[Lazarus] Do we really need a PaintSwastika procedure?

[Juha Manninen]

On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 8:43 AM, Marc Santhoff <M.Santhoff at web.de> wrote:
> Maybe this discussion can be closed when the names are mangled for
> political correctness and/or there is a clear statement added in the
> unit in question.

What is wrong with the names? The symbol is called "swastika".
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swastika

> May it be in the documentation or some comments, so
> people understand the generic nature of those drawing procedures.

Why would people not understand the generic nature now?
The procedures draw graphics without any political pamphlets or such.
It is as generic as it can be.

You actually want to turn this project into a political one. Why?
Now you want a "politically correct" statement that we are contra some
ideology. The next step is add a statement that we are for some other
ideology.
Why?

What means "political correctness" exactly? Does it mean that one must
repeat the bad things done by Nazis well over 70 years ago, at the
same time ignoring other bad things and genocides done after it?
If so, I don't want to be politically correct.

I don't know what is going on here but guys hey, wake up!
It is year 2016 already.
There are many explosive spots around the world. Many dangerous
ideologies, groups and governments, but none of them are Nazis. Nazis
are part of history. Maybe it is time to move to this century now.

Juha