The number of Jews in the world will fall by 33% by 2050

[KrazyHorse]

It's another lazy answer. If Jews from some region would deserve refugee status at any point in time and Israel felt the urge to preferentially let them in for humanitarian reasons then I would support its actions wholeheartedly. By simply offering a right of return to all Jews no matter what their situation it's just acting like yet another racist third world nation.

[Natan]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse
It's another lazy answer. If Jews from some region would deserve refugee status at any point in time and Israel felt the urge to preferentially let them in for humanitarian reasons then I would support its actions wholeheartedly. By simply offering a right of return to all Jews no matter what their situation it's just acting like yet another racist third world nation.

You mean like racist, third world Germany?

[KrazyHorse]

Yes, or like the racist former Sov. U.

The idea of preferentially letting in (for example) American Jews today has no defense.

EDIT: If you're trying to imply that I'm saying that the Third World has a monopoly on racism then you're barking up the wrong tree. Israel is Third World whether or not it it's racist.

[Goingonit]

KrazyHorse:

What about individually persecuted Jews? For instance, maybe an individual Jewish person is feeling as if institutional racism makes it harder for him/her to find a job in his/her country. This person is not a refugee, yet they are a sufferer of antisemitism.

Israel takes the position that Diaspora Jewry has the right to a place free from persecution. Antisemitism does exist, even on Poly (not naming any names), and this is why Israel exists.

I do think that there is a problem with the treatment of Israeli Arabs that needs to be addressed; there should be a way to allow right of return without being discriminatory in, for instance, hiring policy in Israel. Otherwise they look hypocritical.

[KrazyHorse]

That's ridiculous. In N. America Jews aren't subject to any more racism than any other minority group, and less than almost any other. They don't deserve refugee status for very real reasons, namely that they aren't subject to any widespread discrimination.

[Goingonit]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse
That's ridiculous. In N. America Jews aren't subject to any more racism than any other minority group, and less than almost any other. They don't deserve refugee status for very real reasons, namely that they aren't subject to any widespread discrimination.

There is a country for every minority group except blacks (and they tried to make one w/ Liberia ). Jews were a stateless people for many years, now they have a state where they are in the majority. I would in fact argue that every single group should have somewhere where they could go in cases of dire need. Jews are just lucky enough to have one.

Also, there are Jews everywhere (well, not as much anymore, because the ones in Europe got killed or left, the ones in the ME got killed or left, the ones in Yemen left, and the ones in Ethiopia left). But you cannot argue that there is not antisemitism in the world!

[Ramo]

Our immigration laws are there to ensure Israel as a jewish state. Being a sovereign country, Israel has the right to decide so.

What does that right imply? That I can't question those policies?

What else does Israel have the right to do? Murder non-Jews? If not, why?

You apparently have a problem with Israel being a jewish state and not a state of it's citizens, which again you have no bussiness dealing with.

Given your political views, I would assume yes.

You assumed correctly in this case.

However not liberal societies do not give thier citizens the information to choose and let them be converted into terrorists.

Too many double-negatives. What are you trying to say?

The interpretation I see doesn't particularly make much sense...

You would see that in liberal countries there is ever far wider public support for terrorism.

There's more support for terror in a more liberal nation like, say, the Canada, than an authoritarian nation like, say, Iran?

The only such coorelation, IMO, is that the beliefs of people in authoritarian societies more reflects that of their gov't.

For instance, as one muslim leader said, there are schools teaching martyrdom in England.

Source, please.

If I misunderstand you, feel free to elaborate why england isn't free,

Keep in mind that there is no Bill of Rights in England. There is no explicit freedom of speech in the UK, like there is in the US.

As for other freedoms, the polices, has some fairly powers. I might add that a lot of that is due to the IRA's terror.

and what freedom means to you.

Depends upon what you mean by freedom. I advocate political freedom (libertarianism) and social freedom (socialism).

Values which are not defined in the Torah

I meant those that are also shared by Jewish atheists.

And ofcourse there are legitimate disagreements about Torah writings, and they are dealt with nicely, mostly in a liberal fashion, though lately they've been not so liberal.

Why don't you kick out the dissenters? Doesn't this undermine your state's Jewishness?

You ignore the fact that jews do share their culture very much so more than the germans or english.

I think most American Jews are closer to standard American culture than the hodgpodge of cultures you have down in Israel. The only distinctions most of my Jewish friends have with other Americans are last names, and to a much lesser degree, appearances.

And they lived in much worse conditions of travel than the 15th century, until the 19th and 20th century.

Until the 18th century in western europe, 19th century in the middle east and north africa, and the 20th century in eastern europe, Jews practically lived in their own secluded society - whether by will or by force, often to protect them from others wanting to harm them.

You're living in the past. Times have changed.

You see them as if they were just as free and culturally different as a white person in europe.

In the second half of the 20th century, absolutely. Certainly today.

Nope.
It's based on race/ethnicity/heritage.
But in no way is it racist.

From dictionary.com:

"racist

adj 1: based on racial intolerance; "racist remarks" 2: discriminatory especially on the basis of race or religion [syn: antiblack, anti-Semitic, anti-Semite(a)] n : a person with a prejudiced belief that one race is superior to others [syn: racialist] "

So go retire

Don't tempt me.

It's you who try to prevent people from living as they want.

If their choice of lifestyle is to coerce others, damn straight I'll oppose them.

They are just as Israeli as Israeli Jews are.

Uh huh. Except for minor things like having to buy houses at only certain places.

On what grounds does America decide that Americans are more worthy than non-Americans?

Education and wealth. And I completely oppose the US' authoritian, disgusting immigration policy, mind you.

Not true.

It is true. Consider the US, for instance. Businesses almost invariably close early on Sundays because of the Christian custom.

Without a proper law for keeping a holiday, there could be great abuse of worker rights. And it's best to keep a united day of holiday, to prevent chaos when different shops are closed on different days.

That's a good thing to some extent. I might want a service on Saturday. I might want to work on Saturday. Why should you stop me?

It's not a religious law, but rather a social one.
Saturday is chosen, it being a jewish holiday.

I thought y'all go to the Synagogue on Saturday...

For instance, all the social laws originating in the bible and talmud.
Many other laws from the Talmud and such.

Why would Jewish atheists automatically follow them? Even if the law isn't directly related to praying, it's still is derived from religion. Why would they be used to a Talmudic legal code if they came from, for instance, the US?

The rest of the world should have better things to do then telling us how to run our country thank you very much.

Like it or not, there's a world outside Israel, and it would stand a better chance if it didn't piss everyone else off. I'm just stating a simple fact.

You are not any kind of a higher moral body, or any international body which Israel accepts.

And?

If tommorow Israel, or any other country for that matter, decides that it automatically grants RoR to people who eat salami sandwiches, neither you nor I have any say about it.

And?

You are angry at me for "forcing my views on the world"

I didn't know you can vote. I'm actually angry with your gov't's forcing its views on others.

while You are trying to force your views on me and the Israelis.

I'm a 17 year-old University student living across the world from you! How can I possibly force my views on you or your countrymen?

We get along fine with our views and our religion as part of our state. I don't see where is it your responsibility or right, to make decisions for the Israeli/Jewish people or government.

Get some perspective, man! This is an online messageboard, not the world summitt on what's to be done with Israel.

Your right, it isn't my right or responsibility to force the Israeli people what to do. Just like it isn't yours or your state's.

I also don't see how you have any moral justification for being angry at Jews/ Israelis for the way they choose to live thier lives in their own country.

And I also don't understand this national sovereignty argument you keep repeating. "Can't criticize my country because of national sovereignty." What's this magical thing, and where does it get its power? It's like a religion!

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by Goingonit


There is a country for every minority group except blacks (and they tried to make one w/ Liberia ). Jews were a stateless people for many years, now they have a state where they are in the majority. I would in fact argue that every single group should have somewhere where they could go in cases of dire need. Jews are just lucky enough to have one.

If they have the right to selectively allow people in based solely on their ethnicity/religion then I assume you support the Canadian government's past anti-Semitic immigration policies and would not object if we reinstated them?

Maintaining one religion's or one ethnicity's dominance in a country through discriminatory policies is not right, and is the hallmark of petty tyrannies the world over.

[Goingonit]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse


If they have the right to selectively allow people in based solely on their ethnicity/religion then I assume you support the Canadian government's past anti-Semitic immigration policies and would not object if we reinstated them?

Maintaining one religion's or one ethnicity's dominance in a country through discriminatory policies is not right, and is the hallmark of petty tyrannies the world over.

As was said, Israel allows others to enter with proper applications.

Canada is different as there are no ethnic Canadians.

I would much rather have an 'immoral' Israel than no israel at all, or one which does not have a Right of Return.

I do not mind if I don't get let into a country because its ethic inhabitants wish to return. Kant's Categorical Imperative works for me; any moral position I make I would not object to others making.

BTW, I do support a Palestinian state, just not one that includes primarily Jewish areas.

[ZoboZeWarrior]

Originally posted by Goingonit
Kant's Categorical Imperative works for me; any moral position I make I would not object to others making.

I hope Kant don't said only that, because the sentence is quite incomplet : What will you do is other making is destroying you ?

[Goingonit]

Originally posted by ZoboZeWarrior


I hope Kant don't said only that, because the sentence is quite incomplet : What will you do is other making is destroying you ?

???

I assume you are asking, "what if others are attempting to destroy you?" Then, you do what you would want anyone else to do in that poistion.

[Sikander]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse
If they have the right to selectively allow people in based solely on their ethnicity/religion then I assume you support the Canadian government's past anti-Semitic immigration policies and would not object if we reinstated them?

Maintaining one religion's or one ethnicity's dominance in a country through discriminatory policies is not right, and is the hallmark of petty tyrannies the world over.

You are either mad or cloying to a double standard here. What country in it's right mind would allow immigrants to change it's cultural makeup in anything other than slow motion? Every country that willingly allows immigration does so only to the extent that it feels it can safely absorb (read mould their culture to the extent that they don't pose a threat) that population. This is the most important factor in the decision, and it is universal or nearly so. If the population under consideration poses no threat to the culture of the country, then other considerations such as economic capability come into play.

The examples of weak governments which have failed to do their duty in this regard through malfeasance or extreme weakness are like a who's who of failed states, civil warfare and genocide. Zaire comes to mind as a more recent example, as do Lebanon and Jordan. Your government discriminates by numbers (as does mine) in order to retain it's flavor, control the rate of change and prevent the sort of backlash that nobody wants to see, and I wouldn't call it a petty tyranny, though I'm sure some of our anarchist posters would not hesitate to do so.

[KrazyHorse]

If Israel feels that it can't absorb hordes of new immigrants, then let them restrict immigration equally for all culture groups. If it feels that it can, let them allow immigration based solely on an individual's capacity to become a productive citizen.

If Israel feels that being Jewish is an indicator of future potential then it's purely and simply being a racist **** of a country.

Up here we restrict immigration, and do so selectively based solely on education, experience, existence of familial support and possible refugee status (in which case nothing other than a felony record will stop you from getting in). In other words, the government does not try to control the ethnic makeup of the population, and the proof is in the pudding.

http://www.statcan.ca/english/Pgdb/People/Population/demo25a.htm

[Rogan Josh]

Is this thread still going on? I would have thought you would have given up by now.

For the record: I expressed 'delight' in the number of Jews being reduced by the mechanism alluded to in the first post - that is, by intermarrying with people of other ethnicities. I see nothing wrong with this - indeed, I think it is a good thing - and stand by my comment.

Why is there so much paranoia from Jews on this board? I personally don't care what ethnicity or religion you have (why should I?) as long as you don't try to harm people of other ethnicities for no reason other than racism.

The Jews were persecuted last centuary, by previous generations - there is no need to keep harping on about it.

Compare the situation with red haired people. There are hardly any red haired people about these days for 2 reasons. Firstly, they were persecuted and burned at the stake because people believed them to be witches. Secondly, it is a recessive trait so mating with a non-redhead usually results in non-redheads.

Should I be upset because there are not many redheads about? Should we encouraging red haired people to only marry other redheads to preserve the number of redheads in the world? Should redheads be given a country where they can be free from persecution and only accept the immigration of other pure redheads to preserve their genetic heritage?

Of course not.

[ZoboZeWarrior]

Originally posted by Rogan Josh
Is this thread still going on? I would have thought you would have given up by now.

For the record: I expressed 'delight' in the number of Jews being reduced by the mechanism alluded to in the first post - that is, by intermarrying with people of other ethnicities. I see nothing wrong with this - indeed, I think it is a good thing - and stand by my comment.

Why is there so much paranoia from Jews on this board? I personally don't care what ethnicity or religion you have (why should I?) as long as you don't try to harm people of other ethnicities for no reason other than racism.

The Jews were persecuted last centuary, by previous generations - there is no need to keep harping on about it.

Compare the situation with red haired people. There are hardly any red haired people about these days for 2 reasons. Firstly, they were persecuted and burned at the stake because people believed them to be witches. Secondly, it is a recessive trait so mating with a non-redhead usually results in non-redheads.

Should I be upset because there are not many redheads about? Should we encouraging red haired people to only marry other redheads to preserve the number of redheads in the world? Should redheads be given a country where they can be free from persecution and only accept the immigration of other pure redheads to preserve their genetic heritage?

Of course not.

In case of genetic, Red Hair heritage is not lost if "breeding" with a non Red Hair. The gene is sleeping not erased. And the gene could wake up lately.

I believe it is the same thing with cultures. Nothing is really lost in human cultures.