1. You are in essence, although without coming out and saying it openly, saying that because you think others would be offended by it you would therefore not allow it in. Whether you find it offensive or not personally is irrelevant and in no way did I say you personally did in my response which I will quote. You are enabling censorship. It doesn't take any reading into this to see that you would censor a piece of taxidermy/art on the assumption that it would offend others. 2. You called the creator of this piece an artist, which would imply the piece being art. That is easily derived from that quote don't you think? Artists create art don't they? So I'm not actually reading into the post all that much to come up with that conclusion am I? 3.I am in no way offended by your comments and I don't see how my short response was condescending as I have shown above. This part seems to be pandering to the majority: This does nothing but mask the prejudices that the majority in question may have instead of confronting them. Also this does not allow the people who would actually consider this a nice piece the opportunity to see it based on what you think is the preference of the majority. And that is wrong. Would you deny access to a book because you don't agree with the thesis? I don't see how this is relevant but you are the one stereotyping taxidermists here not me so I'll let you defend this on your own. 4.I can't seem to find the Kitsune fox you are speaking of but not for a lack of trying I have been searching for a while now. I don't understand why people are so quick to place things in groups, "this is rogue" or "this is traditional" why can't it just all be taxidermy. What does the "rogue" taxidermist take away from the "traditional" one and visa versa? But anyways, what I am really interested in is discussing the reasons for censorship of this piece due to religious sensibilities. And, the idea that these religious sensibilities should be able to claim a special right to be "protected from the chance of being offended". This is specially egregious in an art context. Taxidermy is art by definition, and just like any other art that may be found offensive (for any reason including religious) the person offended has no more right to censor it than this piece in question. There is not consideration for all here as you say. By definition you are not considering everyone by censoring this piece. Your personal ideas on this piece are irrelevant just like mine are, the fact that it is being censored based on religious reasons is the problem. I do enjoy your pun though.