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.
Is there ever a rational reason to expel an entire population based on their religion?
Is their religion the actual reason they were expelled from Spain, or was that just the cover story? I wonder what the other side would say, because that is a hell of a lot of trouble to go to. Hitler tried to do the same thing not that long ago, and his reasons for doing so were laid out quite plainly for anybody who cared to listen. And he was largely indifferent to Jewish people in his earlier years if his own words are to be believed. Not that that justifies what the SS was doing in Poland of course...he wanted to send all the Jews to Madagascar, or even Palestine or Russia was fine with him. Again that is a lot of trouble to go to.
Thank you for demonstrating what appears to be a bit more objectivity about this subject of significant consequence...
I may be objective in how I might discuss this but I am not objective in my support. I am biased towards Israel. Knowing that tends to result in my being more likely to "defend" Palestinians.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LearnMe
Your list in this regard is "bittul" as someone else put it and of course one man's bittul is another man's attempt at balancing the scales of consideration at least a bit. That sort of balance is obviously missing when it comes to all too many comments in this thread as well, about a mess that simply can't be undone, but who hasn't gone around in these circles with no end all too many times already?
This was likely to be a mess from the beginning. Knowing that, I would still "support" the creation of the Israeli state in Palestine. However, I would never say that Israel had an inherent "right" to exist in that specific geographical location or at least "rights" that surpassed those of the Palestinians who then held the land. Many Israelis (and those on this thread) would disagree.
Maybe they are right in the absolute or maybe it's easier for me to deal with the cognitive dissonance because I'm neither Israeli nor Jewish. For myself, I am "supporting" an action that arguably infringes on the "rights" of others for my definition of "the State of Israel" leaves it demographically Jewish (i.e., no Law of Return).
This I came to terms with many decades ago during those visits to Israel. Going back and forth between multiple friendship groups (two Israeli, one Palestinian) it became clear it was necessary to make a choice. No resolution was possible. This even though that choice was based on a situation that arguably went against some basic value (i.e., loss of homes).
How do I reconcile that? By simultaneously adopting the view that when in acting in our best interests (as most do) that we should strive to avoid self-justification and work towards clarity.
So ... (1) I don't criticize or judge Israelis for acting in their best interests in 1948 or 1967. (2) I do (depending on the "facts" offered) dispute attempts made to justify their actions as moral in the absolute. That second is key because it is also a human tendency to adopt positions that turn those who oppose us into "the other."
I fully realize the above is both confusing and inconsistent. More, the "support" for Israel is far from open-ended. I don't support their internal treatment of Palestinians or the West Bank settlements or the new Nation state law. These latter actions are to me an example of our natural tendency to dehumanize the other when there is conflict. This then turns an initial mess into one that becomes completely unresolvable.
... USA will always have anti-Semites among us, but will never turn its back on the Jewish people.
Two conversational snippets come to mind. That and one recollection:
Snippet 1: An Israeli years ago. "In the end, we can only depend on ourselves."
Snippet 2: An American Jewish friend. "A Holocaust could happen here in America." Me incredulous, but then remembering he was told as a 5 yo how his extended family had been murdered.
Recollection 1: At one point In the weeks after 911 ... the day where I raced to get the kid from daycare with another plane incoming and smoke in the air ... I remembering thinking ... when faced with world terrorism, did I still "support" Israel? ... Then thinking back to Snippet 1, would I advocate for the US turning its back on Israel? The answers remained, yes and no (consciously against potential self-interest).
Sometimes when reading these threads I think back to that recollection.
No, it isn't ant-Semitic. Netanyahu's being criticized for his comment by prominent Jews in and out of Israel.
It's clear some are extremist in accusations of anti-Semitism while others wouldn't recognize anti-Semitism until they hear a person declare they hate Jews.
What Netanyahu said to Gadot was more than a comment. He was pretty much repeating the content of the new Nation State Law passed last year. And, yes, some Israelis are criticizing both that law and Netanyahu.
Quote:
According to the Washington Post, it started when Israeli model and TV host Rotem Sela called for equality for all Israeli citizen regardless of their religion or ethnic background in the face of a recent controversial law declaring Israel as the Jewish nation-state. ... The next day at his weekly cabinet meeting, Netanyahu said, “I would like to clarify a point that, apparently, is not clear to slightly confused people in the Israeli public,” adding, Israel “is the national state, not of all its citizens, but only of the Jewish people.”
So what you're saying is that Jews are unfit for congress because they might be dual nationals even though they say they're not.
In other words, you are discriminating against Jews because of their religion.
Isn't that the very face of Antisemitism?
Not because of their religion. Because they don't have the same incentives as regular Americans, and that's a problem. Remember religion is something you voluntarily subscribe to. What I'm referring to is a group of people unlike all others in regards to having options that certainly have the potential to affect their decision making, loyalties, and behavior as legislators, that other Americans mostly do not have, and that this creates a problem.
This one aspect of the issue could be solved by requiring all legislators to forfeit any rights to foreign citizenship. It wouldn't cure the entire issue presented by Zionism which would remain just as prominent a problem as it is today.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rachel976
You keep ignoring that Jews DO need an escape hatch from this or any other country, and that's why Israel was founded. After 2,000 years of horrific persecution, culminating with an attempt to kill them off entirely, Jews needed a refuge. And by the rise in antisemitism, and the propagation of anti-Semitic tropes, and a Congress refusing to censure an anti-Semite in its midst (to the contrary, honoring her with a key position on the Foreign Affairs Committee), Jews still need it.
And remember, this country didn't want the Holocaust survivors, either. FDR turned around the 900 passengers of the St. Louis to return to their deaths, and he refused to increase the immigration allotment (especially needed from Poland) because Americans didn't want the Jews en masse here. Israel was established because they needed a place to go after their property was stolen and the families murdered, and it made sense to return them to the home they occupied thousands of years ago. (Lest I need to remind you, Jews were in Israel long before Muslims even existed.)
If you need Plan B go live in Plan B. Don't do it here. We don't need that here, and its a risk. It is not what Congress was supposed to be. Congress is for Americans who are "all in" on America...if you're not "all in" you shouldn't be here, let alone representing people who ARE all in.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kdog
Is there ever a rational reason to expel an entire population based on their religion?
Its not about religion really, its about behaviors...culture. Never forget that religion is just some beliefs that you VOLUNTARILY decide to have. Its a belief like any other, it deserves no special protection from criticism, censure, or any other negative reaction to negative behavior.
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.
