This Jewish Week piece includes many Jewish leaders criticizing the "Obsession"
video as a distortion of the Islamic religion. Jack Ross had a smart
response (I can't believe he's only 23, it sort of makes me want to hang up my cleats):
I'm glad that some of the more sensible Jewish leaders out there are
denouncing Obsession, but I can't allow it to go without acknowledging
the outrageous premise of the article that Islamic groups have to be kashered [made kosher] in order to have dialogue with them–
denouncing Obsession, but I can't allow it to go without acknowledging
the outrageous premise of the article that Islamic groups have to be kashered [made kosher] in order to have dialogue with them–
URJ
[Union for Reform Judaism] President Rabbi Eric Yoffie said ISNA
[Islamic Society of North America, an umbrella group of 300 Muslim
groups, attacked in the film] met all of the URJ’s
requirements for interfaith dialogue, including unequivocal
condemnations of terrorism and terrorism directed at Jews and Israelis,
and unequivocal acceptance of a two-state solution–
[Union for Reform Judaism] President Rabbi Eric Yoffie said ISNA
[Islamic Society of North America, an umbrella group of 300 Muslim
groups, attacked in the film] met all of the URJ’s
requirements for interfaith dialogue, including unequivocal
condemnations of terrorism and terrorism directed at Jews and Israelis,
and unequivocal acceptance of a two-state solution–
Demanding support for a two-state solution may be one thing, but in the case of Eric Yoffie and the URJ it has also included the demand (not in the Jewish Week article, but in other statements he's made) that they acknowledge Israel
as a "Jewish state" and other such rhetorical demands of a totalitarian
spirit. At any rate, let it just be a reminder that a lot of these
folks who cling to the religion of "peoplehood" should look in the
mirror if they wonder where the racism of Emerson, Pipes, Woolsey, and
apparently Lieberman comes from.
as a "Jewish state" and other such rhetorical demands of a totalitarian
spirit. At any rate, let it just be a reminder that a lot of these
folks who cling to the religion of "peoplehood" should look in the
mirror if they wonder where the racism of Emerson, Pipes, Woolsey, and
apparently Lieberman comes from.
Show me anything in "Obsession" that is not true! (LOL)
Show me anything (sarcasm alert)in the "Protocols of the elders of Zion" that is not true! – Germany in the thirties was awashed with publications on "Jewish Question" and links between aims of elders and thrust of Jewish businesses and Jewish publications were discussed openly and for political gain.
It is not the content, it is what is being implied that is the problem. If you dehumanise the opponent into the ogre, then it is no hardship to kill his children.
We were as significant at 23.
We're less so now, and more so.
On Jack Ross' inference on "peoplehood".
ALL ideologies, ALL behaviors, have the prospect of corruption and rationalization.
The "peoplehood" of the Jewish people is.
The important questions are how, not whether.
RE: "The "peoplehood" of the Jewish people is."
Is what?
Who all?
Is it a matter of choice more, or more a matter of birth?
Its not something subject to argument.
The only question is how one relates to it.
Jewish peoplehood exists.
Jewish peoplehood is the same as its been for a very long time. The questions raised about assimilation are not new in the slightest.
Jews are primarily by birth, occassionally by invitation and personal adoption.
I agree with what you say above, Richard. So, is the real issue
consent versus descent?
Which one is the greatest virtue of being an American?
Eva Smagacz: "If you dehumanise the opponent into the ogre, then it is no hardship to kill his children."
Agreed. And doesn't the gist of organized Judaism, including its doctrine (particularly the Talmud) deliberately and systematically dehumanize gentiles? Just as Islam dehumanizes infidels? Just as secular humanism dehumanizes the religious? But the problems isn't religion or irreligion, its that these others lack the Christian ethic. Now the others will say that that last statement is an act of dehumanization, even though it is merely a fact.
Clearly, a big part of the problem is that atheists, Jews and Muslims don't want to follow their own belief systems to their natural conclusions, which is endless conflict with the "other." Only Christian-based Western civilization has managed to more or less accommodate the “other." And to the extent that the Christian base continues to erode is he extent to which conflict will continue to increase. The fanatics are bringing their battles inside our gates, and the post-Christian West lacks the faith, integrity and confidence to resist. (Oh, I forgot, we're living in a "global marketplace" now and there are no "gates," say the atheist Capitalists looking to turn a quick buck.)
There is no jewish peoplehood.
Refer to the Cambridge and other studies on the DNA of jews vr. Arabs, Asians, etc.
The only group that shared the same DNA markers with mid eastern jews were Arabs. Asian jews were predominately Asian and so on. However African jews came up second in similar markers to mid east jews and arabs and European jews came in third in markers to mid east jews and arabs.
The studies were actually part of research into diseases that come from genetic inheritance and diseases from combining genes.
Ed,
While I agree with you that Christian ethics are most "evolved" in the way that they put obligation on believers to see Christ in every human being, regardless of who they are, or which tribe/religion they belong to, it is quite a recent development.
But it did bring us concept of human rights, medical care for all, universal education, welfare state and respect for rights of minorities. I am still waiting for the concept of equal share of nation's wealth for people of equal value, but it may still take century or so….
I think an important core point regarding how one is raised (trained),
is that the model imprinted on the blank slate–is, is it an opera world, us versus them, the chosen versus the unchosen, and all of human history translated so?
The weight of human history is not one-sided.