Journalist: 'Seculars anti-Semitic to religious'

The new (meaning of ) anti-Semitism...

Attila Somfalvi. Journalist: 'Seculars anti-Semitic to religious' http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3177232,00.html

The latest celebrity recruit to the Labor Party, television news anchor Shelly Yechimovitz, expressed her fondness of the ultra-Orthodox community in Israel during a radio interview Wednesday morning.

"I am revolted by the anti-Semitic discourse promoted by seculars against the ultra-Orthodox. Their public is an oppressed minority and not an oppressing majority as Shinui tries to portray," Yechimovitz told the radio host.

is really nothing like Jewish politics and the "in-fighting" among Jews outside of Israel is no different. Just hang out for awhile at your local JCC and you'll know what I am talking about.

four synagogues one of which no one will set foot in.

Yes, even in America, observant Jews get grief from our secular brethren.

<snip>
“The Labor party betrayed the secular public and taxpayers a long time ago. In a country where Israelis can only get married through rabbis and tens of thousands of ultra-Orthodox are evading military service, and there is no public transportation in Shabbat, the secular are targeted, " MK Avraham Poraz of Shinui said.

...no public transportation on the Sabbath, but Israel is secular?

that deal was brokered a long time ago when the first coalition government was formed.

stem cell research

(Evangelical Fundamentalist Rapturist Run by a "born again" dry drunk and Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell, James Dobson, Franklyn Graham, etc.)

No government funding of stem cell research.
Growing trend to Intelligent Design in the schools and science curricula.
Militantly anti-GLBT.
Proselytizing by military chaplains to a captive audience.

The US leads the world in state sponsored theocracy. (You just don;t see it if you are of the "majority group")

<>

as simply "secular" or "religous". Most countries are on various points on a continuum between thos two extremes.

So, you're claiming that the fact that Israel has no public transportation on Sabbath as proof that Israel is not a secular country. But in quite a few ways, the US is further towards the "religous" end of the spectrum than Israel; yet are you seriously going to claim the US isn't basically secular?

(in mathematical terms, think "upper boundary")

which of course, we can see by these examples, Israel is not.

What the US is or is not has nothing to do with the discussion, which was about Israel. I think Israel is more religious than commonly acknowledged. I think such religiousity is unfair to religious minorities in Israel and in some ways contradicts claims about the diversity of the society.

Further, I'm curious how, in defense of Israel, the "but Johnnie does it" argument can be used to defend Israel's behavior at the very same time as the "life's not fair" argument is being used to justify Israel's taking things from others. They seem contradictory to me. Isn't the "but Johnnie does it" argument basically an appeal for fairness?

But my point is that Israel is not significantly farther toward the religous end of the spectrum than quiate a few other countries, and that some countries which are commonly accepted as secular are more religous, in some aspects.



Speculation piled on assumption?



without getting into whether these positions are contradictory or not, if you want to point out a contradiction in my posts, use arguments I've actually made.

to me. Of course it is not a theocracy, and I never claimed that, but there is more religious influence there than typically acknowledged, of which this (no bus service on the Sabbath) is just one example. And that is hardly either speculation or assumption, is it? Or are you saying there is some doubt about whether Israel does not have bus service on the Sabbath?

This, however,

<snip>...if you want to point out a contradiction in my posts, use arguments I've actually made<unsnip>
as I read back over the thread, is probably warranted. I did apparently assume too much in the case of bringing the "fairness" issue into the thread. Please accept my apologies for my error.

I will say however, that even on it's own, the "but johnnnie did it" sort of argument doesn't seem to hold water - and the comment about what the US is doing in response to an observation about Israel seems to be that sort of argument. It shouldn't matter in a discussion about Israel what any other country is doing.

medical research because some fundie theocrats and their lemming followers say it is "Baby Killing" or "Abortion" is not secular either.

And using the Kansas taxpers' money to teach unintelligent design is not secular other.

...we have "blue laws," we have zoning ordinances for certain businesses that can't be with 1000 feet of a church (at least we do in OK). While Israel is not 100% secular, the US is much more religious and could be called a Christian nation which is what many us continue to fight to keep a complete theocracy from occurring.

influence of religion within its society and government. Which is significant, because, unlike the US, Israeli society in the beginning really WAS fairly secular. So the comparisons to other countries aren't applicable. The situations are completely different.

And as you know, I'm sure, the settlements are driven in large part by the extremely religious segment of Israeli society. We have nothing similar in US society, so the comparisons are irrelevant.

over the last years their ability to influence the non religious "way of life" has been consistently reduced. They still have their areas of influence with marriage, divorce and being buried...but everywhere else they "in retreat"

you really should ask before writing......some of us actually live in israel.

long time, yes or no? And please don't reply with some other tangentially related issue.

The dream of a "Greater Israel" by the religious extremists has done much to derail any moves toward peace in the country. Yes or No?

It is unclear at this point whether the departure of Sharon from Likud will spell the death knell for the influence of the far-right parties that have had the country in their grip for so long, but you can't deny that they have had an undue influence. I hope it is a good sign of change. But that isn't to say that there hasn't been a huge influence.

most are religious, many have a messianic vision, and they are an obstacle to peace as much as islamic jhihad, fatah, hizballa, etc are...... and they live in the settlements...not in israeli population centers... how is that related to the religious influence on israeli life?...most of israel is made up of non religious citizens as is the character of the country....i would guess that a smaller percentage go to the synagogue or mosque here than go to church in america.

vision of a Greater Israel (ambitions of territorial expansion). The settlements are in violation of international law. You say you "understand the Palestinians" so surely you are aware that the Pals percieve the illegal settlement policy as a sort of creeping, incremental annexation of the disputed territories by Israel. Yet for YEARS, they were allowed, to go on, and even encouraged by the Israeli government. Even when the withdrawal from Gaza was made, with great fanfare, the other settlement activity in the West Bank was allowed to continue.

As I understand it, it is the religious part of Likud that most strongly was associated with the settlement movement. Many believe that the continued settlements are a serious impediment to peace. This is what I mean: the policies of the government were impacted by the extremist religious parties. The entire population does not need to be religious - if the extremist religious parties are in the driver's seat anyway - for the society to be considered to have some fairly significant theological underpinnings.

(The very recent events of the election of Peretz to Labor, and the new party that Sharon is forming, may limit their influence. We'll have to wait and see.)

As I understand it, it is the religious part of Likud that most strongly was associated with the settlement movement. .....This is what I mean: the policies of the government were impacted by the extremist religious parties.

you are confusing two seperate issues and making a conclusion.....

the right wing/religious/messianic view has influence within the likud and govt in terms of settlements....and thats it. It has no influence, nor does it try to influence the daily life of the israeli in terms of religion.

they are NOT in the drivers seat when it comes to running an entire country which is a far more complext entity than settlements. Democratic countries are made up of civil rights, complex economic issues, foreign policies, internal subcultures fighting it for their rights, education, etc...our everyday life is hardly centered around the settlements.

that seems to be where the problem lies....so let me repeat it: our lives are not centered around the settlements, much like the your life is not centered around nor influenced by the war in iraq.

and to emphises the point: the pullout in gaza showed how much real influence they have on our society when push comes to shove: ...and in case you didnt notice, it was zero: they lost every round.

the real question you should be asking now...is if they have such little influence why is it, they are allowed to continue with all thier noise?

and you MUST know that it was the settlements and the kow-towing to the far right vision of a Greater Israel that in so many ways has kept the I/P conflict going; it has driven the Pals to desperation. And I've already pointed out that the withdrawal in Gaza is only a strategic decision, because it was not accompanied by stopping the settlement activity in the West Bank.

Now, it appears from the OP, as I re-read it, that there is even an effort in Israel, to label other JEWS that don't agree with them as anti-semitic. Unbelievable!

and this, is a problem:
<snip>
that seems to be where the problem lies....so let me repeat it: our lives are not centered around the settlements, much like the your life is not centered around nor influenced by the war in iraq.<snip>

We should not let destructive activities of our governments go without comment, just because we feel they don't affect us personally. As John Kennedy said, "if you are not part of the solution, you are part of the problem."

the subject matter was not the settlements and their affect upon the "peace process"...you accused israel of being a theorcratic nation..(using no busses running on the sabbath in parts of israel as proof).then you claimed it was such a nation because of the settlements....neither are true..it was that what i was pointing out.

no more and no less...the question is now, is if you understand that the settlers/their vision, etc have no effect on whether israeli life is based on a liberal civil rights oriented point of view or a theorcratic one?



and once again you show little understanding of israeli politics by claiming the withdrawl from gaza was strategic

so far from what i've read of your writing, you really have very little grasp of israeli internal politics....you've made lots of assumptions based on wrong information....

had a profound influence. Their interest in the illegal settlement movement is often motivated by religious reasons, which include a dream of Greater Israel, which they believe can be achieved by territorial agression against the Palestinians. Even if it is just by default, by refusing to stop them, that CLEARLY indicates a deference to the desires of the religious right within Israeli society. And you say there is such a concern for civil rights??? What about the Palestinian's civil rights?

And if you will read what I ACTUALLY said, I did NOT say that Israel was a theocratic nation, I said that Israel is not as secular as many claim. You are reacting to things I didn't say.

You say I have little grasp of Israeli politics, but you also claim the religious right and the settlements just aren't a very big deal to the average Israeli, and meanwhile make comments about how you feel yourself threatened by Palestinian terrorism. Do you really not see how these are all very closely intertwined?

Connect the dots.

where do all your assumptions come from?

Even if it is just by default, by refusing to stop them, that CLEARLY indicates a deference to the desires of the religious right within Israeli society. And you say there is such a concern for civil rights??? What about the Palestinian's civil rights?

i'll make this short: the reason we (the secular) dont see the settlements as the sole obstacle to peace and hence do not see a "clear" deference to the religious right. The obvious proof is the pullout from gaza, the religous right said no...and they were essentially ignored. (or do you have another reason why the govt ignored the wishes of the "influential religious right"....)

What is "clear" to you is simply a POV that is misinformed, either by choice or not.

I'll give you another short essay:

pre 67, pre 79 there was also terrorism...gaza today, which has not a single settlement still shoots mortors and missles across the border. The northern border, which is an intl border, is still used to attack israel....

and the excuse is?......(drum roll.....)

the settlement issue for the vast majority of the israelis, who are not religious, has nothing to do with religion....if you understand that, you have a chance of understanding the conflict.

and...
palestenain civil rights come after my little girls right to board a bus without fear of getting blown up...

you misconstrue my statements and then argue against point I never made, insulting me for supposedly having made it. I am tired of this. eom

in your last four posts...

The dream of a "Greater Israel" by the religious extremists

The settlements are populated in large part by religious persons with a vision of a Greater Israel (ambitions of territorial expansion)

and you MUST know that it was the settlements and the kow-towing to the far right vision of a Greater Israel that in so many ways has kept the I/P conflict going;

The settlements are an Israeli POLICY, over which the settlers have had a profound influence

______________________________

you dont mention much else....

anyway you could always answer my questions insead of making assumptions based on misinformation...try it

(damn this edit time limit)

I wasn't arguing "X does it too" so much as I'm requesting consistency in definitions.

I read something that's a few years old now that pointed out how inconsistant the Sabbath thing can be with El-Al grounded but Ben-Gurion airport staying open...

I'm not addressing this bit to you, but just lazily rolling a few thoughts from reading some posts in this thread into this one post. I agree with the view that Israel's not completely secular, and while the US is on a par with it, the US has that separation of church and state thing that the Religious Right love to try to chisel away at. I wouldn't agree with pelsar's comment that politically those who'd love nothing better than a theocratic Israel have held no power. Back when Israel came into being, Ben-Gurion gave them concessions (such as the control over marriage and divorce, and exemption from military service) to gain their support for the state. He saw the danger from the Arab states as something that could be faced better without internal bickering in Israel from the religious folk. And when there was the time when things were evenly tied in the Knesset, the small religious party which I can't remember the name of right now got to wield a fair bit of power...

Violet...

the discussion with me was about the settlers and religion....they tend to stay out of the religous aspect of civilan life in terms of making laws etc. Its the orthodox that want the theocracy and meddle with the laws in the knesset.

stores open on saturday, stores closed on saturday....el al can fly, el al cant fly...and so on and so forth. Its a constant fight....however they have been steadly losing influence over the years.

Civil marriages can be done, a multitude of non kosher resturants have flooded israel....kibbutizm have taken in the "less suitable" dead......and even here the religious are losing ground. Some of the more religious are now in the army (though i have my doubts about their effectivness.....).

The overal score card is that they're losing influence on everyday life. thank god for that.

I read in the same book I read the thing about El-Al that the popularity of falafels and shawermas were long ago overtaken by cheeseburgers and other western fast foods. While watching the ebb of the influence of the orthodox community pleases me no end, I'm hoping Israel sees sense and sees a huge resurgence in shawermas, which is my fast-food of choice :)

Violet...

that's somewhat of an exaggeration.

legally, I don't think there's any bar to them beginning flights on Sabbath, since El-Al is now a private company.

I think pelsar's comment was more in response to the claim that the settlements are an indication of an increased trend toward religion in Israel's government. I disagree; those settlers who are religous belong to the national-religous camp, and for the most part, support for them tends to come from those supporting the "nationalistic" component rather than the religous component (if that makes sense).

While it's true that Israel is not completely secular - in particular regarding personal status issues - it is so for the most part. While religous parties have, on occasion, tried to increase religous restrictions in law, their power has actually been decreasing over the last few years. Bear in mind also that in Judaism, the line between Jewish religous practises and cultural practises can be somewhat blurred on occasion.

The origin of religous involvement in Israeli laws is a bit more involved. As far as personal status issues (marriage/divorce) are concerned,, it's not s0 much that they were given that power as that the state didn't create parallel civil institutions - the system is actually a legacy of Turkish rule - probably, as you say, to avoid friction. As far as military exemption is concerned, it's a bit more complicated. After the Holocaust destroyed the yeshivot of Europe, the rabbis asked Ben Gurion to exempt their students - which were fairly few in number - to allow them to rebuild the world of Torah study. I don't think anyone expected it to go as far as it eventually did.

I'm in no way an expert on orthodox Jews in Israel, but from what I understand, they've never really interested themselves in issues like security and war until recently, but are more interested in civil matters. And some of them were (don't know if they still are) anti-Zionist because of their messianic religious beliefs...

When it comes to the orthodox and their belief that everything should close down on the Sabbath, that's something where practicality is always going to win out. The idea of Israel just shutting up shop totally on the Sabbath, while being the wet dream of the orthodox, would cause some problems when it comes to fighting wars and running the state, etc.

I'm guessing the difference between religious and cultural practices would be very similar to places like the US and here, where Easter and Christmas get celebrated by most as lots of chocolate and presents and time off work and school, and there's no religious significance to the holidays at all - actually that's me I'm talking about, but most everyone I knows is in it for the non-religious stuff :)

Violet...

The Theocratic States of America with our dry drunk fundie President does not.

I AM A TYPE II DIABETIC - HAVE ALREADY DEVELOPED DIABETIC NEUROPATHY IN ONE LEG, AND SOME DIABETIC RENAL FAILURE - so I have an effin dog in this fight

Not my cup of tea but there you go. Also, McDonald's and many other companies have 'kosher' restaurants which aren't open on the Sabbath either (there are secular versions though).

A far more interesting topic regarding the "religious quality of Israel" is inter-marriage, which is quite hard to do (you get a big interrogation by the Ministry of Religious Affairs, harassed etc). As one op-ed columnist in Ha'aretz put it in an investigative piece a while back, there is a "general atmosphere of intolerance" currently prevalent in Israel.

I grew up in a state in the US where - until the ACLU fought each of these measures in the courts, we had:

1. A statutory requirement to read ten verses from the King James translation of the Bible every morning in the taxpayer funded public schools. Not the Catholic translation - but the King James version, not the Hertz Old testament - but the Protestant Christian King James version, not the Sts. Cyril and Methodius version - but the King James version. not the Koran- but the Protestant Christian King James version, the the Book of Budda - but the Protestant Christian King James version, not he Gubendu Guru - but the Protestant Christian King James version.

In my City Protestants were a minority - behind the Roman Catholics and the Eastern Orthodox Christians.

2. No retail sales of any items except food on Sundays.

3. No sales of alcohol from 2AM Sunday Morning until 6 AM Monday morning.

4. No professional sports on Sunday (a special waiver was granted for professional baseball and football in the two largest cities in the State, but the game had to be over by sunset).

5. Motion picture censorship for "Decency."

6. Until the 1960's - we had a family law code which made "Absolute Divorce" very hard to obtain; and which prohibited marriage by diabetics, and epileptics.

7. Two hours of released time from Public School each week to attend sectarian religious education.

THE COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA - THE "DISSENTERS' STATE"

This was not a fundamentalist, "Red State" in the "Old Confederacy" - this was Pennsylvania, the Dissenter's State.

I guess this crap is okay if it's Christian or Muslim - but not if its Jewish. Is that your drift.

I'm opposed to any of the stuff you mention and the Israeli practices I mentioned (and much worse ones I didn't mention, but there you go).

Not sure why I have to point this out. :shrug:

My mistake, should have been clearer - I'm not opposed to kosher restaurants, nor am I opposed to them not opening on the Sabbath as belief dictates. I would be opposed to state legislation to that effect, but that doesn't exist in Israel.

I meant in my post that I was opposed to the fruitcakes who stone people (which are probably the same constituency as the folks in the Ministry of Religious affairs who I also alluded to).

who picket stem cell researchers and file frivolous law suits against stem cell research. That is not "throwing a fruit cake". That is sentencing diabetics to a lingering death as a diabetic blind amputee on dialysis in our final days (the Fundies ban mercy killing too)

These are our popularly elected senators - Santorum, Brownbeck, Cornyn, Kaye Bailey Hutchinson, etc. and our Selected President (who gets calls from God).

shops to be open on Sundays (if closed on Saturdays). But shomer shabbat merchants had to be closed on Sunday.

It took about 20 years of ACLU litigation to knock that out. (I am a proud card carrying member of the American Civil Liberties Union).


:shrug: :shrug:

no public transportation on the Sabbath, but Israel is secular?

and after you have defined it, please list the countries that match your definition.

i'm just curious how you define "secular" in terms of all the nations of the world.

You should ask all the people who insist that Israel is secular to define the term, not me. I am just pointing out that there really is a religious influence.

What other countries are doing is not relevant to the discussion, which was about the influence of religion in Israeli society.

Socially, it oppresses everyone else.

Which goes to show how unproductive ultra-Orthodox political parties have been, as far as guaranteeing the welfare of their constituents.

the ultra-Orthodox community has been subsidised by the state to a greater extent than any other.

refer to?