Law House passes antisemitism bill that will target free speech and criticism of Israel

jefferz said:
Calling everyone a traitor was so last month. Try to keep up.
Click to expand...
Well, they certainly didn't just stop being traitors this month. They're operatives of Israel
 
As much as I find woke morons to be annoying and counter-productive; and the ones who do illegal things should be punished accordingly, this is completely ridiculous and goes against everything the first Amendment stands for. The text of the bill essentially says that anyone whose comments are labelled as "antisemitic" by the IHRA can be punished under the Civil Rights Act.

(1) title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. 2000d et seq.), prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, and national origin in programs and activities receiving Federal financial assistance;
(2) while such title does not cover discrimination based solely on religion, individuals who face discrimination based on actual or perceived shared ancestry or ethnic characteristics do not lose protection under such title for also being members of a group that share a common religion;
(3) discrimination against Jews may give rise to a violation of such title when the discrimination is based on race, color, or national origin, which can include discrimination based on actual or perceived shared ancestry or ethnic characteristics;
(4) it is the policy of the United States to enforce such title against prohibited forms of discrimination rooted in antisemitism as vigorously as against all other forms of discrimination prohibited by such title; and
(5) as noted in the U.S. National Strategy to Counter Antisemitism issued by the White House on May 25, 2023, it is critical to—
(A) increase awareness and understanding of antisemitism, including its threat to America;
(B) improve safety and security for Jewish communities;
(C) reverse the normalization of antisemitism and counter antisemitic discrimination; and
(D) expand communication and collaboration between communities.
Click to expand...

For purposes of this Act, the term “definition of antisemitism”—
(1) means the definition of antisemitism adopted on May 26, 2016, by the IHRA, of which the United States is a member, which definition has been adopted by the Department of State; and
(2) includes the “[c]ontemporary examples of antisemitism” identified in the IHRA definition.
Click to expand...

Complete non-sense and this simply cannot pass the Supreme Court.
 
CantCucktheTuck said:
Most of us are really tired of these politicians being more loyal to foreign countries than they are to the American people. Whether that be Israel, Ukraine, or some other random foreign country.
Click to expand...
I mean, it's objectively treason. But we don't live in an actual democracy, nor is rule of law enforced equally.
 
Scheme said:
As much as I find woke morons to be annoying and counter-productive; and the ones who do illegal things should be punished accordingly, this is completely ridiculous and goes against everything the first Amendment stands for. The text of the bill essentially says that anyone whose comments are labelled as "antisemitic" by the IHRA can be punished under the Civil Rights Act.





Complete non-sense and this simply cannot pass the Supreme Court.
Click to expand...
But will you ask yourself why such a blatantly unconstitutional bill made it past the house in such quick time with such a large majority? AIPAC needs to be dealt with, it’s a foreign body that has invaded our government and is throughly corrupting our decision making capability. I see a lot of conservatives criticizing this Bill but none willing to confront how and why it got passed so easily.
 
moosaev said:
I know he voted nay, thats why i literally said it in the post you responded to LOL. My point is that he's previously supported anti-BDS laws, which are really no different from this anti-semitism bill in principle. So don't pretend that the far right is principled on free speech, they aren't.

Also, the backbone of the Reps who voted nay yesterday was the progressive caucus. 70 dems voted nay compared to 20 gop.
Click to expand...
Yeah, no shit that was the backbone. We're actually looking for them to support things on principle even when they disagree with the sentiment, not just when they support the sentiment.

If the exact same bill was "islamaphobia", they wouldn't support it and neither would you. It isn't just free speech when you agree with it and hate speech if you don't.
 
moosaev said:
But will you ask yourself why such a blatantly unconstitutional bill made it past the house in such quick time with such a large majority? AIPAC needs to be dealt with, it’s a foreign body that has invaded our government and is throughly corrupting our decision making capability. I see a lot of conservatives criticizing this Bill but none willing to confront how and why it got passed so easily.
Click to expand...
There are plenty of corrupt conservatives and democrats in Congress. I wish we limited their power and ability to spend money.
 
Scheme said:
There are plenty of corrupt conservatives and democrats in Congress. I wish we limited their power and ability to spend money.
Click to expand...
Got it, so you’re unwilling to focus on AIPAC.

The reason I’m singling them out is because there is currently only one foreign government that has direct control over our’s. Anybody who’s serious about American sovereignty will make that their priority.
 
moosaev said:
Got it, so you’re unwilling to focus on AIPAC.

The reason I’m singling them out is because there is currently only one foreign government that has direct control over our’s. Anybody who’s serious about American sovereignty will make that their priority.
Click to expand...
AIPAC isn't the problem, the problem is that our politicians can be corrupted by the highest buyer (or whatever AIPAC is providing them). If AIPAC went away, then the next highest buyer would have just as much sway.

I would rather solve the actual problem than target one specific bad actor, as I'm sure there's many more lying in the dark. We need to ban lobbying. I go actually want it to go further, I think politicians should be banned from making money other than their salaries and pensions for the rest of their lives. Give them a reasonable salary and pension and let it be known that anyone who runs for House/Senate has their earning potential limited for the rest of their lives.
 
Scheme said:
AIPAC isn't the problem, the problem is that our politicians can be corrupted by the highest buyer (or whatever AIPAC is providing them). If AIPAC went away, then the next highest buyer would have just as much sway.

I would rather solve the actual problem than target one specific bad actor, as I'm sure there's many more lying in the dark. We need to ban lobbying. I go actually want it to go further, I think politicians should be banned from making money other than their salaries and pensions for the rest of their lives. Give them a reasonable salary and pension and let it be known that anyone who runs for House/Senate has their earning potential limited for the rest of their lives.
Click to expand...
There’s a crucial difference you’re missing, every other foreign government lobbying org has to register as a foreign agent….except AIPAC. Israel is 1 of 1 in their ability to influence US politics. There is a difference between political corruption and a foreign government having power over Congress. We can’t totally stop corruption, but we can end AIPACs ability to control Congress with impunity.
 
The XL said:
I mean, it's objectively treason. But we don't live in an actual democracy, nor is rule of law enforced equally.
Click to expand...
I kind of always wondered why we have senators visiting other countries in any official capacity. Would seem that it's only the President or members of his diplomatic corp chosen for such visits that should be hobnobing with foreign political figures. Their jobs are to work for the American people specifically and none of that has anything to do with visits to foreign nations or their representatives. Now there are certain circumstances where Congress does in fact deal with foreign nations or specific individuals but that is as a whole and not on an individual basis, or at least shouldn't be that way.
 
panamaican said:
Ok...I still hadn't read it at the time that I posted. Short or long doesn't change that.
Click to expand...
I saw parts of whats in the bill.

This is a ridiculous bill.
As someone mentioned in a video.

This bill if it passes and is approved would mean they would go after some of the bible phrases just as well...
 
moosaev said:
You just committed an anti-Semitic offense according to Congress. Congrats buddy.
Click to expand...
- Theres several Israelis against this onslaught. Bibi even fired a high ranking military. I guess he was antisemit also?:)
 
Scheme said:
As much as I find woke morons to be annoying and counter-productive; and the ones who do illegal things should be punished accordingly, this is completely ridiculous and goes against everything the first Amendment stands for. The text of the bill essentially says that anyone whose comments are labelled as "antisemitic" by the IHRA can be punished under the Civil Rights Act.





Complete non-sense and this simply cannot pass the Supreme Court.
Click to expand...



The bill does not restrict free speech. It criminalizes discrimination and harassment against Jewish people.
 
Free speech never existed on school grounds.
 
Extremely pro israel but special group rights can fuck off. They are already protected by the same rights that everyone else is.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

White Whale
Social Crisis' at Columbia University forces classes online, arrests at Yale College campuses are becoming battle grounds for Hamas and Israel
65 66 67
Replies
1K
Views
37K
Siver!
Siver!

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,238,418
Messages
55,557,940
Members
174,819
Latest member
blunttruth

Share this page

Back
Top