South Dakota, North Carolina Implement Bills Defining Antisemitism

1
>>Follow Matzav On Whatsapp!<<

Measures utilizing the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s (IHRA) working definition of antisemitism to guide government workers in assessing Jew-hate have become law in North Carolina and South Dakota.

“I am very proud of this historic legislation that will keep our Jewish people secure,” South Dakota’s Gov. Kristi Noem said on Monday when HB 1076 went into effect. The bill mandates the use of the IHRA definition when the state government investigates potential acts of discrimination.

“Since I signed this bill, antisemitic hatred has only grown worse across the United States, but not in South Dakota. I hope states across the country will follow South Dakota’s leadership and take steps to combat this hatred,” Noem said.

She had signed the bill in a signing ceremony in March.

In North Carolina on Monday, Gov. Roy Cooper signed the Shalom Act, which also adopts the IHRA definition.

“Defining antisemitism is important to stopping it, and this new law helps do that as antisemitic incidents are on the rise,” North Carolina’s Gov. Roy Cooper said. “While we protect the right to free speech, this legislation helps to make our state a more welcoming, inclusive and safe place for everyone.”

{Matzav.com}

1 COMMENT

  1. WHAT IS WRONG WITH JOURNALISM!?

    Naturally, anyone opening an article announcing that some organisation has adopted “the IHRA definition of antisemitism” might be curious about what that definition is. Yet, if I search Matzav for “IHRA”, I can find more than 10 articles exactly like this one, and NOT ONE of them gives the definition! WHY?

    It isn’t hard to look up. Here it is:

    “Antisemitism is a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of antisemitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities.”

    For my second rant though, I’d like to point out how RUBBISH this definition is.
    It’s rubbish, because it fails to define anything. And the 2nd sentence isn’t even a proper sentence. Even if you can guess what it’s trying to say, that also doesn’t define or add to understanding antisemitism. It is ridiculous on so many levels, including on a legal level!

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here