Germany plans to use its presidency of the EU to launch an initiative which could lead to common laws across the bloc making it a crime to deny genocide and display Nazi symbols.
Ramesh Kallidai of the Hindu Forum of Britain. "It is almost like saying that the Klu Klux Klan used burning crosses to terrorize black men, so therefore let us ban the cross. How does that sound to you?"
"Every time we see a swastika symbol in a Jewish cemetery, that of course must be condemned. But when the symbol is used in a Hindu wedding, people should learn to respect that,"
"In Sanskrit it means 'May Goodness Prevail.' Just because Hitler misused the symbol, abused it and used it to propagate a reign of terror and racism and discrimination, it does not mean that its peaceful use should be banned."
Knives of all kinds are used for killing.
Should we then ban every knife in every kitchen through the EU?
Is it not the mis-use of swastika that should be banned?
A blanket ban will increase prejudice.
2007-01-21 22:38:15 · 11 answers · asked by kayamat_ka_din 3 in Society & Culture ➔ Cultures & Groups ➔ Other - Cultures & Groups
i absolutely agree that to ban the swastika would increase prejudice.
anything that is used to purposely intimidate, offend or hurt someone else should be severly dealt with via the courts..
it is the people that missue these sacred emblems, inc the union jack, the irish tricolour, knives, and the swastika that is the problem and not an emblem..indeed, an emblem is an inanimate object and needs human intervention to animate it!
genocide within the holocost happened,that is accepted by most decent people..hitler was not decent..and neither are his modern followers, who are just bigots and hate mongers..
similar happens in all states in the world that are at war, northern ireland,and the midlle east to name a few are no exception.
to conclude..it is not the emblem that needs to change it is the thinking of those both in power, who are thinking of banning them..it wont work..and will undoubtably create more tension, intimidation and prejudice..and the thinking of the abusers of such emblems..they need to know that any form of intimidation of horrific events will not be tolerated..
2007-01-21 22:56:42 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
I don't agree with banning symbols or flags i consider that censorship and it will gain sympathy for the Neo Nazi's so it will be counter productive. And you are right why should Hindus be denied the right to use the swastika as it was intended because it was misused by the likes of Hitler?
2007-01-21 22:57:12 · answer #2 · answered by jack lewis 6 · 3⤊ 0⤋
As has been so correctly pointed out, the symbol itself is used by Hindus (and certain Romany groups) as a positive symbol so it shouldn't be banned.
Besides it is much better to openly confront the racist scum who use swastika as a Nazi symbol, rather than banning them and making them go underground. In the open they look like the sad pathetic bigots they are. If they're banned, they can play for the sympathy card.
2007-01-21 22:48:10 · answer #3 · answered by Cardinal Fang 5 · 4⤊ 0⤋
i think of its large, return For fortress Wolfenstien got rid of the Swastika from the whole recreation to conform with German regulation (for this reason the doubled headed eagle used as a replace), i think of every physique who ever performed that recreation might understand that no longer something replaced into lost, and there have been probable some much less harm thoughts. who're those people who so desperately could show the swastika?
2016-10-31 23:38:51 · answer #4 · answered by pour 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
They're talking a load of rubbish, it makes them look like v they're doing something about racism by banning nazi symbols when racism is on the rise. They haven't learned anything about racism and are fated to make an even bigger mistake this time around.
2007-01-21 23:18:12 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
I think on a positive note, it would make it easier to locate people who are passionate about their evil cause. I mean a lot of people who are pretty harmless (if a little sick in their humour) use the swastika currently. If it was banned then only those genuinely up to no good will probably risk themselves by using and displaying it.
2007-01-21 22:45:52 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
Because of everything that has happened within germany because of Hitler I would say that it is only right to ban the swastika. How many people really realise that it was originally used as a sign of piece, its new modern day meaning is of evil.
2007-01-21 23:06:48 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
It shouldn't be banned. It originally stood for something quite opposite to what the NAZI's made it. It should be the NAZI's who are banned, not the Swastika.
2007-01-21 22:47:02 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 0⤋
Bannimng is always an emotive issue, and usually counterproductive.
One way would be to ban all symbols that were used with the intention of propagating racism, etc.
It would not be easy to prove, though.
2007-01-21 22:42:45 · answer #9 · answered by alan h 1 · 3⤊ 1⤋
A ban would make the teaching of history more difficult and ironically make denial easier. Modern Germans shouldn't have to continually apologise for the actions of their ancestors, they are not responsible for what happened.
2007-01-21 22:44:01 · answer #10 · answered by Red P 4 · 5⤊ 1⤋