*for ironbear...lots of sense in the post

"Why* is "glorification" a criteria for banning expression, whereas "condemning" is a criteria for "allowing" it?"

this is the one where i'd go even further and ask  "does a painting with nazis and kill all jews glorify the holocaust or denigrate the nazis. why can't it just be a piece of work that depicts what happened? does a painting of rice fields stacked with skulls depict the horror of the killing fields or does it say" hey wasn't this fun.  sometimes a work that in some way does depict the glorification of some foul deed(lets say the rape of the sabine women) but the art isn't in the glorification. thats a by product. the art is in it's depiction. it shows the kind of people who the painting glorifies and in doing so reminds us of mans inhumanity to man. is that a bad thing. i think every now and then we should look at pics of nazis dancing on jewish graves and smiling less we forget what really happened, so our kids and our kids kids can ask. "did those sick bastards really kill all those jews. did that sick bastard really create a countryside of rice fields covered in human remains. did they really kill teachers" sometimes it's better to see the sick mind than feel it's force after we sweep it under the carpet jmo

billy