Holocaust Denial?

With 20th May approaching, I have seen an increase in the messages (on Facebook, You Tube
and blogs) from Muslims who are rallying to call off the event “Everybody Draw
Muhammad Day”. Most of them give the reason that “it hurts and offends them”,
however some of them argue that if Holocaust denial does not get treated as
freedom of expression than why should drawing caricature of their prophet be
treated as free speech.

Personally I wouldn’t draw a parallel between poking fun at Holocaust and drawing a cartoon of a medieval war
lord. Making fun of victims of Nazi cruelty would be equal to making fun of
Bosnian victims of genocide or innocent civilians who die in a suicide attack.
But does this contradict freedom of speech claims? There are indeed many European countries that
have a law against Holocaust denial and such statements are punishable there. Is
it justifiable that Holocaust should be protected by a law that denies free
speech?

I am kind of lost in this primarily I cannot come up with a decent argument and would appreciate
comments/feedbacks/insights from you folks.

0 members like this

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Michael R on May 18, 2010 at 9:09am

The US does not have laws against Holocaust denial. It gets treated the same as any other form of free speech. Yes, I find it repugnant, but that is their right to do so. That is the reason why there is an EDMD event. {A group} is going to dictate that a US right (free speech) is invalid? I don't think so.

BTW: For {A group} you can put Islam, Christianity, or any other group you wish. The statement still holds true. In this case it happens to be Islam.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Cynical Soldier on May 18, 2010 at 10:59am

I pretty sure hate speech isn't illegal. I can stand on a corner and preach hate and hold rallies but I can't incite violence or advocate it towards the people I'm speaking against. It's the called "Danger Test," I believe. If I want to speak out against a minority group for example, I can't go to a place where there are many of them to preach my hate because there's a high capacity violence in that instance. The United States government is concerned with preventing outbursts of violence due to free speech.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by QM on May 18, 2010 at 4:05pm

Free speech has some limits for sure, like I cannot run into a crowded place shouting 'FIRE..FIRE' or something of this sort.

A group can be offended by some one else's right to use free speech. But is that a reasonable excuse to limit free speech? Or to put it in another way, is there any scenario in which free speech needs to be curtailed?

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by willailla on September 24, 2010 at 8:22pm

After the Patriot Acts, freedom of speech--as well as other rights--were dealt a severe blow. They gave the government the power to search the records of librarians and booksellers in secret and arrest anyone who revealed that searches were made. This in effect creates a self censoring atmosphere in which some books are deemed inappropriate and might be removed from public access. Anyone who ordered one of these books could find himself on a government list of possible subversives.

When one considers that the PAs give government the power to secretly arrest and hold anyone it chooses, without benefit of counsel, indefinitely, this can only end free speech eventually for intellectuals, scholars and critics of the government.

Dumb asses don't have to worry. Nothing they read worries the government.

How can anyone deny the holocaust happened when they see our own government using the same NAZI tactics that led to it?

Rights destroyed by PAs

http://www.scn.org/ccapa/pa-vs-const.html

http://www.fepproject.org/commentaries/patriotactupdate.html

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Gaytor on May 18, 2010 at 10:02am

It's hard for me to understand the aversion Europeans have to dealing with much of WWII. It's likely the distance and not having someone drill into me how bad the war was. I'm married to a Czech woman (I am an American) and I once through out the idea of dressing as Hitler and Eva Braun for Halloween. Only one person in that conversation was amused.
I fundamentally agree that free speech is a good thing, even when it's ridiculous. It's better to fight ideology of each other than the will of a government. But why do they want to deny the Holocaust? I instantly imagine that it's due to wanting to hurt the Jews and not allow them to appear to be victims. Is there another reason?

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Cynical Soldier on May 18, 2010 at 10:47am

"Is there another reason?" Stupidity, that's all.

"It's hard for me to understand the aversion Europeans have to dealing with much of WWII. It's likely the distance and not having someone drill into me how bad the war was. I'm married to a Czech woman (I am an American) and I once through out the idea of dressing as Hitler and Eva Braun for Halloween. Only one person in that conversation was amused."

"Idealism increases in direct proportion to ones distance from the problem."
– John Galsworthy

Your wife is a smart person. You could have pissed off a lot of people and gotten yourself and her into some major crap. I have no clue how you thought that was a good idea. All I can say is that the joke would have been on you.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by QM on May 18, 2010 at 4:08pm

Your wife is a smart person. You could have pissed off a lot of people and gotten yourself and her into some major crap.

Thats is a lot like what I would hear if I decided not to participate in Draw Mo Day.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Gaytor on May 20, 2010 at 8:46pm

I don't recall the last time that I heard such a sensitive whinny answer.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Gaytor on May 18, 2010 at 10:13am

Yes sir

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Cynical Soldier on May 18, 2010 at 10:51am

Neo Nazis, White Supremacists and anti-Semitic's do it simply to disparage those of Jewish ancestry.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by elaine kilshaw on May 18, 2010 at 11:52am

Because there are evil people who do not believe what they see on film actually happening and those who believe a bible that was written before they were born and on complete heresay.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Gaytor on May 18, 2010 at 12:19pm

Others like Mahmoud Ahmadinejad seem to do it to remove the potential of feeling sad for Israel. The country was taken and given to the Jews more or less as a safe haven for Jews. If you remove the guilty or pity or empathy factor ( choose the appropriate word), then you can argue that the West is evil for stealing land. If we made sure they had a place because we care about a ethnicity, then we are not so evil and their placement can be justified. Now their actions since... that's a whole other debate. [ Me: "RUN AWAY!"]