[PrttyBrownEyez21]

My teacher asked us this question and I had never thought about it before.Here's what I think,let me know what you think.

The Question is:
Imagine you are a Supreme Court judge. You need to rule on the legality of the following case: Sexually explicit photographs or artwork exhibited in a public art gallery paid for with tax money (legal or illegal).

My answer:
I guess in a way it's illegal because if the tax payers knew this was where their money was being funneled into then they wouldn't be happy about.But then again some people consider nude pictures to be "artwork" so I think they would consider that a legit reason to pay for.

[excon]

I guess in a way it's illegal because if the tax payers knew this was where their money was being funneled into then they wouldn't be happy about.But then again some people consider nude pictures to be "artwork" so I think they would consider that a legit reason to pay for.

Hello P:

Art is in the eye of the beholder. In this country, though, it doesn't matter if people like the art, or even consider it art or not. The artist has the right to express themselves. It's a First Amendment right, and it can't be taken away.

The government doesn't have to pay for it, though, and it can stop subsidizing it anytime they want. It's not legal or illegal for government to do that.

excon