Not only ironic, also hypocritical: they are proposing to make it illegal to censor views that don't break Polish laws, while replacing a halo with a rainbow in a photo of an icon does break Polish laws, because it "offends religious sentiment", so it could (and probably also should, if you ask them) be censored.
Not really. What constitutes free speech is always qualified, so that's a fantastical argument. In this case, Poland has blasphemy laws (and btw, even Strasbourg allows for these under the margin of appreciation).
In principle, this move shifts decisions from private global corporate power brokers to national representative government. Facebook and Twitter are private, but they've become so powerful and influential that they function like utilities used for communication. It is better to subject these platforms to laws that can be checked by representative government than to the whims of tech oligarchs.
It's still hypocritical to peddle this bill as "protecting freedom of speech" when it is in fact about "who defines what speech deserves freedom".
Unsurprisingly the "who" above is the proponents of the bill and, as the OP notes, they don't exactly have a track record of protecting free speech which makes it even more hypocritical.
You claim to value something but you are not maximalist, therefore there are exceptions you tolerate.
A demagogue that doesn't value it at all but he/she confronts you about your imperfection and demands to you to be a maximalist or you are a corrupt lier and claims that he/she would totally be maximalist about it.
You accept that you are a "fraud" so you oblige to the demand of this person and the value you claim to hold is now a value of someone who doesn't value it at all.
When you transfer the power accept that the demagogue has higher moral ground, the demagogue can drop the claim and do it's own thing.
A good example is Turkey's Erdogan. He was banned from politics but he suddenly decided that will of the people is the highest priority, he was a flaming democrat and he was right that it's not right to ban him from politics. With the pressure from EU and USA his right were restored and Democracy began to flourish in Turkey up until he had enough power to not to have to deal with this.
Fast forward today, He actually tried to steal elections(made the elections canceled, then he lost again with higher margin then proceeded to remove power from the office he lost) and whoever seeks support from EU or USA is labeled as traitor.
It's simply sad that the trick works so well everywhere.