Padraic,
I made no statement about my opinions on the holocaust. I don't intend too. Thank you for the lesson anyways, we unfortunately had to lean about the holocaust every single year in school. Every year without fail, over and over and over. I feel like I have a basic handle on what it was, but again thank you any ways, I love wiki links as argument.
My informed opinion that you missed was that "holocaust denial" cannot be avoided without doing great damage to the concept of "free speech". No one took on that point, only my first sentence. And you both read it as my admittance of being a holocaust denier, something that it clearly was not. Tell me where we draw the line of what people are not allowed to say and think. I would like people not to think there is no god, not to say so. But I admit that that would be very, very unfair and dangerous and wrong. If you want to discuss this, actually discuss my point. The inability to remove supposed "hate crimes" and "human rights issues" (on the level of idea and communication, as opposed to murder or such aciton) form "free speech".
I do very much like holocaust deniers if only that I respect their use of the extremes of freedom. I also love 9/11 truthers, it's funny that a few of you admitted to being a truther and then not. Hard to decide? I have supported 9/11 truth movements since 2001, and never changed my stance, as it is an opinion formed on my very best logic. But alas, that is a very different topic.
It might be that the people that made me learn about "the" capital H holocaust every year had an agenda. There are plenty of more interesting history topics, especially after a few years of the same books over again. The Jewish people are not allowed to pretend to hold exclusivity on human suffering.
If you have had my number for some time, call it.
Thank you,
-Pip
I made no statement about my opinions on the holocaust. I don't intend too. Thank you for the lesson anyways, we unfortunately had to lean about the holocaust every single year in school. Every year without fail, over and over and over. I feel like I have a basic handle on what it was, but again thank you any ways, I love wiki links as argument.
My informed opinion that you missed was that "holocaust denial" cannot be avoided without doing great damage to the concept of "free speech". No one took on that point, only my first sentence. And you both read it as my admittance of being a holocaust denier, something that it clearly was not. Tell me where we draw the line of what people are not allowed to say and think. I would like people not to think there is no god, not to say so. But I admit that that would be very, very unfair and dangerous and wrong. If you want to discuss this, actually discuss my point. The inability to remove supposed "hate crimes" and "human rights issues" (on the level of idea and communication, as opposed to murder or such aciton) form "free speech".
I do very much like holocaust deniers if only that I respect their use of the extremes of freedom. I also love 9/11 truthers, it's funny that a few of you admitted to being a truther and then not. Hard to decide? I have supported 9/11 truth movements since 2001, and never changed my stance, as it is an opinion formed on my very best logic. But alas, that is a very different topic.
It might be that the people that made me learn about "the" capital H holocaust every year had an agenda. There are plenty of more interesting history topics, especially after a few years of the same books over again. The Jewish people are not allowed to pretend to hold exclusivity on human suffering.
If you have had my number for some time, call it.
Thank you,
-Pip
