When I hear Israeli supporters or Israelis use this term it gives me a lip twitch. Are they westernized? Yes. Do they have the good intent of valuing western style government? Again yes.

But I do not buy it one bit when they claim it has nothing to do with religion. It is the same social pecking order denial that you get from Christians in the United States who will call a non Christian equal, but still use the phrase "Christian nation".

Israel has a religious icon on it's flag, it is not a neutral flag, it does not represent the entire population of Israel including Arab and Muslim Israelis anymore than having a cross on the American flag would be neutral.

Most recently Netenyahu said that the "Jewish state" would be based on the Talmud. And again, how would that make anymore sense when Christians in America try to claim that America's laws are ripped out of the bible?

Now of course Israel westernized, and yes far too much of the Middle East is still behind the west in valuing pluralism to the same degree. But no Israel, saying you are not like them because your social pecking order is not fascist, is not equality, it is simply a watered down social pecking order.

The founders of the United States promised to protect freedom of religion, but the glaring lack of the word Christian, and Jesus, and bible, in the Constitution said a lot about what they did not want to be. Theocracy lite is still a theocracy. As soon as you put specific language into law favoring one group over another, you are going to cause divisions.

The only fair thing with government law is to not play favorites and only agree to protect everyone. Israels "Jewish state" claims is problematic for the same reason you have liberal Christians and conservative Christians who view "Christian nation" differently.

America is not a "Christian state", it is nation based on religious freedom, which is why you see "Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of a religion or the free exorcise thereof" and in our oath of office "No religious test".

I do not say this to Jews or supporters of Israel to say "you have to leave", but merely as advice knowing how non Christians in America still are viewed, despite our constitution, as guests at best, and or feared as the "other" because of the attitude of "I am more special than you are, and you are equal as long as you accept that".

When you think about how long it took for a Catholic to get elected President, and even longer fore Jews and Muslims to serve in our congress, I am giving you advice as to what really constitutes a secular state. There is no way to view "Jewish state" as not setting up a social pecking order. Equality is not set up that way. The only way to protect pluralism is the common law of government neutrality.

Well, I always took Jewish to be--in this respect unique--either applicable to one's ethnic or religion. No? After all, many atheists claim their Jewry by heritage.

(August 10, 2014 at 9:28 am)Pickup_shonuff Wrote: Well, I always took Jewish to be--in this respect unique--either applicable to one's ethnic or religion. No? After all, many atheists claim their Jewry by heritage.

Jewish is an ethnicity, Judaism is a religion, it can apply to both. I think that even without the religion of Judaism, jews are very united, and they have the reputation of making lots of money. They still do it. It's impossible for the white house to not have any jewish inside otherwise I don't see reasons for the USA to keep supporting Israel for this long.

Any fair and reasonable state should have a secular government, since that is the only way the rights of minorities can be preserved. That's why the leaders in the Middle East fear political Islam, since it would produce an Islamic state with the persecution of Christian and other minorities. Look what happened in Egypt with the Muslim Brotherhood power-grab. Imagine what kind of state ISIS would implement.

Nope sorry. "Hebrew" and "Talmud" are religious terms and religious traditions, just as "Christian" and "Bible" are. Whatever good intent of pluralism Jews say they have still ignores our species ignorance of wanting to set up social pecking orders. So even if they want to claim it is not about religion, it still is no different than the behavior of other primates in a social structure. It is the same when any group of humans do it.

You cannot put language into common law that favors one group over another, you can only agree to equal protection under the law. Protecting pluralism cannot involve playing favorites based on anything.

"Jew" is a word denoting a sect of our species population, just like "Christian". I say this because I know Americas history and how hard it has been constantly for our minorities to fight to be part of the mainstream. It wasn't the founders fault. It has been the fault of Christians thinking they set up a social pecking order favoring them, and they did not. Their intent was to avoid the conflict even within the same label, which is just as diverse as people who don't share the same label.

---

(August 10, 2014 at 9:36 am)Diablo Wrote: Any fair and reasonable state should have a secular government, since that is the only way the rights of minorities can be preserved. That's why the leaders in the Middle East fear political Islam, since it would produce an Islamic state with the persecution of Christian and other minorities. Look what happened in Egypt with the Muslim Brotherhood power-grab. Imagine what kind of state ISIS would implement.

"Christian state" "Islamic state" "Jewish state". People get lost in the argument of the moment. You can argue too much of the East is dominated by fundamentalists, and they would be right.

But when you look at the history of Christianity, it had it's own dark ages. It oppressed blacks, Native Americans, women and gays. And even today our right wingers are trying to turn back the clock on voting rights and women's rights.

I am not seeking a godless utopia or "atheist state" either. Just pointing out society does itself better when the government a plural society lives under does not set up social pecking orders.

---

(August 10, 2014 at 9:32 am)Blackout Wrote:

(August 10, 2014 at 9:28 am)Pickup_shonuff Wrote: Well, I always took Jewish to be--in this respect unique--either applicable to one's ethnic or religion. No? After all, many atheists claim their Jewry by heritage.

Jewish is an ethnicity, Judaism is a religion, it can apply to both. I think that even without the religion of Judaism, jews are very united, and they have the reputation of making lots of money. They still do it. It's impossible for the white house to not have any jewish inside otherwise I don't see reasons for the USA to keep supporting Israel for this long.

No that still is moving the goal post.

If the Canaanite polytheists never existed there would have not been a Hebrew splinter group started, nor Talmud written. Just this week Netenyahu stated that the "Jewish state" would be founded on the Talmud. The Talmud is a specific book referring to a specific group of people. That is sectarian, regarding a specific sect of a population. There is no way to avoid calling it social favoritism putting one group above another group.

I really have no desire to tell any religion in the world to go away, I am merely talking about human logic and bad logic, even with the best intent without realizing it sets up social pecking orders.

The only way you can protect pluralism is to agree to protect pluralism, and you cannot do that by inserting language into law that favors one group over another.

If Jews, in America understand our history of discrimination against minorities, I would suggest if they understand that, then they should understand there is no good way to play favorites in law language.

America's constitution was not taken out of the bible, that is not anti Christian, anymore than saying our public highways are not Muslim highways or atheist highways, they are open to everyone with no special lane for one group.

Blackout, you can correct me on this but...

Israel seems to be where European nations were before the Second World War; it seems there is a large body of those would like to see a pure Jewish nation-state in the way that Germany or France or Britain struggled with the "Jewish question" during the diaspora in their own yearning for purity. Ironically, where it is the Arab who suffers because of politics in present-day Israel, it was the Jew in Old Europe.

(August 10, 2014 at 10:35 am)Pickup_shonuff Wrote: Blackout, you can correct me on this but...

Israel seems to be where European nations were before the Second World War; it seems there is a large body of those would like to see a pure Jewish nation-state in the way that Germany or France or Britain struggled with the "Jewish question" during the diaspora in their own yearning for purity. Ironically, where it is the Arab who suffers because of politics in present-day Israel, it was the Jew in Old Europe.

I will agree that an ethnicity of Jew people is hard to define, if we look at Jews around the world, we'll see that many have different physical features and skin colour

Even when not making religion the issue, which it is, our species stupid strive for homogeneous groups is absurd when you know evolution is depends on variants. The same attitude is based on race issues too. It is hard for example for someone non Japanese to migrate and mix with them. Same with China. Not even Hispanics see themselves as always being the same group. Cubans do not like being confused with Mexicans. My x wife who is Japanese doesn't like being confused with Koreans.

You cannot rid the world of labels of any kind, but you can insist on your government not setting up social pecking orders.

This conflict is about religion, and unless it is seen a such, neither side will be able to see the other as part of the same species. If the idea of an "Islamic state" bothers Jews, then a "Jewish state" should bother them as well. Just as a "Christian nation" being an atheist here bothers me. Watered down social pecking orders are still social pecking orders.

Quote:If the Canaanite polytheists never existed there would have not been a Hebrew splinter group started, nor Talmud written. Just this week Netenyahu stated that the "Jewish state" would be founded on the Talmud. The Talmud is a specific book referring to a specific group of people. That is sectarian, regarding a specific sect of a population. There is no way to avoid calling it social favoritism putting one group above another group.

Of course this is favouritism, I never denied that.

Quote:I really have no desire to tell any religion in the world to go away, I am merely talking about human logic and bad logic, even with the best intent without realizing it sets up social pecking orders.

I have, they could all go away.

Quote:The only way you can protect pluralism is to agree to protect pluralism, and you cannot do that by inserting language into law that favors one group over another.

Of course

Quote:If Jews, in America understand our history of discrimination against minorities, I would suggest if they understand that, then they should understand there is no good way to play favorites in law language.

America's constitution was not taken out of the bible, that is not anti Christian, anymore than saying our public highways are not Muslim highways or atheist highways, they are open to everyone with no special lane for one group.

Agree. I wasn't trying to protect Jews, I was just saying there are certain features common to all Jewish people, but that doesn't justify favouritism.

I wasn't speaking so much to you but to any potential reader no matter their background or leanings.

---

(August 10, 2014 at 9:36 am)Diablo Wrote: Any fair and reasonable state should have a secular government, since that is the only way the rights of minorities can be preserved. That's why the leaders in the Middle East fear political Islam, since it would produce an Islamic state with the persecution of Christian and other minorities. Look what happened in Egypt with the Muslim Brotherhood power-grab. Imagine what kind of state ISIS would implement.

So?

"I am not like the others" is not my argument. No Israel is not a religiously fascist state, but it is till setting up a social pecking order just like when Americans say "Christian nation". A watered down social pecking order is still a social pecking order.

You can have freedom of religion and equality for all races WITHOUT putting language in law that favors one group over another.