I read an article in the Sunday paper about the “Bodies” exhibits. There are a few things that no one is pointing out about those exhibits that really bother me.

One thing is even if you did not want your children to see the gross displays, because of all the ads, TV commercials and shows like 20/20 they can’t help but see them. The ones they show in the ads must be the most gross of them all. I can not imagine any way to make them even a bit more macabre.

I read in another article that the bodies were unclaimed for at least 4 years. My immediate thought was “Who keeps unclaimed bodies for four years?” Then I wondered how a body could be posed after 4 years.

The process as I understand it is the silicone is injected, the body is posed, and then it hardens. The only way that is possible is for the body to be treated immediately after death, when it is still supple enough to be posed. Then I am supposed to believe it is kept 4 years for someone to claim? After someone invests in the process they wait for someone else to claim the “product”? Who would have the authority to defile a body that is unclaimed even before it has stiffened from rigor mortis? Don’t quote me, but I believe rigor mortis is complete in about 12 hours.

Then I question who has the right to authorize the display of a body in this manner at all. Everyone in the family including the deceased would have to agree. I have been alive long enough to know that is not possible. These “Bodies” are not mannequins, but real people with real sons, daughters, mothers, and fathers. I can not even imagine a mother giving permission to display her child in such a manner, or a child giving permission to display their mother, or father. It should be obvious that consent would not be given whether the body is claimed or not.

Don’t we have laws against publicly displaying sexual organs? Is “art” the magic word that changes everything? Can a flasher claim “art” as a defense? Or “education”? Isn’t the one who displays a sexual organ to the unsuspecting child as guilty as any flasher? Where are those who are suppose to enforce the law and protect the citizens? Can’t we, at the very least, protect the children! Parents are encouraged to bring children to view this atrocity! And they do!!!

I can picture the flasher standing before a judge saying “But your honor, it is “art” and merely for the education of the child”. Whereupon the judge replies, “I don’t doubt you when you say it is “art”. After all, the only requirement for defining “art” is the word of the artist. And I don’t doubt that it was educational for the child, though not beneficial, but you have committed a grievous offense against society. Don’t you understand that no one made any money from your display? I’m going to have to give you six months to think about this so you can learn how to make money from your “art”; like those wonderful museums and promoters”.

Well, it is a stretch to imagine a judge, or anyone else being that honest or understanding, but I don’t understand how anyone could be fairly prosecuted for exposing themselves or defacing a body after these displays.

No sooner than I wrote this than it occurred to me that if someone would gather a group of flashers, dress them in designer coats, place them in a museum, and call it art that they could, not only get away with flashing, but get paid for it!!! Can’t you just picture the ads? The side view of a flasher with his coat almost fully extended and women and children standing in front of him with their eyes wide, and an occasional ooh and ah. It could be called “The art of the uncommon man”. I could think of some funnier names, but I have already gone too far with this.

If you are laughing and I hope you are, don’t laugh to hard. If I described “Bodies” just a few years ago you would have been just as amused and unbelieving that it could really happen as you are of “The art of the uncommon man”.

I believe the “Bodies” exhibit proves beyond a doubt that some will do absolutely anything for a buck (That other master) and also that others will ignore any moral code in order to satisfy a morbid curiosity.

The “law of the land” has evolved into one rule. That is, anything that consenting adults want to do should be allowed. Those who sin do so because they want to. If everyone sets their own standards for what is right or wrong, because it is what they want to do, then there is no standard. Many before me have made this observation. I am just pointing out that the “Bodies” exhibit is proof of the problem; because some adults consent all children are abused.

Because we all come from Adam and Eve these people are related to me and I have not given, or would I give my consent for this atrocity. I might add that God is the Father of everyone and I am quite sure He has neither given His approval, nor is He amused with this “art” and “education”.

5 Responses to THOSE “Bodies” EXHIBITS!!!

  1. Vicki says:

    good post! I don’t know which is worse, the person(s) who dreamed up this exhibit, or the people who pay to go see them..

    truly disturbing and disgusting.

  2. frazen says:

    Hillary has proven her shamleful character with her bid for the presidency.
    Clinton Accused of 1978 Hotel Rape,
    Clinton Murders video in my blog.

    i randomly send ppl link to my blog.
    i may have already contacted u.

  3. Carolyn says:

    This article gives food for thought. I too saw articles in the Pittsburgh area newspapers. I’m considering attending this exhibit, but it fits in with my medical training. There are a lot of value-issues to think about, however. If I attend my observations and feelings will be written up and posted on my site.

  4. Carolyn says:

    My site is, and I am a photo/journalist and author.

  5. astudent says:

    Thanks for the comment. When you are looking for those who are responsible don’t forget the government that permits these atrocities. Those who control us continually preach that we are in charge. What a bunch of ……..

    There may be some who could attend such an exhibit without being offended. But even if there is some education derived, attending will bolster the wealth of those who promote and display the remains of people this way and that is the whole purpose of such an exhibit. I suppose that you will get a free pass if you explain to them that you are a photo/journalist and author; that is if you do not mention anything about moral questions. Thanks for the comment.

    If God appoints the rulers, and He does, then to speak evil about a ruler is to accuse God of doing wrong when He appointed that ruler. We don’t know exactly why God appoints rulers that do evil, but it is obvious that He does, so it can be deduced that it is part of His plan.
    I do not like politics at all. Who rules is God’s domain, not mine, so I don’t really want to get in a dialogue with you. However I wondered why you accused Hillary Clinton of having shameful character for what her husband did. I would not endorse any candidate for office, but at the same time I have to say that it is not right to slander anyone because of the actions of another. But then I would not have written a comment on a subject that was not even included in the post.
    If you want to teach me something, or for me to agree with you about something, you will have to be much more fair and logical than you have demonstrated here.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: