mike@WISDOM.BITNET (Mike Trachtman) (02/20/86)
There is a proposal in the Knesset, here in Israel, to
prohibit the public preaching toward racism, (crude interpretation of
'hasata ligizanut'). This law is of course meant to put the Kach
party outside of the law, or at least their espousing their platform.
(Kach is the political party lead by Rabbi Kahana, of JDL fame, who is
now a member of the Israely Parliment, the Kenesset).
This law has two fascinating things about it.
1) The second part of the same law, would prohibit the denial
that Israel is fundamentally a Jewish state.
This to me, is a racist comment, and thus implicitly
contradicts, the first part of the law.
The second, and more important comment is that the religious parties,
want an addition to the law, that would say 'anything in the
Jewish religion (halacha), will not be construed as being racist.'
The reason for this, is due to many halachot, which are racist,
and thus anyone espousing that someone be religious, would be
violating these laws. Examples that the Religious members of parliment
gave, include havdalah (hamavdil bein yisrail la'amim), separate
cemetaries, disallowing intermarriage, etc.
(how about macho timche et zecher amalek, which is pure Genocide, though not
relevant to today, due to the 'lucky' accident, that there are no identified
Amalekies walking around.)
I think it funny, when politicians in Israel, send the Jewish Agency to
preach against intermarriage in the US and Europe, but in Israel
would find anyone preaching against intermarriage to be violating
the law.
Thus in summarry, what do people on the net think should be the
balance between racism of various sorts (different rights,
separation of communities) on the one hand, and halachik,
religious, or nationalistic Judaism on the other.
And, would it be fair to say, that very Orthodox people are very
Racist in their Utopian view of how the Jewish nation and homeland,
(i.e. am yisrael bi-eretz yisrael bizman hazeh ubizman hamaschiach),
should be? and if so, is that a convincing argument not to be
very Orthodox, but to take a more moderate view of what it is to be
a Jew, that prefers Jews to stick together, but does not disallow
other peoples from living together with us.
Mike
Mike Trachtman
My address:
mike@wisdom (BITNET)
mike%wisdom.bitnet@wiscvm.ARPA (ARPA/CSNET)
mike%wisdom.bitnet@berkley (ARPA/CSNET)
and if all else fails (ONLY for VERY short items)
...!decvax!humus!wisdom!mike (UUCP)jho@ihlpa.UUCP (Yosi Hoshen) (02/21/86)
> The second, and more important comment is that the religious parties, > want an addition to the law, that would say 'anything in the > Jewish religion (halacha), will not be construed as being racist.' > I think it funny, when politicians in Israel, send the Jewish Agency to > preach against intermarriage in the US and Europe, but in Israel > would find anyone preaching against intermarriage to be violating > the law. I think Israel is paying a very high toll to the religionists. It is quite clear that the religionist in Israel, like their countepart in Iran and the fundamentalist in th US, want to shove their religion down everyone's throat. They would like to so without being criticized. The fact that there is no civil marriage in Israel is probably the worst case of of religious coercion. The majority of Israelis are secular. They should tell their elected officials that enough is enough with religious oppression!!!! -- Yosi Hoshen, AT&T Bell Laboratories Naperville, Illinois, Mail: ihnp4!ihlpa!jho
fsks@unc.UUCP (Frank Silbermann) (02/24/86)
>> The second, and more important comment is that the religious parties, >> want an addition to the law, that would say 'anything in the >> Jewish religion (halacha), will not be construed as being racist.' >> I think it funny, when politicians in Israel, send the Jewish Agency to >> preach against intermarriage in the US and Europe, but in Israel >> would find anyone preaching against intermarriage to be violating >> the law. It depends on what you mean by "preaching against intermarriage", i.e. whether you mean: 1) trying to influence people not to choose intermarriage versus: 2) advocating laws prohibiting intermarriage. Many people are in favor of 1), but not 2). Frank Silbermann
fsks@unc.UUCP (Frank Silbermann) (02/25/86)
In article <1144@ihlpa.UUCP> jho@ihlpa.UUCP (Yosi Hoshen) writes: > Israel is paying a very high toll to the religionists. >The religionists in Israel, like their counterparts in Iran want >to shove their religion down everyone's throat. They would like >to so without being criticized. The majority of Israelis are secular. >They should tell their elected officials that enough is enough >with religious oppression!!!! What does it mean "to be a Jew?" Is there any way to characterize the Jewish people other than by religion? If a person rejects the religious aspects, then in what sense is he a Jew? I may claim to be a Jew because my parents were Jews, but eventually I must find somebody in my family tree who was religious. Without the the Jewish religion, how can there be Jews? Israel was founded so that Jews might find relief from persecution. But with the exception of the Nazi period, we've always had the option of excaping persecution by abandoning our religion. This was true during the Spanish Inquisition, as well as in communist countries today. This leads to sensitive questions about the purpose of Zionism. When a person renounces Judaism, in what sense is he different from a gentile? Why should such a person want to live in a Jewish state? Why should immigration laws apply differently to him than to a Moslem or a Christian? In Israel, a Jew can renounce his religion and still receive preferential treatment in immigration. This is what leads our enemies to suspect that Zionism must have some racial motive. What can we say in reply? Frank Silbermann
jho@ihlpa.UUCP (Yosi Hoshen) (02/25/86)
>From Frank Silberman >What does it mean "to be a Jew?" Is there any way to characterize >the Jewish people other than by religion? If a person rejects the >religious aspects, then in what sense is he a Jew? I may claim >to be a Jew because my parents were Jews, but eventually I must >find somebody in my family tree who was religious. Without the >the Jewish religion, how can there be Jews? Frank Silberman asks: What does it mean to be a Jew? Unfortunately, he gives an Answer according to Frank Silberman. His answer is that religion kept the Jews as Jews through the ages. I think that it is irrelevant why there are Jews today. The fact is that there are Jews. My problem is with the religion. My view is that the Jewish religion is a form of superstition. And as such, I cannot find myself bound to other Jews by superstition. On the other hand, it did not make any difference to Hitler whether you are a religious Jew or an atheistic Jew. He reserved a place for you in his ovens. The modern Zionist movement was secular. Herzel, who predicted the advent of the new anti- Semitism and the modern state of Israel, was probably an atheist. The religionists, who had been waiting for the messiah for two thousand years, were late joiners to the Zionist movement. If Jews would have continued waiting for the messiah then we would probably have few more hundred thousand Jews dead in Europe, and the Jews of the Arab word would be still living in fear. >Israel was founded so that Jews might find relief from persecution. >But with the exception of the Nazi period, we've always had the option >of escaping persecution by abandoning our religion. This was true >during the Spanish Inquisition, as well as in communist countries today. I totally agree with your assertion that Israel was formed because of persecution of Jews. However, I don't think that Israel was formed so that Jews who were fleeing from one form of oppression, would find a new form of coercion in their own country. The laws that the religionists in Israel have pushed through the Kneset and are still trying to push can only be viewed as "g'zerot" imposed by a minority on the secular majority. It is inconceivable to me and to many others that a silly religion should be the basis for Israel. The way to reach harmony is for the religionist to respect the secularist desire to be free from religious coercion. I would like to view the Jewish religion as a modern Greek views the Greek Mythology, as a part of my history, but not something that I would be coerced to live by. >This leads to sensitive questions about the purpose of Zionism. >When a person renounces Judaism, in what sense is he different >from a gentile? Why should such a person want to live in a >Jewish state? Why should immigration laws apply differently >to him than to a Moslem or a Christian? In Israel, a Jew can >renounce his religion and still receive preferential treatment >in immigration. This is what leads our enemies to suspect that >Zionism must have some racial motive. What can we say in reply? I think that I have answered the question on the purpose of Zionism. Zionism deals with national issues rather then religious issues. Also, I don't think our enemies need any apologies for what we are. -- Yosi Hoshen, AT&T Bell Laboratories Naperville, Illinois, Mail: ihnp4!ihlpa!jho
spector@acf4.UUCP (David HM Spector) (02/26/86)
I think this question (of who is /is not Jewish) was very nicely addressed in a program that is now making the PBS circuit called "Heritage Coversations with Bill Moyers", Mr. Moyers first guest was Yosef Yerushalami, a historian with the Judaic Studies program at Columbia University. Although I couldn't do justice to what Dr. Yerushalami said in a nutshell, the discussion centered on Jewish identification with Judaism, and why even Jews who are not categorized as "religious" fiercely stand up for their "Jewishness", in spite of secularization, et al. This is a post-companion series to Abba Ebban's 1984 series "Heritage: Civilization and the Jews". This promises to be a very good series, if the first chapter is any indication. David Spector NYU/acf Systems Group SPECTOR@NYU
simon@simon_pc.UUCP (Simon Shapiro) (03/01/86)
In article <274@bocar.UUCP>, sieg@bocar.UUCP (B A Siegel) writes: > > When a person renounces Judaism, in what sense is he different > > from a gentile? Why should such a person want to live in a > > Jewish state? Why should immigration laws apply differently > > to him than to a Moslem or a Christian? In Israel, a Jew can > > renounce his religion and still receive preferential treatment > > in immigration. This is what leads our enemies to suspect that > > Zionism must have some racial motive. What can we say in reply? > > > > Frank Silbermann > > How true how true.. > > Barry Siegel Let me add my two cents worth; When Hitlers trrop collected Jews and turned them into soap and lampshades, No one checked their beliefs. If you were a bona fide Jew, child of one, grandchild of one or grandgrandchild of one, off to the gas chamber you go. So a Jew has a right to find refuge in Israel, wether he is a true beliver (by whose definition?) or not. To me, a declared atheist, living in Israel, serving in the army, protecting & maintaning "Arey Miklat" for us all, is a lot more Jewish that someone living comfortly in the US, donating money and complaining that Israel or Zionism are equivalent to fashism. Where were you, pious people when Jews were slaughtered in Europe? Voting for the same administration that refused sanctuary to the lucky ones that escaped (Cuba took them). I am jewish. I was born & raised in Israel. I served in the IDF for five years. I participated in three wars. I did my share. I complained. I was to the sinagouge no more than three times in my life. I did NOT have a Bar-Mitzva. I am more Jewish than both of you! Simon. Flame off...
fsks@unc.UUCP (Frank Silbermann) (03/03/86)
Me: >> > When a person renounces Judaism, in what sense is he different >> > from a gentile? Why should such a person want to live in a >> > Jewish state? Why should immigration laws apply differently >> > to him than to a Moslem or a Christian? In Israel, a Jew can >> > renounce his religion and still receive preferential treatment >> > in immigration. This is what leads our enemies to suspect that >> > Zionism must have some racial motive. What can we say in reply? Barry Siegel: How true how true.. Simon Shapiro writes: (In article <152@simon_pc.UUCP> simon@simon_pc.UUCP) >To me, a declared atheist, living in Israel, serving in the army, >protecting & maintaning "Arey Miklat" for us all, is a lot more Jewish >that someone living comfortly in the US, donating money and complaining >that Israel or Zionism are equivalent to fascism. Where were you, >pious people when Jews were slaughtered in Europe? Voting for the >same administration that refused sanctuary to the lucky ones that >escaped (Cuba took them). No need to get personal here. I am not at all what you imagine. >I am jewish. I was born & raised in Israel. I served in the IDF for >five years. I participated in three wars. I did my share. I never >complained. I was to the synogogue no more than three times in my life. >I did NOT have a Bar-Mitzva. I am more Jewish than both of you! I do honor you for your contribution -- you risked your life for us all. But fighting is not enough. We must always know exactly what we are fighting for, lest we be tricked into fighting for evil. You fought to protect the Jewish people. But who are we? Someday a fight may arise between two peoples, each claiming to be the "true" Jews. How will we know which side to take, if we have no reasonable definition of "Jewishness"? >When Hitlers troops collected Jews and turned them into soap and lampshades, >No one checked their beliefs. If you were a bona fide Jew, child of one, >grandchild of one or grandgrandchild of one, off to the gas chamber you >go. So a Jew has a right to find refuge in Israel, whether he is a true >beliver (by whose definition?) or not. Do you favor letting Hitler's warped ideas define Jewishness for you? I think Jews should define Jewishness, rather than letting the outside world decide for us. In none of my postings have I claimed to have the answer. The Orthodox believe they have the answers; I only ask whether anyone has an alternative definition that makes sense. Frank Silbermann
simon@simon_pc.UUCP (Simon Shapiro) (03/05/86)
In article <1072@unc.unc.UUCP>, fsks@unc.UUCP (Frank Silbermann) writes: > > Do you favor letting Hitler's warped ideas define Jewishness for you? > I think Jews should define Jewishness, rather than letting the outside > world decide for us. In none of my postings have I claimed to have > the answer. The Orthodox believe they have the answers; I only ask > whether anyone has an alternative definition that makes sense. > > Frank Silbermann I do not think that Hitler's warped ideas were created in a vacum. I think he represented a twisted, extreamed view of the situation. I think he was not alone in his opinions, nor did these opinions go away. As to the definition of "Who is a Jew?" there is even a law (I am not proud to talk about it in public) in Israel bearing this name. I think that (at least in Israel) a separation of 'church & state' should occur. I think that everyone should be allowed to label oneself to onself's heart content. If you see yourself as a Jew, fine with me. If you see yourself as a jewish national, or Israeli, that is fine with me. Just do not pass laws defining me as this or that. When you do, all these self-rightous (spelled badly, I am sure) jew haters will grab it and run away screaming "APARTHEID... RACISM... I TOLD YOU SO..." and make it rather difficult to argue them wrong. I will fight to protect the state of Israel. I will NOT fight against any internal group because of their religous bend. Exactly because I exclude myself (and demand the state to do the same) from this argument. I do see Israel keeping its protective refuge status. Jews are beeing mistreated because of what they are. There is no other place in the world for them to go freely. Simon.