Originally posted by JB88
orrrrr just dont participate. if noone goes to art events, or musuems then they will probably eventually get rid of it. i think that the same should go for military museums because they are pretty much useless for the public defense and they just go ahead and make them without my say so and some might disagree with the glorification of war.
air shows. now theres a HUGE WASTE of money by the standards being laid out here. i think i should start writing my congressman to have them stopped. all that fuel....all of those man hours...is that a part of the defense as laid out by the constitution or does that fall under providing for the general welfare?
no musuems. you have to promise and you can't be a hypocrite so make sure you tell your kids that they can go to the canning factory for their cultural field trips instead.
sounds like a hoot.
orrr....maybe they can go to the "tostitos metropolitan fiesta museum" even better!
Well, I guess if you would rather not discuss the issue of "Whether the Federal Government has been granted the Right to fund things like art." Then I'll take your advice "just don't participate"
If the only thing you have to offer to the discussion is a repeated attempt to justify your position by saying, "They do it for other things, so they should do it for art." or, "We need art", "it's not much money" etc..., then any further participation on my part, is pointless.
Also, the idea that "Art" would dry up with out federal money, is pretty unrealistic. There are lots of ways to fund things, without the use of Federal funds. State funds, corporate funds, private funds, and so on. (Including running museums for profit.)
The "belief" that art is vital to our culture, and we need it for our survival simply doesn't mean the federal government should fund it. I might "Believe" religion is vital, and our society and culture will collapse without it. Any nation without religion is doomed... so on, and so on. So, does that mean if people stop supporting churches, the government should step in and do it? (I don't think so, and I'm pretty sure you would agree with me on that point, if nothing else.)
People can (and some do) make all the same claims about religion you have about art. The point being, there are some that believe our country needs art and would be better off without religion; and just as many (if not more) believe the reverse to be true. (we need the church, and if they close the art museums down, it will be no great loss.)
The point is, believing it is important doesn't address the issues of whether or not our federal government has the "right" to fund those sorts of things.
BTW, I agree that as a whole, Art is a good thing, and a needed thing for that fact. Also, as I posted earlier, I'm not necessarily opposed to the federal funding of it. (Though, I'm not so sure, the federal government has been granted that authority.) I was simply looking for more than, "I think this", "I think that" type of a discussion; but alas, it has eluded me.
Best regards,
--Tachus