Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I voted yes because so much of that crap is done with money from the NEA and that is my tax money. I consider anything created like that to be wrong and it should be destroyed. Oh wait a minute, only artists and others like them have freedom of expression. Which part of the Constitution says anything about freedom of expression? Just wondering since I have never seen the word there, anywhere.
Freedom of speech, of the press, of association, of assembly and petition -- this set of guarantees, protected by the First Amendment, comprises what we refer to as freedom of expression.
Yeah, couldn't choose a really good example because too many people here would get their granny panties in a bunch. These are the same people that wanted to cover up Michelangelo's statue of David for being too risque.
If the artist is allowed to draw a picture of Christ in an indecent act, saying it's his First Amendment right to draw the picture, then why do we have hate crime laws in the first place? Isn't hate crimes, in effect then, violating someone's First Amendment right to express their opinions then? Since hate crimes were made in response to stop hateful acts and speech, then wouldn't drawing this should be considered a hate crime then, since it offends other people's sensibilities?
You have no right to be protected against feeling offended. Hate crime? Inconceivably ridiculous!
Oh what a predicament they are in now....would they complain about how all muslims are violent and must be stopped or would they take sympathy for the muslim because it was offensive "art"
Also I'm talking to another friend about this right now and he brought up Larry Flynt. Would those who support crowbar lady be happy if an assassination attempt was made on this guy's life?
all conservative old ladies are violent and must be stoped, foo'
Notice how many right-wingers are suggesting that committing a crime by vandalizing private property is a form of free speech. They clearly don't know what they're talking about.
Also, notice how many of them are screeching about taxpayer dollars, government funding, etc., when there's no evidence at all that the work of art in question was funded with public dollars. Are they immune to the facts?
I'm glad to see that a majority of people here don't support destroying someone else's property, even if it offends them. We can't have a civilized society if people think it's okay to destroy or vandalize someone else's property simply because they don't like it.
Is this the same guy who started a thread claiming republicans were attacking people on food stamps?
How about, we are having a little fun here, and pushing the buttons of the left?
Although I do not agree with this type of art, I do not support the destruction of any art. Her religious beliefs do not give her right to destroy other people's property. It is a crime and she should have to pay for it, like it or not. She has no right to determine who can see what. She is not God. If she does not like it, she should not buy it. Case closed.
Where in the Constitution does the word expression appear? I think that is the question I asked.
...
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohKnip
Not the constitution, although sometimes thought to be part of the 1st Amendment. Instead this right is found in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights See article 19.
The definition of "art" is subjective. For First Amendment purposes, however, porn is considered to be free speech. It's only illegal if a judge and jury declare it to be obscene.
The definition of "art" is subjective. For First Amendment purposes, however, porn is considered to be free speech. It's only illegal if a judge and jury declare it to be obscene.
Obscene, but not profane.
The "artist" combined the two, attempting to legalize the one with the other by marriage.
Oh, he's a real genius!
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
