NationStates Jolt Archive

Can you prove that what they are spreading are lies?

No he can't.

Or since you already have this preconcieved notion that anyone who believes in (an abrahamic) religion is inherently evil, you just automatically know they are lying?

that's it.

Belief is of course subjective, and when exposed to modern science and the modern world in general no one can be fully religious in the full meaning of the word,

As opposed to believing in a failed economic theory that everyone knows does not work, that's rich coming from you.

And yes...you can be fully religious in today's world.

Can you prove that what they are spreading are lies?Yes.

I personally don't think so, no.
infringe on free speech and it is easy to "revise" other rights.

No. Spreading lies means to be a liar.
Not at all. Lying has to do with intent and belief.

If you ask a small child who brings them presents on Christmas Eve, and they reply in all honesty, “Santa”, they are not lying.

You can’t be lying if you don’t know the truth of the matter, or at least don’t know what you say is false. No-one would chastise the child for lying; they do not know any better. As far as they are concerned, Santa does bring them presents on Christmas Eve. Now, we know the truth of the matter; it is in fact the parents or guardians of the child who are bringing them presents. The child has been misinformed.

Another example: Till very recently, I believed that it took around four seconds for light from the Sun to travel to Earth. In fact, it takes around eight seconds. Up until a couple of weeks ago, if you had asked me how long it took light to travel from the Sun to the Earth, I would have said, “around four seconds”. I was wrong, but I was not lying. Again, for me to be lying, I would have to have known that the figure of around four seconds was wrong.

So, unless you believe that children talking about Santa are lying, or anyone talking innocently and incorrectly about facts of the world are lying, then your case falls flat on its face.

And if you do think that children talking about Santa are lying, then I’d plead to you to never have children.

Yes.

Then prove it.

Can you prove that what they are spreading are lies?

Yes.

Then prove it.

Yes, please do.

However, the granting of human rights has nothing to do with freedom of belief.

I'm...astonished.

UB, consider what you have stated, above.

Consider the 1st amendment to the US Constitution, in particular the Establishment Clause.

Consider that you, as an Atheist, are protected by this concept - freedom of belief - from your religious neighbours and their respective establishment.

Consider that you are arguing against that very protection.

No. Spreading lies means to be a liar.

And what about those who perpetuate the lie because they don't know better or do not have the proper education? Would you call them liars too?:rolleyes:

if you ban something, it means that you're scared by this..and these theories are too crazy to be seriously scary

Freedom of speech is a central right in a democratic society. Unless particular types of speech directly lead to harm against others (e.g. "people from group x should be shot/bombed/whatever"), there is no justification for restricting it no matter how objectionable it is to some.

I'm not sure about the numbers cited - 6 million is a LOT of Jews, but Hitler had a long time and a large territory, so I suppose the 6 million figure of Jews killed under Adolph is possible. Even if it was only 600,000 Jews as some claim, that's a lot of people who were killed just because they looked different.

I would like to know why the Jews get all the publicity, though. Hitler hated my ancestors (I'm part Polish on my father's side) just as much as he hated the Jews. There's also the Gypsies and the Slavic peoples and who knows who else who just got imprisoned for questioning der Fuhrer

At any rate, I oppose making it illegal to question the holocaust.

I would like to know why the Jews get all the publicity, though. Hitler hated my ancestors (I'm part Polish on my father's side) just as much as he hated the Jews. There's also the Gypsies and the Slavic peoples and who knows who else who just got imprisoned for questioning der Fuhrer

.


Better press credentials, really. Jews are pretty well entrenched in the worlds of Media, Arts, and Science. Look at how many of the Atomic Bomb scientists were Jews fleeing Naziism- Einstein, Szilard, and Teller, and Enrico Fermi's wasn't, but his wife was Jewish. Newspaper owners, movie moguls, top scientists, when you have those contacts, your story gets told. It is a shame if it becomes the only story told.

Also, the other major groups being sent were "communists" and "homosexuals" (in quotes because many were probably not actually so.) who were considerably less popular at the time.

http://www.youtube.com/v/iXKHw0EZrqM

However, the granting of human rights has nothing to do with freedom of belief.

When you take away the right to believe what you will, you strip people of their individuality, forcing them to conform to what you say is the 'right' beleif. Then, you can force them to believe other things, such as the idea that only the government is the only good choice for controlling monetary decisions, because they know what is 'right' for you, because its right for everyone else.

I'm not sure about the numbers cited - 6 million is a LOT of Jews, but Hitler had a long time and a large territory, so I suppose the 6 million figure of Jews killed under Adolph is possible. Even if it was only 600,000 Jews as some claim, that's a lot of people who were killed just because they looked different.

I would like to know why the Jews get all the publicity, though. Hitler hated my ancestors (I'm part Polish on my father's side) just as much as he hated the Jews. There's also the Gypsies and the Slavic peoples and who knows who else who just got imprisoned for questioning der Fuhrer

At any rate, I oppose making it illegal to question the holocaust.

Probably because persecutaion of jews has been an ongoing thing for centuries, if not millenia.

I can not in good conscious support the prohibition against the denial of the Holocaust of the Second World War. While I find the idea that there are those that aim to deny the systematic extermination of 12 million people absolutely deplorable, I can not prevent them from peacefully questioning the claims and facts.

Granted, on the same note, I have read plenty of the literature on both sides in preparation for a collegiate debate. I can firmly refute many, if not all of the claims made that the WWII Holocaust was fabricated, but I must still accept the fact that those claims can be made.

I find the most substantial evidence to be the testimony given at Nuremberg. Many of the accused defended themselves as "following orders." If these people really had not participated, why did they not state that "I took no part, and if it occurred, I had no knowledge," as a defense? This, coupled with the faulty or simply outright erroneous processes used by so-called 'experts' tells me that it did happen, that history has much of the facts properly recorded, and that the National Socialist Party in Germany was responsible for the genocide of over 12 million people, an astronomical number that must never be forgotten.

I voted no. Everyone has a right to an opinion, no matter how retarded.