Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

Edited at 2014-09-27 23:30:11

At 9/27/14 11:07 PM, Bit wrote:

At 9/27/14 10:39 PM, Freaki-boy92 wrote: Stuff

I used scientists as an example because they are a group which has often been met with serious opposition with regards to their ideas. Yes, there is substantial modern evidence which proves many of their hypothesis, but many of them had highly controversial ideas in their time. People could have justified arresting Darwin because 'evidence' against evolution can be found in the Bible. That was the limit of most peoples' understanding of life because it was all of the evidence most people needed. Certainly people would have agreed that his ideas were 'toxic'.

No modern ideas should be censored for the same reason. Even though most people may believe the contrary, the idea itself is not necessarily incorrect. Making it illegal to present new ideas - even ones which have been disproved in some respect - is completely counterproductive. If the idea is wrong then it will be disproved again, but it should never be illegal to present an idea.

My tv shows are about to come on in a bit so I'm just gonna leave this to the other guy.

Why should it be illegal, though? And what makes you think that a very, very small group denying a historical event will bring about another genocide?

1:"It should be illegal/criminalized because it's denying the event that happened as a result of years of racism, intolerance, and an anti-productive culture. Denying when events like the Holocaust happened basically gives room for other people to do stuff along the lines of "HA, HA LET'S MAKE INTOLERANT JOKES AND BE TOTAL RACIST SHITHEADS OVER AND OVER AGAIN AND SAY NEVER NOTHING EVER HAPPENED UNTIL IT BOILS DOWN TO ANOTHER GENOCIDE LOL"."

2: Don't you think the root of the hate that starts genocides starts out small? It might not in the immediate future, but over time, some really anti-productive beliefs like racism or "hate never led to any mass genocide" can grow in number, to where it can become a mass-cultural view/belief. Religions like Scientology are an example of this where the religion spread from just small starting group meetings to over hundreds of thousands of members. Memes like dick-neck originally started from this small website and spread to become a temporary internet fad.

None of those apart from Scientology are actually counter-productive in terms of, you know, people being weeded out in some hate-induced campaign of "MAKING A PURE RACE", and even then, Scientology was nowhere near the Holocaust or any other genocide.

I don't think we're on the same page. I'm saying that, in principle, Holocaust denial is just as ignorant and harmful as any religious or conspiracy group who believe that history is incorrect, and feel the need to 're-educate' people using lies.

I don't know about you but I don't think in terms of lives that saying the Earth is flat or that there was some conspiracy loophole in some past event is as harmful as believing that hate didn't lead to a mass and brutal genocide of at least around 20 million people. The two former that I listed can be harmful but I don't think nearly as the latter.

...Except denying that mass genocides happened, if enough believed it, would lead to having an excuse to spread hate.

But they don't. In fact, Christianity has done quite a bit more to spread hate than Holocaust deniers. Especially hate for women and homosexuals.

I don't mean to be rude, but it seems like you're going off topic now. What does Christianity have to with anything in this argument?

---

At 9/27/14 11:07 PM, Bit wrote:

At 9/27/14 10:39 PM, Freaki-boy92 wrote: Stuff

I used scientists as an example because they are a group which has often been met with serious opposition with regards to their ideas. Yes, there is substantial modern evidence which proves many of their hypothesis, but many of them had highly controversial ideas in their time. People could have justified arresting Darwin because 'evidence' against evolution can be found in the Bible. That was the limit of most peoples' understanding of life because it was all of the evidence most people needed. Certainly people would have agreed that his ideas were 'toxic'.

No modern ideas should be censored for the same reason. Even though most people may believe the contrary, the idea itself is not necessarily incorrect. Making it illegal to present new ideas - even ones which have been disproved in some respect - is completely counterproductive. If the idea is wrong then it will be disproved again, but it should never be illegal to present an idea.

My tv shows are about to come on in a bit so I'm just gonna leave this to the other guy.

Why should it be illegal, though? And what makes you think that a very, very small group denying a historical event will bring about another genocide?

1:"It should be illegal/criminalized because it's denying the event that happened as a result of years of racism, intolerance, and an anti-productive culture. Denying when events like the Holocaust happened basically gives room for other people to do stuff along the lines of "HA, HA LET'S MAKE INTOLERANT JOKES AND BE TOTAL RACIST SHITHEADS OVER AND OVER AGAIN AND SAY NEVER NOTHING EVER HAPPENED UNTIL IT BOILS DOWN TO ANOTHER GENOCIDE LOL"."

2: Don't you think the root of the hate that starts genocides starts out small? It might not in the immediate future, but over time, some really anti-productive beliefs like racism or "hate never led to any mass genocide" can grow in number, to where it can become a mass-cultural view/belief. Scientology is an example of this where the religion spreads from just small starting group meetings to over hundreds of thousands of members. Memes like "dick-neck" originally started from this small website and spread to become a temporary internet fad.

I don't think we're on the same page. I'm saying that, in principle, Holocaust denial is just as ignorant and harmful as any religious or conspiracy group who believe that history is incorrect, and feel the need to 're-educate' people using lies.

I don't know about you but I don't think in terms of lives that saying the Earth is flat or that there was some conspiracy loophole in some past event is as harmful as believing that hate didn't lead to a mass and brutal genocide of at least around 20 million people. The two former that I listed can be harmful but I don't think nearly as the latter.

But they don't. In fact, Christianity has done quite a bit more to spread hate than Holocaust deniers. Especially hate for women and homosexuals.

I don't mean to be rude, but it seems like you're going off topic now. What does Christianity have to with anything in this argument?