The House of Representatives is trying to pass a resolution making the term “Free Palestine” an official antisemitic slogan.

Republican Representative Gabe Evans from Colorado introduced the resolution in the wake of the attack on a gathering for Israeli hostages in Boulder this week. Mohammed Sabry Soliman, an Egyptian national, has been charged for the attack, during which he yelled “Free Palestine,” according to the FBI.

“Whereas, while shouting ‘Free Palestine,’ an antisemitic slogan that calls for the destruction of the state of Israel and Jewish people, Mohammed Sabry Soliman attacked the peaceful demonstrators with homemade Molotov cocktails,” the resolution reads. House Republicans are expected to vote on the nonbinding resolution next week.

  • themeatbridge@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    21
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    12 hours ago

    I’m not antisemitic. I know that I’m not, even if I can’t prove that to anyone who cannot see into my mind. But in words and actions, I’ve never done or said anything antisemitic.

    I believe that Palestine should be free. Passing a law isn’t going to change my mind or affect my behavior. If someone calls me antisemitic, they’re either mistaken or lying. Passing a law won’t change the truth behind their words.

    • Nate Cox@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      10 hours ago

      Making a statement legally classified as antisemitism opens up legal retaliation under the guise of “hate speech”, which is not protected speech.

      It doesn’t change the truth of it, but it does change he the consequences of it.

      • neatchee@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        6 hours ago

        Not be contrarian, but this is a common misconception. Hate speech IS protected speech in the US, but it can be used to enhance the punishment of a related crime into a hate crime.

        It can also, under specific circumstances, be considered “fighting words”. But again, that depends on the specific context and is not broadly true.

        This is one of my least favorite facts, but it is unfortunately true

        • Nate Cox@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          6 hours ago

          I mean, if we’re being technical then “hate speech” isn’t a legal term at all, but I should have made it clearer that I was alleging the republicans were building their usual flimsy-as-shit-case to harass their “enemies”.

          • neatchee@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            6 hours ago

            That is for sure. There is no question that it is an asinine attempt by the GOP to weaponize the law, rather than a genuine attempt at protecting Jews in any way, shape or form