Arguments Against Art Censorship

1013 Words3 Pages

Art should not be censored because it restrains people from expressing themselves along with the audience understanding their view. Art is a expression and a feeling, not an object or something that can be shut down. Censoring of art is censoring of feeling, and censoring how people express that feeling is a violation of the First Amendment. Censorship is to block or prohibit something from being viewed, said, etc. It is not allowing certain thing/s to be shown either to the public or in general - in this case art. As mentioned in the previous paragraph, it restricts people from fully expressing themselves due to whatever the piece may be, be offensive to certain people and beliefs they have. Personally, art censorship is to be enforce if …show more content…

From personal experiences, art is an outlet to many. Yes, there are those good at math or english, but for the students who do not outshine their peers academically, they may do so in a way of expressing themselves. School districts fell like it is a good idea to cut down or eliminate the arts education completely, and have the school offering these subjects be drop them drastically. The NEA/NEH assist those in need. They “help people exercise their creativity” (NEA) and help people benefit from the arts and the defunding is critical to the arts enrichment. It's a rare source of creative enhancement in certain areas where they do not benefit from neighboring cities or cultural institutions. The endowments have made it possible for people in these areas to be able to dance in a small town or listen to a live poet. Defunding organizations as mentioned, it not only hurts children from becoming well-rounded individuals, but because they aren't good at math or science, feel like they are not good enough, but they can be very good artist. This process would make it even harder for them to succeed in what they are the good at the

Open Document