Should they take down the "crucified frog" sculpture?

I echo your response my friend, I admire the museum for taking a stance, I am sorry but so much is censored in this day age in a world of the free, it is no longer thus. I think the sculpture is art and I have known worst things to appear in galleries all around the world, please it's art, get over it! Even if I was religious I'd still be offering the same response here. Dictatorship we don't need it thank you very much!

Yeah! The church is always trying to control everything - the morals of people, telling them what to think. I think the museum is doing the right thing - the artist is just trying to express his thoughts into a medium, which is what art is. The church has no right to limit what can or can't be shown, or we'll all return to the dark ages - thought police, anyone?

Well, I can understand the catholic church's position. It is blasphemous. And in theory they are within their rights to ex-communicate the director of the museum and the artist. But they can't force them to take it down. It's not their place to dictate it outside their own properties. They can threaten punishments, take measures as I stated before, but they can't force them to take it down. I guess it's up to the personal believes of those in charge of the museum whether or not they should take it down. If they are strict catholic, they better obey or suffer exclusion from the church. If they are not, why should they care about what the pope has to say? To the contrary, it's great publicity and might drive traffic their way they might not otherwise have had;)

I dont see it as blasphemous and it is far more of a work of art than a lot of "Emperors new clothes" stuff that people rave about because they think they should! There are plenty of 'works of art' which could be considered far more offensive to both the Church and basic moral decency. As it happens, we have a crucified duck at our house which my son made in school...