Is this a display of artistic genius or simply sick ?

StrangeQuarkMatter

I hope a leprachaun takes Guillermo to the top of a rainbow and drops him into a pot of anthrax infested doggy biscuits.He is obviously just a bass tard with the artistic ability of a chewed up squeaky toy.

MajoMILSdlGMGV

In my opinion that is not art. He is justifying his inhumanity by saying it is art. I don't think someone who is mentally stable is capable of such thing, and the people who own the gallery or allowed the display are just as unstable. 

Dee

@MajoMILSdlGMGV

But you say this without even investigating the artist or their reasoning, interesting 

Dee

 @anonymousdebater

Did you research the artist or their intent , I bet that’s a ....no 

someone234

Dee who thinks mass genocide is the best way to treat poorer populations strikes again with valuing idiotic art appreciation as more important than animal rights.

Bravo, let's celebrate HIP HIP HOORAY. another psychopathic debate today.

Dee

@someone234

Dee who thinks mass genocide is the best way to treat poorer populations strikes again with valuing idiotic art appreciation as more important than animal rights.

Someone one who thinks watching children die slowly of starvation is better than ending their lives quickly strikes again and demonstrates he just make judgements based on his herd mentality 


Bravo, let's celebrate HIP HIP HOORAY. another psychopathic debate today. 

Bravo , let’s celebrate HIP HIP HOORAY another debate someone does not understand 

someone234

@Dee I think we should feed them and help them instead of killing them you are just too foolish to comprehend long-term solutions.

Dee

@someone234

 I think we should feed them and help them instead of killing them you are just too foolish to comprehend long-term solutions.

Who are you talking about now dogs / people /both as you’re to foolish to say which and why aren’t you off feeding them instead of typing up “ foolishness “ 

someone234

@Dee Why aren't you mercy killing them instead of typing up foolishness?

Dee

@someone234


No , I prefer to be like people like you and watch them die slowly ..... Hey we are on the same page of , who would have thought?

someone234

@Dee You have shown your true colours yet again but do not tell me the type of person that I am thank you very much.

Dee

@someone234

You have shown your true colons yet again

cdog1950

Personally speaking, and this won't be the most logical argument: should I stumble upon such an outrage I would stomp the s-- out of the "artist", thereby making a large blood stain on the floor which I would call "art."

MayCaesar

The reasoning behind a certain action does not matter in terms of objective reality; the action itself does. Forcing a dog to starve is forcing a dog to starve, regardless of whether it is done out of sadism, or to convey some deep philosophical point: the end result is, the dog is starving. 

Think about it this way: if someone walks up to you on the street and hits you in the head with a hammer, will any possible reasoning behind this action make up for the fact that you have been injured? It might in the eyes of the attacker, but probably not in your eyes.

Art, in theory, can be done in any physically possible way. However, something being art does not cancel its other properties - such as, for example, it being cruel.

Mr_Bombastic

@Dee
Some people who find this objectional are the same people who have no problem killing an unborn child. Oh, the irony.

Gand

Art is pretty much indefinable, therefore anything can be called art, but that shouldn’t be used to justify harming sentient creatures. If by calling something art absolves it from condemnation and legal prosecution then boiling a baby alive could be deemed permissible simply by calling it art.