Liberty Leading the People

Liberty Leading the People, it's a picture of Eugene Delacroix. The piece of art was painted in the year 1830 (French Romanticism). This picture is is the maximum expression of the French Revolution.

The canvas represents a scene of the 27 of Julio 1830 in which the people of Paris lifted barricades.

The king Carlos X from France had suppressed the Parliament for ordinance and he had the intention of restricting the freedom of Press.

The initial disturbances became a rising that ended in a revolution continued by angry citizens of all the social classes. An only leader didn't exist. For that reason Delacroix represents to the Freedom as guide that leads to the. Neither this represented in an abstract way, but rather it is a very sensual and real allegorical figure.

The spectator only has two possibilities, uniting to the mass, or being razed by her. The people is the union of classes: it is represented the bourgeois with their top hat and seizing the rifle, to the side a ragged one and a wounded that he requests mercy to France.

To the bottom fog and smoke of the battle that dilute a quite realistic French neighborhood appear. To the feet of the Freedom a moribund one the aim fixedly indicating us that it has been worthwhile to die for her.

The square is exposed in the Museum of the Louvre and it is one of the most important artistic expressions in the history of the art.

This is a moral juridical conflict that affects to all our society, but clear in the news we always find out the priest violator and those things, and apparently we all feel as offended when seeing this, we take it as something personal, to my I find that to get angry is well, it is rational to feel uncomfortable in front of the injustice. But the problem is not so easy of solving, because we cannot impute such a serious crime to any person without strong tests, and apparently the argument prima facie it is: "don't the priests have sexual relationships, therefore, should they have a certain psychic disposition (deceitful) that makes them act in a such way of achieving sexual satisfaction with smaller than age (possibly)". AND do I find this problematic because the same thing happens to people that complete other lists in the society, the relative, the neighbor, the uncle, the professor, and them (hypothetically) do they have sexual relationships with their couples, then why they make this type of crimes? (In fact the sexual abuses to children are carried out statistically in their majority by married men) The point is, we cannot establish a necessary relationship between The pederasty and the priesthood, (it is merely a contingent relationship). it would Be as saying that the homosexuals are not capable to adopt children (stupidity). The priest chose to live its life according to certain moral, and good rules, it is part of its autonomy, its freedom, we cannot tell him: it is Better to change the norms of the church, so that they can have sexual relationships", because it would be to treat him as a being unable to make their own decisions, as a boy. He decided to be governed under certain norms, then we have to treat him as a rational and free, and good fellow if you think that it is good the celibacy, I respect you. You respect me to my because I think that the sex is part of the life. And good we all are free. Then the topic I believe doesn't go for the side of the celibacy, I believe that the added difficulty, is that the priest is a minister of faith, a person that guides then to the church that is the gathered community, he should be morally a spotless person (according to the Catholic morals") and in that sense I find that he has to be punished severely, but that is task of the tribunals of justice that have to treat him I eat any other citizen in the flesh.