Democrats Continue to Work on the Tough Issues Facing America

Weatherman2020

Diamond Member
Mar 3, 2013
91,000
61,582
2,605
Right coast, classified
Rep. Lacy Clay (D-Mo.) will file a federal lawsuit on Tuesday against the Architect of the Capitol for removing a constituent’s painting that depicted police officers as animals from the Capitol complex.

Clay will argue that the painting’s removal, which followed outcry from House Republicans and police advocacy groups, violated his constituent’s First Amendment rights to free expression.

The painting by student David Pulphus showed a confrontation between black protesters and police officers with guns drawn, depicted as feral pigs.

Clay’s district includes the city of Ferguson, where a white police officer shot an unarmed black teenager in 2014. The shooting sparked waves of protests.

Keep reading…

His constituent had a constitutional right to make the painting but not a constitutional right to have it displayed in the US Capital ....
 
I am wanting to exorcise my Constitutional free speech rights as well

I drew an AWESOME picture of Muslims fucking a goat while they eat a pork and bacon sandwich

I DEMAND that my original artwork be displayed in the capital

and I am confident that my friends on the left will stand shoulder to shoulder with me to ensure that this happens!
 
Simple solution. Leave the 'Cops as Pigs' painting where it is and right next to it, hang a different version of the same painting depicting the Cops as human and the Black protesters as monkeys. Is one more offensive than the other? Is one acceptable and one not? If so, which one and why?
 
What is it these days?

Do we need to put out a primer on the 1st Amendment?

Not calling on journalists is NOT a violation of Free Speech, nor Freedom of the Press.

Not allowing a painting to be hung in the Senate is not a violation of a constituents Freedom of Expression.
 
Last edited:
You know, if this were on private property, I would have no problem with it being kept on the wall. Why? Free speech pretty much covers it.

However...........federal property is actually OUR (as in the nation's) property, and as such, nobody has the right to demand that their artwork be kept on the wall. Why? Because it's public property and there is a new administration coming in, and they have the right to decide what they will and won't display. As well as the fact that it is in a place of honor in this country, but those spaces are limited and should be rotated to allow other artists to be depicted as the incumbent administration judges fit.

I mean, the picture had a good run, but let someone else have a shot as well.

Yeah. I know............lots of you conservatives are going to think that I've come over to your way of thinking, and lots of you liberals are going to call me a traitor, but in reality, I'm neither. I like to look at things logically and see if there is any merit there or not.

In this case, not. If he wants to continue to display the picture, put it in a private collection or a museum somewhere.
 

Forum List

Back
Top