No, you don't sound dismissive at all, but this is actually a perfect example of the importance of getting your information first hand. I get that not everybody has the time or the inclination to spend hours reading legislation or verifying the accuracy of online claims. But you have to understand how often second hand information is partial or flat-out inaccurate.
I was surprised by the link you provided, not only because I read the New Hampshire bill while researching this article, but because I'd visited that same page. "Did I miss something?!" I asked myself.
Nope.
"Proposed" text is not actual text. All bills go through a number of changes from original draft to final draft. And while I didn't see a version that contained this text, the version that was passed doesn't contain it. As for your fears that teaching race history would become "literally illegal", here's some of the wording from the final bill (the full bill can be found here):
I. The general court hereby finds and declares that practices of discrimination against any New Hampshire inhabitants because of age, sex, gender identity, sexual orientation, race, creed, color, marital status, familial status, mental or physical disability, religion, or national origin are a matter of state concern, that discrimination based on these characteristics not only threatens the rights and proper privileges of New Hampshire inhabitants but menaces the institutions and foundation of a free democratic state and threatens the peace, order, health, safety and general welfare of the state and its inhabitants.
II. Nothing in this subdivision shall be construed to prohibit racial, sexual, religious, or other workplace sensitivity training based on the inherent humanity and equality of all persons and the ideal that all persons are entitled to be treated with equality, dignity, and respect.
III. Nothing in this subdivision shall be construed to limit the academic freedom of faculty members of the university system of New Hampshire and the community college system of New Hampshire to conduct research, publish, lecture, or teach in the academic setting.
[emphasis mine]
Sadly, white supremacists have always had a blank check to write whatever unhinged legislation they want. And don't get me wrong, this is obviously cause for concern and vigilance. But writing a bill is not the same thing as passing a bill. The fact that racists exist is not cause to uncritically swallow the most inaccurate, alarmist takes that click-hungry websites decide to throw up on the internet.
Again, I think we agree that there are problems in race education. I see them both in the way the evils of slavery and segregation are sometimes downplayed and even denied (I link to examples of this in the article) and in the agenda driven revisionism of things like the 1619 project. In both cases, I think the question of whether these are most accurately described as CRT is largely irrelevant.
