When I first started using the internet in 1998, I immediately joined a discussion group that was made up primarily of Australian photographers, mostly folks who were affiliated with some university or the other. Periodically we would get into an argument about the nature of art. This might be prompted because someone posted an admiring comment about someone like Mapplethorpe or Ofeli. While Mapplethorpe has done some work that I would regard as artistic, and I do appreciate, he has also done some work which I personally think was calculated to offend. Ofeli is an African artist (said advisedly) who did a famous portrait of the Madonna that has elephant dung on it. Sometimes we got into these arguments when someone commented positively about a particular art work in which a crucifix was set into a jar of urine. Now I have never been a Catholic, and never intend to be, but I think it is wrong to use nastiness and filth to disparage someone else's religion, no matter what that religion is. If you want to offer a rational argument against that religion, fine, be my guest. Observe common civility. So it would be the academic Australian artists, versus me all by myself. Some people probably sat and watched from the sidelines, amused. So I find the portrait of the Madonna by Ofili offensive. Is it art? Not in my opinion. This is a very strongly held opinion. And I would assert this, and people would actually mock me for my opinion. To my way of thinking, since I did not mock them, but tried to talk to them rationally, I had established higher ground, and that there was no excuse for this behavior. After years of this, I finally got tired of it and left the group. It is unlikely I influenced anyone's opinion, though I can always hope.

I will say categorically that art must be beautiful, or it must be intended to motivate a person to a humanitarian act. If it does neither, it's not art. If it is based on a philosophy of nihilism, it's not art. We have had some very destructive influences in the world, especially in recent years, which has seriously harmed civilization. They say that in the United States, we live in a post-Christian era. This is reflected in what is considered art. Francis Schaeffer wrote a book entitled How Should We Then Live? It is a magnum opus, which discusses many different forms of art, and traces their history. Eventually, a series of films was also made based on this book. In both book and films, examples of visual art were given and discussed. During the time of the Judeo-Christian consensus, people worked to make beautiful art, art that glorified God. A major change came about when philosophers started to write and establish the idea that God doesn't exist, there is ultimately no hope, and so forth. Schaeffer uses the term "nihilism" to label their writings. They sketch people as being just another common animal, with no ethical impulses, or if so, these impulses should be rejected; it's all a matter of opinion. One idea is as good as another. There is no attempt to judge ideas, or say that some are more worthy than others. But we not only have the right to judge ideas, we have the responsibility.

If we don't judge ideas, than mass slaughter of people is acceptable, and we have no right to object.

There are certain basic ethics in the universe. Causing someone else unnecessary pain is wrong. We have laws that define certain felonies. These acts are intrinsically wrong, and if any civilization wants to continue to exist, it must provide heavy punishments for people who commit these acts. After WWII, the world tried the Nazi leaders, and condemned many of them to death. But, they said, we didn't know it would come to this. One of the defendants actually said this, "I never knew it would come to this. You must believe me! You must believe me!" And the judge said, "It came to this the first time you condemned an innocent person to death."

I sometimes also get into discussions with atheists who maintain that you can live an ethical life, and have a firmly formed ethic, without having a religion. And I know atheists who live highly ethical lives. So where is the problem? Well, to begin with, I ask them, what makes an act unethical? The usual answer is, "if it hurts someone." And I then will say, you mean if it causes someone pain. And they will say, "yes." So we explore that avenue. And then I ask them, what makes pain evil? They can't tell me! Sometimes pain is necessary. It serves as a warning that you have been hurt. If you cannot perceive pain, you probably won't learn not to put your hand in a fire. And if something is hot, you will get burned if you touch it, and the first way you will find out is by smelling your burned skin. A few unfortunate people in the world cannot perceive pain. Sometimes surgeons have to cause pain in order to heal. But other than that, it can be said that causing someone pain is evil. But why is causing pain evil? They cannot answer this question. The result is that even though they have a finely tuned sense of ethics, they have no foundation for it at all. In talking to a number of atheists, I have learned that they have developed their personal ethic from what are basically Judeo-Christian roots. They don't usually acknowledge this. But it is there. Ultimately, ethics have a religious basis, and there is no getting around this.

Let me tell you a story by way of illustration, of why you have to have some kind of absolute ethic in a society, and why it had better be the right one. In the book Peace Child, by Don Richardson, a small group of people who live in the jungles of Indonesia is described. Missionaries went to them, and discovered that they had a rather unusual cultural trait. They believed that it was the subject of legends when someone betrayed a friend. The more elegantly the person betrayed his friend, the better everyone liked it. When they passed down their stories, their oral history, they told stories of the heroes who had betrayed their friends in the most elegant way possible. I don't imagine I have to say that this is a very dysfunctional cultural trait, to say the least. The result was that nobody trusted anybody else, and small families were isolated from all other small families, and the people suffered because they could not cooperate in any way to solve a community problem. Into this situation, the missionaries came, and tried to figure out how to reach the people with their message of salvation. They began by learning the language, developing a writing system, and making a dictionary. They worked this way for quite awhile, and they invited the participation of the local people. But they couldn't figure out how to explain that Jesus came to save them from their sins. They might as well have been speaking Greek. This went on for months. Finally, one of the people working with them came and told them about another cultural trait. They had a legend of the Peace Child. The Peace Child was an infant taken from his parents and given to parents in another village, and those parents in turn gave their child to the original couple. As long as both children lived, there would be peace between the two villages, and nobody would betray anyone else. This man then explained to the people that Jesus is our Peace Child, sent to reconcile us with God. This the people understood, and it totally transformed their culture. Now they could lead prosperous and healthy lives.

Every culture in the world has a piece of the truth. For this group, that piece was the Peace Child.

This is how profound an ethical idea can be, how much it can influence a society.

We are at a crossroads. Will civilization be preserved, or will we descend into barbarity? Already, the civilized nations are being attacked by barbarians who believe death is preferable to life, and they will gain their reward if they kill themselves and as many other innocent people as they can. Slavery is still rampant in many parts of the world. Some nasty diseases are pandemic in some places, such as AIDS in Africa. Sexual promiscuity and deviant sex is celebrated. Women by the tens of millions get abortions. Politicians indulge in ethical violations, deceit and fraud, and other manner of nonfunctional behavior. In some circles, this is celebrated, and in others, it is dealt with, which means there is a double standard, and the way things often look, the scoundrels win. Taxes are astronomical in most of the world, there are billions of poor people, many of whom don't even have clean drinking water. Take your pick: high taxes, or living like animals. So what can we do about it. Each of us can make our little niche of the world a better place. Together, we can make a difference.

My career as an artist is based on making my little niche of the world a better place. I seek to delight people with beauty. I seek to make images that are uplifting and give people a sense of joy or peace. I go to remote places to take pictures of beautiful places to share with other people who cannot go where I went. And so, for me, art is about beauty.

Soli Deo Gloria
(Latin - To God Alone be the Glory)