BF2S Forums Way to Go France

Ikarti wrote:

On one hand, that's a good thing they acknowledge the genocide. On the other hand, making denial of genocide a crime is fairly pointless and does infringe upon rights. I mean, they have laws in Europe about Holocaust denial. If you do that in America everyone will just think you're a loony who probably married their cousin.

If you get fined for smoking, why not?

Ikarti wrote:

sergeriver wrote:

Ikarti wrote:

On one hand, that's a good thing they acknowledge the genocide. On the other hand, making denial of genocide a crime is fairly pointless and does infringe upon rights. I mean, they have laws in Europe about Holocaust denial. If you do that in America everyone will just think you're a loony who probably married their cousin.

If you get fined for smoking, why not?

Fining them, fine, but it costs more to keep them in jail when they really haven't done anything more than make an idiot of themselves.

I think it will consist only in a fine, the jail is too much, but it still is good to see someone feels we need to remember in order to never commit the same mistakes.  I say well done.

Bubbalo wrote:

I disagree with any law like this.  The word "though-crime" comes to mind.

Then you have an asshat like Ottomania opening a thread "do you agree that the Armenian Genocide is a myth?" and defending the turks saying there's no proof of it.

Heck, I'd say +100 to the French.  A lot of Americans hate them, but they really don't get the credit they deserve sometimes.

Call of Duty 3, coming out later this year, depicts the liberation of Paris.  In the game, you only get to play as American, Brit, Canadian, and Polish troops.  The liberation of Paris was actually performed by a French division.  Way to go America, the most "realistic" WW2 game of the year and you don't even get the F'ing countries right.  But w/e, the noobs will be pleased with just about anything that comes out with the words "INTENSE" and "REALISTIC WW2 COMBAT" spammed all over the box.

Last edited by Spearhead (2006-10-12 09:21:09)

Last edited by King_County_Downy (2006-10-12 09:34:44)

Ikarti wrote:

On one hand, that's a good thing they acknowledge the genocide. On the other hand, making denial of genocide a crime is fairly pointless and does infringe upon rights. I mean, they have laws in Europe about Holocaust denial. If you do that in America everyone will just think you're a loony who probably married their cousin.

Albert Einstein's parents were cousins, and he married his cousin, too.

That is one of the worst laws ever...

Last edited by specops10-4 (2006-10-12 17:43:54)

France is a strange place.

Bubbalo wrote:

I disagree with any law like this.  The word "though-crime" comes to mind.

No free speech in France, I guess. Guess they'd better shrug off that 'holier-than-thou' attitude.

In Germany, I am almost positive it is illegal to deny the Holocaust.  It may be against our American way of thinking "Do or think whatever you want, it's not our fault if you're insane", but it's used to prevent distortions, which is what Hitler did. 

It's not like they're busting doors looking for random people who think something...

The French government doesn't decide "what their people think".  Europe remembers World War 2 quite vividly, and they're taking steps to destroy appeasement for people like the Nazis.  It's also illegal to display a swastika in Germany, in case some of you didn't know.  So please, stfu about European countries "deciding what their people think".

Last edited by Spearhead (2006-10-12 20:56:40)

sergeriver wrote:

Then you have an asshat like Ottomania opening a thread "do you agree that the Armenian Genocide is a myth?" and defending the turks saying there's no proof of it.

Which he has every right to do.  The problem is, how do you make the call on what is or isn't disputable?

jonsimon wrote:

Bubbalo wrote:

I disagree with any law like this.  The word "though-crime" comes to mind.

Honestly, I thought France was above Orwellian government.

There are many things you cant legally say in public, this is just one more. It has close to nothing to do with what one is allowed to think about the subject. In principle I am against such laws because they may hinder/handicap debates about history. On the other hand, I am all for making these kind of events as widely known as possible. You must agree that this is a great way to arouse peoples interest on the matter.

Last edited by SpaceApollyon (2006-10-13 05:27:37)