New Antisemitism Law Would Be the Most Aggressive Anti-speech Law We've Seen, and Make the Bible Illegal

It defines the New Testament as Antisemitic

Do we have any Tucker Carlson fans in the house tonight?

Throw ‘em out!

Any Charlie Kirk followers here among us?

Get ‘em up against the wall!

Matt Walsh supporters???

Straight to the gulag!!!

You can’t just make a law banning speech based on an ever-evolving definition that gets updated on some website owned and operated by unelected charlatans.

That is the absolute definition of tyranny. Not that anyone even cares about English anymore, or laws, or any part of reality. If you decide that a certain group is allowed to declare what people are allowed to say or do, and the group tells you that the bad speech and thoughts can evolve and change definition over time, you are just saying that everyone is a slave of the state.

But really. This new law says that there is a ‘working definition’ of antisemitism as laid out by an organization called the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA), that has to be obeyed by everyone.

According to that definition, one example of antisemitism is making any kind of claim of “Jews killing Jesus.”

So you understand: that means that these congress people and their donors are saying that the New Testament is illegal. That was the conclusion reached by Charlie Kirk, and Matt Walsh and Tucker Carlson when it passed the House.

You know? Those pundits we all love and adore…so long as they’re towing the line of political correctness.

I wonder what will happen to them now that their comments are in direct opposition to an insane and totally bizarre new restriction on quoting the Bible?

Here’s the congressional prostitute Mike Johnson refusing to clarify if there is any kind of criticism or protest against the state of Israel that would not be prohibited by this law.

So yes. Antisemitism, which has no clear definition, but which is able to evolve according to the IHRA, is now illegal in America.

The Guardian:

The US House of Representatives has voted to pass an antisemitism awareness bill, a controversial measure sponsored by a New York Republican amid controversy over pro-Palestinian protests on college campuses in Manhattan and across the US, as Israel’s war with Hamas drags on.

The bill passed 320-91 with some bipartisan support.

Mike Lawler’s bill will “provide for the consideration of a definition of antisemitism set forth by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance for the enforcement of federal anti-discrimination laws concerning education programs or activities, and for other purposes”.

The use of this ‘hate crime’ concept has always been unhinged. The purpose, as usual with the media in America, is to control what people think.

I remember when I was in college, a gay man on a college campus was killed and it became a huge national media story. The narrative was that he was killed for no reason at all except being gay, murdered by homophobes. (It was later shown that the killers themselves were gay, and it was some kind of botched drug deal.)

At the time, I was a huge true believer in all liberal causes. But even at that point, I was so confused when I heard the media saying that it was a ‘hate crime.’

I was like, “Are some murders not hateful? How do you do a loving murder? Or a neutral murder?”

I always knew it was a fake idea.

Of course I later realized what we all now know: that the point of making hate crime laws is to politicize the legal system to steer people toward approved opinions. It allows the system to take real crimes like murder or vandalism, and claim that those crimes are worse if they happen to a privileged person (like a gay person).

To pull it off, all you have to do is point to some historical atrocity and say, “Everyone in the group who went through that (slavery, genocide, sexism, homophobic) event is in a privileged class. Nobody is allowed to criticize anyone in those groups.”

Then you can make laws, some unwritten taboos enforced by the media and social media platforms, some written into literal laws in the legislatures.

If you allow laws like that, you have introduced the idea that some kinds of victims deserve more sympathy or justice than others. Most people will agree that hate is bad, and will probably be dumb enough to think it can be stopped with a law.

Laws can’t be used to control people’s thoughts and emotions. That is gibberish. Laws are designed to prevent actions that violate other people’s safety or property. That’s all.

But once you have planted the idea that certain actions are more hateful than other actions based on who was being attacked, you will be able to extend the logic to, “Actually, just saying bad things about certain victims is worse than saying bad things about normal people.”

One of the current expressions of this is that the media and government are claiming that nobody has any sincere or legitimate criticism to make of Israel. The ONLY reason anyone is criticizing their genocide operation is sheer blind hatred (antisemitism).

Democrats opposed it as a messaging bill meant simply to boost Republicans on a hot-button issue and trap Democrats into taking politically awkward votes.

The American Civil Liberties Union opposed the bill, telling members: “Federal law already prohibits antisemitic discrimination and harassment by federally funded entities.

“[The bill] is therefore not needed to protect against antisemitic discrimination; instead, it would likely chill free speech of students on college campuses by incorrectly equating criticism of the Israeli government with antisemitism.”

Yes.

The sponsors of the bill are saying that without it Jewish students will be unsafe on college campuses. In reality, the purpose is to shut down free speech exposing the Gaza genocide.

The Foundation for Middle East Peace (FMEP), which “works to ensure a just, secure and peaceful future for Palestinians and Israelis”, has defined the shifting meaning of “antisemitism” in US political discourse.

“Traditionally,” the FMEP says, “‘antisemitism’ has meant hostility and prejudice toward Jews because they are Jews – a scourge that has imperiled Jews throughout history, and is a source of resurgent threats to Jews today.

“In recent years there has been an energetic effort to redefine the term to mean something else. This new definition – known today as the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s ‘working definition of antisemitism’, is explicitly politicised, refocusing the term to encompass not only hatred of Jews, but also hostility toward and criticism of the modern state of Israel.”

We have free speech. At least in theory. Americans are allowed to criticize our elected representatives if we feel that they are not representing our best interests.

Most Christians are not big fans of government murders against anyone—doing psycho overseas war crusades for unknown reasons just aggravates the sin much, much more.

Congressman Matt Gaetz has been going very hard against all of this insanity.

He pointed out correctly that if this bill actually becomes a law, it will establish the DOE as an Antisemitism police and, ironically, will do much to exacerbate the very thing it claims to be preventing.

I didn’t expect the Matt Walsh redemption arc but yes, I am here for it.

Gaetz is doing God’s work.

The Hill:

Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.) labeled the House antisemitism legislation as a “ridiculous hate speech bill” ahead of the vote on Wednesday.

The House approved a bill that aims to crack down on antisemitism on college campuses amid ongoing pro-Palestinian protests taking place at U.S. universities across the country. Gaetz voiced his opposition to the bill ahead of the vote, saying that some excerpts of the Bible would meet this bill’s definition of antisemitism.

“This evening, I will vote AGAINST the ridiculous hate speech bill called the ‘Antisemitism Awareness Act,’” he wrote on social media platform X.

“Antisemitism is wrong, but this legislation is written without regard for the Constitution, common sense, or even the common understanding of the meaning of words. The Gospel itself would meet the definition of antisemitism under the terms of this bill!” he continued.

Christians: wake up!

This is a law aimed at outlawing the Gospel.

Are you beginning to understand?

The bill, if enacted, would require the Department of Education to use the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s (IHRA) working definition of antisemitism when enforcing antidiscrimination laws.

Yep. They want to shut down all free speech at the universities. The institutions where the whole purpose is to educate people and train them to think critically.

Gaetz said that one of the examples of IHRA’s definition of antisemitism includes “claims of Jews killing Jesus.” He then pointed to excerpts from the Bible to back his argument, suggesting that the religious text would fall under the definition.

“The Bible is clear. There is no myth or controversy on this. Therefore, I will not support this bill,” he added on X.

The IHRA defines antisemitism as “a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews” and says “Rhetorical and physical manifestations of antisemitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities.”

The bill would also cover contemporary examples of antisemitism identified by IHRA, including  “using the symbols and messages associated with classic antisemitism (e.g., claims of Jews killing Jesus or blood libel) to characterize Israel or Israelis.”

This USA/Israel war in Gaza is completely out of control, as well as being extremely unpopular.

Thousands of children have been killed. And untold more civilians in general have died from the bombs and the torture murders before being thrown in mass graves by the IDF.

These university protests are not slowing down. They’re spreading and increasing. The tear gas and arresting students are failing.

I don’t think goofy laws banning criticism of Israel are going to work, either.