I'll try not to repeat previous arguments, and yes I do think breaking this thread into reasonable sized chunks is a good idea.

I agree with Max about the purpose of art (not Art (grin)).

To return to posts at the begining of this section, my main concern with Whippoorwill's views is that it appears to be founded on a concern for legality only. That I, or anyone else, breaks the law in opposing Government policies bothers me not one iota, thats a person ethical decision. Likwise, how we oppose it. Personally I do not think violence ever did anything except beget more violence, (which doen't mean I'm a pacifist, just that I recognize violence is not a solution). As has been noted before and again by both Barry and Chet above, the best way to ban this type of song is to remove the cause. But as thats too hard, the reaction to hide the symptoms arises. Unfortunately this reaction not only fails in its intent, but has the corollory of devolving to "Authority" the right to make decisions on what we should *all* think or express. Socrates is probably the best known example of where this leads, but there are plenty of modern examples - the efficiency of the CIA in making Pete Seeger, Paul Robeson and many others "non people" in the fifties was at least as high as that achieved by the NKVD, and done for the same reasons - opposing the interests of the majority as percieved by the Government.

And, let's not forget that the American declaration of independence was an illegal act carried out by people willing to kill those protecting the rights of the de jure Government.

Pete M