Chad Perrin wrote:
Apparently, to you, killing someone for being a Jew is more wrong than killing someone for speaking out of turn. To me, it's equivalent in either case, because in both cases it is murder.
The idea of "hate crimes" is a fairly recent one. This would mete out punishment according to the intentions of the person doing the killing. If a "hate crime" deserves harsher punishment, then a "love crime" such as euthanasia clearly deserves more lenient treatment.
Completely aside from that, the swastika has been used for other purposes for hundreds of years before World War II, including as a Christian symbol, while the hammer and sickle went from obscurity to symbol of an oppressive, mass-murdering regime in a relative blink of an eye.
That's why the swastika was such an effective symbol.
And also, if we are to begin considering "indirect deaths", well, the US is responsible for quite a lot "indirectly".
Let's not start with the circumstantial ad hominem comparisons. It would be nice if you'd retract that statement.
I see nothing "ad hominem" in that general statement. No specific individual is being attacked.
Ec