Freedom Of Speech And Holocaust Denial

[MissScripture]

[quote name='Extra ecclesiam nulla salus' post='1196796' date='Feb 16 2007, 01:33 AM']
It is a touchy subject. Jews don't like it (obviously) because many of their people were killed in it. But to simply question the number killed, or the manner in which they were killed is not wrong. For one how accurate could the records be, and were does the number 6,000,000 come from? i have heard so many different numbers that i have no idea which is right, they could all be wrong. It is simple arguing over historical facts.
then there are those who say the jews made the whole mess up. I see this as wrong, but im not sure it should be illegal.
P.S i just got back from the holocaust museum in D.C.

there were a lot of misconceptions there about christian "anti-semetism"

but the whole place is creepy
[/quote]
The number 6,000,000 is probably rounding it off, so that it's an even number, but I'd say that the numbers are probably pretty close to accurate. The Nazis recorded pretty much everything. Germans, in general, were pretty big on records.

[SJRod55]

[quote]I might absolutely disagree and abhor what another person says, but that doesn't give me the right to stop them. [/quote]

Totally agree

[kenrockthefirst]

[quote name='StThomasMore' post='1196709' date='Feb 15 2007, 11:48 PM']The only thing a man must believe about that time period would be historicity of the Pope and Catholic bishops during the AD 1940s and historicity and validity of the documents and pronouncements issued by him alone or with them.[/quote]

I hate to bring this up, but the Pope / Vatican weren't exactly in the forefront of defending human rights during the period in question (although I would qualify that by saying there were plenty of religious who did the right thing, e.g. St. Maximilian Kolbe).


[quote name='Maggie' post='1196759' date='Feb 16 2007, 01:18 AM']Yes - the New Covenant is now in effect. But just because the Gentiles are now "chosen" does that necessarily mean that the Jews are now "unchosen"? Surely God doesn't "de-select" people?[/quote]

I draw your attention to Romans 11:

1
I ask, then, has God rejected his people? Of course not! For I too am an Israelite, a descendant of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin.
2
God has not rejected his people whom he foreknew. Do you not know what the scripture says about Elijah, how he pleads with God against Israel?
3
"Lord, they have killed your prophets, they have torn down your altars, and I alone am left, and they are seeking my life."
4
But what is God's response to him? "I have left for myself seven thousand men who have not knelt to Baal."
5
So also at the present time there is a remnant, chosen by grace.
6
But if by grace, it is no longer because of works; otherwise grace would no longer be grace.
7
What then? What Israel was seeking it did not attain, but the elect attained it; the rest were hardened,
8
as it is written: "God gave them a spirit of deep sleep, eyes that should not see and ears that should not hear, down to this very day."
9
And David says: "Let their table become a snare and a trap, a stumbling block and a retribution for them;
10
let their eyes grow dim so that they may not see, and keep their backs bent forever."
11
Hence I ask, did they stumble so as to fall? Of course not! But through their transgression salvation has come to the Gentiles, so as to make them jealous.
12
Now if their transgression is enrichment for the world, and if their diminished number is enrichment for the Gentiles, how much more their full number.
13
Now I am speaking to you Gentiles. Inasmuch then as I am the apostle to the Gentiles, I glory in my ministry
14
in order to make my race jealous and thus save some of them.
15
For if their rejection is the reconciliation of the world, what will their acceptance be but life from the dead?
16
If the firstfruits are holy, so is the whole batch of dough; and if the root is holy, so are the branches.
17
But if some of the branches were broken off, and you, a wild olive shoot, were grafted in their place and have come to share in the rich root of the olive tree,
18
do not boast against the branches. If you do boast, consider that you do not support the root; the root supports you.
19
Indeed you will say, "Branches were broken off so that I might be grafted in."
20
That is so. They were broken off because of unbelief, but you are there because of faith. So do not become haughty, but stand in awe.
21
For if God did not spare the natural branches, (perhaps) he will not spare you either.
22
See, then, the kindness and severity of God: severity toward those who fell, but God's kindness to you, provided you remain in his kindness; otherwise you too will be cut off.
23
And they also, if they do not remain in unbelief, will be grafted in, for God is able to graft them in again.
24
For if you were cut from what is by nature a wild olive tree, and grafted, contrary to nature, into a cultivated one, how much more will they who belong to it by nature be grafted back into their own olive tree.
25
I do not want you to be unaware of this mystery, brothers, so that you will not become wise (in) your own estimation: a hardening has come upon Israel in part, until the full number of the Gentiles comes in,
26
and thus all Israel will be saved, as it is written: "The deliverer will come out of Zion, he will turn away godlessness from Jacob;
27
and this is my covenant with them when I take away their sins."
28
In respect to the gospel, they are enemies on your account; but in respect to election, they are beloved because of the patriarchs.
29
[b]For the gifts and the call of God are irrevocable.[/b]
30
Just as you once disobeyed God but have now received mercy because of their disobedience,
31
so they have now disobeyed in order that, by virtue of the mercy shown to you, they too may (now) receive mercy.
32
For God delivered all to disobedience, that he might have mercy upon all.
33
Oh, the depth of the riches and wisdom and knowledge of God! How inscrutable are his judgments and how unsearchable his ways!
34
"For who has known the mind of the Lord or who has been his counselor?"
35
"Or who has given him anything that he may be repaid?"
36
For from him and through him and for him are all things. To him be glory forever. Amen.

[Extra ecclesiam nulla salus]

[quote name='MissScripture' post='1196868' date='Feb 16 2007, 10:44 AM']
The number 6,000,000 is probably rounding it off, so that it's an even number, but I'd say that the numbers are probably pretty close to accurate. The Nazis recorded pretty much everything. Germans, in general, were pretty big on records.
[/quote]

see, this is what i am talking about. How do you know that? that could be a lie, or completely made up.

[kenrockthefirst]

[quote name='Extra ecclesiam nulla salus' post='1196890' date='Feb 16 2007, 11:47 AM']
see, this is what i am talking about. How do you know that? that could be a lie, or completely made up.
[/quote]

It's not like we don't know what happened. This occurred 60 years ago, within living memory. It's a matter of record.

Having said that, one should be able to express one's views, however wrong they are. Par example, in China we don't want the Thought Police telling genuine Catholics what they should think, believe, or say.

[SJRod55]

Taking the role of the Devils Advocate.... when do the rights of the individual and therefore the right of free speech conflict or pose a threat or danger to the rights of another individual or group? When do you cross the line between your right for freedom of speech and another person or groups right to be 'safe' and 'secure'.

[Resurrexi]

[quote]I hate to bring this up, but the Pope / Vatican weren't exactly in the forefront of defending human rights during the period in question (although I would qualify that by saying there were plenty of religious who did the right thing, e.g. St. Maximilian Kolbe).[/quote]

I wasn't trying to say whether the Pope was defending human rights (which they were, BTW). I was making the following point:

It is incorrect to say "One can believe whatever he wants as long as he accepts the Dogmata and Doctrine of the Catholic Church"
One must also believe in the historicity and validity of the Popes, Ecumenical Councils and Bishops of the Catholic Church and of the documents promulgated by Popes and Ecumenical Councils (and probably in certain instances, Bishops).

Other than these things, though, one may believe whatever he wants if it is good for his faith.

[Maggyie]

[quote name='Rod' post='1196915' date='Feb 16 2007, 12:13 PM']Taking the role of the Devils Advocate.... when do the rights of the individual and therefore the right of free speech conflict or pose a threat or danger to the rights of another individual or group? When do you cross the line between your right for freedom of speech and another person or groups right to be 'safe' and 'secure'.[/quote]

LEGALLY, I think, at least with regards to US law, limiting speech usually depends on a "true threat" of physical harm. For instance, in Virginia v. Black, the Supreme Court ruled that states could only prosecute cases of cross-burning if it was clear that the gesture was meant to intimidate or suggest violence (burning a cross on someone's lawn, for instance).

But if the Klan held a rally on their own property and burned a cross as a part of the "festivities," however, that would merely be an expression of a political opinion and couldn't be prosecuted, even though many, many people would find it deeply offensive.

[Resurrexi]

[quote name='Maggie' post='1197185' date='Feb 16 2007, 05:35 PM']LEGALLY, I think, at least with regards to US law, limiting speech usually depends on a "true threat" of physical harm. For instance, in Virginia v. Black, the Supreme Court ruled that states could only prosecute cases of cross-burning if it was clear that the gesture was meant to intimidate or suggest violence (burning a cross on someone's lawn, for instance).

But if the Klan held a rally on their own property and burned a cross as a part of the "festivities," however, that would merely be an expression of a political opinion and couldn't be prosecuted, even though many, many people would find it deeply offensive.[/quote]

I don't get why the KKK burns crosses... isn't burning crosses anti-Christian (unless of course done respectfully to a worn-out blessed crucifix)? The KKK are supposed to be protestants...

[Didymus]

no, I think it's 'burning crosses' as in pouring gasoline on the grown in the form of a cross and lighting it. At least that's what I thought it meant.

[cmotherofpirl]

[quote name='StThomasMore' post='1196782' date='Feb 16 2007, 02:05 AM']"Holocaust denial" is neither a pretty nor ugly thing... it is morally neutral unless spurred by hatred for the Jewish race (Distinct from the Talmudic religion), in which case it would be evil.[/quote]
Lying is never morally neutral.

[cmotherofpirl]

[quote name='kenrockthefirst' post='1196881' date='Feb 16 2007, 11:22 AM']I hate to bring this up, but the Pope / Vatican weren't exactly in the forefront of defending human rights during the period in question (although I would qualify that by saying there were plenty of religious who did the right thing, e.g. St. Maximilian Kolbe).[/quote]

THIS is absolutely untrue.

[cmotherofpirl]

[quote name='Extra ecclesiam nulla salus' post='1196890' date='Feb 16 2007, 11:47 AM']see, this is what i am talking about. How do you know that? that could be a lie, or completely made up.[/quote]
Wrong. The germans meticulously recorded how many people they murdered. Millions of catholics died as well, NOT just the jews.

[Maggyie]

[quote name='StThomasMore' post='1197213' date='Feb 16 2007, 08:26 PM']I don't get why the KKK burns crosses... isn't burning crosses anti-Christian (unless of course done respectfully to a worn-out blessed crucifix)? The KKK are supposed to be protestants...[/quote]

I read somewhere that they believe the burning cross is a good way of showing that Jesus Christ is the Light of the World... how twisted.

[Resurrexi]

[quote name='cmotherofpirl' post='1197216' date='Feb 16 2007, 06:29 PM']Lying is never morally neutral.[/quote]

It's not lying. You are free to believe what you want about the "Holocaust" (I personally think it's sick and twisted to refer to it as that since holocuast means burnt offering and not a mass murder of a race). As was stated, all on has to believe in is the Dogmata and Doctrines, that is, everything contained in the Scripture and Tradition, and the historicity and validity of the Popes, Bishops and Oecumenical Councils.