If there’s one thing that most Americans cherish and revere it’s our freedom to express ourselves in our political and social opinions, and to even openly protest when we disagree so strongly about various issues that confront us – peaceful protest, of course.

While this holds true for all of us as individuals, the question looms as to whether or not leaders of cities, states, and other governmental entities should back one side or another in social or political movements. Should they be taking sides or should they remain neutral?

Of special concern to some is the financial support that is sometimes granted in support of such movements. Not all of us may agree on any given issue that gains support from those who are charged with spending these funds. Even when a majority of citizens agree on supporting something, there will practically always be dissenters who resent seeing their hard-earned monies spent in support of something they feel should be privately funded.

So, it is up to our civic leaders to decide whether or not funding a socio-political movement is an appropriate action to be taken. Is neutrality the way to go or is it important to take a stand on one side or the other on a particular issue.

Protest and shedding light on social ills is a time-honored tradition in our country. It has affected important change throughout our history. Notably, civil rights and Vietnam in the 60’s. But should public funding be a part of the process?

It seems like a question far above our pay grade.