ext_45764 ([identity profile] sleep-x-dream.livejournal.com) wrote in [community profile] hh_clubs 2006-02-26 06:31 pm (UTC)

There are a ton of ways to use artistic expression that is not graphic.

Graphic in what sense? For a period in time the terms "gee", "golly", and "gosh" were deemed graphic/vulgar/unacceptable by American society, but today they are not. By censoring artist now, future generations will be without.

There is no reason why artists cannot express themselves instead of limiting themselves through foul language, clothes that cover nothing, etc.

To many these "limitations" as you call them are actually possibilities and opportunities. It's all about options. At one point in history it was improper for women to show their ankles when wearing bathing suits. Today it is perfectly fine.

Children are the future of this and every society and should be protected so they can develop into healthy individuals. If this means censoring art media, so be it.

While I agree children are the future, censorship is not. Censorship hides, and in a sense, erases part of our history. By placing bans on things today we hinder our future generations from having opportunities.


trent | slytherin

Post a comment in response:

This account has disabled anonymous posting.
If you don't have an account you can create one now.
HTML doesn't work in the subject.
More info about formatting