House passes anti-semitism bill.

[Twilight Hue]

House passes antisemitism bill with broad bipartisan support amid campus arrests

The Antisemitism Awareness Act would require the Education Department to adopt the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance's definition of antisemitism.

www.nbcnews.com

Bipartisan as well. At least some sense and sensibility exists.

 

[Pogo]

House passes antisemitism bill with broad bipartisan support amid campus arrests

The Antisemitism Awareness Act would require the Education Department to adopt the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance's definition of antisemitism.

www.nbcnews.com

Bipartisan as well. At least some sense and sensibility exists.

This bill, hope the Senate has more sense and dismisses it.

It is just virtue signalling pandering not an actual well thought out bill.

 

[Twilight Hue]

This bill, hope the Senate has more sense and dismisses it.

It is just virtue signalling pandering not an actual well thought out bill.

We will see. I hope it passes.

 

[Quagmire]

Here's a link without a paywall:

https://www.npr.org/2024/05/02/1247374244/house-passes-bill-aimed-to-combat-antisemitism-amid-college-unrest

 

[Revoltingest]

Here's a link without a paywall:

https://www.npr.org/2024/05/02/1247374244/house-passes-bill-aimed-to-combat-antisemitism-amid-college-unrest

A toothless law to pander to Zionists.
Pproblems...
- 1st Amendment allows hate speech. It supersedes legislation.
- To ban hate speech against one religion's adherents, but no others
is pandering.
- To treat criticism of Israel, Jews & Judaism as "anti-semitism" is dishonest.
- It ignores the basis for protest, ie, government's support of Israel's
genocidal acts against Palestinians.

 

[Twilight Hue]

A toothless law to pander to Zionists.
Pproblems...
- 1st Amendment allows hate speech. It supersedes legislation.
- To ban hate speech against one religion's adherents, but no others
is pandering.
- To treat criticism of Israel, Jews & Judaism as "anti-semitism" is dishonest.
- It ignores the basis for protest, ie, government's support of Israel's
genocidal acts against Palestinians.

Measure passed with 390 to 91. What does that tell you?

 

[VoidCat]

Anyone got a link to the actual bill?

 

[Revoltingest]

Measure passed with 390 to 91. What does that tell you?

As I said in an earlier thread on the same topic,
The unexpectedly high number of dissenters is
encouraging, ie, unconditional support for Israel's
genocide of Palestinians is waning.

 

[Twilight Hue]

Anyone got a link to the actual bill?

It's provided in the article.

https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/6090/text?s=1&r=3&q=%7B%22search%22%3A%22antisemitism+awareness%22%7D

 

[VoidCat]

It's provided in the article.

https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/6090/text?s=1&r=3&q=%7B%22search%22%3A%22antisemitism+awareness%22%7D

Just read it. Why are folk complaining about it? Seems like it's just saying there needs to be a defination so to enforce laws regarding discrimination against Jewish folk. There's been a rise of hate speech and hate crimes against jewish folk recently. Im reminded of a synagogue that got attacked recently. Because of the stuff going on about Palestine folk are attacking jewish folk who have nothing to do with it or may even support Palestine.

 

[VoidCat]

Just read it. Why are folk complaining about it? Seems like it's just saying there needs to be a defination so to enforce laws regarding discrimination against Jewish folk. There's been a rise of hate speech and hate crimes against jewish folk recently. Im reminded of a synagogue that got attacked recently. Because of the stuff going on about Palestine folk are attacking jewish folk who have nothing to do with it or may even support Palestine.

Im now reading the defination on here

What is antisemitism?

With the IHRA working definition of antisemitism, the IHRA built international consensus around an answer to the question, what does antisemitism mean?

holocaustremembrance.com

The one being considered

 

[VoidCat]

Ok so one the concerns is fear of folk not being allowed to criticize Israel. From the link which ill post again

What is antisemitism?

With the IHRA working definition of antisemitism, the IHRA built international consensus around an answer to the question, what does antisemitism mean?

holocaustremembrance.com

Manifestations might include the targeting of the state of Israel, conceived as a Jewish collectivity. However, criticism of Israel similar to that leveled against any other country cannot be regarded as antisemitic. Antisemitism frequently charges Jews with conspiring to harm humanity, and it is often used to blame Jews for “why things go wrong.” It is expressed in speech, writing, visual forms and action, and employs sinister stereotypes and negative character traits.

Sure criticism of israel can be antisemetic. But what I bolded makes sense and is part of the guidelines on the website definition. I think it's a fair thing. I mean criticism of an african country can be considered as racist if its directed in a racist way. Example would be saying that Nigera is full of dirty inhuman savages. Not true but certainly racist. However criticizing Nigeria for a government policy that hurts others is not racist(I dont know much about Nigeria else id put an example of such a policy).

Knowing this im not understanding the issue.

 

[Twilight Hue]

Just read it. Why are folk complaining about it? Seems like it's just saying there needs to be a defination so to enforce laws regarding discrimination against Jewish folk. There's been a rise of hate speech and hate crimes against jewish folk recently. Im reminded of a synagogue that got attacked recently. Because of the stuff going on about Palestine folk are attacking jewish folk who have nothing to do with it or may even support Palestine.

That's why they want to ensure the definition of antisemitism is made crystal clear and to recognize those who are promoting antisemitism and those who are actively supporting terrorist groups whose only goal to to celebrate the killing of jews and the destruction of Israel like the Nazis did.

The bill is meant to educate more than anything else as far as I can tell.

 

[Revoltingest]

Just read it. Why are folk complaining about it? Seems like it's just saying there needs to be a defination so to enforce laws regarding discrimination against Jewish folk. There's been a rise of hate speech and hate crimes against jewish folk recently. Im reminded of a synagogue that got attacked recently. Because of the stuff going on about Palestine folk are attacking jewish folk who have nothing to do with it or may even support Palestine.

And Jews are attacking pro-Palestinian demonstrators.
Muslims here have been subject to violence, hate speech,
& discrimination too.
Why do Jews warrant such special protective legislation,
but not one other group does?

This is particularly hypocritical of Congress, given that
is has supported Israel's apartheid & genocide of
Palestinians unconditionally.

 

[VoidCat]

That's why they want to ensure the definition of antisemitism is made crystal clear and to recognize those who are promoting antisemitism and those who are actively supporting terrorist groups whose only goal to to celebrate the killing of jews and the destruction of Israel like the Nazis did.

The bill is meant to educate more than anything else as far as I can tell.

Im not 100% in agreement with the bill. Just to me as it is now it seems ok and a good thing. Im not Jewish however. I cannot say what is or isn't antisemetic. However ive looked a lot on the holocaust rememberance site. From my understanding they try to be very through with history. And would understand antisemetism as they have to know in order to present history correctly.

And Jews are attacking pro-Palestinian demonstrators.
Muslims here have been subject to violence, hate speech,
& discrimination too.
Why do Jews warrant such special protective legislation,
but not one other group does?

This is particularly hypocritical of Congress, given that
is has supported Israel's apartheid & genocide of
Palestinians unconditionally.

I'm not sure I really care for your opinion on this but I'll bite. Maybe this group is using the current circumstances to get this done something they may have wanted done for years? Im not saying thats the case. But I know antisemetism has been climbing for years before the recent Gaza situation. It wouldnt surprise me if thats the case. The current situation means the bill would be paid attention to more then previous years. And plus oh no! One discriminated group is reaching out for help that means we are putting them before another discriminated group. This discrimination thing ain't no contest. Helping any marginalized group be protected from it is great. Heck maybe muslims might be pushing for similar bills I havent looked now would be a great time for that as folk would pay attention to bills against islamaphobia more with the current situation going on in Gaza.

 

[Revoltingest]

I'm not sure I really care for your opinion on this...

Well, that's a pretty dismissive thing to say.
I'll move on to other posts.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Just read it. Why are folk complaining about it?

Ok so one the concerns is fear of folk not being allowed to criticize Israel. From the link which ill post again

What is antisemitism?

With the IHRA working definition of antisemitism, the IHRA built international consensus around an answer to the question, what does antisemitism mean?

holocaustremembrance.com

Sure criticism of israel can be antisemetic. But what I bolded makes sense and is part of the guidelines on the website definition. I think it's a fair thing. I mean criticism of an african country can be considered as racist if its directed in a racist way. Example would be saying that Nigera is full of dirty inhuman savages. Not true but certainly racist. However criticizing Nigeria for a government policy that hurts others is not racist(I dont know much about Nigeria else id put an example of such a policy).

Knowing this im not understanding the issue.

These are the points that I think could be problematic:

Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, e.g., by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor.

Personally, I think all countries should be secular, free democracies where all residents should have equal rights. This means that while I think that all people in Israel, including Jews, should be free and protected, I disagree with defining a state in terms of religion or ethnicity. I expect that some people would think that my position is one described by this quote.

I also think that the relationship set up between Israel and the Palestinian people is one of Apartheid... which is very close to saying that the State of Israel is a racist endeavour.

Applying double standards by requiring of it a behavior not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation.

In discussions around things like human rights abuses and civilian casualties, I often see people trying to pass off Israel's conduct as normal for a western nation at war, despite the fact that the IDF is killing civilians in Gaza at a rate many times that of other recent conflicts.

Apologists for the IDF's atrocities tend to straw-man calls for a reduction in civilian casualties to be applying a double standard to Israel.

Drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis.

Since the IDF is perpetrating a genocide in Gaza, comparisons with the Nazis are going to come up.

... so those are the problems I have with this definition.

 

[VoidCat]

Well, that's a pretty dismissive thing to say.
I'll move on to other posts.

I just know your post history. I dont know much about the Israel-Palestine conflict that's why i stay out of threads and not take sides regarding it but you dont seem like someone who I'd listen to on the topic. You are clearly firm on one stance and to the point I worry about bias. I am thinking that regarding the bill if it was presented a couple years ago maybe not many folk wouldve thought this bad. So im looking at the bill without thinking about if Israel is in the right or wrong regarding Gaza. I dont want strong opinions on the Gaza issue clouding my judgement on the bill. I want to know Does this bill help prevent discrimination against Jews and if there was discrimination how would it help? Does the bill actively help or harm folk?

 

[VoidCat]

These are the points that I think could be problematic:



Personally, I think all countries should be secular, free democracies where all residents should have equal rights. This means that while I think that all people in Israel, including Jews, should be free and protected, I disagree with defining a state in terms of religion or ethnicity. I expect that some people would think that my position is one described by this quote.

I also think that the relationship set up between Israel and the Palestinian people is one of Apartheid... which is very close to saying that the State of Israel is a racist endeavour.



In discussions around things like human rights abuses and civilian casualties, I often see people trying to pass off Israel's conduct as normal for a western nation at war, despite the fact that the IDF is killing civilians in Gaza at a rate many times that of other recent conflicts.

Apologists for the IDF's atrocities tend to straw-man calls for a reduction in civilian casualties to be applying a double standard to Israel.



Since the IDF is perpetrating a genocide in Gaza, comparisons with the Nazis are going to come up.

... so those are the problems I have with this definition.

Well you have to consider the other part i bolded:
However, criticism of Israel similar to that leveled against any other country cannot be regarded as antisemitic.



if other countries were doing what israel is up to would your criticism be the same? If so I dont think it can be considered antisemetic by the defination. Those were examples and broad ones that are listed of how the defination can be applied

Edit @9-10ths_Penguin

Read above those examples

Contemporary examples of antisemitism in public life, the media, schools, the workplace, and in the religious sphere could, taking into account the overall context, include, but are not limited to

That means the whole context of what you saying has to be considered not just one part

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Does the bill actively help or harm folk?

As far as I know, the legal effect of the bill is zero.

I wish I could remember the details, but I vaguely remember another bill that attempted to spell out how the Constitution would be interpreted and the Supreme Court slapped it down pretty hard, making it clear that it was them - the Supreme Court - and not Congress that has the authority to interpret the Constitution.