“Costa Rican artist Guillermo Vargas has been accused of creating a sensation — not art — after he reportedly tied up a stray dog and left it to starve.”

Should a piece featuring a starving dog be considered art? Is it ethical? Does it matter that the dog was a starving stray dog before being brought to the gallery? What if the artwork inspired people to take positive actions? Or become aware of their own apathy?

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=89830782

In a shocking decision in a case against a Houston couple, a judge ruled that animal snuff, or ‘crush’ films, are protected by the First Amendment.

Animal lovers and decent human beings in general are appalled and disgusted that this ruling allows people to film animal torture, which might otherwise be a crime, as long as it is called ‘art.'”

Should films depicting the death of animals be considered art? Would limitations, even ones most people find objectionable, stifle artistic expression?

http://www.lifewithdogs.tv/2013/04/texas-judge-says-animal-snuff-films-are-constitutional/