Catholic, I am shocked that the Catholic League is speaking out against my PETA ads, which I am very proud of. "
And you can also visit here to see what all the fuss is about.
If wonder if Krupa -- and PETA -- would have considered a similar photo shoot featuring a Star of David, or a crescent.
Add to Del.icio.us
Add to Technorati
Add to Digg
Add to Newsvine
Add to Facebook
Add to StumbleUpon
Subscribe
I don't think God or Jesus would be offended considering that they made us naked. I wonder if any of the people so offended have even seen the picture. As a Christian and an animal lover, which I think should be synonymous since God made all creatures, I was not offended by the photo. In fact, it is quite beautiful and has an important message. As far as the model, again, Jesus kept company with far more controversial women than a mere playboy model. Attached is the link to the photo, if you'd like to see it to draw your own conclusions.
Maybe it's me. Maybe I hang around with the wrong crowd. But I'm not aware of significant numbers of gorgeous women who walk around topless holding adorable little puppies while they're also praying the rosary.
This seems -- in the words of one of my colleagues -- "really gratuitous."
And full frontal nudity with a strategically placed cross is, at the very least, tasteless. It's clearly designed to shock. And raise eyebrows (among other things...)
Dcn. G.
What else do you expect from a group that on the one hand splashes paint on people who wear fur and then kills 21,000+ animals due to "money issues?"
Fools go where angels fear to tread
Klaire misunderstood my post if s/he is responding to my comment about TOB. Fr Loya points out, as a trained professional artist who worked with nudes for years in art school, that it is strategically placed coverings of a nude body which turn the beautiful nude into something titillating. It's the fact she is not in fact nude, but is strategically covered with the cross that turns her body into another, offensive, message.
Post a Comment
By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.