Surely this is wrong, as Madison, Jefferson, and the U.S. Supreme Court have opined. The issue in New York City, though, may not be so much about the public funding of things which religious groups find blasphemous , but more the fact that such artwork, opinions, or writings are permitted in the first place. The Catholic League takes aim at a host of privately-funded events, including films like Stigmata and Priest. The League has yet to display what may be its true colors in demanding that government ban such cultural fare, but it is interesting to note that in the New York Legislature, at least one bill proposes to ban anything that insults or denigrates the religious beliefs, symbols or practices of any group. Mayor Giuliani insists that the city is well within its proper role in trying to shut down the Sensations exhibit, and seize control of the Brooklyn Museum of Art since its directors have defied His Honor s dictates.
Museum directors are outraged, and so are civil libertarians.
Whatever merit there is to the argument who pays the piper picks the tune , these people still see a dangerous form of censorship at work. Were Giuliani and Cardinal O Connor to prevail, we would have a situation where only that which passed the scrutiny of certain government and religious elites would be displayed in the peoples galleries. Giuliani could not appeal to taxpayers when he instigated his notorious cleanup of 42nd street and other venues across the city populated by exotic bars and adult bookstores. One can presumably locate a religious book shop on 42nd street which peddles literature depicting gays as sinners, or Jews and blacks as spawns of the devil. No one is compelled to purchase or view these offerings, and there seems to be a thriving market for them where this public casts its votes in the form of dollars.