I'm sure Fox News does it all the time.

I just don't think there really was any message or purpose for the use of the church besides shock though.

The exorcism plot was so thin and pointless, there was no depth to anything.

She's performing in America where most people are Christians and Christian symbolism is more identifiable. What's the issue?

An interesting dilemma: Does a figure like the Pope who, for example, constantly sends out anti-gay messages really the deserve the respect of someone who disagrees with his view point? I think a well-done criticism of the Catholic Church is never unnecessary. Too bad Nicki Minaj's performance was just a hot mess collection of pointless shock imagery.

She offended the CATHOLIC church, not Christian.

Wait a minute.



Since when was sharing an opinion on a performance mean "changing the media to please them"? They had the feeling that Nicki was mocking them, why would they not have right to be offended? It's like saying Drake has no right to comment if Common dissed him in a rap. Not saying Nicki meant to offend them, but you know what I'm trying to say.

Thank you. At least when Madonna did it, it was somewhat thought-provoking. Nicki didn't have a clue what she was doing and that's why she's getting dragged like Linus' blanket from Charlie Brown.

I see no lies in the bolded part.....

Yes,pop artists should be considerate of others beliefs and give respect BUT on the other hand,you have people who disrespect others "in the name of god" (notice the quotes)

Simply put,If pop stars are going to use religious figures to shock,then yes they should be ready for the stones BUT Christians or "Christians" can't be offended if someone calls them out for shoving their behavior down the throats of someone who doesn't wish to live that lifestyle.

It goes both ways.

Off topic. And I want receipts.

I'm tired of it, but not for the same reason as others. I don't care about the offensiveness as much as I do about the fact that it's over and done.

I don't mind Nicki's references because they were interesting and well executed imo, but I'm annoyed by Gaga's, particularly the religious songs. It's just tacky.

How is that off-topic? There is plenty of Muslim-bashing in this country. The difference is that they are a fairly disenfranchised minority in the United States, so it sets a pretty dangerous precedent for hating and excluding a small group of people on the sheer basis of religion. (Where have I seen that before...?)

On the other hand, Christians are the majority hegemony of our country. People criticize their religious principles because they represent the status quo in America and those individuals want to see a change. And Christian lobby groups have plenty of resources to fight back—hence you see names like the Catholic League pop up in the media all the time.

We shouldn't take that ****.

But ok, situation's different here in sweden, its like everyone's brainwashed here and gets excommunicated if you utters any slight criticism towards Islam. Let alone are proud of your heritage and history, you're labeled racist.

I'm just tired of any type of religious disrespect, for any religion. Religion is a touchy subject, and it doesn't matter what religion your are or if your atheists, try to understand that people take it seriously and respect. The sooner we learn to just respect one anothers personal private beliefs the better off we will be.

As for Gaga bringing up religious imagery.

Sans the performances (which I have not counted yet) there are only 4 songs and 2 music videos where Gaga blatantly uses religious imagery....

Alejandro-The video where she uses the cross/swallows the rosary.

Electric Chapel
Bloody Mary
Black Jesus † Amen Fashion
Judas (Song and Video)

Other than that,Gaga really doesn't use that much religious imagery.

Also,Nicki and Gaga's 09 VMA performance differed greatly in religious aspects because Gaga really didn't have any in that perforrmance.(If anything,the ONLY reason why Nicki's Grammy Performance and Gaga's VMA performance were ever linked was beause there were a few AESTHETIC similarities,and the fact that LaurieAnn was used.Other than that,No.)

Co-signed, agreed....