Giuliani- Abysmal Record on Free Speech

[Iplayboard]

[ QUOTE ]
since when has it become a 1st amendment right for artwork to be funded by tax dollars?
PUBLIC museums exist at the privilege of the tax payers. Since Rudy was elected by the tax payers of New York to represent their interests, he was within his rights to threaten to take away their funding for displaying contraversial 'art'."


[/ QUOTE ]

Guiliani wasn't within his rights, that's why his legal battle to take away funding was unsuccessful. He wasn't representing the interests of the taxpayers seeing as how the majority disagreed with his actions.

Anyway the point of my post wasn't to say that Guiliani was neccessarily in the wrong, which he was, but just to say that it was just a political stunt. He didn't do it for his convictions or for the taxpayers, but just to appeal to conservative groups. How could he possibly say it's offensive without even seeing it? That'd be like me saying the Passion of the Christ is a shitty movie without having gone to watch it.

[JackWhite]

[ QUOTE ]
How could he possibly say it's offensive without even seeing it?

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't necessarily buy that argument. If somebody discribes a piece of art to you that included elephant dung on the Virgin Mary, would you really need to see it in person to determine if you found it offensive or inappropriate?



[ QUOTE ]
He wasn't representing the interests of the taxpayers seeing as how the majority disagreed with his actions.

[/ QUOTE ]

So if the majority of people disagree with you in a poll, it means you aren't representing their best interests? At the time of the Iraq War resolution in Congress a few years ago, the majority of Americans polled were in favor of it. Did those members of Congress who voted against the war do a disservice to their constituents?

[Iplayboard]

[ QUOTE ]


I don't necessarily buy that argument. If somebody discribes a piece of art to you that included elephant dung on the Virgin Mary, would you really need to see it in person to determine if you found it offensive or inappropriate?



[/ QUOTE ]

Elephant dung has a different meaning in the Nigerian culture than it does in Western culture. Your assumption that it is offensive contains an underlying ethno-centric view on your part.

Furthermore, Guiliani approved the artwork before he decided it was offensive, so he dug his own grave.

More importantly, if you find a piece of artwork offensive, don't [censored] look at it. It doesn't give you the power to take that right away from everyone else, to decide own their own what is offensive or not.

When authority tells you it is doing something for your own good, beware.

[Felix_Nietsche]

if you find a piece of artwork offensive, don't [censored] look at it.
**************************************************
I agree.....


It doesn't give you the power to take that right away from everyone else, to decide own their own what is offensive or not.
************************************************** *******
As long as the artwork is displayed by PRIVATELY FUNDED galleries, then no one can stop people from viewing that artwork.

But when artists/museum curators take tax dollars, they have to answer to the tax payers and the representatives of the tax payers. THERE IS NO RIGHT FOR ART TO BE PUBLICALLY FUNDED OR PUBLICALLY DISPLAYED....... If this is the case then I'm going to draw some stick figures and demand a million dollars and that these drawings be displayed in a museum of my choice. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Personally I don't think the govt should be financing art.

[ QUOTE ]

Giuliani- Abysmal Record on Free Speech


[/ QUOTE ]

Record? I thought everything was on CD's now. And usually even the bad ones have a couple of cuts that get good play.

[img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]