Most fans of Shakespeare would agree that the artistic importance of Hamlet lies not in the details of the plot or the political intrigue involved but in the psychological struggle Hamlet undergoes and the language through which it is expressed. These distinctions are not unusual in art criticism. But in politics divergent issues tend to become inextricably bound together. Consider how the U.S. office of the Surgeon General has recently been politicized, with attitudes toward abortion and even masturbation taking precedence over medical merit. This is problematic.
Politicians are much more willing to employ the term than they are to explain what they mean by it.
Some examples of how value systems have been employed might help clarify what I mean. Senate majority leader Bob Dole recently stated that the entertainment industry should stop putting profit before decency and seemed particularly concerned with the level of violence in art. The suggestion of the former is that violence always punishes the bad, but the latter reveals the truth that violence can find anyone. I'm not sure if it is more dangerous to let a child see violence portrayed or to see violence portrayed without any sense of its consequences. Real world consequences cloud the issue further.