jailed for denying the holocaust

[hobbes]

I'm really not sure that that's right. As far as I can tell, it is the opinion that is the crime, rather than any violence or hatred it may incite.

As I understand it, it's publicly denying the holocaust which is the offence.

So you are both wrong, but hobbes is wronger than you.

I would never tolerate such a suppresive government.

Laws should be driven by individual rights, not popularity.

Such suppression of opinion is totalitarian.

I enjoy the way you state that "the ends never justify the means" in one context (torture), then approve of it in another. Very convenient.

Fuck that.

[GepperRankins]

i think i forgot half way through typing.



well, regardless of facts and if people take offence, the law shouldn't get involved in peoples opinions

People can have whatever opinion they want, it's when they express those opinion and effect other people's lives that the law takes an interest.

Is a rally in the middle of London, where the speakers express their opinion that all green people are useless cunts and should be thrown out of the country OK.

I for one want the law to intervene.

i see your point now.

i was about to say people will analyse what people say, then i realised "nope, most people are stupid".


so uh, yeah. i realised it is possible, and fairly easy to brainwash everyday people

[JPaul]

I think you'll find it is, as that's where he was convicted and sentenced.

Well, the rule is moronic.

Can there be any disagreemnet to that?

Should I be jailed when I say that the US moon landing was a government hoax.

How many people do you think would be deeply hurt by that opinion being expressed.

How many people who survived the .... never mind, I've already posted that. Either you've read it and ignored it, or not read it. I'm cool either way.

I think I'll go and pish on someone's grave, what do their friends and relatives care. The person is dead anyway.

[JPaul]

As I understand it, it's publicly denying the holocaust which is the offence.

So you are both wrong, but hobbes is wronger than you.

I would never tolerate such a suppresive government.

Laws should be driven by individual rights, not popularity.

Such suppression of opinion is totalitarian.

Fuck that.

Luckily you live in USA, so Austrian law is not a problem

[JPaul]

As I understand it, it's publicly denying the holocaust which is the offence.

So you are both wrong, but hobbes is wronger than you.

I enjoy the way you state that "the ends never justify the means" in one context (torture), then approve of it in another. Very convenient.

Just covering your edit.

What in the name of fuck is that supposed to mean.

[Skillian]

It just seems to me to be silly to specify the event.

Would we need seperate laws for denying Sept. 11th, Hiroshima, Red Square or other sensitive tragedies? Or do a certain number of people have to die before it gets its own law?

[hobbes]

[QUOTE=JPaul]

Well, the rule is moronic.

Can there be any disagreemnet to that?

Should I be jailed when I say that the US moon landing was a government hoax.

How many people do you think would be deeply hurt by that opinion being expressed.

How many people who survived the .... never mind, I've already posted that. Either you've read it and ignored it, or not read it. I'm cool either way.


Lots of things cause emotional scars but are not jailable offenses.

Do you have anything other than phish to offer.

On one hand the ends never justify the means and on any=other they do.

Quit talking phish.

[hobbes]

I enjoy the way you state that "the ends never justify the means" in one context (torture), then approve of it in another. Very convenient.

Just covering your edit.

What in the name of fuck is that supposed to mean.

think.

Torutue is never justified

But a law that suppressed freedom of speech is, because emotions may be hurt.

FTW?

[JPaul]

It just seems to me to be silly to specify the event.

Would we need seperate laws for denying Sept. 11th, Hiroshima, Red Square or other sensitive tragedies? Or do a certain number of people have to die before it gets its own law?

The systematic attempted genocide of Jews, over several years, is hardly specifying "the event".

Sorry if you think it's a numbers thing. 6,000,000 men, women and children chosen because of their religion and for the most part civilian and of no military significance, sort of justifies it for me.

[Busyman]

I think you'll find it is, as that's where he was convicted and sentenced.

Well, the rule is moronic.

Can there be any disagreemnet to that?

Should I be jailed when I say that the US moon landing was a government hoax.

No, that is just my idiotic opinion.

Everone has the right to be an idioit. Being an idiot should not make one a criminal.

We are discussing the merit of the law. The law is shit if an uniformed opinion is a jailable offense.

The laws has merit if, by his expressed opinion, he is enciting harm to others.

Good post.

I would think that someone saying that America didn't use blacks for slave labor is an idiot but I would think it dumb as hell to jail him/her for it and I'm black.

I do like how the forum helps bring out what people think on here and how some people show how moronic they are regardless of their sentence structure.

Luckily the Austrians are the ones jailing their ill-informed citizens and conspiracy theorists. We have our own shit like the Patriot Act.