Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Good. Anyone that supports terrorism would be a toxic cancer in an office setting, court room or pretty much anywhere.
I think it is rather odd how Hollywood celebrities have not really come out on one side or the other. Usually they are very vocal in any social justice movement or conflicts. I guess they are smarter than we think to keep out of it but then again there are many Jewish people at the top in Hollywood and the actors do not dare to be blackballed from a studio.
Actually, a Semite is: a member of any of a number of peoples of ancient southwestern Asia including the Akkadians, Phoenicians, Hebrews, and Arabs People have coined the phrase anti-Semite after WWII in order to describe hatred of the Jews
Is that even constitutional, people have the right to think what they want, & it is not against the law to support Palestinians, plus a person can support the right of Israel to exist & also Palestinians to co exist. I don't approve of the thought police.
The Constitution applies to the federal government, not the private citizen. Wherever the People are mentioned in the Constitution, it's always in reference to what the federal government CANNOT DO to the People.
If someone doesn't want to hire anti-Semites, people who are left handed or wear ugly shoes, that's their prerogative under the right of voluntary association. Free speech in the Constitution is about the government CANNOT put you in jail for speaking ill against the government. It doesn't mean that all speech among anyone ever is free from consequences among other private individuals.
Good. Anyone that supports terrorism would be a toxic cancer in an office setting, court room or pretty much anywhere.
I think it is rather odd how Hollywood celebrities have not really come out on one side or the other. Usually they are very vocal in any social justice movement or conflicts. I guess they are smarter than we think to keep out of it but then again there are many Jewish people at the top in Hollywood and the actors do not dare to be blackballed from a studio.
What about those that support apartheid against the Palestinians? Obviously a racist that believes those people to be inferior. Probably the companies owned by the Jewish that hate Palestinians, but who would want to work for them anyway?
"Palestinians are caught in a Catch-22 situation. Israel requires them to obtain a permit to build or even erect a structure such as a tent, but – unlike Jewish Israeli applicants – rarely issues them a permit. Many Palestinians are forced to build without permits. Israel then demolishes Palestinian homes on the basis that they were built “illegallyâ€. Israel uses these discriminatory planning and zoning policies to create unbearable living conditions to force Palestinians to leave their homes to allow for the expansion of Jewish settlement."
"Palestinians across all areas under Israel’s control have fewer opportunities to earn a living and engage in business than Jewish Israelis. They experience discriminatory limitations on access to and use of farmland, water, gas and oil amongst other natural resources, as well as restrictions on the provision of health, education and basic services."
To me it is odd to support this behavior by the Israelis, and wonder how others have dealt with the violation of their civil rights, demolition of their homes, being limited on food, water, etc., based on their ethnicity.
So terrorism wrong, decades of being denied basic civil rights and being oppressed in every way is OK, or does it depend on the race or religion of a person? I mean, look at the history of our own country.........
So, basically "white shoe law" deals with the ultra rich, and anyone is surprised who they support.
Thanks for clarifying, Volo, lots of people miss this point.
People do indeed have the right to think what want. So - evening sun - if I knew you thought pedophilia was a reasonable hobby, or arson, or bestiality, or cannibalism, or rape, or many other things - then - in your opinion - it should not (legally) affect whether or not I can hire you, right? Wrong.
What about those that support apartheid against the Palestinians?
This a deep complex ancient topic I won't pretend to understand. But what ever (in this case) you define as "apartheid" this refers to a position of the gov't - not the average Jewish person in the street, who has very little to do with day to day policy, in Israel or anywhere else.
On the other hand, NOT supporting violence by "day to day" Palestinians - who are trying to strengthen a position that is NOT of the gov't., but is instead of a faction of - well - just "people" in the street - does not mean one supports apartheid.
One can support the right of Jews to exist without supporting the government of Israel, just as one can condemn the actions of militant Palestinians without hating ALL Palestinians.
Don't generalize - don't broad brush - be very specific - who exactly hates and supports what - and why?
The Constitution applies to the federal government, not the private citizen. Wherever the People are mentioned in the Constitution, it's always in reference to what the federal government CANNOT DO to the People.
If someone doesn't want to hire anti-Semites, people who are left handed or wear ugly shoes, that's their prerogative under the right of voluntary association. Free speech in the Constitution is about the government CANNOT put you in jail for speaking ill against the government. It doesn't mean that all speech among anyone ever is free from consequences among other private individuals.
You are free to associate with whoever you like in your private life. But it all changes once you decide to grow your private enterprise and move it into the public realm, and seek to obtain a business license to engage your enterprise into commerce and trade.
What about those that support apartheid against the Palestinians?{snip}
Wasn't it the Palestinians who turned down many opportunities to have their own land, including Eastern Jerusalem?
In November 1947, the Mufti refused a UN partition plan that offered to establish two states, one Jewish, the other Arab. The Mufti rejected any and all two-state solutions until the day he died.
Another great opportunity that gave the Palestinians everything they wanted, was offered to Yasser Arafat in 2000 , and then in 2008, Mahmoud Abbas walked away from another opportunity.
To put a not to fine point on it, the Palestinians never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity. Why? I think it's because they do not want peace or a Palestine state, they just want all the Jews dead.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
