In article
<23c3de49-e6ca-4a75-b54e-f1305786da69@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
cryptoguy <treifamily@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> > At the time the war ended, homosexuality was criminal in the U.K., I
> > think most or all of the U.S., probably in at least some of the other
> > allied powers. It shouldn't have been illegal, of course--just as the
> > Nazis shouldn't have ruled Germany. But in terms of the existing legal
> > structure, why was locking up homosexuals not in the same category as
> > locking up burglars?
>
> There were certain categories of people whom the Nazis put into
> concentration
> camps not because of what they DID, but what they WERE. The list
> includes
> Jews, Homosexuals (male and female), Gypsies, Jehovah's Witnesses,
> Freemasons, the mentally and physically disabled. There were others,
> but
> those are the ones that come to mind. AFAIK, ordinary criminals,
> convicted
> through the courts, did not wind up in the camps.
>
> For this reason, it possible to argue that wholesale freedom for those
> in the camps was reasonable.
Fair enough.
But that wouldn't apply to someone convicted of homosexual activities as
opposed to homosexual tastes.
--
http://www.daviddfriedman.com/
http://daviddfriedman.blogspot.com/
Author of _Harald_, a fantasy without magic.
Published by Baen, in bookstores now
|
