This is a stupid debate as most restaurants sell Beef and pork which is offensive to Muslims and Hindus respectively to say nothing of Jews and the veggies. This is definitively offensive and alienates a goodly proportion of British citizens.

Should it be prohibited I don't think so.

Those who don't like it eat somewhere else

ash

quote:

Originally posted by Tobias:
....in some of London's finest restaurants you will find artistic offerings depicting love, sex etc - lots of statues and paintings going back centuries depicting this indeed some of these works are proudly displayed in restaurants and hotels the world over.

Ah, yes. One person's erotica is another person's porn.

quote:

If you are talking about porn, then yes this would (a) probably be illegal and (2) against what it considered public decency

Why are images that would offend 'public decency' (whatever that is) illegal, but images that offend some peoples religious sensibilities allowed? I guess it's all about who shouts the loudest.

quote:

Although I don't know of any restaurants (outside of the sex trade) that would want to put porn on the walls.

And I can't understand why any restaurant would want to use religious symbols in an attempt to create "an atmosphere that is vibrant and sexy."

Ash: missed the point entirely.

It would be illegal due it it being visible to minors, no comparison to the Buddha image whatsoever.
If a restaurant wanted to display such images i am pretty sure, and Tobias would probably know better, that if they blanked out the windows and advertised as an over 18 / 21 venue displaying such images then it would be legal.

I am talking about images that are on public display.

But its a non-arguement because sexual images are not allowed to be sold or shown to minors under british law so therefore there is no way on gods earth, or Buddhas earth, that they will be allowed to be on public display. You think displaying sexually explicit images where they could be seen by minors is equivalent to displaying a Buddha image under a staircase, get a grip mate.
It is a totally different thing. I think you are being more offensive towards the Buddha image, by likening it to a sexual image, than any restaurant could ever be.

quote:

Originally posted by N Barton:
I think you are being more offensive towards the Buddha image, by likening it to a sexual image, than any restaurant could ever be.

Please show me where I did that. Oh, you can't; because I didn't!

It is the restaurant that describes images of the Buddha as sexy, not I.

What I did do was say that some images that cause offence are allowed to be displayed publicly, others are not.

Such is life.

Nick,

Is today one of those days when you think to yourself, why the bloody hell did I bother

Keith

quote:

Originally posted by Noi & Nick:
... Please show me where I did that. Oh, you can't; because I didn't!

It is the restaurant that describes images of the Buddha as sexy, not I...

Where exactly does the restaurant say that?

I think it is you Nick who is missing the point. We live in a relatively free society that gives us a wide freedom of choice. Ash's point is valid in the context of this debate, what he said is completely true. Often Muslims are the ones accused of refusing the freedoms we enjoy but when I was in the United Arab Emirates (a Muslim state) I ate bacon and pork sausage for breakfast, I had pork belly in a fantastic restaurant and I drank wine, beer and gin! I was afforded the choices I would have enjoyed at home, many Muslims would be horrified that I could buy and consume such things in a Muslim state.

I enjoy the freedoms of living in the UK, I like that choice to follow (or not) a particular religion or faith - however I do NOT like having others religious beliefs affecting MY enjoyment and MY freedoms. We live in a multi-cultural environment in the UK where ALL religions and ALL people MUST accept everyones right to do or not do something (within the law).

quote:

Originally posted by Tobias:

quote:

Originally posted by Noi & Nick:
....It is the restaurant that describes images of the Buddha as sexy, not I...

Where exactly does the restaurant say that?

From their website, and posted earlier, The décor continues the oriental chic and and helps to provide an atmosphere that is vibrant and sexy.

I, too, have eaten pork and drunk alcohol in restaurants etc in Muslim states (although when I was last there you could do neither in the transit lounge at Doha) but in most to do so out in the street or on public display would be, if not illegal, then frowned upon I believe.

I think that this is off the point, though, because there is a big difference between Jews, Muslims, Hindus etc. accepting that other people eat what is, to them, forbidden food and someone using a religious object to provide an atmosphere that is vibrant and sexy.

quote:

Originally posted by Keith&Mol
Is today one of those days when you think to yourself, why the bloody hell did I bother

I do seem to be in a minority of one, for sure. I expected that there would be those who disagreed with me, this is a forum for debate after all and I am not going to get upset merely because some do not share my views (although they are, to be honest, Noi's views more than mine).

IMHO, with the right to free expression comes the responsibility to avoid needless offence. Unfortunately, though, we live in a society where everyone knows their rights but damn few care about their responsibilities.

Which is getting a bit heavy for what started out as an observation on the chosen decor of a pretentious bar/restaurant!

I still fail to see where this restaurant describes images of Buddha as "sexy". They have not said that have they? It is you who has put words in their mouth.

Nick, the restaurant does not appear to me to be causing needless offence - or any offence for that matter. You still haven't answered my question though of why a statue is offensive, what makes it offensive? Why is it just so wrong?

quote:

Originally posted by Noi & Nick:
... Unfortunately, though, we live in a society where everyone knows their rights but damn few care about their responsibilities.

Quite, but what's that got to do with a statue in a restaurant?

The food looks good

With the utmost respect, Tobias, I am surprised that a man as erudite as your self cannot see that your questions have already been answered in my previous posts.

The offense is caused because religious images are not being treated with respect. They are placed low down and one was where customers walked over it to reach the upstairs bar. They are not there for any purpose other than, to use the restaurant's own words, provide an atmosphere that is vibrant and sexy. They are being used in a way that would be deemed by most to be totally unacceptable were they Christian or Muslim images.

quote:

quote:

Originally posted by Noi & Nick:
... Unfortunately, though, we live in a society where everyone knows their rights but damn few care about their responsibilities.

Quite, but what's that got to do with a statue in a restaurant?

The answer to this lies in my preceding sentence, which you left out of the quote:- IMHO, with the right to free expression comes the responsibility to avoid needless offence.

quote:

Originally posted by Keith&Mol:
The food looks good

According to my boss, who has eaten there once, it isn't. He reckons the Chinese buffet in Chertsey Road to be far better value.

No offending images, either. (Unless you're an Aldershot supporter as they have a Woking shirt signed by the team framed and hung on the wall. )

I'm sorry Nick, I still cannot see the problem. I have read your posts a couple of times and cannot see how displaying these statues can be offensive or why a restaurant should not be allowed to use them in the context they have.

How do you treat a statue with disrespect?

Have you ever been to Rome, Malta perhaps or northern Portugal? There are several restaurants there with Catholic imagery and the like - all to do with ambiance rather than making a religious statement. I once visited a restaurant in a converted church in the UK, lots of statues in there too. As a Christian, I wasn't offended - given the context they looked the part.

Muslim images? I don't know if I know what a Muslim image is - although I have eaten in an Arabic restaurant in Manchester who had a couple of paintings of Mosques on the walls.

As I say, we live in a country where we enjoy certain freedoms - it's just a pity we have a few who do not want us to enjoy those freedoms and instead force their religious beliefs on the rest of us.

If the items were being used mockingly then I would fully agree with you, but that is not what this particular restaurant is doing.

Here's a pic of a restaurant in India. I wonder if they think that they're chic and sexy

quote:

Originally posted by Tobias:
How do you treat a statue with disrespect?

When we were packing up Noi's things for her move to the UK I put her Buddha image down on the ground. This caused great consternation and a rebuke from Noi as doing so was showing disrespect to the Buddha.

I am not a theologian, but I suspect that the disrespect was not to the statue, but to the concept which the statue represented. I was disrespecting the statue therefore I was disrespecting the Buddha himself.

That using religious images in this way does not cause offense to you is obvious, and I can understand and respect your view.

I have tried to explain that doing so does cause great offense to Noi and other Thais of our acquaintance, and why. It's a shame that you, and others, cannot understand that this is so.

quote:

It's a shame that you, and others, cannot understand that this is so.

I understand perfectly but don't agree at all the restaurant is not in Thailand and is not even a Thai restaurant, they are almost certainly Chinese Buddhas and they have different traditions.

ash

Plus I did not miss the point as usual you choose to be obtuse selling pork etc offends Muslims and Jews , selling Beef and leather goods offends Hindu's what about their rights ??

quote:

Originally posted by Noi & Nick:
... I have tried to explain that doing so does cause great offense to Noi and other Thais of our acquaintance, and why...

But you haven't explained 'why'. It's obvious they are offended, but it's the 'why' that is confusing the hell out of me. You mentioned the statues are being 'disrespected' but you don't say how they are being disrespected; you mention the restaurant say the Buddhas are 'sexy' - but those were your words not the restaurant's (to be accurate the restaurant actually says the 'atmosphere' is vibrant and sexy - and the definition of sexy in modern language use includes being appealing, interesting and attractive with no 'sexual' connotation).

Different religions have different peculiarities and customs, different cultures have their different peculiarities and customs. It is in this context we all have to be aware - in the UK we have our freedoms and privileges and those who have religious beliefs do so within that context. In Thailand it maybe considered disrespectful to use such images/statues in restaurants (although I have seen them in restaurants in Thailand too) but we are in the UK and the issues must be considered in that context. Yes, if these items were used as ashtrays or had them 'dressed' in inappropriate attire I would have sympathy with you. But here, in British society, there is nothing wrong in displaying such items. They are not there to be disrespectful or to provoke or taunt Buddhists, if they were then you would be entitled to be offended.

quote:

Muslim images? I don't know if I know what a Muslim image is - although I have eaten in an Arabic restaurant in Manchester who had a couple of paintings of Mosques on the walls.

That is because the Hebrew Bible or Old Testament forbids the creation and use of images of God.
i.e. Thou shalt have no graven image of your God or anything in Heaven.
The ancient Israelites failed to obey this law in the desert and Moses, who was coming down from the mount was aghast when he saw the golden calf they had created as an object of worship. He had it destroyed and broke the tablets of stone up on which were written the 10 commandments.
Muslims or the practitioners of Islam obey this law, most christians do not obey this law in the main.

quote:

most christians do not obey this law in the main.

Most Christians do plus the context was that you can't make an image or idol for worship i.e from the amplified bible "Exodus 20:4 You shall not make yourself any graven image [to worship it] or any likeness of anything that is in the heavens above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth"

ash

Ajahn Brahm's Right View explains that Buddhists can choose never to be offended.

Interestingly according to this article Buddha images were maybe banned by early Buddhists
from http://www.slate.com/id//
"Many Eastern religions make liberal use of imagery—pictures of the Buddha and of Hindu gods are particularly widespread. Some historians theorize that early Buddhists banned religious imagery: You can find ancient art that uses symbols—like a tree, a wheel, or a footprint—where a picture of the Buddha would normally go. Sikhism, which merges elements of Islam and Hinduism, prohibits the depiction of God. Sikhs do allow images of their most important spiritual figures for inspiration."

ash

Plus its common in Thailand

http://www.buddhistchannel.tv/index.php?id=70,4604,0,0,1,0