Wednesday, December 28, 2011

Tattoos, again

I’ve said similar before, but i’m saying it again ’cause i still don’t get it: If putting tattoos to decorate your body is a defacement precisely parallel to slapping paint on one of our temples (i.e., graffiti, it’s a Bad Thing), then why do so many of our temples (not least the one in the middle of Salt Lake City, arguably our flagship temple) have decorations and carvings and stuff? Kind of goes against the whole idea, you know?

Unless the idea is actually that it’s carvings and not paint, so tattoos are out but scarification is okay? I don’t think that’s what they’re after, but it’s the only way i can think of to keep the image consistent.

1 comment:

Heather the Mama Duk said...

Well, the temple adornments are kept nice. Ever see a 50-year-old tattoo? Most tattoos seem to be gotten when someone is relatively young and many of those can definitely be equated with graffiti. On the other hand, some tattoos are quite nice.