France recently moved to make the denial of the Armenian genocide a punishable offense under law. Of course this raises a plethora of questions. Although this happened a little while ago, its really pertinent to what we are discussing, so I want to know what you guys think. Here the link to an Article on it from the Herald tribune:
http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/10/12/news/france.php?page=1
Can passing such a law be considered just?
Can not passing such a law be considered just?
Could a law like this ever get passed in America?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
This was posted by Thomas Mallon
The post, I mean
I do not necessarily think that a law such as this is just. Even though Holocaust denial is ludicrous, a law limiting what people can say is still questionable, because other peoiple wanting to pass other laws against speech could use it as a point of reference. I'm not using the "slippery slope" argument and saying that this law definitely will lead to others, but I do think it's important that free speech be maintained, because sometimes what is right and wrong to say gets fuzzy (even though in this case, Holocaust denial is obviously wrong). On the other hand, I see where the French government is coming from in that Holocaust denial can lead to anti-Semetic emotion and is really not right. Then we get back to the whole question of legislating morality. But aren't all laws legislating some sort of morality? Basic human rights are based on morals, and just because they are does not mean they shouldn't be enforced. So where do you draw the line, if there is one? But there has to be one, if not existent than created, because thats sort of what the law is for...I'm not sure though. Can laws be made to accomodate this gray area of legislating morality?
I agree with Katie. I don't think that it should be passed as a law because obviously there are people out there who deny that the genocide ever happened but they should not be punished for having those beliefs. Although it happened, and like the Holocaust, there are those who completely deny "facts" of history but it usually comes down to the way they were ways. This also relates to the Hate.com video with the women talking abou white supremacy while holding her baby. It is exactly the same question that the whole class addressed, "what will that kid turn out like with a mother like that". I feel enlightment as opposed to punishment would be a more viable solution.
On the other hand they are apart of ignoring/avoiding the fact that genocide has happened around the world. By not addressing these things it is just contributing to the ignorance (in schools, within families, etc.).
So in a way passing the law and not passing the law are both just, but maybe not equally.
I'm not quite sure if a law like this would ever get passed in America because there is a high probability that there are people who believe the genocide did not happen, among other things (like White Supremacy, etc.).
Post a Comment