HR 6090 is a piece of legislation I'm going back and forth on atm.
On the one hand, hate crimes are a thing in the US and I think they should be due to people like Dylan Roof, because it adds more teeth behind Racist degenerates who engage in unlawful activity.
I agree with HR 6090's section 3 (5) goal in that "The use of alternative definitions of antisemitism impairs enforcement efforts by adding multiple standards and may fail to identify many of the modern manifestations of antisemitism." I.E. antisemitism clearly falls under title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, but that doesn't mean much if we can't accurately define it.
That part I'm on board with.
However...
I'm also not a fan of DEI. And if this just adds "Jews" to the DEI list of "oppressed, have-nots" #Neo-Marxist...putting a cherry on top of a pile of crap does not suddenly make the pile of crap less crappy. DEI sucks and needs to be disbanded from anything publicly funded imo.
On the other hand, If somebody is posting all over social media stuff like, "Hitler was right" and then they get arrested assaulting somebody at one of these anti-Jewish Rallies, I'm all for an extra charge being thrown their way.
At any rate, I'm still early on in the research stage of things and I'm open to arguments.
I am opposed to 6090.
1) It is being made in the heat of the moment.
2) What group do "you" belong to that could itself be protected, or even unprotected, from future bills?
3) This is just a bad precedent.
4) Our Congress has nothing else to do?
Like it or not, I think hate speech is considered to be free speech and this bill starts shutting down what we can't and can't say. That in mind, if someone drops an N bomb or whatever and takes an ass beating for their troubles? "Officer, the gentleman with the Nazi tattoos fell off the curb and that nice, young Black gentleman was helping him to his feet. That's what I saw."
