Artists claim this all the time.
Hey, it's our right, man! Don't stifle me or swallow my soul!
I believe we should--nay, must-- tackle all subjects we feel passionate about. We shouldn't fear in silence something that burns through us to be said.
But, with everything we handle, we must look at the how and not just the why.
Kenneth Goldsmith, a conceptual poet, took the autopsy report of Michael Brown and "made it into a poem" by rearranging/subtracting/explaining the actual text of the report. Should this have even have been done? I understand wanting to talk about issues, rip them open and show everyone what they look like not smothered by shadows. You may tell me he has accomplished it, he has us talking, now. But I disagree; now he has us talking about Kenneth's rights, Kenneth's choices. He has utilized the needless death of a person of color for HIS advantage, to advance HIS name.
(I've heard from a few sources he ended it on a line about Mr. Brown having average genitals. Is that so the old, white fogey penning this undeniable masterpiece can relate to his subject? Because, you know, a human unjustly murdered isn't nearly anything anyone can relate/sympathize with.)
Read more about it.
We can talk about... write about... anything we want. Art should, thoughtful people should. But we also must be mindful of how we approach it. How best to keep our intentions clear and message strong. Unless, of course, your entire answer to WHY you're tackling a topic IS to shine a light on yourself, regardless of who was hurt or what implications there might be. Then, my friends, you deserve the fallout.
Have you seen people cover a topic just to make themselves shine? Did you hear about the Michael Brown poem?