Date: Sun, 5 May 2024 04:59:07 -0500 Mime-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: the Republican anti-anti-Semitism on college campuses bill Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv References: <20240502174315.00006c52@example.com> <17cc3f5499b4321c$231968$197378$4ed50460@news.newsdemon.com> Content-Language: en-US From: trotsky In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Lines: 149 Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!diablo1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feeder.usenetexpress.com!tr2.iad1.usenetexpress.com!news.newsdemon.com!not-for-mail Nntp-Posting-Date: Sun, 05 May 2024 09:59:07 +0000 X-Received-Bytes: 8310 Organization: NewsDemon - www.newsdemon.com X-Complaints-To: abuse@newsdemon.com Message-Id: <17cc8f53ab56fb83$232579$197378$4ed50460@news.newsdemon.com> Bytes: 8691 On 5/4/24 10:00 PM, FPP wrote: > On 5/4/24 5:33 AM, trotsky wrote: >> On 5/3/24 11:38 AM, BTR1701 wrote: >>> Rhino wrote: >>>> On Thu, 2 May 2024 17:37:44 -0000 (UTC) >>>> "Adam H. Kerman" wrote: >>>> >>>>> I'm trying to figure out if I support the legislation that passed the >>>>> House yesterday defining anti-Semitism and requiring the Department of >>>>> Education to use the definition to determine whether a university has >>>>> failed to take action against anti-Semitism. Department of Education >>>>> may be required to cut federal funding for universities found to be >>>>> disriminating. >>>>> >>>>> Anti-Semitism is an expression of thought. The definition, which >>>>> includes in its definition of anti-Semitism the criticism of Israel >>>>> that tends to apply uniquely to Israel and no other nation on earth, >>>>> is possibly a reasonable one. >>>>> >>>>> The incidents of speech can certainly be labeled as anti-Semitic, >>>>> along with incidents in which threats, intimidation, vandalism, and >>>>> violence have occurred. >>>>> >>>>> Is the legislation requiring universities to shut down protests or >>>>> punish those participating in the protests if there is no finding that >>>>> the speech also included threats and intimidation? >>>>> >>>>> Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Georgia) opposed the legislation on >>>>> religious grounds. Do I look to her for leadership on religion or >>>>> anything at all? She wrote that she would not vote for the law >>>>> because it "could convict Christians of antisemitism for believing >>>>> the gospel that says Jesus was handed over to Herod to be crucified >>>>> by the Jews." This has been used as justification for violence >>>>> against Jews over the centuries. >>>>> >>>> I could really benefit from some facts here. My knowledge of the >>>> details from either a Christian or Jewish perspective is extremely >>>> limited here. >>>> >>>> I know that Jesus was crucified at Herod's behest. Herod was a King but >>>> did he actually have the power to order the execution on his own >>>> initiative or was he simply doing as the Roman emperor directed without >>>> any realistic possibility of dissenting? And what was Herod's own >>>> religion? Was he Jewish? Was he a popular leader among the Jews? (Yes, >>>> I know that is a silly question given that very few people had much say >>>> over who was going to be their king: it's not like he was elected! But >>>> kings, however they can be get that job, can be anywhere on a spectrum >>>> from widely loved to massively despised. I'm just curious where Herod >>>> was among the people he ruled.) What were the sentiments of the Jewish >>>> community about Jesus? I knew Jesus was Jewish but I don't know if most >>>> Jews thought well of him or if they thought he was some kind of >>>> harmless weirdo or dangerous heretic. >>>> >>>> Also, how did Jesus come to be in Herod's custody? What actual crime >>>> did he commit? Who arrested him? Was his crime seen by agents of the >>>> King (the equivalent to today's police) or was he turned in by an >>>> informer? I know Judas is supposed to have a part in this - I remember >>>> something about Judas getting 30 pieces of silver to denounce Jesus - >>>> but again, I don't remember details. Did Judas actually slink into a >>>> police station-equivalent and rat out Jesus? Or was he rounded up and >>>> tortured into denouncing Jesus? >>>> >>>> I think I need to know all this in order to form an opinion on Greene's >>>> concerns. I should point out that I've heard accusations of >>>> wing-nuttery against Greene, especially by the "progressive" media, but >>>> I've never heard a single clip directly from her where she explains her >>>> views about anything so I'm trying to give her the benefit of the doubt >>>> initially, even though I utterly loathe the idea that she's trying to >>>> protect a justification for launching anti-Jewish pogroms. >>>> >>>>> I heard excerpts of the bill's sponsor's speech on the House floor on >>>>> C-SPAN this morning. Michael Lawler (R-New York) is the lead sponsor. >>>>> He explained that he was trying to help college leaders understand >>>>> what anti-Semitism is because they have so much trouble noticing it >>>>> taking place. I couldn't stop laughing. >>>>> >>>> Bravo to Lawler for his wit! >>>>> The bill's sponsors stated that the bill includes language that does >>>>> not thwart criticism of the government of Israel. I'm not sure. The >>>>> anti-Semitic criticism of Israel they are trying to thwart could be an >>>>> expression of anti-Semitism (under the definition) and may not be an >>>>> attempt to threaten or intimidate. It's possible to be anti-Semitic >>>>> without making a death threat. >>>>> >>>>> These are my concerns. I haven't thus far found concerns stated by >>>>> Democrats who opposed the legislation to be all that specific to >>>>> concerns they claim to have over the potential for free speech to be >>>>> stifled. >>>>> >>>> Yet somehow I feel sure the Democrats would be EXTREMELY unhappy if any >>>> new law limited the right of their precious "progressive" students from >>>> being as anti-Israel/anti-Semitic as they wanted to be. >>>>> Even if Republicans supporting this legislation have the moral high >>>>> ground -- and they do appear to -- I don't want speech stifled. >>>>> >>>> A worthy goal! >>>>> Even those students supporting Hamas might have been represented by >>>>> David Goldberger to protect their civil right to free speech, in the >>>>> olden days in which the ACLU represented Kluxers and neo-Nazis so that >>>>> the rest of us might speak freely. >>>> >>>> That was then, this is now. My perception is that the ACLU has morphed >>>> beyond recognition into a hard-core anti-capitalist left wing group of >>>> advocates. >>> >>> Matt Walsh summed up my thoughts on the bill and the absolute >>> inability of >>> Republicans to take a win without cocking it all up: >>> >>> https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=5FadIjHlYcM&t=608s >>> >>> There's no way I'll support anything that gives foreign governments the >>> ability to set the limits of acceptable speech in America. >> >> >> Does "supporting things" whilst being an anonyshit carry a lot of >> weight then? > > > Again, Thanny cites another right wing fanatic MAGA troll.  This time > Matt Walsh. > > Who is Matt Walsh that Thanny wants to cite?  This fucking guy! > > > On cartoons and anime: >> “It’s really popular amongst teens and young adults. I think it’s all >> satanic,” he declared before noting he had no evidence to back up that >> assertion. >> “I have no argument for it. I have no argument for why it’s satanic,” >> Walsh added. “It just seems that way to me. All anime to me seems >> weird—just like bizarre, creepy.” >> >> The Daily Wire provocateur and apparently self-appointed self-help >> guru wrapped up by declaring that adults should never watch animated >> movies or series. >> “In general, I don’t think that adults should be—whether it’s anime or >> any other kind of cartoon, with rare exception—adults really shouldn’t >> be watching cartoons in general, I would say,” he stated. > > So cartoons are now "satanic". > > Matt Walsh is nothing more than a homophobic troll.  So, naturally, he's > Thanny's go-to guy. And do you find the right wing homophobes the ones most likely to be gay? I do.