Man Sues Metropolitan Museum of Art Because a Painting of Jesus is White and It Offends Him – IOTW Report

Man Sues Metropolitan Museum of Art Because a Painting of Jesus is White and It Offends Him

Look for update on this story after the read moreScreen Shot 2015-12-08 at 10.37.03 AM

I tried calling Justin Renel Joseph, but he’s not picking up the phone listed on his lawsuit.

Below is one of the paintings that causes him great pain. He says he doesn’t want to pay for it, meaning, he doesn’t want his taxes funding something that is deeply offensive to him personally.

Sort of like funding abortion when you’re a Christian.

racist-jesus_1449510298447_591539_ver1.0

I would like to ask Justin, who is listed as self-employed on Facebook, if he pays taxes in NYC. That would be central to his case. He would have no standing as a non-taxpayer.

I’m also interested in whether he is a worshipper of Jesus, that would have bearing on whether he has standing or not. I couldn’t make a claim that I was deeply offended that Muhammad was depicted at all, let alone if he was depicted as white.

I’d also like to ask him if The Virgin Mary covered in elephant dung, surrounded by photos of vaginas, qualifies as being offensive enough not to be funded. (The Brooklyn museum housed the painting at taxpayer expense.)

I’d also like to ask him if people have the right not to be offended by art? I always thought certain art was effective precisely because it was offensive.

If the answer is yes,that he has the right not to be offended,  then I suggest we do away with all art funding, as well as PBS and NPR, because they offend me on a daily basis.

I can be as much of a priggish snowflake as the next asshole who is faux-offended for political reasons.

Update:

Justin’s girlfriend is from South Korea, her name is Janet Lee1157578_10202799629891378_1688718254_n

How is this germane? Well, The Metropolitan Museum of Art explained that cultures often depict historical figures in their own image. Justin says that’s poppycock!

Well, here are some South Korean artists depicting Jesus.

080709_p14_religious1

tim-jesus-jesus

9c2cea6ba7a6041709fd9899b2ad0046 080709_p14_religious

I’m deeply offended.

 

26 Comments on Man Sues Metropolitan Museum of Art Because a Painting of Jesus is White and It Offends Him

  1. Jesus was Irish
    He kicked the bejassus out of the money lenders and threw them out of the temple.

    He hung around with a bunch of guys, drinkin’ and tarrying with the wine.

    He lived at home with his Mother and Father but used to wander off for months at the time

    He was a carpenter by trade

    He had blue eyes.

    So there!

  2. This is when you need a law that says if you file a frivolous lawsuit and loses, the plaintiff is responsible for all court costs. His lawyer, the museum’s lawyers, the court time and staff wages. Also the lawyer that takes up his case gets a nice 6 month suspension for wasting the courts time.

    Put a stop too all this nonsense in one second.

  3. Flesh-colored, of course.

    🙂

    in·car·nate

    adjective: incarnate

    /inˈkärnət,inˈkärˌnāt/

    1. (especially of a deity or spirit) embodied in flesh; in human form.
    “God incarnate”

    synonyms: in human form, in the flesh, in physical form, in bodily form, made flesh;

  4. The basic concept has been around for awhile, it’s called “Loser Pays”. Unfortunately, because there are SO DAMNED many lawyers in Gooberment and floating around loose on their own, it would harm their industry if it ever passed. Ergo, until we “kill all the lawyers”, it will never pass.

  5. Actually, Tommy, I always thought that the facts that a) he lived at home until he was 30, b) he went into his Father’s business, c) his mother thought he was God, and d) he thought his mother was a virgin marked him as certifiably Jewish.

  6. Fur, I’m not sure what you mean when you enquire about this buffoon ‘ s status as a New York City taxpayer.

    The Metropolitan Museum of Art is NOT a city agency. It is a private not-for-profit per section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code and is financed by philanthropy, not city funds. You may be confusing it with The Museum of the City of New York, which IS a city agency.

    Nobody’s asking him to pay for shit, except for the admission fee, which is now “recommended”at $25.00. (I remember when it was $2.00.) If he finds any of the art so “offensive,” he has the option of boycotting the museum. Certainly, nobody will miss him.

  7. As the owner of a religious art studio, I would like to remind Justin that the great majority of religious art was commissioned by devout (or guilt-ridden!) donors who had very personal motivations, directions, and bequests: they not only requested (or assumed) a certain ethnicity, they paid for certain family members, friends -and enemies- to be depicted. Should he be similarly motivated, by conscience and/or budget, my studio -and many others- would be happy to be commissioned to depict Jesus in a variety of races –as we have done for a variety of patrons who are more concerned with making Christ’s message understandable to a diverse audience than with using His story or visage to promote any one cultural/political agenda.
    Please note also, that while operating costs of museums and galleries may be civic, many works on display were donated directly by individuals, families, or trusts, or were purchased as the result of bequests, legacies, or grants. Not Justin’s taxes or yours or mine…
    I would be curious to see and happy to review/discuss any religious artwork Justin has created, funded, or donated. Wouldn’t you?

Comments are closed.