Columbus Underground Messageboard » Tag: censorship

Columbus Underground Messageboard » Tag: censorship - Recent Posts http://www.columbusunderground.com/forums/tags/censorship ColumbusUnderground.com Messageboard en-US Tue, 18 Jun 2013 07:30:39 +0000 http://bbpress.org/?v=1.0.2 <![CDATA[Search]]> q http://www.columbusunderground.com/forums/search.php Brant on "GOP Ascendancy Bodes Ill For Arts Funding" http://www.columbusunderground.com/forums/topic/gop-ascendancy-bodes-ill-for-arts-funding/page/15#post-461741 Mon, 10 Sep 2012 13:41:00 +0000 Brant 461741@http://www.columbusunderground.com/forums/ Here's your resurrected discussion thread for the day. <blockquote>Economist Debates: Should governments fund the arts? In Italy a museum director is setting fire to artworks to get the attention of politicians. Elsewhere people have been more subtle but no less aggrieved about the decline in public funding for the arts. As governments struggle to pay for such basics as education and health care, arts funding has taken a hit.</blockquote> READ MORE: <a href="http://www.economist.com/debate/overview/236" rel="nofollow">http://www.economist.com/debate/overview/236</a> RoJoNo on "Jazz Arts Group - Don't Listen to This! September 23-24" http://www.columbusunderground.com/forums/topic/jazz-arts-group-dont-listen-to-this-september-23-24#post-393685 Tue, 20 Sep 2011 15:26:22 +0000 RoJoNo 393685@http://www.columbusunderground.com/forums/ <blockquote><cite>svezdos <a href="http://www.columbusunderground.com/forums/topic/jazz-arts-group-dont-listen-to-this-september-23-24#post-393539">said</a>:</cite> Byron Stripling needs your help -- He's toying with the idea of performing Chuck Berry’s controversial hit, “My Ding-A-Ling.” It’s a cute little dittie, but could be offensive to some. Do you think he should censor himself on a concert about censorship? Let us know what you think. </blockquote> <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p490t_6Z9aY" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p490t_6Z9aY</a> svezdos on "Jazz Arts Group - Don't Listen to This! September 23-24" http://www.columbusunderground.com/forums/topic/jazz-arts-group-dont-listen-to-this-september-23-24#post-393539 Tue, 20 Sep 2011 10:22:25 +0000 svezdos 393539@http://www.columbusunderground.com/forums/ Byron Stripling needs your help -- He's toying with the idea of performing Chuck Berry’s controversial hit, “My Ding-A-Ling.” It’s a cute little dittie, but could be offensive to some. Do you think he should censor himself on a concert about censorship? Let us know what you think. Anne on "Jazz Arts Group - Don't Listen to This! September 23-24" http://www.columbusunderground.com/forums/topic/jazz-arts-group-dont-listen-to-this-september-23-24#post-392829 Thu, 15 Sep 2011 23:59:03 +0000 Anne 392829@http://www.columbusunderground.com/forums/ This topic of censored music makes me wonder why some songs are even played on heavy radio rotation all day long. If the lyrics are so bad, why aren't they only played after a certain time of day for what should be adults listening? I have been listening to 97.9 at home lately (mostly because of 89.7 moving to 101.1 and I can't get it to come in....yes I am still annoyed about that!) and all day they play this song - Eminem & Royce Da 5'9 feat. Bruno Mars - Lighters. It's a fine song with nice music, but man do I get tired of hearing a bunch of half bleeped out words on the radio! Why even bother airing it! Obviously, lyrics are not safe for work in this video. <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A7ZmEN2HqC8" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A7ZmEN2HqC8</a> svezdos on "Jazz Arts Group - Don't Listen to This! September 23-24" http://www.columbusunderground.com/forums/topic/jazz-arts-group-dont-listen-to-this-september-23-24#post-392364 Wed, 14 Sep 2011 14:42:52 +0000 svezdos 392364@http://www.columbusunderground.com/forums/ Be sure to come early and enjoy a pre-concert lecture with the Thurber House beginning at 7:30 p.m. where we will discuss banned books and literature throughout history and the cultural climate that made them taboo. This lecture will help kick off the Jazz Arts Group’s Inside Track “Think & Drink” event series and the American Library Association’s “Banned Books Week.” Held during the last week of September, “Banned Books Week” highlights the benefits of free and open access to information while drawing attention to the harms of censorship by spotlighting actual or attempted bannings of books across the United States. Anne on "Jazz Arts Group - Don't Listen to This! September 23-24" http://www.columbusunderground.com/forums/topic/jazz-arts-group-dont-listen-to-this-september-23-24#post-392095 Tue, 13 Sep 2011 12:55:11 +0000 Anne 392095@http://www.columbusunderground.com/forums/ JAZZ ARTS GROUP'S INSIDE TRACK SERIES PRESENTS "DON'T LISTEN TO THIS!" FEATURING BYRON STRIPLING, DAVE POWERS & CHRISTIAN HOWES Columbus, OH - The Jazz Arts Group's Inside Track series kicks off the 2011-12 season on September 23 - 24 at the Lincoln Theatre with "Don't Listen To This!," an evening of music and lyrics that once fanned the flames of controversy, featuring Byron Stripling, Dave Powers and Christian Howes. Music censorship didn't begin in the '80s with Tipper Gore and the PMRC. Dean Martin's hit song "Wham! Bam! Thank You Ma'am" was banned by radio stations for having suggestive lyrics. Rosemary Clooney's "Mambo Italiano" was deemed having lyrics void of good taste. The lyrics of the Cole Porter classic, "I Get a Kick Out of You" were changed for airplay due to a reference to cocaine. And Billie Holiday's version of "Love for Sale" was banned for references to prostitution. Join Byron Stripling and friends for an entertaining and educational look at how censorship has affected popular music even before the birth of rock 'n' roll! "You'll be amazed by the stories behind these 'banned' songs and learn of their rise into mainstream American culture," shares Stripling. "'Don't Listen To This!' will showcase some of the finest music ever written...that you weren't supposed to hear!" Joining Stripling on stage will be Dave Powers. For over 30 years, Powers has been a vital part of the Columbus, Ohio music scene as a pianist, keyboardist, and vocalist. Considered one of the most successful musicians in the local spectrum, Dave manages to win over the hearts of all who hear him perform. Powers is also a huge collector of music, records and recordings which earned him a radio program called "'78 Corner" on local NPR-affiliate WCBE, so his contributions to the evening should be intriguing. Also joining Stripling is Columbus native Christian Howes. Following a string of self-produced albums through the '90s, Howes stepped into a larger arena by moving to New York, where he soon became an in-demand figure on the scene. The Minneapolis Tribune calls him "arguably the most intriguing young violinist in jazz," while Downbeat magazine has awarded him the #2 spot in their Critics Poll four times as "Rising Star" jazz violinist. Single tickets are on sale now for $32 (orchestra) and $37 (loge) and are available by phone at 614-469-0939 and through all Ticketmaster outlets. Student tickets are also available for $15 with student ID at the door only. Call 614-294-5200 or visit <a href="http://www.jazzartsgroup.org" rel="nofollow">http://www.jazzartsgroup.org</a> <http://www.jazzartsgroup.org/> for more information. The Inside Track music series is presented by Sequent with ongoing support from the Ohio Arts Council, the Greater Columbus Arts Council, the Columbus Foundation, and the Westin Columbus. Media support is provided by The Columbus Dispatch, Columbus Alive and WCBE 90.5 FM. jeff_r on "GOP Ascendancy Bodes Ill For Arts Funding" http://www.columbusunderground.com/forums/topic/gop-ascendancy-bodes-ill-for-arts-funding/page/15#post-382475 Sat, 16 Jul 2011 08:57:03 +0000 jeff_r 382475@http://www.columbusunderground.com/forums/ If you're like me and don't have Real Media Player installed on any of the computers you frequent, here's a link to the story in streaming/Windows Media format along with a transcript: <a href="http://www.wksu.org/news/story/28834">Ohio Arts Council gets boost in funds The state budgets increases the group's funding by $4 million, but it comes with spending provisions</a> I'll admit to being pleasantly surprised by this news. It's heartening to know that our legislators recognize (at the fiscal level) the value the arts bring to Ohio. I don't find anything unreasonable about the restrictions either, provided those restrictions don't impact Ohio's ability to take advantage of the federal grant money that Julie Henahan referred to (It does make me wonder if similar restrictions regarding administrative costs and disbursements are assigned to other state agencies). Jeff Rich (Chair, Ohio Arts Council) penned a nice thank you to the Ohio's arts advocates, along with a breakdown of the budget: <a href="http://ohiocitizensforthearts.wordpress.com/2011/07/08/thank-you-from-jeff-rich-ohio-arts-council-chair/">Thank You from Jeff Rich, Ohio Arts Council Chair</a> More details here: <a href="http://ohiocitizensforthearts.wordpress.com/2011/06/30/ohio-arts-council-receives-6-6-million-increase/">Ohio Arts Council Receives $6.6 Million Increase!</a> Yay Ohio! rus on "GOP Ascendancy Bodes Ill For Arts Funding" http://www.columbusunderground.com/forums/topic/gop-ascendancy-bodes-ill-for-arts-funding/page/14#post-382117 Thu, 14 Jul 2011 10:11:03 +0000 rus 382117@http://www.columbusunderground.com/forums/ <blockquote><cite>Brant <a href="http://www.columbusunderground.com/forums/topic/gop-ascendancy-bodes-ill-for-arts-funding/page/14#post-382057">said</a>:</cite> Huh. Our GOP state legislature has INCREASED arts funding in the final version of the 2011-12 budget. <a href="http://www.statenews.org/story_page.cfm?ID=15364&year=2011&month=7" rel="nofollow">http://www.statenews.org/story_page.cfm?ID=15364&year=2011&month=7</a> </blockquote> Funny, eh? Brant on "GOP Ascendancy Bodes Ill For Arts Funding" http://www.columbusunderground.com/forums/topic/gop-ascendancy-bodes-ill-for-arts-funding/page/14#post-382057 Wed, 13 Jul 2011 23:30:53 +0000 Brant 382057@http://www.columbusunderground.com/forums/ Huh. Our GOP state legislature has INCREASED arts funding in the final version of the 2011-12 budget. <a href="http://www.statenews.org/story_page.cfm?ID=15364&year=2011&month=7" rel="nofollow">http://www.statenews.org/story_page.cfm?ID=15364&year=2011&month=7</a> jeff_r on "GOP Ascendancy Bodes Ill For Arts Funding" http://www.columbusunderground.com/forums/topic/gop-ascendancy-bodes-ill-for-arts-funding/page/14#post-378313 Mon, 20 Jun 2011 09:01:15 +0000 jeff_r 378313@http://www.columbusunderground.com/forums/ <blockquote><cite>jackoh wrote <a href="http://www.columbusunderground.com/forums/topic/gop-ascendancy-bodes-ill-for-arts-funding/page/14#post-378286"> >> </a></cite> Why artists or any artistic endeavor should attempt to rely on public funding is beyond me. Funding through tax dollars is subject to two constraints- the approval of elected officials and the support of the taxpaying public. The judgment of either entity regarding the merit of any kind of art is certainly suspect. To cite one example, Henry Miller's Topic of Cancer could never have received any kind of public funding (in fact, it was subject to public prosecution) but remains one of the singular artistic achievements of the last century. Any serious artist should pursue their vision apart from any kind of public funding because the price exacted for that funding is a loss of any kind of independent vision, which remains the wellspring of any real art. </blockquote> I understand the spirit of your post, though I look at the issue from a slightly different perspective. Rather than arguing against public funding for the arts because of perceived constraints, why not argue against those constraints? As noted above, the NEA itself was created, "to help create and sustain not only a climate encouraging freedom of thought, imagination, and inquiry but also the material conditions facilitating the release of this creative talent". In my mind that's a worthy goal, and one we ought to require our leaders to honor. It's also important to recognize that arts funding at the national and state level has more to do with supporting local and regional arts organizations and non-profits than it does awarding grants and commissions to individual artists. The article I linked above offers a glimpse of how that funding impacts arts organizations in Kansas. Locally, we've seen how public arts funding worked hand-in-hand with private developers to make the Short North what it is today. While the work of individual artists is often the focus of the public arts funding debate, it's not really where most of the money goes. Finally (and for what it's worth) I'm never quite sure how to respond when someone uses terms like "serious artist" and "real art". Perhaps others feel qualified to decide where one would draw the line regarding those arguably subjective concepts, but I certainly don't. DavidF on "GOP Ascendancy Bodes Ill For Arts Funding" http://www.columbusunderground.com/forums/topic/gop-ascendancy-bodes-ill-for-arts-funding/page/14#post-378300 Mon, 20 Jun 2011 06:30:21 +0000 DavidF 378300@http://www.columbusunderground.com/forums/ And of course he set no limits or parameters on the art he paid for. My point is that it is simplistic to simply say no "serious" artist should take public funds. Sure, there are many artists whose vision doesn't fall within the constraints of public funding, but by no means does that mean that no work of significance can be produced by someone taking public money. jackoh on "GOP Ascendancy Bodes Ill For Arts Funding" http://www.columbusunderground.com/forums/topic/gop-ascendancy-bodes-ill-for-arts-funding/page/14#post-378293 Sun, 19 Jun 2011 22:22:35 +0000 jackoh 378293@http://www.columbusunderground.com/forums/ <blockquote><cite>DavidF wrote <a href="http://www.columbusunderground.com/forums/topic/gop-ascendancy-bodes-ill-for-arts-funding/page/14#post-378288"> >> </a></cite> <img src="http://www.openculture.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/sistine.png"> <blockquote><cite>jackoh wrote <a href="http://www.columbusunderground.com/forums/topic/gop-ascendancy-bodes-ill-for-arts-funding/page/14#post-378286"> >> </a></cite> Why artists or any artistic endeavor should attempt to rely on public funding is beyond me. Funding through tax dollars is subject to two constraints- the approval of elected officials and the support of the taxpaying public. The judgment of either entity regarding the merit of any kind of art is certainly suspect. To cite one example, Henry Miller's Topic of Cancer could never have received any kind of public funding (in fact, it was subject to public prosecution) but remains one of the singular artistic achievements of the last century. Any serious artist should pursue their vision apart from any kind of public funding because the price exacted for that funding is a loss of any kind of independent vision, which remains the wellspring of any real art. </blockquote> It's true. There's absolutely no examples to be found of any art of any merit that was funded through the patronage of the authorities of that time. None at all. Ever. In any form whatsoever. No serious artist would ever allow themselves to work under the conditions set forth by those holding the purse strings. Simplistic arguments are fun!</blockquote> But those "patrons of the arts" were in no way beholden to the sentiments of those from who they extracted their largesse. They simply collected the money and spent it how they pleased, according to their own sensibilities. If the contributing faithful would have complained to Pope Julius about his artistic grants he would have, literally, told them to go to hell. DavidF on "GOP Ascendancy Bodes Ill For Arts Funding" http://www.columbusunderground.com/forums/topic/gop-ascendancy-bodes-ill-for-arts-funding/page/14#post-378288 Sun, 19 Jun 2011 21:47:37 +0000 DavidF 378288@http://www.columbusunderground.com/forums/ <img src="http://www.openculture.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/sistine.png"> <blockquote><cite>jackoh wrote <a href="http://www.columbusunderground.com/forums/topic/gop-ascendancy-bodes-ill-for-arts-funding/page/14#post-378286"> >> </a></cite> Why artists or any artistic endeavor should attempt to rely on public funding is beyond me. Funding through tax dollars is subject to two constraints- the approval of elected officials and the support of the taxpaying public. The judgment of either entity regarding the merit of any kind of art is certainly suspect. To cite one example, Henry Miller's Topic of Cancer could never have received any kind of public funding (in fact, it was subject to public prosecution) but remains one of the singular artistic achievements of the last century. Any serious artist should pursue their vision apart from any kind of public funding because the price exacted for that funding is a loss of any kind of independent vision, which remains the wellspring of any real art. </blockquote> It's true. There's absolutely no examples to be found of any art of any merit that was funded through the patronage of the authorities of that time. None at all. Ever. In any form whatsoever. No serious artist would ever allow themselves to work under the conditions set forth by those holding the purse strings. Simplistic arguments are fun! jackoh on "GOP Ascendancy Bodes Ill For Arts Funding" http://www.columbusunderground.com/forums/topic/gop-ascendancy-bodes-ill-for-arts-funding/page/14#post-378286 Sun, 19 Jun 2011 21:21:28 +0000 jackoh 378286@http://www.columbusunderground.com/forums/ Why artists or any artistic endeavor should attempt to rely on public funding is beyond me. Funding through tax dollars is subject to two constraints- the approval of elected officials and the support of the taxpaying public. The judgment of either entity regarding the merit of any kind of art is certainly suspect. To cite one example, Henry Miller's Topic of Cancer could never have received any kind of public funding (in fact, it was subject to public prosecution) but remains one of the singular artistic achievements of the last century. Any serious artist should pursue their vision apart from any kind of public funding because the price exacted for that funding is a loss of any kind of independent vision, which remains the wellspring of any real art. jeff_r on "GOP Ascendancy Bodes Ill For Arts Funding" http://www.columbusunderground.com/forums/topic/gop-ascendancy-bodes-ill-for-arts-funding/page/14#post-378268 Sun, 19 Jun 2011 13:53:25 +0000 jeff_r 378268@http://www.columbusunderground.com/forums/ Here's what it looks like when a Republican Governor guts their own state's Arts Commission. <a href="http://www.pitch.com/2011-06-09/music/kansas-arts-commission-sam-brownback/"> Sam Brownback's Crusade Against the Kansas Arts Commission.</a> <blockquote>Why is Brownback picking a public fight over 0.005 percent of a $13.8 billion state budget? He says he believes that private donations, not taxpayer money, should fund arts and culture in the state. But conservative politicians say things like that all day and never act on it because they know that slashing government agencies and programs means slashing jobs. And fewer jobs mean fewer votes come election time. The difference is Brownback's political ambitions, which extend beyond the Sunflower State. He has already run for president once, and his recent move from the cozy confines of the U.S. Senate to the governor's mansion suggests that he's looking to get a little bit of that sweet "executive experience" Republicans are always talking about before he makes another go at the White House. This is a rÃƒÂ©sumÃƒÂ©-building period for Brownback, a time for him to push through statewide legislation that'll endear him to the GOP base in a presidential-nomination race. Privatizing the arts Ã¢â‚¬â€ the sinful, secular, Jesus-hating arts Ã¢â‚¬â€ is a winning symbolic gesture.</blockquote> Brant on "GOP Ascendancy Bodes Ill For Arts Funding" http://www.columbusunderground.com/forums/topic/gop-ascendancy-bodes-ill-for-arts-funding/page/14#post-371769 Sat, 07 May 2011 15:12:22 +0000 Brant 371769@http://www.columbusunderground.com/forums/ As of 2012, the NEA will recognize interactive media (video games) as an art form. I don't know who's gonna be more pissed about this, the GOP or Roger Ebert. Full story: <a href="http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/109835-Games-Now-Legally-Considered-an-Art-Form-in-the-USA" rel="nofollow">http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/109835-Games-Now-Legally-Considered-an-Art-Form-in-the-USA</a> Brant on "GOP Ascendancy Bodes Ill For Arts Funding" http://www.columbusunderground.com/forums/topic/gop-ascendancy-bodes-ill-for-arts-funding/page/14#post-355418 Thu, 10 Feb 2011 09:49:21 +0000 Brant 355418@http://www.columbusunderground.com/forums/ Heard a <a href="http://www.npr.org/2011/02/10/133622745/as-hide-seek-ends-a-step-back-to-look-for-lessons">follow-up story</a> on NPR this morning: <blockquote>The response of the head of the Smithsonian was to pull the video. That was the wrong move, according an internal review conducted by the Smithsonian's board of regents. "Once an exhibition is opened, absent actual error, things should not be removed without a significant consultation process," said regent Patty Stonesifer during a press conference last week. Still, attendance at the Portrait Gallery shot up more than 75 percent from this time last year. And David Wojnarowicz, who died almost 20 years ago, is now a free-speech cause celebre. ... Since the controversy erupted, "Fire In My Belly" has been viewed online more than a million times. It's been screened in solidarity by galleries nationwide, and was recently purchased by the Musuem of Modern Art.</blockquote> wildgoose77 on "GOP Ascendancy Bodes Ill For Arts Funding" http://www.columbusunderground.com/forums/topic/gop-ascendancy-bodes-ill-for-arts-funding/page/14#post-346376 Tue, 21 Dec 2010 14:07:34 +0000 wildgoose77 346376@http://www.columbusunderground.com/forums/ <a href="http://www.tcj.com/hoodedutilitarian/2010/12/wojnarowiczs-apostacy/">James Romberger</a>: <blockquote>A Fire in My Belly has been defended as being about AIDS and not about his anger towards the Church, but DavidÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s later motivations should not be retrospectively applied to a film that he made earlier. The Smithsonian has posted a Ã¢â‚¬Å“Q&AÃ¢â‚¬Â on their website which claims, Ã¢â‚¬Å“This imagery was part of a surrealistic video collage filmed in Mexico expressing the suffering, marginalization and physical decay of those who were afflicted with AIDS.Ã¢â‚¬Â However, what is being shown on Youtube and elsewhere online is not the original film, its intent has been changed because elements have been added that are misplaced in time. The versions in circulation now both have imposed soundtracks and their meaning is altered with added imagery that was made years later. David made A Fire in My Belly in 1986, before he was diagnosed with AIDS.</blockquote> rus on "GOP Ascendancy Bodes Ill For Arts Funding" http://www.columbusunderground.com/forums/topic/gop-ascendancy-bodes-ill-for-arts-funding/page/14#post-346366 Tue, 21 Dec 2010 13:16:25 +0000 rus 346366@http://www.columbusunderground.com/forums/ <blockquote><cite>jeff_r wrote <a href="http://www.columbusunderground.com/forums/topic/gop-ascendancy-bodes-ill-for-arts-funding/page/14#post-346357"> >> </a></cite> <blockquote><cite>gramarye wrote <a href="http://www.columbusunderground.com/forums/topic/gop-ascendancy-bodes-ill-for-arts-funding/page/14#post-346329"> >> </a></cite> <blockquote><cite>jeff_r wrote <a href="http://www.columbusunderground.com/forums/topic/gop-ascendancy-bodes-ill-for-arts-funding/page/14#post-346322"> >> </a></cite> Now if your point was that there exist different social standards or norms for how different religions are portrayed, you could probably make a strong case. I just don't believe that the answer to any perceived double-standard is to put limits on artistic expression. </blockquote> Again, and I will continue to insist this as long as you continue to conflate the two: There is a difference between limits on artistic expression and limits on public funding of art. </blockquote> Rosenberger v. Rector and Visitors of Univ. of Va. disagrees. As stated in that decision, the government may not act on or restrict expression when it Ã¢â‚¬Å“expends funds to encourage a diversity of views from private speakers.Ã¢â‚¬Â The belief being that when the government accepts the role of patron by subsidizing expression from private speakers, it cannot favor one viewpoint over another. It must remain content neutral. Well, that's exactly the role Congress assigned the NEA when they established it in 1965. The NEA was brought into existence with the expressly stated role of patronizing artists and encouraging artistic expression. Here's how the Senate Committee Report that accompanied the legislation stated it: <blockquote>...in the administration of this act there be given the fullest attention to freedom of artistic and humanistic expression. One of the artist's and humanist's great values to society is the mirror of self-examination which they raise so that society can become aware of its shortcomings as well as its strengths...Countless times in history artists and humanists who were vilified by their contemporaries because of their innovations in style or mode of expression have become prophets to a later age. Therefore, the committee affirms that the intent of this act should be the encouragement of free expression. [C]onformity, for its own sake is not to be encouraged, and...no undue preference should be given to any particular style or school of thought or expression. </blockquote> The U.S. Code echoes this sentiment, stating: <blockquote>...it is necessary and appropriate for the Federal Government to help create and sustain not only a climate encouraging freedom of thought, imagination, and inquiry but also the material conditions facilitating the release of this creative talent...In order to implement these findings and purposes, it is desirable to establish a National Foundation on the Arts and the Humanities. </blockquote></blockquote> Thank you, Jeff. Best argument I've seen yet for the elimination of the NEA. If it can not be responsible to the citizens, it should not exist. jeff_r on "GOP Ascendancy Bodes Ill For Arts Funding" http://www.columbusunderground.com/forums/topic/gop-ascendancy-bodes-ill-for-arts-funding/page/14#post-346357 Tue, 21 Dec 2010 12:43:22 +0000 jeff_r 346357@http://www.columbusunderground.com/forums/ <blockquote><cite>gramarye wrote <a href="http://www.columbusunderground.com/forums/topic/gop-ascendancy-bodes-ill-for-arts-funding/page/14#post-346329"> >> </a></cite> <blockquote><cite>jeff_r wrote <a href="http://www.columbusunderground.com/forums/topic/gop-ascendancy-bodes-ill-for-arts-funding/page/14#post-346322"> >> </a></cite> Now if your point was that there exist different social standards or norms for how different religions are portrayed, you could probably make a strong case. I just don't believe that the answer to any perceived double-standard is to put limits on artistic expression. </blockquote> Again, and I will continue to insist this as long as you continue to conflate the two: There is a difference between limits on artistic expression and limits on public funding of art. </blockquote> Rosenberger v. Rector and Visitors of Univ. of Va. disagrees. As stated in that decision, the government may not act on or restrict expression when it Ã¢â‚¬Å“expends funds to encourage a diversity of views from private speakers.Ã¢â‚¬Â The belief being that when the government accepts the role of patron by subsidizing expression from private speakers, it cannot favor one viewpoint over another. It must remain content neutral. Well, that's exactly the role Congress assigned the NEA when they established it in 1965. The NEA was brought into existence with the expressly stated role of patronizing artists and encouraging artistic expression. Here's how the Senate Committee Report that accompanied the legislation stated it: <blockquote>...in the administration of this act there be given the fullest attention to freedom of artistic and humanistic expression. One of the artist's and humanist's great values to society is the mirror of self-examination which they raise so that society can become aware of its shortcomings as well as its strengths...Countless times in history artists and humanists who were vilified by their contemporaries because of their innovations in style or mode of expression have become prophets to a later age. Therefore, the committee affirms that the intent of this act should be the encouragement of free expression. [C]onformity, for its own sake is not to be encouraged, and...no undue preference should be given to any particular style or school of thought or expression. </blockquote> The U.S. Code echoes this sentiment, stating: <blockquote>...it is necessary and appropriate for the Federal Government to help create and sustain not only a climate encouraging freedom of thought, imagination, and inquiry but also the material conditions facilitating the release of this creative talent...In order to implement these findings and purposes, it is desirable to establish a National Foundation on the Arts and the Humanities. </blockquote>