'Dig a hole and dump them in it.'

...a bill that would ban the use of state funds to purchase any books or other materials that "promote homosexuality".

...Allen does not want taxpayers' money to support "positive depictions of homosexuality as an alternative lifestyle".

Revel,

Why do you assume that the Administration is determined to "censor free art ... in public schools and libraries"? .......

Revel,

Why do you assume that the Administration is determined to "censor free art ... in public schools and libraries"? Have you seen a proposal anywhere to impose Federal censorship over what art is displayed in schools and libraries? The books and materials purchased for those institutions comes from you local taxes, not the Federal government. It is your local school board who budgets the money and decides what curriculum will be taught in your schools. In recent times there has been great public demand for school standards to insure that all students meet some minimum level of academic knowledge. As a result we've seen some Federal involvement (which I generally oppose), but that involvement is not concerned with what "art" appears in the classrooms.

Library acquisitions are made from funds budgeted by their municipal, or counties, not the Federal government. Generally, the money is allocated, but no book or art work is specified. That is left to the Libraries to determine, and in a time when local government budgets have been shrinking most funds are spent to buy the books most needed to fill public demand and to maintain collections. What censorship exists, exists in the judgements made by library administrators who have to make difficult choices.

Though you didn't mention museums who depend upon public money, they are the most problematical. Most do not get much, if any, Federal money, and that money isn't for specific art work or exhibitions. Like the libraries, museum curators have to get by with shrinking budgets, but they mostly make their own decisions as to what art to purchase, or exhibit. Sometimes they deliberately choose provocative materials in hope of gaining publicity and increased public attendance. The problem comes when the County Board of Supervisors is so offended that they threaten to cut off funding if the museum continues to purchase/exhibit art like XYZ. That gets into the news, and a public uproar follows. That is a local matter, not federal, and should be worked out locally.

I don't understand why you would feel at a disadvantage in these exchanges. You are an adult and you have opinions. We may disagree on certain matters, but then why should we all agree? Your opinion may be correct, perfect and complete. In that case you may be able to persuade us to adopt a better, more perfect and compete opinion. You may be wrong, wrong, wrong. In that case, you may learn something and alter your opinion(s). Far more often we are all somewhat "right" and somewhat "wrong" in our beliefs. It is through the open and candid exchange of ideas, thoughts and opinions that knowledge and wisdom are enhanced. The key is to remain at least partially open to the idea that we, our opinions, might very well be wrong, wrong, wrong. Thinking isn't always easy, or without risk to settled notions of what is "right". Almost everything in our experience is muddled to some extent. Write on.

Quote:

...a bill that would ban the use of state funds to purchase any books or other materials that "promote homosexuality".

"Promote" [v]: make publicity for; try to sell (a product); "The salesman is aggressively pushing the new computer model"
To "promote homosexuality", then, would mean trying to recruit kids and entice them to become homosexual??
This is not the same as this:

Quote:

...Allen does not want taxpayers' money to support "positive depictions of homosexuality as an alternative lifestyle".

Positive depictions would lean more toward teaching tolerance, and showing that homosexuality is OK.

I see them as two different things. Is "promoting" the same as "showing positive depictions"?
Anyone else?

Shouldn't the Attorney General have some say over the decor of his own offices under his jurisdiction?

Did the Attorney General dictate that no nude statues appear in other Federal Buildings? Did he issue orders that no school or library in the United States display classical nude statuary, or that only paintings of the Last Supper on velvet be hung in public places?

Mr. Allan is a state legislator from the great State of Alabama, and his legislation would only apply to that State ... if it ever manages to get enough votes in the State legislature and is signed by the State governor. At that point, the law would probably be challenged in Federal District Court, and in due time would find itself before the U.S. Supreme Court where in all likelihood it would be struck down as unConstitutional under the First Amendment, and others.

The President can invite almost anyone to the White House he wishes to meet. Some are folks he likes and agrees with, others may be political enemies who he wishes to reign in. We don't know what passed between the President and this obscure State Legislator, so it's a pretty big leap to assume that the President is about to ask for Federal legislation mirroring this fellow in Alabama.

I'm truly sorry that you've never had the opportunity to visit a world class museum. Where do you live? Could you take a week or so of vacation? I'm guessing that there is a pretty good museum within a few hundred miles of where you live, but perhaps not. There are great museums in other States, but my favorites are the L.A. County Museum of Art and the Getty Museums in L.A., the DeYoung in San Francisco, National Galleries in Washington D.C., MOMA and the Guggenheim in N.Y., and the Peabody in Salem, Mass. Smaller library systems often don't have the resources to buy much beyond those materials most requested.