14 replies to this topic

[Athgar]

Right now they are discussing about spreading laws against holocaust denial to all EU countries.

http://news.bbc.co.u...ope/6263103.stm

What do you think? Should all countries have laws against holocaust denial?

[CodeCat]

I think it's dangerous. While I think it's absolutely rediculous that people deny the holocaust or any other kind of genocide, it does still fall under the right of personal belief. If you're able to outlaw denying the holocaust, how long will it be before people start outlawing denial of evolution, science, god, homosexuality or something else?

[chemical ali]

See this is why the EU is bad, the laws passed are an attack on every right of individuality and national sovereignty of the member states.

I can't wait till we leave.

[duke_Qa]

seems kinda fascist to disallow people opinions about such things, even if the things were totally wrong in the first place. if they get these sorts of rules through i demand that we get the same rules for people claiming that the bible is factually correct and the likes.

making it illegal will only make the problem bigger imo. people love to break laws for the sake of breaking them, and a law saying stuff like this may seem stupid for alot of people. you have to be dim-witted to believe that the concentration camps, all the mass graves and the likes, were made as a part of a conspiracy to let the jews have their own country or something like that. But making it illegal to talk about a conspiracy theory seems like extinguishing a bonfire with a bucket of gasoline.

its not like Bush and the gang have made it illegal to talk about 9/11 conspiracies.

[Cheshire Fox]

This is a hard one for me...

On the one hand, I'm directly connected to the Holocaust. It's my family members who are lying in some of those graves. On the other hand, we can't control what people think and say. There's such a thin line. I hate people who deny the Holocaust passionately. I hate fascism and restriction of ideas with equal passion, my family suffered horribly under that as well.

So basically, I have no fucking clue.

[Calamity_Jones]

Seems like we all thing more or less the same thing. It's wrong, but so is restricting peoples opinions. Still, the holocaust is something terrible, and denying it is just fething twisted. Like daytime television.

So... do we throw people in the slammer for what they think? They might have really really bad opinions, but still... How long before you go in for saying you think taxes are a bit over the top... or that you don't like the governments plans to build a 2 kilometre tall combine citadel on your neighbourhood.

But, do we tolerate people mocking one of the greatest tragedies in mans history?

Perhaps the best solution would be to punish people who stir up trouble by expressing their opinions a bit too vigorously. You can have an opinion, but I don't want to hear it you bastard!

[Cheshire Fox]

Christ, I hadn't heard about that. If possible, could try and find where you saw that? not because I doubt you, just because I'm intrigued.

That's just absolutely silly and disgusting. WWII was the event which defined and created this decade. It's the single most important thing is recent history. I don't care if it makes countries look bad, you can't very well pretend it never happened.

[Cossack]

Denying the holocaust is like denying evolution. The facts are irrefutable so there is absolutely no reason to question it.

It really pisses me off when people deny what is right in front of there eyes. Its like saying 2+2=5 and believing it.

In a way (I may sound like some sort of fascist here), irrefutable facts should be made illegal to deny. This would ensure the truth prevails and is never lost on people too stupid or biassed to accept it.

Edited by Cossack, 23 April 2007 - 08:38 PM.

[Cheshire Fox]

I totally see where you're coming from, but I just can't bring myself to agree. People should be allowed to believe whatever they want, as long as that belief is never forced on anyone else or become a threat to anyone's safety and security. Crazed religious fanatics can really believe what they want as far as I am concerned, but as soon as they force that on other people or start bombing buildings and lynching people, it's a whole other matter. Science based facts with hard, solid evidence are the only thing that should be publicly taught.

[Jeeves]

In a way (I may sound like some sort of fascist here), irrefutable facts should be made illegal to deny. This would ensure the truth prevails and is never lost on people too stupid or biassed to accept it.

The only problem with that is that some people do differ in opinion. Whilst you may agree the holocaust happened, and outlawed the denial of it, how would you feel if you were prosicuted because someone outlawed the denial of creationism? Bush being a god? 2+2=5?
I'm sure you could find people who might want anything to be punishably undeniable, but the only way to survive with differences of opinion without decending into extremes of dictatorship of the mind is to allow people their beliefs.

[Calamity_Jones]

Well put. I kinda agree with Cossack, I mean, banning things like this would help to remove them, but it is still removing some of the freedoms we have taken so long to give to everyone. Where do we draw the lines? Who draws the lines? What's to say that once we outlaw one thing, we go and start outlawing others.

[Cossack]

It may sound strange, but Im a bit of highly authoritarian liberal (yes, they usually dont mix). Im the type of person that would say. "Okay everyone, respect each other, dont do anyone harm, and treat all equally.....or you will be sent to a "re-education" centre for 10 years"

In a way I support restrciting personal freedoms in order to protect personal freedoms. (which is why I say holocaust denying should be illegal)

[Cheshire Fox]

I hate fascism even more than ignorance and stupidity and religious fanatics. I could really never support this. It's no mans right to tell another what to believe. If Jews for Jesus doesn't try to convert me or force there beliefs on me, I'd be cool with them. Instead I hate them. However, if they just minded there own business and the government shut them down, I'd be pissed about that as well.

[MSpencer]

It may sound strange, but Im a bit of highly authoritarian liberal (yes, they usually dont mix). Im the type of person that would say. "Okay everyone, respect each other, dont do anyone harm, and treat all equally.....or you will be sent to a "re-education" centre for 10 years"

In a way I support restrciting personal freedoms in order to protect personal freedoms. (which is why I say holocaust denying should be illegal)

That's called Friendly Fascism, as opposed to Corporate Fascism. Both are very, very bad.

I began writing a post this morning, but I found it rather impossible to come up with one cohesive answer. Britain has laws which prohibit the use of certain racially offensive words in public, and I believe that's a good thing, it promotes some measure of law and order, but to ban a subject from even intellectual debate is simply ridiculous.

[CodeCat]

Actually no, that's Stalinism.