David <mcc### [at] yahoocom> wrote:
:   I am very disturbed about the November-December 2000 stills winner. Quite
: frankly, I don't want to see pictures of naked women (or men, for that
: matter)!

  Quite frankly, I think that's your problem. No offence intended. Seriously.

: This picture should have been disqualified for inappropriate content.

  I don't see any inappropriate content in this image and thus see no reason
to disqualify it.
  Have you ever been in an art museum? Have you ever seen nudity in there?
Would you say that they should ban those paintings or statues because they
have nudity (even though many of them are just priceless)?

: What right has anyone to post content which is almost universally
: considered evil on an innocent raytracing site!?

  Universally? This is the first time I hear anyone say that nudity as art
is evil. And I have been here for quite many years.
  I wouldn't use the word "universally".

: God is good! 

  I don't think God hates nudity.

  It may be that I live in a more liberal country (we have saunas and all
that here in Finland), but I think that it's quite globally accepted that
nudity in art can perfectly be decent and acceptable.
  Of course pornography is another story. However, we are not dealing with
pornography here.
  If you have problems with nudity, perhaps you should revise your attitude.

  Just think about a similar case: The fact that some people really hate
religious pictures doesn't mean that they should be banned or even that those
people should rant about them (they usually don't because they respect
other people's views).

-- 
char*i="b[7FK@`3NB6>B:b3O6>:B:b3O6><`3:;8:6f733:>::b?7B>:>^B>C73;S1";
main(_,c,m){for(m=32;c=*i++-49;c&m?puts(""):m)for(_=(
c/4)&7;putchar(m),_--?m:(_=(1<<(c&3))-1,(m^=3)&3););}    /*- Warp -*/

Post a reply to this message