What you think of Sinéad O'Conner tearing up Pope John Paul II foto on Saturday Night Live TV Show?

i would have understood it if it was a pic of ratzinger, aka benedict XVI.
but john paul II… he was one of the better examples of popes

She did it again?

It’s just a photo…
I mean you can rip up a photo of Bruce Dickinson in front of me, and I wouldn’t care.

Nah, it was only once way back in the days.

I think it was immature and frankly did no favours for her public image.

So this is kind of an “Oldies” question?

It was from what I understand , unwilling to kick out those who infiltrated the Roman Catholic church with pedofiliac perversion, they weren’t kicked out but placed in different parishes. Oh and Sinéad was a child of some sort of abuse when she was a kid so she fights for kids rights.

Indifferent.

She’s an artist. She can do that. People can also decide not to buy her music if they object. She had and still has the right to do it.

Awesome! Fight the real evil.

I’d pick @The_Compassionate_Heretic‘s word too, “Indifferent”.
But I don’t think I’d use “art” as an argument.

Um…is it the 90’s? And if it is, why am I so old?

Bizarre. I just mentioned Sinead O’Connor (re: her cover of “Black Coffee”) to someone about three minutes ago.

I thought the brou-ha-ha was ridiculous.

Old-flippin’-news.

Who cares? It happened almost 20 years ago.

I personally didn’t care, but it ruined her career.

was i even alive then

I hadn’t heard of this until today when I looked it up (I was, after all, only 1 year old when this happened), but I have to say I don’t care. On one hand I like that she did whatever she wanted, but I also don’t think it was necessary and I don’t think it helped anything at all.

Here’s what I thought at the time: If a more established and long respected recording artist/activist had done it, it would have been fine. Some would have disapproved, but it wouldn’t have had a major impact on their career. I kind of felt like she got too big for her britches and jumped the gun, eager to make a big statement. It backfired on her in a big way. It’s too bad, because she seemed kind of destined for greatness and then “POOF” – it was like she didn’t exist anymore!

I think nothing of it. She has a right to express herself any way she wishes. Tearing up a photo of someone certainly doesn’t make you a bad person.

wait. why did she do it? does anyone know why she tore up the photo?

Rip Van Winkle-are you just catching up-that was 17 years and a completely different pope ago. Or is this your history homework? lol

@kevbo quick, put your tinfoil hat back on, the mind reading aliens are back, and asking questions on Fluther. =)

@alive: To express her disgust at the behavior and policies of the Roman Catholic church.

Since you’re descibing a scene from the distant past, you should judge it based on the context of that time when it happened.

1. Different Pope
2. Different time
3. Act was symbolic, had nothing to do with the person
4. Reasons had to do with Catholic policy at the time, not with the Pope, which admittedly is the least evil of all popes ever to hold that position (and certainly a much better person than the one they have now). It also happened before JPII’s efforts to reconcile with the other Christian denominations and even Muslims and other faiths.

At the time, I applauded her action. I would not have applauded it 5 years ago. And I’d applaud it again today, but for different reasons.

I am glad that Fluther came about so seVen could finally vent. I remember watching SNL when it happened. I thought, “hmm?...she would be pretty if she had hair.”

Holy shit man I thought I had woken up and time traveled to 1992!! You scared me for a second there. The answer of course is: “Who cares? It happened 17 fucking years ago!”