7 ms·

"hurting religious feelings" is an arrestable offense. Ouch. I think the western nations often underestimate their own freedoms.

• srean 14y ago
  Depends. Try denying the holocaust.
  • almost 14y ago
    You think that pointing out that "holy water" is in fact sewage from a blocked drain is the same thing as claiming that the systematic murder of 6 million people never happened?
    • srean 14y ago
      You are arguing about a false equivalence. I was responding to the claim about the western "freedom" to offend.
    • J3L2404 14y ago
      What thesis one purports is inconsequential to the freedom of ideas. It stands on its merit or it doesn't. No need for bureaucratic intervention. Down with the idea police.
    • gouranga 14y ago
      Let's clear something up here. We will never know the truth. Evidence was burned, paperwork destroyed, the 'responsible' people were trialled in private and executed, propaganda was all over the place, facts are omitted for political gain and people needed to save face. The official story needed to be promoted. The people who deny the holocaust do not deny, but question whether or not the official story is 100% accurate or not. However to have any political force disallow questioning the official story is not an acceptable situation. It undermines free speech and it purveys an unacceptable duality of reality and fiction. Wars are always recorded in the eyes of the victors and are closed from future investigation (a bad situation).
      • urbanjunkie 14y ago
        There's a mountain of evidence that supports the fact that millions of Jewish people were killed in concentration camps. Are you seriously claiming that the biggest issue that holocaust deniers have is that the "official" version isn't "100% accurate".
        • gouranga 14y ago
          Not quite - that's what your history teacher taught you. There's evidence that an undetermined but quite large number of people sadly died in concentration camps during the second world war. The number, race and cause of death was not entirely determined and is not possible to determine any more. That's all the facts on the table - there are no more concrete facts at all believe it or not (find me a citation which is credible to prove otherwise!). This is extrapolated into millions of Jewish people were killed in concentration camps which is the "official story" by the victors. The story came before evidence and evidence was destroyed before the story could be verified. The main issue is that historical revisionism is used to piece together events so we can learn about the past. When the label and respective charge of "holocaust denial" is placed one something, it is a closed subject where revisionism is no longer allowed. It's an enforced dark age. It should always be open for discussion and research. Perhaps one day some clarity will be found? Perhaps more can be brought to justice, perhaps more names could be cleared. It's not closed, so don't close it is what I'm saying.
          • srean 14y ago
            Is it really relevant if it was 6 million or 2 million or less. Regardless of the numbers it was mankind at its worst. Not the singular act of depravity, not the only act of genocide, but it does not need to be so to be condemned. I think there are better things to do than nitpick on the numbers. At least the allied forces had the foresight to document the concentration camps. My first reaction to it when I was reading about it was, go on fight the war, cover more ground, why are you pausing over this "PR exercise". But then they (Churchill et al) were right, I was wrong, clearly I am not made up for this kind of stuff.
          • 14y ago
  • J3L2404 14y ago
    Or sending a racist tweet from the pub after a match. When does he get out? Maybe Europe needs a constitution.
  • VMG 14y ago
    Still, most people would rather live with that restriction than move to Iran where you can have a congress about that but get executed for blasphemy. The OPs point stands, people in the west are vastly more free in their expression than in most other countries.
• gouranga 14y ago
  Hm, not quite. At least in the UK, we've got: Race Relations Act 1976 Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 Racial and Religious Hatred Act 2006 Also a load of stuff inherited from the EU which is very restrictive. Unfortunately for us, the intent of the laws was good but when you take a look at how the laws are applied, they are usually used via interpretation to silence and detain people with an opinion, be it valid or not. It's free speech for all (including the bad stuff), or no speech at all. The latter is all too common.