Reply to Antisemitism Awareness Act passes the House

Forum Index » Political Discussion

Reply to "Antisemitism Awareness Act passes the House"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Does it include opposition to Zionism into the anti-semitism spectrum?[/quote]

IHRA does not list “zionism” but does have:

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.[/quote]

This is the most absurd thing ever. Can you imagine if we passed a law that criminalizes denying white Christians their right to self determination, by claiming that the existence of a white Christian state is a racist endeavor? I guess Jewish people are the only people allowed to have an ethnostate and have it not be racist. And if you criticize this the [b]US gestapo[/b] will send you to jail. Scary, scary stuff we’re dealing with here. [/quote]

This Act was meant exactly for people like you.[/quote]

Well, the Act applies to the institution itself discriminating in an anti-Semitic manner. For example, if a professor in a lecture adopts a view point that corresponds to one of the illustrative example of antisemitism in the IHRA working definition.

It doesn't do anything to restrict students protesting in a courtyard.

What this will likely do is cause professors and administrators to be much more careful about what they say in their official capacity as university officials that accept federal funds. I think that's OK - they shouldn't be spouting antisemitic dog whistles while on the job. They do, however, have free speech rights when not teaching classes in their personal time. [/quote]

People get fired for what they say online/in public all the time, and yes, outside of work too. That predates this act...[/quote]

Sure, if they are an at-will employee. But many professors have tenure which gives them stronger speech protections as part of their job so that they can say what they want without fear of losing their job. It's akin to the speech and debate clause for members of Congress.

IMHO, Title VI of the CRA needs to be reopened to cover religious discrimination. [/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics