View RSS Feed

johnwk

Federal funding of the arts violates First Amendment protections!

Rate this Entry
Quote Originally Posted by johnwk View Post
Quote Originally Posted by mkh View Post
The national endowment for the arts is a great thing and it's budget is such a blip I don't understand why righties pick that sort of hill to stand on.

“Righties”?


To answer your question, the irrefutable fact is, Congress is not authorized under the Constitution to tax for and spend federal revenue to promote the production of art.


Aside from the fact that federal funding of the arts is a misappropriation of federal revenue, it may come as a surprise to some that funding the arts using federal revenue violates the protection guaranteed to taxpayers under the First Amendment! Let me explain.


In 1998, the U. S. Supreme Court ruled in the case National Endowment for the Arts v. Finley that NEA grants are constitutional if content does not offend "...general standards of decency..." But the Court not only ignored the absence of a power granted to Congress by our Constitution to fund the promotion of art, it likewise ignored the carefully limited wording in our Constitution granting power to Congress To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts and how may this be done? by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries


So, how does federal funding of the arts violate a taxpayer’s guarantee that Congress shall make no law …abridging freedom of speech? Federal funding does so by allowing A, who has received federal grant money taxed away from B, to vocalize and express their opinions and feelings in a more forceful manner than B, who has been taxed to finance A’s expressions and feelings in public, while B’s financial resources are reduced by the hand of the federal government in its quest to fund A’s speech and expressions.


In clear and simple language, federal funding of the arts provides a group selected and made privileged by folks in government with a powerful megaphone to express their opinions and feelings, while such funding is forcefully taken from those who may object to the expressions and opinions spewed out in a federally funded venue.


And this brings us back to the danger of allowing the federal government to engage in such funding as stated by Representative John Page:


"The framers of the Constitution guarded so much against a possibility of such partial preferences as might be given, if Congress had the right to grant them, that, even to encourage learning and useful arts, the granting of patents is the extent of their power. … the wise framers of our Constitution saw that, if Congress had the power of exerting what has been called a royal munificence for these purposes, Congress might, like many royal benefactors, misplace their munificence; might elevate sycophants, and be inattentive to men unfriendly to the views of Government …Annals of Congress Feb 7th,1792 Rep Page



JWK


They are not “liberals” or “progressives”. They are conniving Marxist parasites who use government force to steal and then enjoy the property which labor, business and investors have worked to create.

Submit "Federal funding of the arts violates First Amendment protections!" to Digg Submit "Federal funding of the arts violates First Amendment protections!" to del.icio.us Submit "Federal funding of the arts violates First Amendment protections!" to StumbleUpon Submit "Federal funding of the arts violates First Amendment protections!" to Google

Comments