Hitler's gas chambers mere fiction?

[ChochemV2]

I've really lost track of this thread. So what are the major objections again?

"Judaism is a religion not a race" seems to be a theme but I'm not exactly sure who is claiming you can be racially Jewish... I know earlier in the thread I was trying to point out that race is a functionally useless term which has the weakest basis for biological difference between organisms of any taxon.

Something about Israel seems to be up for debate too but I can't figure out exactly what. I'm guessing Faust and Co. are claiming Israel has no legal right to exist because it's a popular argument, one which I can't really disagree with it. There was little, if any, legal precedent for spontaneously creating a country using land wrested from an indigenous population, however, that hardly seems to matter now because Israel does exist and is an established country. What are we supposed to do, step back and let the fanatics kill millions of people for no good reason? Are we supposed to force every Israeli to pick up and move somewhere else on the planet? Besides it being a logistical impossibility most of those people would never leave and we would probably end up killing a fair number of them in the process...

The final topic I see under discussion pertains to the criteria for a person to meet so they can be called "Jewish"... Ultimately I don't understand how this can be argued because people will call themselves whatever they want and others will judge that label based on their own opinions. Whether or not that label agrees with Judaism's many documents doesn't even matter much because every separate group will interpret those documents however it wants so, as with every religion, there is no single "True" meaning to anything.

One side of my family identifies itself as "Jewish" so I consider myself to be of Jewish background. Whether I actively practice or not means little to me because the culture of Judaism had an impact on me as a child so, even if it's in a minimal sense, I am Jewish. In much the same way I recognize that the other half of my family, the Irish Catholic side, also had an impact on me so I would also identify my background as Irish Catholic.

[Leyla Shen]

The insanity rolls on….

What are we supposed to do, step back and let the fanatics kill millions of people for no good reason? Are we supposed to force every Israeli to pick up and move somewhere else on the planet? Besides it being a logistical impossibility most of those people would never leave and we would probably end up killing a fair number of them in the process...

We? Who’s we? You mean, Jewish Irish Catholic America? You’re speaking to British Turkish Australia here, mate. Why should I give a fuck about the religious State of Israel any more than they give a fuck about Palestinians? (That was one of my major questions.)

Nah, you could sit back, shut your mouth and let them do it quietly--like Israel is doing with the Palestinians. And when it is exposed, the official reply should be: “Oops, sorry--didn’t mean that…Well, they started it…Mind your own anti-semitic business” and so on.

The final topic I see under discussion pertains to the criteria for a person to meet so they can be called "Jewish".

I don’t see this as a separate topic to the preceding one, particularly because they are so obviously and intimately connected! (And we only seem to recognise Muslim countries as theocratic! What do you call a religious democracy?)

If you cannot logically muster the criteria for “Jew,” how do you manage to muster the criteria for “fanatic,” and what is it exactly? Like, does it mean religious fanatic, or just Muslim fanatic. If the latter, please explain how you personally manage to establish a rational and coherent criteria for it that differentiates between the piety of Jewish fanaticism and perversion of Muslim fanaticism.

[Leyla Shen]

now that is a most FUCED up "law." 100% Jewish in nature!!

"it grants immigrant status to individuals who are not Jewish but are related to Jews."
NOT JEWISH BUT RELATED TO JEWS?????

I know, go figure. It's so insane one can't even begin to fathom it without doubting their own sanity first. You see, it has a mystical sort of power that renders anyone who reads it completely unconscious, like as if it isn't really there, ya know? Hardly see an eyelid bat. Yet, if that was part of some Muslim country's policy it'd be publicised to high-heaven. It'd be just as popular in rhetoric as the "fatwa" is.

[ChochemV2]

We? Who’s we? You mean, Jewish Irish Catholic America? You’re speaking to British Turkish Australia here, mate. Why should I give a fuck about the religious State of Israel any more than they give a fuck about Palestinians? (That was one of my major questions.)

We as in the people who would have to intervene if it was decided Israel was illegal and didn't deserve to exist anymore. I'm pretty sure my first example isn't valid anymore but it wasn't out of the question for Israel to be invaded in it's past but forcing Israel to do things which would leave it vulnerable isn't out of the question. Saying Israel was created illegally is fine but ultimately pointless in any debate on current affairs in Israel because there is really nothing that can be done about it.

I don’t see this as a separate topic to the preceding one, particularly because they are so obviously and intimately connected! (And we only seem to recognise Muslim countries as theocratic! What do you call a religious democracy?)

I'm not going to deny that Israel was founded on Jewish principles, however, you can still buy and sell pork within it's borders and yet you can't even get a certain style of haircut in Iran. There may be a religious aspect to life in Israel (and of course to it's very creation) but the government isn't forcing a strict interpretation of the Torah down it's citizen's throats.

As for the Law of Return, Israel doesn't decide what it means to be Jewish it probably has more practical reasons for creating such a distinction. If you're Jewish and you're married to a Christian then they will take your whole family instead of forcing you to break up (well...unless your spouse is Palestinian but even the Israeli's are pissed off about that one).

[Alex Jacob]

http://www.mideastweb.org/briefhistory.htm
http://www.mideastweb.org/jewreligion.htm
__________________________________

http://www.sacred-texts.com/jud/talmud.htm
__________________________________

An Israeli in Paris saw a pit bull attacking a toddler. He killed the pit bull and saved the child's life.

Reporters swarmed the fellow. "Tell us! What's your name? All Paris will love you! Tomorrow's headline will be: "Hero Saves Girl from Vicious Dog!"

The guy says, "But I'm not from Paris.

"Reporters: "That's OK. Then the whole of France will love you and tomorrow's headline will read: 'Hero Saves Girl from Vicious Dog!'"

The guy says, "I'm not from France, either."

Reporters: "That's OK also. All Europe will love you. Tomorrow's headlines will shout: 'Hero Saves Girl from Vicious Dog!'"

The guy says, "I'm not from Europe, either.

Reporters: "So, where ARE you from?

The guy says, "I'm from Israel.

Reporters: "OK. Then tomorrow's headlines will proclaim to the world: 'Israeli Kills Girl's Dog!'"

[Leyla Shen]

Yes, Alex, those poor victimised and persecuted Jews. I know….

http://www.halturnershow.com/IsraeliAtrocities.html

Breaking the Silence

He was born in Jerusalem, the son of an American born father and Canadian-born mother who immigrated to Israel in 1973, the year of the Yom Kippur War. The 24 year old, much like every other male in Israel, was drafted into the army at the age of 18. Everyone is obliged by law to serve in the military; men serve for three years and women for two.

Breaking the Silence (BTS) is a group of discharged soldiers who are veterans of the second Intifada, which began in September 2006. The group has tasked itself to reveal to the Israeli public the daily routine of life in the territories, a routine that gets no coverage in the media.

For Shaul and his comrades it was obvious that they were going to do something, and it was obvious that it was going to be about Hebron. Hebron is a Palestinian city in the West Bank located to the south of Jerusalem. It is considered a holy city to Jews, Muslims and Christians. This is where Abraham, Isaac, Sarah, and Jacob are buried in what is referred to by the Jews as The Tomb of The Patriarchs, and by the Muslims as al-Haram Ibrahimiyah. Furthermore, Abraham is an important figure in all three religions.

The title of the exhibit was Bringing Hebron to Tel Aviv. Shaul explains that if anything symbolizes Israel, it's Tel Aviv. In Israel, Tel Aviv is often called "The Bubble." It is a place where people would rather sit down in coffee shops and not see anything more than a few feet around them.

The goal of BTS was not just to show shocking pictures. Not to tell horror stories about life in the West Bank or Gaza. The goal of BTS was to help people understand the mindset of occupation, to understand the mindset of an occupier.

Yehuda Shaul stares on intensely and leans forward. "No one wants to hear what's really going on in the occupied territories. No one wants the dirt from the backyard to get to the front. It's time to put the dirt so that everyone can see and that we can all begin to address it"

[Oceaxer]

I don't understand this effeminate obsession over the 'rights' of Mohammedan savages. Peace will never come till every Mohammedan is civilised out of existence.

[Leyla Shen]

Chochem:

L: We? Who’s we? You mean, Jewish Irish Catholic America? You’re speaking to British Turkish Australia here, mate. Why should I give a fuck about the religious State of Israel any more than they give a fuck about Palestinians? (That was one of my major questions.)

C: We as in the people who would have to intervene if it was decided Israel was illegal and didn't deserve to exist anymore.

“We” have already intervened and it is because of that intervention that Israel exists. (I have posted documentation to substantiate that previously such as the Balfour Declaration, Churchill’s White Papers and the Declaration of the League of Arab Nations.) Israel’s military might was funded by the US, and continues to be so today. There is simply no way that a small religious community could have done it any other way. So, you get the logical question is the US ultimately run by Jews?

It is obvious that “we,” as in the people who would have to intervene, have already intervened and continue to do so; of that, there clearly is no doubt. Causality doesn’t just stop when political borders are drawn up. Therefore, if Israel was illegal then, it is illegal on the same basis now given that it exists under the same conditions. Naturally, I’m not proposing that conditions cannot improve. It is always a possibility, no matter how slight. For instance, Australia doesn’t kill Australian Aborigines any more. Like the Palestinians to Israel, they don’t actually constitute a threat to Australia---and, well, they never really did.

Do you not find it incredibly stupid that Israel would be promoting immigration into a country that is already lacking in one of the most basic natural resources for human life---water? And all this for a religious homeland with religious borders.

I'm pretty sure my first example isn't valid anymore but it wasn't out of the question for Israel to be invaded in it's past but forcing Israel to do things which would leave it vulnerable isn't out of the question. Saying Israel was created illegally is fine but ultimately pointless in any debate on current affairs in Israel because there is really nothing that can be done about it.

Yes, your first example, by which I presume you mean the mainstream media idea that is “letting the fanatics kill millions of people for no good reason,” is hyperbole. You know, “the axis of evil.” Yet, that’s exactly what you face when you question Israeli policy and their activities. I have never seen a more common “argument” than the one that always refers one back to ideas of “the” Holocaust---“millions of innocent people.” And all the while, Chochem, thousands of innocent people are dying for Israel’s “right to exist.”

Your defeatist statement of Israel’s legitimacy and any point in discussing it defies all reason and evidence. Or is it more of an emotional plea? There are things being done about it right now, every day. Like I said, despite what Jews might like to believe, causality did not stop with the creation of Israel’s borders. There was no threat to any Jew once the Ottoman Empire had been divided and conquered and the Arabs granted borders of their own, except the one that came when Israel decided to kill Palestinians to make room for Jews. You see, the Arabs then realised just exactly what position these religio-political borders had put them in. Necessarily, then, Israel necessarily has no more of a legal leg to stand on than any of the Arab countries. So, what business does “the secular West” have in taking either side implicitly or explicitly?

More later.

[Leyla Shen]

Every Mohammedan ought to be civilised out of existence.

Yes, together with every insane Jew.

[Ataraxia]

Victim mentality,is there anything more piss-weak.

Muslims,Jews,Catholics,Prots -they all seem to specialise in it.

Surely that's not what their prophets taught.

Soft!

[Oceaxer]

1. No Territorie is the intrin?ic Propertie of a particular Race of People. Any Person who hath the Means & Power to hold on to the Territorie & to fend off Barbarians can legitimately make any proprietarie Claims he de?ireth.

2. I?rael, like South Africa, is now fac'd with what is effectively an exi?tential Threat to Civili?ation itself. It is the ?acred mi??ion of all progre??ive Races to preserve Civili?ation at any cost. I?rael, as an outpost of Western Civili?ation, ought to be preserv'd, just as Rhodesia, Apartheid South Africa, British India, and other extinct Western Colonies, ought to have been preserv'd. The over?preading of the Hither Ea?t & Africa by European Colonists is perhaps one of the more progre??ive Events in human Historie. The uplifting of hereditarie Barbarians to Bearers of a rudemintary modern Cvili?ation cou'd not have been effected without colonial Intervention.

[Carl G]

I see they don't have the letter 's' in Arcturus. That is, unless they are spelling "Arcturus."

They're also not big on the letter "y", preferring instead to spell things "ie" as in berrie pie. Interesting.

What part of Arcturuf do you actuallie hale from?

[Oceaxer]

Wrote Carl G,

I see they don't have the letter 's' in Arcturus. That is, unless they are spelling "Arcturus."

'?' is the Letter 's' in medial Form - not the letter 'f'. The uncapitalised terminal 's' is only u?'d at the end of Words.

[Dan Rowden]

This is a modern English board. Use it or piss off. Seriously, what is it with this sudden influx of insane people?

[Oceaxer]

This is a modern English board. Use it or piss off. Seriously, what is it with this sudden influx of insane people?

I am using modern English, Sir. If you are desirous I conform to contemporarie Usage, & cease using the medial s in my Writings,?very well. Do but forgive me if I have fallen back into my old habits ever and anon.

[Dan Rowden]

I do desire it. I don't believe for a second you ordinarily speak like that and claim to be sane.

[Alex Jacob]

I thought that Muremakers post was rather clever and apropos. Even couching it in an older form of English, when there were formulations of exactly this sort; a sort of divine right to conquer territory and civilize 'barbarians', and stated as if it were indisputably clear to any person who could read. Our present world has been vastly formed by exactly this process, to almost unimaginable degrees. We are living in the aftermath of this molding process. That is our world. We are the end product of those processes. (Each of you now reach out and shake each other's hand, and say God Bless).

In many ways the same world-view, though brought considerably up to date, is still functioning.

Personally, I don't really get into the legalistic arguments. It's not that one can't it is that two very polarized narratived come crashing into one another and both make their case. In some way it depends how you want to inflect the argument and I am not sure there is an intrinsic clarity as to who is right and who is wrong.

I don't think there will be any substantial resolution at all, however, until the day comes when the neighboring states recognize Israel's existence and stop calling for Israel's destruction. Period.

[ChochemV2]

“We” have already intervened and it is because of that intervention that Israel exists. (I have posted documentation to substantiate that previously such as the Balfour Declaration, Churchill’s White Papers and the Declaration of the League of Arab Nations.) Israel’s military might was funded by the US, and continues to be so today. There is simply no way that a small religious community could have done it any other way. So, you get the logical question is the US ultimately run by Jews?

We intervened insomuch as the rest of the world didn't want to suffer the indignity of a sudden influx of Jews so soon after World War II. Not only did people not want to give property back to so many displaced people but they didn't want to competition, they didn't want to have to look their guilt in the face every day, and quite a few people blamed the war on the Jewish people. Dumping a few hundred thousand people in the Middle East was perfectly acceptable because then there would simply be two groups of disliked people beating each other to a pulp. Even then the settlers bought all of their own land until the first war, they received little or no help from the British, and most of the pre-Israel funding came from private donations and not governments. Your supposedly "logical" question is so ridiculous I'm amazed it even comes up especially given our insane immigration restrictions while so many people were trying to run for their lives.

Maybe now we provide support but I fail to see how America is controlled by secret Jewish interests...

It is obvious that “we,” as in the people who would have to intervene, have already intervened and continue to do so; of that, there clearly is no doubt. Causality doesn’t just stop when political borders are drawn up. Therefore, if Israel was illegal then, it is illegal on the same basis now given that it exists under the same conditions. Naturally, I’m not proposing that conditions cannot improve. It is always a possibility, no matter how slight. For instance, Australia doesn’t kill Australian Aborigines any more. Like the Palestinians to Israel, they don’t actually constitute a threat to Australia---and, well, they never really did.

As illegal as it is to spontaneously form a new country by force of arms the original settlers were legal residents in the area. Jewish immigrants had been buying up land to live on for decades so they were as entitled to life without the threat of harm as the indigenous population. It took the action by the British to stop land sales and Jewish immigration and the new settlements still had to live through the constant threat of violence. The British were in the pocket of the people who controlled the oil and the Israeli's had pity and hatred on their side to try and force the matter. Independence played into the hands of the Arab populations as much as it played into the hands of the Israeli's after all, who would have thought a bunch of farmers could defeat the armies of Egypt, Syria, Transjordan, Lebanon, Iraq and Saudi Arabia with plenty of support from the local Palestinians? It's only recently that Israel has achieved relative safety through a combination of technological superiority and successful diplomatic agreements with Jordan and Egypt.

Do you not find it incredibly stupid that Israel would be promoting immigration into a country that is already lacking in one of the most basic natural resources for human life---water? And all this for a religious homeland with religious borders.

Israel is a country of roughly seven million in an area the size of New Jersey surrounded by tens of millions of people. They have had the resources and ingenuity to accommodate around a third of the world's Jewish population so far so why not try to get a few more on their side?

[ExpectantlyIronic]

Faust,

actually it does matter, for people who want to see the absurdity of it.

Life, the universe, and everything is absurd. Pointing out particular absurdities is about as hard and productive as shooting cattle at point blank with a .50 cal.

You being the raving lunatic that you are, in so far that you care not for precision and honesty, would not bother to investigate this conundrum.

There is nothing to be investigated about it. It's word play and only significant for the purposes of empty rhetoric.

The whole thing is arbitrary because the Jewish faith is arbitrarily designated to an arbitrary group of people who are arbitrarily segregated from the rest of the Semitic populations.

Granfalloons are all arbitrary. That you've recognized one granfalloon for what it is might be commendable if you weren't so blind to the rest. We arbitrarily designate men as Christians, atheists, Hoosiers, Swedes, geniuses, and haberdashers. In the wise words of Bokonon (Kurt Vonnegut): "If you wish to study a granfalloon, just remove the skin of a toy balloon."

Nothing that signifies things is irrelevant you belligerant jackass. infact, in philosophizing, nothing is irrelevant.

My statement stands in absence of any attempt by you to explain why I'm to think of such a thing as relevant. A holistic appeal like "in philosophizing, nothing is irrelevant" is absurd on the face of it. What's on television right now is clearly not relevant to the problem of universals.

You cannot be a Christian just because your parents are, there's NO SUCH THING in Christianity.

As an atheist I have some hesitation towards using Christian tradition as the sole basis for how words should be used. We all use words in new and different ways almost all the time. Why be stifled by a queer need for conformity to convention?

This is why you're an idiot and cannot make this absurd example.

Yet I did.

Religion is supposed to be chosen out of your own logical choices, NOT out of parental lineage. Therefore, you CANNOT be a Christian atheist!!!!!

If my religion should be based on choice, and my Christianity isn't, then I shouldn't be a Christian. Your premise says nothing to indicate that I couldn't be a Christian atheist. I'm not sure that you recognize the difference between descriptive and normative statements. What I should do, and what I can do, are two very different things. Regardless, I'm not using "Christianity" to indicate religious beliefs, so your whole point here is moot.

That is so FUCKED.

It totally blows my mind too man!

The term itself is impossible to exist!!!!

ROFL. Is it? Is it really "impossible to exist"?

Religion and race, are TWO DIFFERENT THINGS.

I never said I was part of a Christian "race". It's all arbitrary to talk of races of men. Just granfalloons, and you know how we study granfalloons. I'm just Christian because my parents were Christian. I'm a Christian atheist because I don't believe in God. It's semantics not science. Pretty simple stuff here dude. Nothing significant is meant by it.

WTF? a gentleman who wants to win respect from his fellows WTF? This has no place in honest philosophy.

Gentleman who want to win respect from their fellows shall be the thing of which philosopher's never speak then?

These are PERFECT circumstances.

If you want to seem like a bigot. Which you probably do, given that you're the worst sort of scum: self-righteous, hateful, uncivil, stupid, and quick to anger. Though, those qualities do tend to go together in people don't they?

HAHAHHA. Wise men don't have reputations, which is why they're wise.

Oh? They use their mind powers to prevent people from forming opinions of them then?

it's not bigotry you belligerant idiot, it's showing conclusively how absurd it is. Not to mention the fact that there are, "self-hating" (ridiculous term) "Jews" who say the same thing!! ie Weininger.

Good job at forming a nonsensical response to a comment of mine you took utterly out-of-context.

wtf. Truth will cause people to hate, so be it. Israel and the Talmud has racist policies that causes people to hate.

If you care about victims of racism I suggest doing something to help them. Bitching about Jews does about nothing. Allen Ginsberg was a Jew. That he has nothing to do with the problems you propose tells me that Jews aren't anymore the problem then all men in general are. In all things it is hurtful actions that are the problem, and not the granfalloons to which men are aligned with. To focus on them is to contribute to the problem, as opposed to helping to get rid of it.

[Leyla Shen]

I'm not going to deny that Israel was founded on Jewish principles, however, you can still buy and sell pork within it's borders and yet you can't even get a certain style of haircut in Iran. There may be a religious aspect to life in Israel (and of course to it's very creation) but the government isn't forcing a strict interpretation of the Torah down it's citizen's throats.

As for the Law of Return, Israel doesn't decide what it means to be Jewish it probably has more practical reasons for creating such a distinction. If you're Jewish and you're married to a Christian then they will take your whole family instead of forcing you to break up (well...unless your spouse is Palestinian but even the Israeli's are pissed off about that one).

Well, you could have done better than that if you were willing to be honest about Israel. But you can’t really talk about the virtues of not killing 18 year olds (of Iranians by death penalty for crimes in Iran, and of even younger Palestinians in the name of Israel in the occupied territories), stoning minority groups, etc. I mean, god knows how many billions poured into Israel and the best they have to bring to the middle east is a society that is allowed to buy and sell pork and has a greater choice of hairstyles? Wow. Oh, and lest we forget that they are and have only ever been, in fact, the one theocracy in the middle east with undeclared weapons of mass destruction (nuclear and biological). And all this time, the war on terror was for what, exactly, if not this? Oh, sorry---Israel allows you to buy and sell pork, and get whatever kind of haircut you want! And it doesn’t shove the Torah down your throat, yet. Nah, the US couldn't possibly be run by and for Jews, could it? Or, wait, perhaps you conceded that it is because Israel buys and sells pork and provides a variety of hairstyles!

No, not Jewish “principles,” Chochem. The Jewish religion. I mean, hello? It’s the fucking Holy Land. Everybody knows that!

The reason Israel has no constitution (which is precisely what the secular component of that country wanted) is because the religious majority (obviously) has obstructed same since 1948. They’re waiting for more Jews to arrive….

[Leyla Shen]

If you care about victims of racism I suggest doing something to help them. Bitching about Jews does about nothing.

If you care about people bitching about Jews, stop bitching and do something to help them. Like, apply to Israel for citizenship.

[rolls her eyes]

[ChochemV2]

Well, you could have done better than that if you were willing to be honest about Israel. But you can’t really talk about the virtues of not killing 18 year olds (of Iranians by death penalty for crimes in Iran, and of even younger Palestinians in the name of Israel in the occupied territories), stoning minority groups, etc. I mean, god knows how many billions poured into Israel and the best they have to bring to the middle east is a society that is allowed to buy and sell pork and has a greater choice of hairstyles? Wow. Oh, and lest we forget that they are and have only ever been, in fact, the one theocracy in the middle east with undeclared weapons of mass destruction (nuclear and biological). And all this time, the war on terror was for what, exactly, if not this? Oh, sorry---Israel allows you to buy and sell pork, and get whatever kind of haircut you want! And it doesn’t shove the Torah down your throat, yet. Nah, the US couldn't possibly be run by and for Jews, could it? Or, wait, perhaps you conceded that it is because Israel buys and sells pork and provides a variety of hairstyles!

How typical, you can't do anything but make emotional appeals and shift the goalposts whenever I reply. I'm betting you know exactly why I mentioned the sale of pork in Israel and restrictions on haircuts in Iran but don't feel like handling that. You accused Israel of being a theocracy and while it has a strong religious foundation it doesn't allow Judaism to overrun it's every public policy as other theocracies in the region do. Israel doesn't force people to adhere to a strict interpretation of Jewish principles unlike many predominately Muslim countries which have no compunction forcing their inhabitants to act in a strictly Mohammedan way.

No, not Jewish “principles,” Chochem. The Jewish religion. I mean, hello? It’s the fucking Holy Land. Everybody knows that!

Six of one half a dozen of another.

The reason Israel has no constitution (which is precisely what the secular component of that country wanted) is because the religious majority (obviously) has obstructed same since 1948. They’re waiting for more Jews to arrive….

That would be exceedingly stupid of them since there are relatively few Jews in the world... There are fewer Jewish people worldwide than the population of Florida and a third of that total already live in Israel (another third lives in NYC). I don't disagree with the reason for there being no constitution; the orthodox Jews have been holding it off since independence because they have always wanted a more theocratic country with limited success. Moderate Israeli's have been keeping them at bay for just as long and continue to stress the need for a constitution. Israel is just like every other country, there are people who want one thing and people who don't, they do not speak with one voice.

EDIT: I guess I should clarify before the next round begins. I won't edit what I wrote but what I'm inferring is that it would be idiocy for them to wait any longer since Israel already has such a large population. When independence was first declared I could understand waiting until there was a more diverse spread of different groups of Jews, however, at this point I don't think waiting for more people to come to Israel is really a motivating force in not adopting a constitution.

[Alex Jacob]

"How typical, you can't do anything but make emotional appeals and shift the goalposts whenever I reply."

It seems to me that this is the central 'game' that is being played. I don't have the sense that Leyla or Faust are arguing in 'good faith', so there will always be a 'shifting' of the goalposts' whenever a response is offered. The point is not to gain clarity or understanding, or to accomodate different views ('fucking Jews!'), it is just to vent some disatisfaction and what looks and feels like basic rage.

Anti-jewish sentiments---judenhass---is a strange animal.
___________________________________

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_Laws_of_Israel
___________________________________

http://www.inner.org/images/challah-pair.jpg
http://www.russianjewry.org/images/shabbat/shabbat.jpg

[Leyla Shen]

How typical, you can't do anything but make emotional appeals and shift the goalposts whenever I reply. I'm betting you know exactly why I mentioned the sale of pork in Israel and restrictions on haircuts in Iran but don't feel like handling that. You accused Israel of being a theocracy and while it has a strong religious foundation it doesn't allow Judaism to overrun it's every public policy as other theocracies in the region do. Israel doesn't force people to adhere to a strict interpretation of Jewish principles unlike many predominately Muslim countries which have no compunction forcing their inhabitants to act in a strictly Mohammedan way.

The bottom line is that the creation and current policies of Israel are exactly theocratic. In what way does instituting a constitution not then equal shoving a strict interpretation of the Torah down one's throat? I don’t really care if they enforce anything else on their population, at this stage. I very much think that blowing up the Palestinians is part of their religious "ethic" and suspect that the secular portion of the country has very different views on it than the Zionist. So, as with any country, Israel is exactly as Israel does. I don’t give a flying fig if they buy and sell pork!

Six of one half a dozen of another.

Well, just so we're really clear, ya know...

That would be exceedingly stupid of them since there are relatively few Jews in the world...

Yes, indeed. See how much we agree?

I don't disagree with the reason for there being no constitution; the orthodox Jews have been holding it off since independence because they have always wanted a more theocratic country with limited success.

I’m not sure what you mean by that. You don’t disagree with having a theocratic country? Correct me if I’m wrong but weren’t you just recently complaining that you can’t seem to shake the label Jew even though you’re not Jewish?

Israel is just like every other country, there are people who want one thing and people who don't, they do not speak with one voice.

Yes, it is. But there are definitely things about it that stick out like dogs’ balls.

I guess I should clarify before the next round begins. I won't edit what I wrote but what I'm inferring is that it would be idiocy for them to wait any longer since Israel already has such a large population. When independence was first declared I could understand waiting until there was a more diverse spread of different groups of Jews, however, at this point I don't think waiting for more people to come to Israel is really a motivating force in not adopting a constitution.

I agree, absolutely. But, alas…

(Shut up, Alex. You’re an idiot.)

[ChochemV2]

I’m not sure what you mean by that. You don’t disagree with having a theocratic country? Correct me if I’m wrong but weren’t you just recently complaining that you can’t seem to shake the label Jew even though you’re not Jewish?

All I'm pointing out is that the Israeli people are split on strict theocracy and secular government. There are those who want a theocracy and they have historically had more power so Israeli policy has been largely religiously-drive in the past. Recently, however, the secular portion of Israel's population has enjoyed increased power and it evident in their passing of various basic laws and the like even if they aren't what we would call a constitution.