Church of Body Modification Creates First
Amendment Debate in Johnston County
Emily Gamiel, Staff Writer
After the fourth suspension of
14 year old female freshman student
Ariana Lacono at Clayton High School,
many questions were raised about
the reasoning for her suspension: her
religion. The young woman is one of
many that belong to the Church of
Body Modification, also referred to as
the C.o.B.M. The church respects and
encourages different types of body
modification, whether it is piercings,
tattoos, and/or other forms of altera
tion. In the church’s mission state
ment, the church promises to “always
grow as individuals through body
modification and what it can teach us
about who we are and what we can
do.” It also states that they respect all
forms of body modification, as well as
respect those who choose not to alter
their bodies. In their statement of
faith, they say, “We believe our bod
ies belong only to ourselves and are
a whole and integrated entity: mind,
body, and soul.”
The nose piercing that resided
on the young girl’s face was against
Clayton High School’s dress code poli
cy. However, as an article of faith, La
cono believes her nose ring should be
protected by her Constitutional rights
and allowed in the school. The student
argues that the institution in which
she belongs is one credible enough to
be considered a “religion.” School admin
istrators have a different point of view on
the piercing. The American Civil Liberties
Union has taken action in aiding the girl
to file an appeal against her suspension.
The appeal was made and quickly denied.
The Johnston County school system is
holding strong on their decision to sus
pend the student for breaking the rules.
They do not deem the religion that this
student claims to have as a credible one.
Rather than focusing on a reli
gious symbol or an almighty ruler, such
as the Virgin Maty or God, the Church
of Body Modification is based solely on
the individual. Different forms of body
modification include, but are not limited
to: tattoos, piercings and scarification,
as well as reconstructive and cosmetic
surgery. Another practice that the church
performs is body manipulation. Accord
ing to the church’s website, this includes
“body suspension, hook pulling, play
piercing, fasting, binding, corsetry, fire
walking, and other rituals that test and
push the limits of the flesh and spirit.”
The congregation strives to achieve their
own personal goals and dreams rather
than worship a god, making it a question
able “religion” to school officials. The be
lief that modifications to the body create
a sense of unity for people of this religion
is very firm in the church and a large por
tion of what they stand for. This reason-
Nikki Lacono left and her daughter Ariana Lacono, 14
http ://hotbuzz.bloguez.com/hotbuzz/pagen8/images
ing was given by the student subsequent
to her being suspended. She claimed
that her nose piercing gave her a sense
of wholeness. School officials, however,
disagreed that the piercing was solely
an expression of religion, and the high
school freshman will serve her suspen
sion in full.
The church’s website, www.uscobm.
com, provides information on the be
liefs, practices, and faith of the church
for any interested parties.
Sao Paulo Art Biennial:
Freedom of Expression or
Just Too Far?
At this year’s Sao Paulo Art
Biennial one of the big questions was:
Is there a point when art goes too
far? According to Heidi Blake of the
Telegraph, charcoal artist Gil Vicente
caused more than a little stir with his
exhibit on Saturday, September 25.
Vicente’s charcoal drawings depicted
various national leaders being execut
ed by gun or knife. Among the leaders
drawn were Queen Elizabeth II, Pope
Benedict XVI, and United States
former president, George W. Bush.
Perhaps the most unnerving aspect
to the drawings was that the murder
weapon was sketched into the hands
of Vicente himself. *
In an article in the Daily Star
written by Marc Burleigh about Vi
cente’s charcoal exhibit at Sao Paula,
Joy Close, StaffWriter
Burleigh discusses the controversy con
cerning Vicente’s exhibit. He quotes the
Lawyers of Brazil Association’s response
to the exhibit, “Even though a work of
art freely expresses the creativity of its
maker, without limits, there have to be
limits to exhibiting it publicly.” Bur
leigh goes on to quote Vicente’s defense
about his drawings, “Because they kill so
many other people, it would be a favor to
kill them, understand? Why don’t people
in power and in the elite die?”
In a comment on Blake’s ar
ticle posted on the Telegraph website a
reviewer known as Suicde Notes posted
his admiration of Vicente’s exhibit and
said, “This work is amazing and rich
in intellect, courage, and expression of
free speech. Look at a bunch of good for
nothing Americans trying to comment
and belittle
the artist...
You will never
have as much
courage, intel
lect, or talent
to compre
hend, let
alone express
anything as
true, important
and vital as he
[Vicente] just did.”
Cameron Johnson, Assistant
Professor of Art who teaches charcoal at
Meredith College is of the opinion that
“because we have freedom of speech,
it is debatable whether Vicente’s work
went too far, but as an artist we must
ask ourselves what is our intent in mak-
Gil Vicente with one of his works, http://www.mid-day.com/im-
agedata/2010/sep/bush.jpg
ing our work and what is the appropri
ate way to depict that intent. Art is a
powerful instrument which can be used
to uplift and inspire, but also to corrupt
and destroy. Each artist has to make
that decision; however, the viewer has
a decision as well.”