I care about their music, nothing else.

Nope, I can appreciate what they create without worrying about who they are.

Nope

Great question. I would say no, not at all. Art should be considered separate from all of that and, judged solely on it's own merits.

No. As long as their work continues to produce what I like, their private life does not interest me. ... case in point, I like Michael Jackson's music, but I do not like him.

Not at all...I believe in freedom of choice, of freedom of speech and freedom of expression. They have the right to believe in whatever they choose.

No, but with the following exception: When that political or moral view that I find offensive starts leaking into their artistic work, I won't be interested in buying it anymore. Let me try to explain what I mean by this, although it will be difficult because I'm still sorting it out for myself. There are many artists that I admire that I wouldn't necessarily want to encounter in real life, would never want to know personally, and possibly would actively dislike if I did know them. But this does not diminish my appreciation of their works as an artist, separate from their personality or politics. Some of my favorite rock bands were total womanizers, for example, and would probably be total douche-bags to me if I met them. Some of my favorite writers, the same (Hemmingway, totally). Some artists are vain, some are pretentious, and some are just assholes. But as long as the work is good, I can appreciate the work and their incredible talent as the small miracles they are. When the work itself becomes offensive, that's where I get off. There was a cult comic book that I'm not going to name, let's call it Barabas, that was legendary and ground-breaking in its time, and at the beginning was really kind of wonderful. But the author at some point did a mental u-turn and became visciously, hatefully misogynist. Now that's disappointing, but I'm used enough to sci-fi fiction to not be surprised by sexism (I still love Heinlein, despite it all). But once it started to infect the comic, it took over in a big way, amounting to long, long, meandering and slighly crazy screeds in the back of the comic about women and their deficiencies. It directly affected the plot of the book, changed how he handled the female characters, and definitely changed the way he treated female readers. Not only did I stop reading the book, I stopped mentioning it online (I won't offer him the free advertising). Because while I will willingly support an artist for his talent and despite whatever personal issues he/she may have, I will certainly not support a work that actively insults me, personally or just morally. That artist has every right to put their work out there even if I find it insulting. I wouldn't try to stop him from doing it or protest the result. But I'm certainly not going to pay him for it. I basically try to keep the artist separate from the art and judge on an individual basis. Although if I find out something unsavory about an artist, it might make me look differently at their writings or lyrics and turn me off altogether.. it's tough. It's a lot simpler when they're dead, honestly. In the artistic marketplace, a living artist is being financially supported by my purchase of his work; it makes no difference to a dead artist whether I buy his work or not. I don't really care if Mozart was a murderer, he was a genius. But I'm really loathe to financially support the career of someone who makes a career of stepping on my rights, or marginalizing people I care about, or whatever foolish thing he's doing. I try not to hold it against, say, an actor in a completely unrelated project (like Ahnuld, for instance, when he was still acting) if they're doing their job well. It's also hard because there are some things you can never know the truth about - I've heard terrible rumors about one of my favorite bands, for instance, that really really troubled me. If true, I would really never want to listen to their music again. (This isn't a political view, it's something one of the band supposedly *did*). I struggled with it for a little while and eventually decided that I could never know for sure, and what mattered was what was in the music. When it comes to something an artist supposedly said somewhere, in an interview or off-the-cuff, the media produces so much manufactured reality and artiface and manipulation that it's hard to know what their real thoughts are. Reporters love it when one of these people gets "caught out" and I'm sure there's a lot of baiting too. Again, that's why I try to keep my judgements for the art and not the artist.

No, I didn't agree with the Dixie Chicks when they announce to the French people that they were ashamed of our president, but I still enjoy their music.