From: "Gary Britt" 


"Ellen K."  wrote in message
news:39g6p1djpihej0jingig7jb6nnmon89orb{at}4ax.com...
> On Sun, 4 Dec 2005 11:58:26 -0500, "Gary Britt"
>  wrote in message
:
>
> >Israel has free speech unless you speak to someone about another
> >religion.  That's a free speech restriction based solely upon religious
> >beliefs being voted into law.

> Let's be honest here.  There is no ban on "speaking to someone about
> another religion", for example in a course on comparative religions etc.
> Proselytization is not at all the same thing as "speaking to someone
> about another religion".

Sure it is.  Its the same thing, and defining the line where it begins is
very arbitrary and capricious.  It is so vague and capricious that a
potential offender has no way of knowing how not to violate the law, other
than by staying completely silent.

Its a restriction on free speech AND the free exercise of religion.

> Considering the Jews' history of being given
> the choice to convert or be killed, banning proselytization is
> completely logical and appropriate.

That's a cannard and not the reason for the law.  The Israelis aren't
afraid of a new inquisition taking place in the land of Israel.  They are
afraid that their beliefs might not stand up to exposure to others beliefs.
 I don't see any other way of interpreting this particular law(s).   In the
land of Israel there is a lot of history of Christians being murdered for
their beliefs, for being idolators, etc. and it is this kind of persecution
of Christians and their beliefs that is the real foundation for this
particular law.

>  It should be noted also that all
> religions are allowed to be freely practiced in Israel, unlike other
> middle Eastern countries like Saudi Arabia.

Yes that is true, and don't mistake my complaints above as my being
anti-Israel.  I'm definitely not.  I'm just trying to say that Israel's
democracy, which is far better and light years more fair to all than any
surrounding government in the middle east, isn't perfect and has a lot more
mixing of religious leaders and state religion in its laws and politics
than in the USA.  The ACLU throws up if a school kid has a bible with him
in the cafeteria.  In Israel religious instruction is part of the public
school system isn't it?  In Israel, the church controls the political
institutions that sanction marriage and determine who is a Jew with a right
to citizenship, etc.  It would be like Jerry Falwell being in charge of
determining who can get married and who can be a citizen in this country.
The religious in Israel is so intertwined with the state that it seems to
me aid to Israel is in fact aid to a religious organization that is
forbidden by USA separation of church and state principles as they are
advocated by the ACLU and like organizations.

I'm not against aid to Israel with the above statement.  I'd just like to
see the ACLU stop opposing a few million of government dollars to religious
schools and faith based social service organizations, or for them to show
appropriately more concern about the 11 Billion dollars that goes each year
to a religious, faith based organization, known as the state of Israel. 
I'd like to see the ACLU promote tolerance by minorities for the beliefs of
the majority just as hard as they promote tolerance by the majority for the
beliefs of minorities.

Gary




>
> >The religious Jews and orthodoxy in Israel
> >participate in parliament and the creation of the laws of Israel and are
> >deeply intertwined with the kind of laws made.  So intertwined that I
don't
> >think Israel can properly be called a secular state.
> The state is secular.  The fact that people run for office on a
> religious platform and get elected, just means it's a democracy.
> People also run for office on other platforms and get elected.
>
> >
> >Gary
> >
> >"Ellen K."  wrote in message
> >news:q2p5p15kdj1m49r29frchbe9hk5rt1boaa{at}4ax.com...
> >> You are mixing up a lot of different things.
> >>
> >> A Jewish PERSON is anyone born of a Jewish mother or who converts
> >> according to Jewish law (which means an "Orthodox"
conversion).  Jewish
> >> LAW is established in the Talmud and codes.
> >>
> >> Many Jewish PEOPLE do not adhere to Jewish LAW in their daily lives.
> >> I'm sure everyone here knows Jews who do not observe the Sabbath or the
> >> dietary laws.  The "reform" and
"conservative" movements, while
> >> comprised of Jewish PEOPLE, have instituted many practices that are not
> >> in accordance with Jewish LAW.  To cite a non-political example, they
> >> use musical instruments in their Sabbath services.
> >>
> >> To LIVE in the land of Israel is part of normative Judaism.   However,
> >> the establishment of a STATE in the land of Israel is expected by
> >> normative Judaism to be brought about by the messiah, not by secular
> >> powers.
> >>
> >> The present state of Israel is a secular state, established by the UN.
> >> G-d is not even mentioned in the national anthem.  In fact there were
> >> protests in the Orthodox communities at the time the secular state was
> >> under consideration, on the grounds that while every Jew who could do
so
> >> should LIVE in the land of Israel, there should not be a Jewish STATE
> >> until the coming of the messiah.  While today the general position in
> >> the Orthodox community is that since the state does exist it should be
> >> recognized and supported, there are still groups who, although large
> >> numbers of their members live in the land of Israel, do not support the
> >> secular state and their members who live there refrain from voting in
> >> Israeli elections.
> >>
> >> Zionism per se was a secular movement, part of the same phenomenon that
> >> resulted in the Jewish socialist movement --  a secularization of
> >> selected Jewish religious ideas but without the religion.  Normative
> >> Judaism says live in the land of Israel, Zionism says establish a
> >> secular state in the land of Israel.  Normative Judaism says a person
> >> has a duty to help the less fortunate, socialism says make a government
> >> that takes from the rich and gives to the poor.  (Actually the early
> >> kibbutzim were probably the only place socialism ever actually worked,
> >> due to the fact that the residents were there by idealistic choice.)
> >>
> >> From a secular political standpoint, the establishment of a state where
> >> Jews could be guaranteed entry was unfortunately proven necessary by
the
> >> Holocaust.  Even the United States turned away refugees fleeing the
> >> Nazis.  In view of the fact that the people who are today screaming
that
> >> the Jews took away the "Palestinians'" (in quotes
because there were no
> >> "Palestinians" then) land did not scream when
Hitler was exterminating
> >> 6,000,000 Jews, it's difficult to attribute their current position to
> >> humanitarianism.
> >>
> >> Another inconsistency (to be polite) in the statements of the
> >> anti-Israel people is that these are the same people who would rightly
> >> say it is wrong to have residency restrictions based on race or
> >> religion, e.g. preventing black people from living in certain
> >> neighborhoods, but support the position that no Jews should be living
in
> >> the land of Israel.   Why is "no blacks allowed"
wrong, but "Judenrein"
> >> right?
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Sun, 27 Nov 2005 10:03:44 +0000, Adam
> >> <""4thwormcastfromthemolehill\"{at}the
field.near the bridge"> wrote in
> >> message :
> >>
> >> >Ellen K. wrote:
> >> >> How did you get to be so filled with hate?
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >That is the question I have been asking you for most of
this thread.
> >> >
> >> >On what grounds did jewish people think that they had the right to
> >> >forcibly drive people out of their homes, take their land
 & create
war,
> >> >death & destruction on a large scale?
> >> >
> >> >That the land was given to them by God?
> >> >
> >> >To quote just one of your mails:
> >> >
> >> >"One crazy person doing something and attributing it
to his religion
is
> >> >clearly one crazy person.
> >> >
> >> >Multiple official representatives of a religion, all
saying the same
> >> >thing and attributing it to their religion, is a strong indication
that
> >> >the religion in question can legitimately be interpreted
in accordance
> >> >with their statements."
> >> >
> >> >So this was clearly not the action of one crazy person but that
multiple
> >> >official repesentatives were all saying the same thing.
> >> >
> >> >Or are you saying the whole thing was a purely nationalist struggle
for
> >> >survival with no religious element?
> >> >
> >> >Adam
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >> On Fri, 25 Nov 2005 18:35:24 +0000, Adam
> >> >>
<""4thwormcastfromthemolehill\"{at}the field.near the
bridge"> wrote in
> >> >> message :
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>>Zionism is a straightforward land theft with
> >> >>>violence & menaces & terror on behalf of all jews.
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >>
> >
>

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5