Date: Sat, 4 May 2024 04:31:21 -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> Content-Language: en-US From: trotsky In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 112 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: Sat, 04 May 2024 09:31:21 +0000 X-Received-Bytes: 6615 Organization: NewsDemon - www.newsdemon.com X-Complaints-To: abuse@newsdemon.com Message-Id: <17cc3f3b49e579d9$231967$197378$4ed50460@news.newsdemon.com> Bytes: 6996 On 5/4/24 3:36 AM, FPP wrote: > On 5/3/24 12:38 PM, 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 > > Why is it when he says "my thoughts" I think of Trump "ace-ing" his cognitive test?