No Swastika ban, says Germany after Hindus' protest

[struggle4progress]

Brussels, Jan 29 (DPA) European Union president Germany Monday said it was not planning to criminalise the display of Nazi insignia such as the swastika.

The move comes after Hindu groups throughout Europe protested against reported plans for such a ban, arguing that the swastika had been part of their religious symbols for nearly 5,000 years before the Nazis appropriated it.

Germany, which currently runs the agenda-setting EU presidency, wants to use its term at the bloc's helmet to push through new rules that would make denying the Holocaust a crime in the 27 EU member states.

However, the planned legislation "will not seek to prohibit specific symbols such as swastikas", the German EU presidency said in a statement ...

http://www.indianmuslims.info/news/2007/january/30/international/no_swastika_ban_says_germany_after_hindus_protest.html

[Manifestor_of_Light]

1. The Buddhists use it too, being a distillation of HInduism.

Neither group uses large in your face swastikas, either.

[Silent3]

2. I wouldn't care if the swastika...

...was being displayed by neo-Nazis at a holocaust-denial rally. As despicable as such people are, no one should deny them free speech or free expression.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

3. I don't know about Hinduism, but the Buddhist swastika is

the mirror image of the Nazi swastika (or more properly, vice versa, since the Buddhis swastika is older.)

The "arms" of the Nazi swastika face clockwise, while the "arms" of the Buddhist swastka face counter-clockwise.

[cyborg_jim]

4. No doubt the Germans feel sensitive

But the illogical of their laws in the wake of Nazism doesn't really help a jot.

[Evoman]

5. Why don't the Hindu just get a cooler symbol?

I know they had the swastika first, but symbols are a dime a dozen. I'm sure that I could come up with a better symbol.

[kiahzero]

6. Because symbols aren't fungible. (n/t)

[cyborg_jim]

7. It would cost too much to replace the stationary