Joanna Krupa Defends Posing in PETA's Racy Crucifix Ad
Tongues are already wagging over Joanna Krupa's latest PETA ad, but not everyone is showering this angel for animals with love and support. More specifically, the Catholic League had some not-so-nice things to say.
Always on her toes, the Dancing With the Stars alum was swift to come to the defense of her newest ad by releasing the following statement about why she chose to pose for us:
"It's understandable that the Catholic League is wary of another sex scandal, but the sex we're talking about pertains to dogs and cats. As a practicing Catholic, I am shocked that the Catholic League is speaking out against my PETA ads, which I am very proud of. I'm doing what the Catholic Church should be doing, working to stop senseless suffering of animals, the most defenseless of God's creation. I am a voice for innocent animals who are being neglected and dumped by the millions at shelters. In my heart I know that Jesus would never condone the suffering that results when dogs and cats are allowed to breed."
Read the Catholic League's "PETA Sinks to New Low with Joanna Krupa Crucifix Ad"
Sign up for the OV Daily Newsletter
OV Social
. . .of PETA 's consistent throwing of women under the bus via objectification/dehumanization (T&A, pieces of meat ) in order to draw attention to their cause. Makes no sense whatsoever and I'm sure loses them more members and dollars. Saw Lisa Lange on television and she seemed to be saying " sex sells" so that makes it okay?
Does she not get the connection between the way a group is perceived and how they are treated? A piece of ass, no matter how lovely, is still a piece of ass and exists to be used and pitched, never respected as a full human being.
Ironic that they are so often associated with Playboy and the porn mentality. . .which consistently dehumanizes women by presenting them as Bunnies, Pets, Chicks, etc. Possibly that's why women/ animals so connected in their minds.
Really, Joanna? Really?
You don't see how the Catholic Church could possibly be offended by a big breasted, naked woman adorning a Crucifix? Really?
Lust is a sin in the Christian doctrine (yes, Catholics are Chrstians, too!). Plain and simple. You are portraying a lustful image. Not only are you portraying a lustful image, but you are supporting a group that kills 92%-95% of the animals it takes in. PETAs motto should be: "Better off dead than in the hands of a family that could love them."
It's not even the add that bothers me. Every time I see PETA on an add, I just laugh because of their hypocrisy. It's the comments on how you doesn't understand how the Catholic Church could possibly be offended by the material.
Furthermore, to say: "In my heart I know that Jesus would never condone the suffering that results when dogs and cats are allowed to breed."
Really? Do you really listen to what Jesus says? What would he say about this add? Would he approve or shake his head in disappointment? Animals were meant to have sex , there is no suffering involved. We humans are the ones who screwed up the pet population (did anyone else think of Bob Barker) by years over breeding.
The only thing I actually agree with you on is that pets should be adopted, and not purchased.
I could go on, but I have actual work to do. I don't get paid to sit on my butt for 6 days a week, model for a day and fall backwards into money .
Very well said.I love it when I see others that are aware of these scams. Now we all need to spread the word. Surely this PC can be used as one of the tools to do away with PETA -HSUS and any groups which operate under their umbrella.Tell a friend!
Throughout history religious paintings have depicted women and men in various states of undress, even the Madonna. The organized, corporate-run Church itself owns many, though they went thru a period where the themselves altered and destroyed parts of some. Why the sudden shock at this depiction? Seems hysterical to me.
And why should religious people not to be concerned about the welfare and the needless suffering of the creatures created by the Creator?
The Church should be involved in this effort, much more so than it is, if indeed it is at all.
Donohue has no compassion for women's health concerns so it surprises me not that he's blind to the abuse of animals as well.
First off, as I stated, I am not offended by the ad itself. I could care less about a naked woman. I was simply trying to establish commentary on why I think her outlandish claim that the Catholic Church should not be offended is completely asinine.
Secondly, if you are claiming this is art, then that is on you. As a man, I think it's a naked women used to incite a desire. I love art; in fact, i took an entire college course on art in the 19th century. I appreciate it. Again, I am not sure this could be classified as art, but then again, art is more of what you feel. I can't put enough emphasis on this: I DID NOT FIND OFFENSE TO THE ADD. I simply found her words to be moronic.
I also did not state religious people should not be concerned about the welfare of animals . I think, nay, I know PETA has killed over 90% of the animals they take in. That is a fact; look up the statistics. She is supporting a genocidal organization. In fact, in the Bible, Noah took on hundreds of animals per the request of God himself.
If Joanna Krupa wants to help defenseless abused animals she should work with a credible organization that really cares about animals. PETA with their incomprehensible policies concerning animal rights only hurts those seriously engaged in helping animals. I suspect that PETA uses animal cruelty to exploit human beings out of their cash. I am not against naked women but I am against using sex to sell anything. I have to admit that looking at her "Be an Angel" animal cruelty is the last thing in my mind.
"In my heart I know that Jesus would never condone the suffering that results when dogs and cats are allowed to breed."
Yes, every time cats make kittens, Jesus sheds a tear.
The plural of 'anecdote' is not 'data'.
The suffering that results is not the direct result of the cats' breeding, but that the humans who are their caretakers irresponsibly allowed the cats to breed. Do you realize that the geometric progression of animal overpopulation is almost as catastrophic as that of human overpopulation? (Think of an ad for Raid MAX, which shows two roaches becoming 4, and so on and so on and so on.)
So, to fix the problem of humans irresponsibly failing to care for kittens (or puppies) PETA slaughters them wholesale (fact), and you condone?
I'd rather there be more responsibility in the humans than the kittens/puppies be destroyed...That is why I do not support PETA.
The plural of 'anecdote' is not 'data'.
exploiting that lowest of human instincts, sexual lust!