Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Mexican Playboy Publishes Nude Virgin Mary on Cover
FoxNews.com ^ | Friday, December 12, 2008

Posted on 12/12/2008 10:02:26 AM PST by Joiseydude

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 121-130 next last
To: library user
Playboy isn’t a porn mag.

Last time I checked, albeit many years ago, the magazine was loaded with soft port -- including pictures of nude women, depictions of simulated sexual intercourse, racy cartoons, lewd letters, profanity and other forms of smut.

I doubt if Hef has significantly softened his material over the past three decades.

61 posted on 12/12/2008 10:45:09 AM PST by Zakeet (Be thankful we don't get all the government we pay for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: TCH

“Mary is co-redemtrix”

There is where our theology differs. Declaring Mary co-redemtrix raises her to the level of a deity. That, IMHO, is blasphemy.

Jesus is the ONLY redeemer, and the ONLY one anybody needs to be redeemed. Everybody needs to be redeemed by Jesus.

Mary herself needed to redeemed by Jesus (her physical son) to be redeemed and enter heaven.


62 posted on 12/12/2008 10:49:25 AM PST by Brookhaven (The Fair Tax is THE economic litmus test for conservatives)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee
Classical paintings of the Blessed Virgin Mary nursing her Son were painted to depict her motherhood and devotion, Playboys images are designed to sexualize her (and realize that Catholicism teaches that the Virgin Mary REMAINED a virgin and was therefore nonsexual). There is a huge difference.

******************

Exactly right. The goal of pornography has nothing to do with motherhood or love of God. What was the intent of the publishers of this unfortunate magazine? That is one question that I think we can all easily deduce.

63 posted on 12/12/2008 10:49:55 AM PST by trisham (Zen is not easy. It takes effort to attain nothingness. And then what do you have? Bupkis.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: mnehrling

I found the entire issue online (PDF) and am downloading it now. I will see just how “immoral” it is (probably not that bad)...


64 posted on 12/12/2008 10:52:19 AM PST by library user
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

I see many purely religious posts here on FreeRepublic. Just about everyone respects them and no one posts in those threads critizing them.

Yet you post a news story about the current state of society and you get the very religious members complaining about the content of such threads.

It's a news story, and the story ain't gonna change no matter how much you might object to the directly related content of such stories.

65 posted on 12/12/2008 10:55:18 AM PST by Joiseydude (Let the Hero, born of woman, crush the serpent with his heel,)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: Joiseydude

how typical. lefties defiling America and Christianity, all the while telling everyone how brave they are for printing such a cover.

here’s a thought for those ‘extra brave’ publishers... how about printing a rendering of Mohammed f*cking a pig?

now that would be brave. (will never happen, since it would upset people... unlike defiling Mary’s imagine)


66 posted on 12/12/2008 10:58:08 AM PST by sten
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: sten
lefties defiling America and Christianity,

Pssst, it's the MEXICAN version of playboy.

67 posted on 12/12/2008 10:59:49 AM PST by Travis T. OJustice (Change is not a destination, just as hope is not a strategy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: mnehrling

YOU SAID” Frankly, that picture looks pretty tasteful, not much unlike classic paintings of Mary nursing.

Problem is that there is no intention nor any subtle implications that the picture is meant to be a respectful depiction of the Incarnation and the humaness of Jesus and Mary.

It is purely purient and disrespectful. And meant to be so.

Stop with the defense of such crap please.


68 posted on 12/12/2008 11:00:58 AM PST by amihow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Travis T. OJustice

so? mexico is very Christian and the lefties that run the organization just can’t help themselves.


69 posted on 12/12/2008 11:04:23 AM PST by sten
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: Brookhaven

You are mistaken.

This is a matter of common sense and reason.

Mary was pre-redeemed by Christ. She is immaculate by a favor of God. If she were not so conceived, then Christ would be stained with Original Sin.

Since Christ could not be born of Woman without the freewill choice of a human being, Mary, and could not assume His humanity without the contribution of human flesh, then Mary IS a necessary and integral part of God’s Plan of Salvation, and THAT fact makes her CO-redemptrix... NOT the redeemer, but that which is necessary for the redeemer to act as such!


70 posted on 12/12/2008 11:05:32 AM PST by TCH (Another redneck clinging to guns and religion)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: John123; Forward the Light Brigade

No, since Mexico was first founded as a country independent from Spain, it’s Constitution was explicitly anti-Catholic. The 1917 Consititution was even more so, and Catholic priests were forced to “go underground” or be murdered. (which many were) U.S. Americans seem not to realize this.


71 posted on 12/12/2008 11:06:27 AM PST by nickcarraway (Are the Good Times Really Over?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: mnehrling

I agree.


72 posted on 12/12/2008 11:08:49 AM PST by Travis T. OJustice (Change is not a destination, just as hope is not a strategy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Travis T. OJustice

“Pssst, it’s the MEXICAN version of playboy.”

Pssst, AMERICA is a continent that INCLUDES MEXICO!

You must remember to distinguish between “America” and the U.S.A. :)


73 posted on 12/12/2008 11:09:19 AM PST by TCH (Another redneck clinging to guns and religion)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: sten

Then make your point about MEXICO, and not America, so you don’t sound so ignorant.


74 posted on 12/12/2008 11:10:11 AM PST by Travis T. OJustice (Change is not a destination, just as hope is not a strategy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: TCH

Fair dinkum, point taken. Generally, especially here in the USA, America is taken to mean the USA. “God Bless America” isn’t taken to mean Mexico, Chile, Argentina, Canada, USA, etc...


75 posted on 12/12/2008 11:12:06 AM PST by Travis T. OJustice (Change is not a destination, just as hope is not a strategy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: AuntB; TommyDale

Thank you both.


76 posted on 12/12/2008 11:14:45 AM PST by OldEagle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Travis T. OJustice

True, and generally I will not ever argue the point when a discussion is clearly within the context of the USA, and without need of declaration. But in this case people need be reminded, since the issue is continental by accident and national by point of fact. Anyway, we digress... back to the subject at hand.


77 posted on 12/12/2008 11:17:34 AM PST by TCH (Another redneck clinging to guns and religion)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: TCH
Mary was pre-redeemed by Christ. She is immaculate by a favor of God. If she were not so conceived, then Christ would be stained with Original Sin.

Where is that in the Bible? Mary "pre-redeemed"?! Not there. The earliest church fathers didn't teach that either.

78 posted on 12/12/2008 11:19:07 AM PST by Tamar1973 (Riding the Korean Wave, one Bae Yong Joon drama at a time!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: TCH
God please strike these people.

That sounds like something an islamo would say.

79 posted on 12/12/2008 11:24:46 AM PST by DogBarkTree (Sometimes you have to let it go in order to get a Grip.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: TCH
Anyway, we digress... back to the subject at hand.

Heavenly boobies?

80 posted on 12/12/2008 11:26:55 AM PST by Citizen Blade (What would Ronald Reagan do?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 121-130 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson