The Non-Jews and Israel

[Just the Facts]

I'm not sure I buy your "Thief" premise. There is religious freedom in Israel. If I'm not mistaken the only prohibition is Jews marrying non-Jews. The non-Jew needs to convert OR THE JEW NEEDS TO CONVERT to the religion of the non-Jew partner. Seems the only people being "dsicriminated" against by this law are the Jews themselves.

I don't know the policy regarding foreign marriage. This may be a Jewish religious doctrine rather than an Israli political law, I don't know. Can a non-Jew marry a Jew abroad then return to Israel as a married couple?

 

[Starscream]

To joo haters it does.....note that I didn't call them racists....you can hate someone and not be a racist;-)

I agree that one can hate another and not be a racist. But in the eyes of many, wether you hate all or one, you're still called a racist, a bigot, intolerant, and whatnot if you hate one that is different from you.

There is nothing in that amendment that says non-jews will be treated as lower beings (ie second class). Just where the hell are people getting this idea from? All this dust up about the new amendment to the Israeli citizenship laws just shows that in the international community anti-semitism is still alive and well.

 

[mentalfloss]

I agree that one can hate another and not be a racist. But in the eyes of many, wether you hate all or one, you're still called a racist, a bigot, intolerant, and whatnot if you hate one that is different from you.

There is nothing in that amendment that says non-jews will be treated as lower beings (ie second class). Just where the hell are people getting this idea from? All this dust up about the new amendment to the Israeli citizenship laws just shows that in the international community anti-semitism is still alive and well.

Nonsense. The implications of the amendment may separate state from the individual as someone mentioned earlier - 'Jewish state' vs. 'Judaism'. However, all states in every country should now be moving toward a secular attitude. This is the actual argument being brought forth. It has nothing to do with Jews specifically. All states and all individuals should be free from any dogmatic influence.

 

[DaSleeper]

All dogma should be replaced by Aheist Dogma

 

[Just the Facts]

All dogma should be replaced by Aheist Dogma

lol is that like the Bank Robbers Code of Honour?

 

[mentalfloss]

All dogma should be replaced by Aheist Dogma

I was using the word dogma to refer to both theistic and non-theistic principles. We shouldn't be forcing atheism, aheism or religion in any constitutions.

 

[Colpy]

I was using the word dogma to refer to both theistic and non-theistic principles. We shouldn't be forcing atheism, aheism or religion in any constitutions.

The reason the Jews established and wish to maintain a Jewish state is simple......they are not safe anywhere else in the world, and have not been for 2000 years.

The Holocaust was simply the climax of centuries of Jew murder.

To wish to keep Israel as a Jewish state is simply a desire for survival. No more, no less.

Your principles about secularism are unrealistically idealistic in the light of Jewish history.

 

[DaSleeper]

I was using the word dogma to refer to both theistic and non-theistic principles. We shouldn't be forcing atheism, aheism or religion in any constitutions.

While I aggree with that statement because it is after all the basis of western society...freedom of religion!

But what we are seeing more and more these days is not freedom of religion but freedom from religion...as seen in the systematical removal of any reference to religion from public institutions which could be called by some as pushing atheism to the forefront...

 

[mentalfloss]

While I aggree with that statement because it is after all the basis of western society...freedom of religion!

But what we are seeing more and more these days is not freedom of religion but freedom from religion...as seen in the systematical removal of any reference to religion from public institutions which could be called by some as pushing atheism to the forefront...

Firstly, freedom of religion should be a civil liberty in as much as it does not influence government. That's why the constitution is in place. It's supposed to be there to appease a civil liberty without becoming intrusive.

Secondly, removing religious references from state legislation definitely helps to get rid of associations that are harmful to society. I wouldn't have a doubt that atheists are the most concerned about religion being tied to any nation's culture. They are probably the best judges of the corruption that religion has brought since the dawn of man and wouldn't want to replicate that. And even if they are exhibiting some sort of influence, they are doing it the right way - by simply removing that association without tying atheism into state culture.

Former civil rights movements like feminism had to actually spar in the opposite direction to actually achieve some sincere equality. They have their work cut out for them as we become more egalitarian. But this movement to make a state more secular is an important neutral move that doesn't necessitate any sparring to get the right message across.

So, I wouldn't get too antsy about atheists here. Even if they were plotting devilishly in the background, making a state secular would be counterproductive to any agenda they had to begin with.

 

[Colpy]

Firstly, freedom of religion should be a civil liberty in as much as it does not influence government. That's why the constitution is in place. It's supposed to be there to appease a civil liberty without becoming intrusive.

Secondly, removing religious references from state legislation definitely helps to get rid of associations that are harmful to society. I wouldn't have a doubt that atheists are the most concerned about religion being tied to any nation's culture. They are probably the best judges of the corruption that religion has brought since the dawn of man and wouldn't want to replicate that. And even if they are exhibiting some sort of influence, they are doing it the right way - by simply removing that association without tying atheism into state culture.

Former civil rights movements like feminism had to actually spar in the opposite direction to actually achieve some sincere equality. They have their work cut out for them as we become more egalitarian. But this movement to make a state more secular is an important neutral move that doesn't necessitate any sparring to get the right message across.

So, I wouldn't get too antsy about atheists here. Even if they were plotting devilishly in the background, making a state secular would be counterproductive to any agenda they had to begin with.

You have no idea what you are talking about.

The reason you live in a free society, one in which individual rights are respected, is largely due to the religious philosophers of the seventeenth century.

John Locke, the father of modern democracy, was a Deist.........a follower of Judeao-Christian beliefs, but a dissenter in that he did not believe in the Trinity, that Christ was God.....

His philosophy on the rights of man was based on the idea that if man was valued equally in the eyes of God, why would it not be so in the eyes of man? And if all men are created equal, if all men are of equal value in God's eye, then all men must share the same rights....

This was a very radical idea, and one that caught fire in the English Christian world.....

Now, if you want to talk about misery, how about discussing the 100 million murdered in the twentieth century in an attempt to create the perfect godless world of communism?

 

[mentalfloss]

The idea that "all men should be treated equal" does not rely on God or religion in principle. Despite the fact that we needed the extra tag to convince people before doesn't mean we need it now. And it would be prudent of us to ensure we instill those values without necessitating the indoctrination of the Christian motif.

In other words: society is evolving, and no longer requires Christianity to operate on a similar ethical basis.

 

[Starscream]

Nonsense. The implications of the amendment may separate state from the individual as someone mentioned earlier - 'Jewish state' vs. 'Judaism'. However, all states in every country should now be moving toward a secular attitude. This is the actual argument being brought forth. It has nothing to do with Jews specifically. All states and all individuals should be free from any dogmatic influence.

If that is true then why doesn't the international community put pressure on Muslim countries, whos laws and constitutions are governed by heavy non-secular systems, to move away from religious governing and adopt a more secular attitude? Why put so much attention on Israel and a insignificant amendment to a citizenship law?

 

[mentalfloss]

If that is true then why doesn't the international community put pressure on Muslim countries, whos laws and constitutions are governed by heavy non-secular systems, to move away from religious governing and adopt a more secular attitude? Why put so much attention on Israel and a insignificant amendment to a citizenship law?

Because it's not that easy?

Look at how hard it is to change an 'insignificant amendment', and contrast that with the fundamentalist regimes in most muslim countries. These things don't happen overnight. And it's more difficult for the UN to be diplomatically resolving these issues when the west believes a solution should come from militant oppression.

 

[darkbeaver]

Show us that star of dave tattoo on your arse Colpy. Servile gentile hater, defender of zionist scum, pathetic marketer of the Zionist fabricated Jewish history. You are free and easy when you point at the dead by godless communist hands but you convieniently omit the many millions more butchered and starved by the godless capitalist banking monsters. Also you forget the Zionists roots of the Bolshevik Revolution. Your kind of selectivism is the common killing denominator. Just keep clinging to that rotten old Israeli hull Colpy and we,ll soon witness you slipping under the waves of time with them. There is no doubt that the bankers will pull the rug out from under the Jewish state precipitating their being ground to dust. No bankers will be harmed during this event.

 

[petros]

You forgot that Zionism is based on Kabbalistic Masonry.

 

[Starscream]

Because it's not that easy?

Look at how hard it is to change an 'insignificant amendment', and contrast that with the fundamentalist regimes in most muslim countries. These things don't happen overnight. And it's more difficult for the UN to be diplomatically resolving these issues when the west believes a solution should come from militant oppression.

Ah ok. The UN chooses to put pressure on Israel because it's far easier than doing so to the fundamentalist governments of the muslim countries. Yep, that sounds like the UN alright. Don't you think the international community should occupy itself with pressure on the fundamentalist regimes, and other governments as such (who's laws and legal systems are far more strict and punishments much more severe and inhumane) than a simple addition to a citizenship application? So who's the bigger problem of the two and which should dealt with more?

The Israeli legal system even defines the country as a jewish nation (the word democratic came decades later), Israel is mentioned many times all over the globe as a jewish state, and was founded as a jewish state for jewish people, and is reguarded as a jewish state even to this day. The admendment simply requires people applying for citizenship to recognize and accept that.

 

[Colpy]

Show us that star of dave tattoo on your arse Colpy. Servile gentile hater, defender of zionist scum, pathetic marketer of the Zionist fabricated Jewish history. You are free and easy when you point at the dead by godless communist hands but you convieniently omit the many millions more butchered and starved by the godless capitalist banking monsters. Also you forget the Zionists roots of the Bolshevik Revolution. Your kind of selectivism is the common killing denominator. Just keep clinging to that rotten old Israeli hull Colpy and we,ll soon witness you slipping under the waves of time with them. There is no doubt that the bankers will pull the rug out from under the Jewish state precipitating their being ground to dust. No bankers will be harmed during this event.

Hi DB!

Nice to see you surface to slap your tail..........

BTW, I didn't forget the "Zionist roots of the Bolshevik revolution....one can not forget what never existed........

And...make up your mind.....do the Jews control the banks, or are the bankers going to destroy the Jews????

 

[mentalfloss]

Ah ok. The UN chooses to put pressure on Israel because it's far easier than doing so to the fundamentalist governments of the muslim countries. Yep, that sounds like the UN alright. Don't you think the international community should occupy itself with pressure on the fundamentalist regimes, and other governments as such (who's laws and legal systems are far more strict and punishments much more severe and inhumane) than a simple addition to a citizenship application? So who's the bigger problem of the two and which should dealt with more?

The Israeli legal system even defines the country as a jewish nation (the word democratic came decades later), Israel is mentioned many times all over the globe as a jewish state, and was founded as a jewish state for jewish people, and is reguarded as a jewish state even to this day. The admendment simply requires people applying for citizenship to recognize and accept that.

I'm pretty sure they are putting pressure on both. And of course you'll find much more resistance in fundamentalist regimes. That said, it's time to evolve now. Israel != Jew. By having that association it implies that the majority of its citizens must be Jewish and any dilution of that majority is wrong. Israel isn't the only state to have such associations. Of course the U.S. has a strong mentality for housing a Christian majority, and even that is threatening to other cultures.

We need to be mixing everything up and getting rid of national culture based on traditional regimes. It's going to happen anyway, but the more accepting we are of it now, the more conflict we can avoid. Let jews and muslims and christians and buddhists and hindhu and atheists all mesh in harmony. Putting the rubber stamp for only one dogma on any culture is counterproductive to our evolution as a species.

 

[Avro]

It's simple.

Jews are always right and those Islamofacists are always wrong.

The end.

 

[Starscream]

I'm pretty sure they are putting pressure on both. And of course you'll find much more resistance in fundamentalist regimes. That said, it's time to evolve now. Israel != Jew. By having that association it implies that the majority of its citizens must be Jewish and any dilution of that majority is wrong. Israel isn't the only state to have such associations. Of course the U.S. has a strong mentality for housing a Christian majority, and even that is threatening to other cultures.

We need to be mixing everything up and getting rid of national culture based on traditional regimes. It's going to happen anyway, but the more accepting we are of it now, the more conflict we can avoid. Let jews and muslims and christians and buddhists and hindhu and atheists all mesh in harmony. Putting the rubber stamp for only one dogma on any culture is counterproductive to our evolution as a species.

I severely doubt the international community is putting pressure on both. Especially seeing that the fundamentalist governments and others as such are still going about their daily business with nothing happening to them (ie: no sanctions, no expulsions from the UN, no limitaiotns on the trade deals, etc). Oh sure the UN likes to wag the finger when a political opposition group in China gets rounded up and severly punished, or when a homosexual gets life imprisonment in a Islamic court, or even when someone is beatened for making a critic of a royal family, but that's all it does, wag a finger. What does Israel get? Roasted over the coals. If that's what is called pressure on both sides, then id hate to see what a onesided pressure looks like.

Israel was founded as a jewish state for the jewish people. There was never anything said that the majority of the population HAS to be jewish. The majority of the population IS jewish because the largest influx of immigrants to that country was jewish, while arab and christian populations remained pretty stagnant or increased at a much slower pace. However you look at it, Israel IS a jewish state, and it is something people have to accept.