| |
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Scott Edward Sanburn writes:
> > There's no way to support one artist while denying another without
> > establishing an artist-of-the-state, but the NEA could be beneficially
> > applied to libraries and similar forums (fora?) without endorsing a single
> > artistic agenda. However, as you correctly point out, Scott, it's wrong to
> > require the taxpayer to support an artist--especially a sensationalistic
> > and, frankly, uninteresting one--whose work is patently offensive to that
> > taxpayer. Or, at the very least, the taxpayer should be able to choose
> > where those taxes go, so that a devout Catholic taxpayer, for example,
> > doesn't have to worry about funding a seemingly deliberate affront to
> > Catholicism.
>
> Correct. See Dave, I am not that bad! :)
This is so weird for me! Now I'll have to start taking those pins out of my
Scott Sanburn voodoo doll... 8^)
Dave!
(whimsical followups to off-topic.fun)
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]
|
| (...) It happens, really! :) (...) Hmmm...I think so. I will have to check on that. (...) That's for sure, but I would rather have the states have any money targeted to arts come their way instead, even to local areas, if possible. (...) Correct. (...) (25 years ago, 4-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
473 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
