Holocaust revisionism should be legal

If you felt offended by my first paragraph then I am sorry but I always look into the past debates to try and grab an idea of who I am debating against when I said "hate and fear" that wasn't directly aimed at you but the debates you have done in the past again this was in no way supposed to offend you so I am sorry. I cannot speak for any individual, but why do they have to 'get anything out of it'? This is meant to be an event from history. This makes it worthy of examination and revision, as would be the norm with any other event in history. This is how we learn, discover, this is how errors or falsehoods within history are corrected, through the freedom to fairly examine the evidence for one's self, as a sentient human being and adult. You have no way of knowing what "this research is driven by", but you assume that you do. You've already made up your mind that this one event should have some sort of quasi-religious status that is akin to 'going against god' from centuries ago, you've already made up your mind that any adult that dares think for themselves or do their own research is drive by some unexplained "hate". People do things every day because they believe that action will cause a reaction. To give an example that if someone chooses to garden usually it's for aesthetic reasons or being able to grow food so it may not be anything noticeable but in everything we do we expect something to come out of it in the end. When you said "Falsehoods within history are corrected" it still brings in the original question I asked of "why" as in why do these people want the holocaust to be corrected if this drives them to do research then what do they see happening in the end what shall they receive if they disprove the holocaust and you are right I have no way of knowing the drive behind the research but the reason the laws are in place is too make sure those being driven by hate don't have a way to strengthen their hate as well as the hate of others. If I have no way of knowing what drives others than you have no way of knowing my own stance on the issue either so you cannot make that judgement on me after just one round yet you already have. The emotional stuff here ^^ is totally and utterly redundant. As you say, it is meant to be a "part of history". As such it should be freely open to research, examination, and revision. As much as I love to hear that my argument is redundant I have to disagree because believe it or not this is an emotion fuelled subject and I'm not talking about the revisionist I’m talking about the victims. Look there is no way any revisionist can know 100% that the holocaust never happened so the ones you are defending (those who do it in a non-threatening way) still need to make sure no one is getting hurt and that it should still be done in a way that is respectful to everyone and most importantly the Jews who were the biggest victim in the event. So your position here is that Zyclone B gas was not in fact used but "carbon monoxide gas"? Just to be clear, is that your position re the type of gas allegedly used? Have you ever checked to see, even using the most modern day methods, how long it takes to cremate even one body? But these things are also moot, as the subject here was not my personal view on specific aspects of this event, but that adults should be perfectly at liberty to do their own research, weight the quality of evidence, and make up their own minds. No it is not my position because I do not have a concrete idea of which method was used as I had looked up to see what was used and I found that it was Carbon Monoxide Gas and we can argue over it but that's not what we are here for. When you say moot I’m not sure what you are referencing if you are talking about my argument I was pointing out that existing research was not very clear and appeared to be a bit one sided real researchers cannot be biased and must take on both sides to find what they are looking for and I saw that this report did not do that very well and the arguments are common with revisionist's. I do believe that adults have certain rights to knowledge but this right conflicts with the rights of other so is their right to knowledge more important? No it isn't Accusations of what or whom? Are you suggesting that people who are holocaust revisionists in the countries I mentioned don't to go prison and incur massive fines? My entire position is purely based around the freedom and liberty of any individual to study this historical event for themselves and make up their own minds about all and every claim. My position is that truth fears no investigation. It is not 'accusations' to say that men are thrown in prison for peaceful research and for making up their own mind. It's a self-evident fact. My question is the everyman treatment someone just doing peaceful research on their own term not a 1 in 100 case like the politician all I want to know is how unfairly they are being treated. Your position isn't freedom of historical research its freedom to research the falsehood of the holocaust there is a difference. Again what do you mean I don't understand how it is a "Self-Evident Fact" can you back this statement up cause it's not put into context very well. So it "does good" to put people in prison or ruin them financially for doing their own research and making up their own mind. Only some sort of slave would be penalised for daring to do that. Whether it is a fine or a prison sentence is moot. The research itself and gathering of materials is illegal in all those so called 'free' nations. They end up with a criminal record for doing their own research and making up their own mind as any human being should be allowed to do.This has nothing to do with violence, that's a straw man popped in for effect. This is about a person's inherent right to do their own research any make up their own mind, without fear of being penalised by the state for doing so. This is not research in which the person is collating information on how to make an execute bombs. This is information and this ispeople's human right to have a mind of their own. If that constitutes 'violence' or 'hate' to you, then you must have a very different meaning for those words than the ones I use. Research is not 'violence'. Making up your OWN mind should never be a crime. Your use of Neo Nazi's here is also amiss, since your clear implication is that anyone that thinks for themselves on this issue and who may have a view different somewhat to the state mandated 'view' is a 'Neo Nazi' with the implication then being anyone that researches this must really want to "murder Jews". Does this gentleman seem such a threat to you? Comparing a revisionist to a slave is just such an overblown claim and these two things have nothing to do with each other no matter what stance you have on either subject. You also seems to use "'Free Nation'" a lot so my guess is that you believe that we do not have access to free rights so then to use your term isn't this debate "moot" if there is already no chance of it becoming legalised. Sure it's another argument if it should or shouldn't but it seems this cause is already lost by your belief that we lack freedom. Another thing that got me was when you claimed it has "nothing to do with violence" which from the start is false because the holocaust is a violent event and to this day still drives people to perform violent acts. Sure revisionism isn't always violent but you would be wrong to claim it is never violent and because of that people want to make sure it doesn't cause violence because it does have a violent background to it. Your claim that "people's human right to have a mind of their own" doesn't match with this debate as you have not broken any laws if you just believe it is false you break the law when you go and try to disprove the event with “research”. I have ran out of characters but I will address those men you had pointed out in the next argument.