Hillary Clinton says we need more intermarriage

US Politics
on 239 Comments

On NBC Nightly News last night, Andrea Mitchell interviewed Hillary Clinton and (at minute 16 or so) vaguely described Chelsea’s imminent marriage as a "very interesting experience" for the Clintons, because Hillary is a "Methodist" and Chelsea is marrying "in an interfaith context." Note that Mitchell (who is Jewish, married to a Jew) has no trouble spitting out Methodist, but cannot inform her viewers that the lucky man, Marc Mezvinsky, is Jewish.

Mitchell asked what this means to Hillary. And hat’s off to Hillary Clinton, she hit the question out of the park. Beautiful statement about American freedom. 


I think it says a lot about not only the two young people involved and their strong love but also their deep faith, both of them. But it says a lot about the United States, it says a lot about this wonderful experiment known as America, where we recognize the right that every single person has to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. And over the years so many of the barriers that prevented people from getting married, crossing lines of faith, or color or ethnicity, have just disappeared. Because what’s important is, Are you making a responsible decision, have you thought it through, do you understand the consequences? And I think that in the world we’re living in today, we need more of that…

The other night a friend said that I urge Jews to marry non-Jews. I guess I feel the same way Hillary does, that intermarriage is a good thing, and a reflection of real integration and freedom in the U.S., and why should anyone limit their potential partner pool to a tiny percentage of the population? But people choose their partners for a lot of reasons, cultural factors are significant; and I think people who want to marry along ethnic/religious lines should do so. Heck, marriage is hard enough, without more social prescriptions of any variety, including mine. Though some of the barriers Hillary describes are erected by Jews. Elliott Abrams wrote in his book Faith or Fear that Jews who marry non-Jews should be shunned. Even powerful Jews have valorized such social coercion. Shame.

About Philip Weiss

Philip Weiss is Founder and Co-Editor of Mondoweiss.net.

Other posts by .


Posted In:

239 Responses

  1. Chaos4700
    July 19, 2010, 9:23 am

    And in other news, Jews still cannot marry non-Jews in Israel, nor can they marry non-Jews and bring their spouse to Israel.

    Which of course, is only news because no one in the mainstream US will mention it, in spite of the fact that it’s been this way for… what, the entire existence of the Zionist regime as a neocolonial artificial nation?

    • potsherd
      July 19, 2010, 11:58 am

      Chaos, I think they can still bring a non-Jewish spouse to Israel.

      • DICKERSON3870
        July 19, 2010, 5:37 pm

        RE: “I think they can still bring a non-Jewish spouse to Israel.” – potsherd
        SEE: Israeli Ministers to Vote on ‘Jewish’ Pledge of Allegiance for Arabs ~ By Jason Ditz, Antiwar.com, 07/15/10
        (excerpt) Israel’s Cabinet is expected to meet this Sunday to approve resolutions aimed at severely curbing the ability of Arabs married to Israelis to move into the nation, including the first in what could be a series of controversial “loyalty oath” demands on Arabs by the nation.
        The measure would require Palestinians who are married to Israelis to swear loyalty to Israel as a “Jewish state” before being granted an identity card to live with their families. Other requirements already in place include providing “financial guarantees’ to the Israeli government…
        ENTIRE ARTICLE – link to news.antiwar.com

  2. eljay
    July 19, 2010, 9:35 am

    >> “Because what’s important is, Are you making a responsible decision, have you thought it through, do you understand the consequences?”

    This comment, although painfully obvious, is at least worth something. The rest (“I think it says a lot about … their deep faith … it says a lot about this wonderful experiment known as America … ) is fluff.

  3. potsherd
    July 19, 2010, 9:36 am

    Some Jews are saying Chelsea should convert. But then she still wouldn’t be a Jew according to Israel’s conversion law.

    This is a timely event.

    • James
      July 19, 2010, 8:06 pm

      hardly anyone lives their religion anyway.. it is what many are born into, but for them to practice it we would have to be living in a different world.. most people go to church to wash their hands on sunday from all the corruption they engage in the rest of the week…

      he could convert to her religion… that would be a more independent and interesting response… it is amazing how a religion judiasm which claims to not proselytize has an enforced attitude about the other half converting to their religion… it is just proselytizing in a different form…

      regardless, it would be great if any of these people that profess to be a part of a particular religion got round to practicing the higher calling of it… unfortunately it is all image, with no substance.. we see the substance with the number of wars these countries engage in.. the usa is not christian and israel is not judiac.. it is all mostly an empty facade… it is becoming more obvious to others too, which is a good thing..

      • Mooser
        July 20, 2010, 1:42 pm

        “israel is not judiac..”

        I bet Wondering Jew, or even Witty, could prove you wrong! And besides, isn’t that an anti-Semitic thing to say, especially considering all the Jews who live there and run the place?

      • Elliot
        July 21, 2010, 10:56 pm

        James: “the usa is not christian”
        Increasingly, not, religiously Christian but, culturally – very much so.
        School vacations are still around Christmas and Easter.
        The National Cathedral is the iconic location for religious ceremonies.
        There is still value in being different.
        And being Jewish is not just about religion, it’s about having a community that isn’t the same as the default secularized religion of this country.
        I believe religion serves a valuable role. It speaks in terms of right and wrong and speaks to people’s hearts. Obviously, this power is greatly abused, in the U.S. and around the world. But, I think we’d be poorer if we gave up religious communities and what religion, at its best, can offer.

  4. Jim Haygood
    July 19, 2010, 9:43 am

    Don’t these marriages seem to have a dynastic quality? With Jewish funding constituting half the party’s income, there’s an unspoken sense that it would be expedient for protestant Democrats to ally with Jewish spouses.

    Examples include 1988 presidential candidate Michael Dukakis with his wife Kitty (who would have the first Jewish first lady); 2004 Dem. candidate Howard Dean’s Jewish wife Judy (ditto); Al Gore’s daughter Karenna Schiff (recently separated); and now Chelsea Medvinsky.

    Nothing wrong with strategic marriage; it’s the norm in Asia. The fascinating aspect is that maybe these political families don’t even perceive it themselves. It’s just something in the air, deriving from the aphorism that ‘the Democratic Party and Judaism are the same; they just observe different holidays.’

    • hayate
      July 19, 2010, 10:47 am

      Good point about dynastic marriage. It’s common among the very rich and powerful and among royalty.

      • Citizen
        July 21, 2010, 6:40 am

        So, let’s see, Chelsea is studying Health Care & her future hubby is a Goldman Sachs guy–I’d say that’s a lock on Power Avenue. (Didn’t his daddy serve time in prison for 7 years for financial scheming?)

    • Philip Weiss
      July 19, 2010, 2:34 pm

      smart, didnt think about that. and campbell brown converting when she married dan senor, and anthony lake converting.

  5. IrishMark
    July 19, 2010, 9:43 am

    Frankly, who cares what their religion is?
    I don’t mind if he’s Jewish, Muslim, Christian, Bhuddist or Pastafarian.
    Does it make them any lesser human beings?

    Back to Lennon’s “Imagine” lyric.

    • wondering jew
      July 20, 2010, 10:39 am

      I really dig the misspelling that yielded Pastafarians. Are those people who eat Pasta on all occasions when Rastafarians would smoke some ganga.

      (Bad joke alert: Rastafarians are anti Jewish because they dread lox.)

      • Chaos4700
        July 20, 2010, 10:41 am

        It’s not a misspelling. “Pastafarians” is actually a good joke, which is maybe why it went over your head.

      • eljay
        July 20, 2010, 10:45 am

        >> I really dig the misspelling that yielded Pastafarians.

        It’s not a mis-spelling – it’s The One True Religion:
        Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster
        link to venganza.org

      • tree
        July 20, 2010, 10:59 am

        eljay’s right. More on the Pastafarians here;

        link to en.wikipedia.org

        BTW, isn’t labeling the One True Religion a misspelling an anti-semolinic remark?

      • Mooser
        July 20, 2010, 11:53 am
  6. eljay
    July 19, 2010, 9:47 am

    >> Pastafarian

    The One True Religion! :-)

  7. lobewyper
    July 19, 2010, 9:47 am

    I wonder if Hilary’s view that people should intermarry more frequently will get her on Abe Foxman’s enemies list?

    • Mooser
      July 19, 2010, 10:08 am

      “Hilary’s view that people should intermarry more frequently”

      I agree, and in fact, plan to intermarry several more women. Don’t you think that would be big of me?

      • potsherd
        July 19, 2010, 11:59 am

        Convert to Islam. You get four.

      • Bumblebye
        July 19, 2010, 12:05 pm

        I dunno, we’ve got a rabbi over here in rural England with SEVEN wives. At the last count.

      • traintosiberia
        July 19, 2010, 6:56 pm

        It will require lots of divorces to rotate the availability of women for every man.

      • thankgodimatheist
        July 20, 2010, 6:16 am

        “Convert to Islam. You get four.”

        Only optional, not a compulsory thing..BTW, the habit is rapidly vanishing as a the very reason which made it possible and admissible, (men dying at war and women outnumbering the survivors, thus were taken care of ) is no more relevant.

      • wondering jew
        July 19, 2010, 12:27 pm

        Mooser-
        When cracking wise (from Animal Crackers) it couldn’t hoit to give credit where credit is due- to Groucho or to George S. Kaufman and Morrie Ryskind.

      • Mooser
        July 19, 2010, 12:42 pm

        Wow, WJ, such a mayven you are! But I get all my jokes from Cap’n Billy’s Whiz-Bang.
        But is there some reason why you decided to open your mouth and let out a fortz?
        No doubt you have good advice for us concerning matrimony, please, don’t deprive us of your experience.

      • Mooser
        July 20, 2010, 11:50 am

        I knew Wondering could not keep his mouth shut on a subject about which he knows less than nothing. That’s an irresistible opportunity for him.
        And he doesn’t disappoint, he never does.

      • RoHa
        July 19, 2010, 7:24 pm

        Does it count as intermarriage if neither of us is a Jew?

        If so, I’ve already done it once. I too wanted to keep Hilary happy by intermarrying again, but She Who Must Be Obeyed forbad it. Unless the new wife was really, really, rich.

  8. David Samel
    July 19, 2010, 9:48 am

    If Andrea Mitchell had reaslly been on her toes, and been inclined to ask, she could have followed up with: “One of our closest allies is Israel, with whom we supposedly share fundamental values, but Israel does not permit marriages between Jews and non-Jews, who actually have to leave the country to get married. How do you feel about that?” Or, she could have asked, “Will Chelsea convert to Judaism, and if she does, how would you feel about her having more rights in Israel than the non-Jewish indigenous population?” Of course, if she had been asking these kinds of questions all along, she probably would have torpedoed her own journalistic career years ago and been Helen Thomased.

    I agree, Phil, that intermarriage is a great thing, though I do not know from experience. My wife and kids don’t really look Jewish, though – does that count?

    • demize
      July 19, 2010, 6:35 pm

      Yes, there is that. I’m the product of a mixed marriage, it gave me the unique perspective of disliking everybody.

      • RoHa
        July 19, 2010, 7:25 pm

        “a mixed marriage”

        You mean, between a man and a woman? Is that allowed where you live?

      • demize
        July 19, 2010, 7:32 pm

        They were. It is.

  9. Mooser
    July 19, 2010, 9:52 am

    I love my Mom, I love my sisters, but I did not want to marry them. It’s as simple as that.
    Besides, I was lucky enough to meet the most extraordinary, the best and brightest woman in the world, who is the bee’s roller skates, just like Mother makes, and the right stuff to give the troops, which is me. Happy 21st Anniversary, my very own GAP.

    • Mooser
      July 19, 2010, 10:05 am

      “Heck, marriage is hard enough,”

      Hard? It’s as easy as falling off a log! And as soon as she fished me out we headed over to the registrar. And then her mother said we could come and live in her house…..

      Ho-kay, I’m gonna quit while I’m behind.

    • Psychopathic god
      July 19, 2010, 12:04 pm

      Happy Anniversary, Mr. & Mrs. Mooser.

      21. hmmm. finally legal.

      • Mooser
        July 19, 2010, 12:11 pm

        Thank you, very much.

    • annie
      July 19, 2010, 5:19 pm

      happy A mooser. you’re both lucky to have eachother.

      • Mooser
        July 20, 2010, 12:08 pm

        Thanks, annie.

  10. MarkF
    July 19, 2010, 10:44 am

    Mooser, good stuff! You’re right, it’s easy. Keeping from getting divorced, that’s the tough part…..

    I married a Christian gal, a sister no less. She’s a good soul, and that’s all I could ask for. My dad died before I married. I don’t think he would have approved, but my mom was alright as was the rest of my family. Even grandma loved her. Sheesh, she has more Judaic stuff than I do. She’s into the Passover plates, Menorahs, etc.

    To each his/her own. Life’s too short. Besides, I think a good rule in life is do the complete opposite of whatever Elliot Abrams does. Much better odds of getting into heaven.

    • Mooser
      July 19, 2010, 11:10 am

      “She’s into the Passover plates, Menorahs, etc.”

      So is my wife. But when when she’s really angry, she’ll use anything at hand.

      • Mooser
        July 19, 2010, 11:28 am

        ” but my mom was alright “

        My Mom really tried, but she couldn’t warm up to my wife. First of all, she married me, and to my Mom, that meant she must have serious problems or absolutely no standards.

      • Citizen
        July 19, 2010, 4:28 pm

        Gee, Mooser, your Mom is my dad. Fits, doesn’t it?

      • MHughes976
        July 19, 2010, 4:37 pm

        My mother, who was 92 at the time, was not too happy about my having an internet romance, since in her day you had to be introduced, preferably by your sister.
        Years before, my mum had introduced me to the ME problem by finding it a bit strange that the foundation of Israel (to which she had no objection) was being celebrated, by a speaker at her church, as actually a triumph for Christianity. She gave me an attitude of friendly scepticism towards religion for which I’ve been increasingly grateful.
        Happy anniversary from me too. How odd that your anniversary should also be my birthday. Off to Venice for a bit.

      • Mooser
        July 19, 2010, 5:09 pm

        Thanks, MHughes976.

      • Mooser
        July 19, 2010, 5:13 pm

        If only one could be one’s own Grandpa, things would be easier.

  11. bijou
    July 19, 2010, 11:33 am

    Hilary “Israel and the US share common values” Clinton might want to reconsider that assumption… as a reminder, here’s how it’s done over in Tel Aviv.

    • Mooser
      July 19, 2010, 12:09 pm

      “The job of the task force was to patrol the city at night and break up Arab-Jewish dates.

      The Arabs stole our dates!

      Someday a good comedy-improv team will get ahold of this Purity Patrol thing and develop an act they could play for years. (“An Arab you’re dating? Why not my friend Uri here, he’s a good Jewish boy, and as we were driving up he said how pretty you were…”)

      • RoHa
        July 20, 2010, 5:47 am

        Israel invented dates?

        I thought Arabs had been growing them for centuries.

      • thankgodimatheist
        July 20, 2010, 6:28 am

        “I thought Arabs had been growing them for centuries.”

        And in pre-Islamic times during the Jahiliyyah ( period of ignorance), worshiping them! They would make idols/statuettes for worship out of matured dates and when feeling hungry, simply eat them.
        No fools…

  12. hayate
    July 19, 2010, 12:10 pm

    I wonder if the hillary critter would be so enthusiastic about her prospective son in law if he were black or a Muslim? Or both?

    • Mooser
      July 19, 2010, 12:16 pm

      Well, weren’t they going to make his Dad an honorary Nigerian?

  13. Berthe
    July 19, 2010, 1:17 pm

    Several months ago, I got a tremendously aggressive attack from Glenn Greenwald in his comments section for asking about Jewish intolerance of intermarriage. It was actually like Glenn had never, ever contemplated that Jews might be intolerant of intermarriage! It was odd because (a) Glenn is not usually such a defender of Jewishness and (b) I sure wasn’t the first person in the world to notice that Jews are pushed/indoctrinated/whatever to marry Jews!

    The whole point of noticing is that it means more than being nosy about who people marry. If this non-intermarriage policy tends to set Jews apart so that they are easily recognized as Jews for advantages over non-Jews, is that a good thing?

  14. Jim Holstun
    July 19, 2010, 2:29 pm

    Do Jews control the media? They do in my house–just try getting the remote away from that woman!

    Hilary’s fluffy comment will still probably not go down to well with Foxman et al. Intermarriage is the 800-pound gorilla for American Zionists: it’s probably the single biggest threat to maintaining Jewish Zionist lockstep, but it’s hard to attack it without sounding too volkisch. So the only hope is to try sparking intrafaith romance via Birthright trips to the Jewish and Democratic State (though the funds were decimated by larcenous Madoff–thanks, Bernie!) and J-Date (the most annoying pop-ups at Haaretz).

  15. Antidote
    July 19, 2010, 3:09 pm

    I’m with Hilary on that one – and this is more than ‘fluff’. Aren’t barriers to intermarriage deeply racist? Note Nuremberg race laws, Apartheid South Africa. I heard a radio interview recently during which the point was made that Jewish families compare marrying a non-Jew to the Holocaust, along the lines: “You’d just be finishing what Hitler started by marrying a non-Jew”. This pretty much collapses ‘extraordinary’ hate/genocide and love/marriage as if they were just different means to the same end, i.e. elimination of Jews. Is this sane?

    I would have to add that I don’t generally care whether this or that ethnic/religious group declines or mixes with other groups. When has that ever NOT happened, past, present and future? And what, other than violence, oppression and infringements of individual rights, has ever prevented it?

    As for ‘strategic marriages’ between Jews and US/D families: who’d have a problem with it if this did not include the scenario of strengthening ties with a country for better or worse — Israel, which keeps getting worse and more threatening to democracy in Israel and the US (among other ‘allies’)

  16. bijou
    July 19, 2010, 4:15 pm

    It was actually like Glenn had never, ever contemplated that Jews might be intolerant of intermarriage!

    Honestly?
    He must be completely ignorant of Jewish history! I mean, even the most cursory look at wikipedia would confirm this.

    Another point: It is a matter of record that a Jew cannot marry a non-Jew in the state of Israel by law. Non-Jews can marry each other, but no mixing allowed.

    • Citizen
      July 19, 2010, 4:36 pm

      Glenn sounds like he never talked to us young Goy males who’ve had relationship with Jewish females. Still, all these years later now I can tell you
      my mother-in-law never really actually poured hot chicken soup down on me. Eventually she gave up trying.

      • bijou
        July 19, 2010, 4:45 pm

        LOL Citizen.

    • thankgodimatheist
      July 20, 2010, 7:00 am

      “It was actually like Glenn had never, ever contemplated that Jews might be intolerant of intermarriage! ”

      I read the exchange between Glenn and Berthe. What Glenn seems to object to is not that Jews aren’t intolerant of intermarriage (to this he concedes), only to the idea that they’re MORE so than any other group..

      • Citizen
        July 20, 2010, 11:32 am

        Yeah, I read the first page of exchange and that’s the conclusion I drew too–Glen was spending his energy by pointing out other (non-Jewish) intolerent groups. He must have lost that flashlight to the Gentiles.

  17. Danaa
    July 19, 2010, 4:35 pm

    There were suggestions made by some Rabbis that Chelsea convert to Judaism. Some people chuckled, some heckled and most moved on. I wonder what the reaction would have been if suggestions were made by say, certain pators, that Medvinsky convert to chritianity.

    Just thought I’d put the scenario out there…..

  18. hayate
    July 19, 2010, 6:36 pm

    Perhaps Greenwald is unfamiliar with this:

    Jewish Girl Prank Calls Her Parents

    link to break.com

    This is hilarious.

    • Antidote
      July 19, 2010, 6:46 pm

      Hilarious? I don’t know. Hysterical perhaps, but not in a good way.

    • Citizen
      July 20, 2010, 11:43 am

      The reaction to the prank call by the parents reminds me of my younger days when I start having a relationship with the girl who became my wife.
      Difference is I never said anything the times her mother said stuff like this mother does.

      • Mooser
        July 21, 2010, 4:15 pm

        “Difference is I never said anything the times her mother said stuff like this mother does.”

        You took the high road, good for you! And, you walked off with the girl, and got it in writing, and made it official. Those wedding bells did ring out! God knows, one must make allowances for mothers-in-law!

        Look, Citizen, you are not the only one who has troubles with in-laws. My Father-in-law, til the end of his life, always referred to them as “National Hebrew” frankfurters.

  19. wondering jew
    July 20, 2010, 5:24 am

    As an individual it seems quite probable that intermarriage is natural for Jews living in an open society. Between the fact of the wider availability of nonJewish mates and scientific data pointing to the attraction to those with somewhat similar genes (the scientific equivalent of Mooser’s “I don’t want to marry my sister!”: The sweaty undershirt test reveals the preferences of women when given sweaty undershirts to rate their attractiveness: A 2002 study found women prefer the scent of men with genes somewhat similar to their own over the scent of nearly genetically identical or totally dissimilar men.) it seems safe to say that intermarriage is natural. To stop, prohibit or sanction those who intermarry is to squelch their individuality or their natural inclinations.

    Intermarriage may be preferable to the wider American society- blurring lines of ethnic separatism might create a more perfect union. (I doubt that if we are taking the world as one community that the intermarriage of Jews who make up such a small percentage of the world would make much of a difference.)

    Intermarriage is decidedly against the interests of Jewish society. It is not in the interest of Jewish society to limit the number of Jews being born or to increase the odds that those Jews who will be born will have a Christmas tree in their house or be confused about whether they are Jewish or not. It is conceivable under certain circumstances that bringing new genes into the Jewish tribe would be a positive, but given the present inability of Jewish society to educate even those who marry in, Jewish society is in no shape to compete against the predominant society and to expect positive things to happen to Jewish society from this development seems ridiculous.

    To prefer the natural tendencies of the individual over the needs of the Jewish community/tribe/people/civilization is an acceptable reaction, especially given the importance our society gives to individualism and we as individuals value our individualism. To prefer that which is better for America over that which is better for Jewish society is an acceptable choice for someone who values their American identity over their Jewish identity. To pretend that there is no clash of values here and there is nothing to be lost by Jewish society seems dishonest to me.

    (As for those who wish to see the Jews disappear, that there should be fewer people who look Jewish and so Jewish nepotism will be weakened, I think it is clear that this is an anti Jewish attitude. If this can be explained some other way, please enlighten me.)

    In the argument regarding the future of Israel, the Jews of the Diaspora who wish to make their arguments heard by the people of Israel, those words might be better heard by those who value Jewish society. (See Yair Sheleg’s column on Tisha B’av in today’s Haaretz.) By not valuing Jewish society your comments regarding the future of Israel will be seen by Israelis as coming from a stranger with totally unJewish or anti Jewish values rather than from a friend.

    • RoHa
      July 20, 2010, 5:39 am

      I quite agree that it is dishonest to pretend that intermarriage will not weaken Jewish society. But so what?

      Why would it matter if Jewish society disappeared?

      Would the world be a notably worse place?

      Would it be a better place?

      I know you think that Jewishness is more important than humanity, but why should anyone else share that peculiar idea.

    • Antidote
      July 20, 2010, 8:12 am

      “To pretend that there is no clash of values here and there is nothing to be lost by Jewish society seems dishonest to me.”

      What would be lost is cultural/ethnic diversity, and that is as regrettable a loss whether we are talking about Jews or other minorities. It might be helpful to look at it from the minority/majority perspective. Do you find it objectionable when right-wing groups of white Americans worry about their majority status and the prospect of Americans ‘darkening’ over the next decades, due to demographic trends? If they were fiercely opposed to intermarriage with non-whites? And call everybody ‘anti-white’ who called them racists (they actually do claim reverse racism lately to defend their white suprematist xenophobia).

      A Jewish majority has never existed in the diaspora, but does exist, carefully guarded and socially and politically engineered, in Israel. And there can be no doubt that Zionism is racist, and not only against non-Jews. Haaretz ran this recent article about settlers in Lieberman’s neighborhood opposing Russian Israelis moving in -for fear that their sons and daughters might fall in love and marry a partner who is not Jewish enough/having no Jewish mother.

      link to haaretz.com

      You tell me whether such attitudes are worth protecting – from the perspective of Jews or non-Jews?

      Clearly, assimilation and intermarriage have been and continue to be
      a threat to Jewish society/identity. Well, join the club. It’s much the same for a great many other ethnic groups. I’m more interested in the survival of humanity. Not being religious myself (and not Jewish either), I would maintain that the Christian idea of homogenous mankind is ethically preferable.

      The spectre of anti-Semitism, past and present, endlessly cited and also provoked by zionists, might well be the only remedy against Jewish assimilation, lending some ethical legitimacy to what would otherwise be shouted down as racist and chauvinist. Just imagine the Germans were passing laws against intermarriage with non-Germans. All hell would break lose, and rightfully so

      (As for those who wish to see the Jews disappear, that there should be fewer people who look Jewish and so Jewish nepotism will be weakened, I think it is clear that this is an anti Jewish attitude. If this can be explained some other way, please enlighten me.)

      In the argument regarding the future of Israel, the Jews of the Diaspora who wish to make their arguments heard by the people of Israel, those words might be better heard by those who value Jewish society. (See Yair Sheleg’s column on Tisha B’av in today’s Haaretz.) By not valuing Jewish society your comments regarding the future of Israel will be seen by Israelis as coming from a stranger with totally unJewish or anti Jewish values rather than from a friend.

      • Antidote
        July 20, 2010, 8:23 am

        Sorry WJ, cut-and-paste mess. Again,without the remainder of your post at the end – and with one addition:

        “To pretend that there is no clash of values here and there is nothing to be lost by Jewish society seems dishonest to me.”

        What would be lost is cultural/ethnic diversity, and that is as regrettable a loss whether we are talking about Jews or other minorities. It might be helpful to look at it from the minority/majority perspective. Do you find it objectionable when right-wing groups of white Americans worry about their majority status and the prospect of Americans ‘darkening’ over the next decades, due to demographic trends? If they were fiercely opposed to intermarriage with non-whites? And call everybody ‘anti-white’ who called them racists (they actually do claim reverse racism lately to defend their white suprematist xenophobia).

        A Jewish majority has never existed in the diaspora, but does exist, carefully guarded and socially and politically engineered, in Israel. And there can be no doubt that Zionism is racist, and not only against non-Jews. Haaretz ran this recent article about settlers in Lieberman’s neighborhood opposing Russian Israelis moving in -for fear that their sons and daughters might fall in love and marry a partner who is not Jewish enough/having no Jewish mother.

        link to haaretz.com

        You tell me whether such attitudes are worth protecting – from the perspective of Jews or non-Jews?

        Clearly, assimilation and intermarriage have been and continue to be
        a threat to Jewish society/identity. Well, join the club. It’s much the same for a great many other ethnic groups. I’m more interested in the survival of humanity. Not being religious myself (and not Jewish either), I would maintain that the Christian idea of homogenous mankind is ethically preferable – and genetically more sound, given the fact that there are no ‘races’, and that all humanity has their common root in Africa, long before there were any Jews.

        The spectre of anti-Semitism, past and present, endlessly cited and also provoked by zionists, might well be the only remedy against Jewish assimilation, lending some ethical legitimacy to what would otherwise be shouted down as racist and chauvinist. Just imagine the Germans were passing laws against intermarriage with non-Germans. All hell would break lose, and rightfully so.

      • Mooser
        July 20, 2010, 10:42 am

        “By not valuing Jewish society your comments regarding the future of Israel will be seen by Israelis as coming from a stranger with totally unJewish or anti Jewish values rather than from a friend”

        So what? Who the fuck cares?

    • potsherd
      July 20, 2010, 8:39 am

      Intermarriage is just as likely to increase the number of Jews by expansion as inmarriage is by contraction.

      There is only one test for a religion – does it meet the needs of the believers. A religion that fails this test fades away. A religion that succeds, does not. Thus the only threat to Judaism is irrelevancy.

      Why would you want to preserve a religion that so poorly meets the needs of its believers that they abandon it? Why should people be chained to a religion that is meaningless or worse for them? People don’t live a history, they live their lives in the present day. If Judaism is relevant to these lives, they will embrace it and perpetuate it.

      Judaism is preserved in Israel by force and by law, and the consequence is its profound corruption. Nowhere but in Israel are Jews so discriminated against, nowhere else can Jews be arrested for praying. Nowhere else are there so many Jews so distant from the official religion imposed on them.

      • Danaa
        July 20, 2010, 10:58 am

        potsherd, well spoken, especially – “nowhere but in Israel are Jews so discriminated against”

        Which goes to what I’ve been saying for some time – far from being a blessing, Israel has become a curse for Jewish people everywhere – a cross they have to bear, many through no choice of their own. The ultimate irony is that Israel, as the “homeland for Jews”
        metamorphosed first into a “homeland for THE Jews” and then into a “THE Jewish Homeland”, deliberately leaving Jewish homes everywhere else spiritually stranded, sucking the air out of age old customs and contaminating all discourse about life, devotion and meaning with the poisonous trappings of power wielded poorly.

        Personally, I think the diaspora Jews – especially the ones in America so tortured by false fealties to some other would-be home that is anything but – should throw off the yoke and reclaim their true heritage as a people of the earth, who, in their very diversity, have served as a relatively decent witness to much of its history.

      • Mooser
        July 20, 2010, 12:30 pm

        “There is only one test for a religion – does it meet the needs of the believers. A religion that fails this test fades away. A religion that succeds, does not.”

        Eggs-ackly! But look what’s happening; two completely different sets of needs. What American Jews need out of their religion is very different than what Israelis need out of their state religion. I see a schism coming.
        I think, barring all kinds other events, 10-15 years tops, as those who have acted as obfuscating intermediaries between these two different sets of needs die off, and they come into direct conflict.

        I’ll say it again, the Zionists have put themselves in a position that makes losing control of the narrative a huge blow, much bigger than it needs to be. Phil is right. Insert a wedge in that crack, twist, and the whole thing might split.

    • Mooser
      July 20, 2010, 10:41 am

      “The sweaty undershirt test reveals the preferences of women when given sweaty undershirts to rate their attractiveness: A 2002 study found women prefer the scent of men with genes somewhat similar to their own over the scent of nearly genetically identical or totally dissimilar men.)”

      I had a feeling you wouldn’t be able to keep your yap shut, Wondering, but let me (ha, ha, ha) as you( guffaw, choke, splutter) if you got (ha, ha, ha) A citation or link for that “study”? (okay that’s it, I got the question out, and excuse me while I ROTFLMSJAO!!!)
      And don’t worry, Wondering, I do believe the “Cosmopolitian” archives are complete, and go back to 2002 (ROTFL)

      • wondering jew
        July 20, 2010, 10:47 am
      • Mooser
        July 20, 2010, 12:37 pm

        Okay, Wondering, you got me. I mean, with authouritative info like that! I just got one question, how does the Jewish genes translate into undershirt odors? I don’t want to make any mistakes this time, what does a Jewish girl smell like? (‘No, I don’t want to meet your parents, just their laundry)

    • Mooser
      July 20, 2010, 10:52 am

      By the way, Wondering Jew, if you want to marry your Mother or Sister because you like the smell of their sweaty feminine undergarment, go right ahead. Knock yourself out!

      Maybe it’ll bring some advantages: “You can’t shoot me, I’m a Jewish hemophiliac with Ty-Sachs”

      Stupid, bigoted and misinformed is no way to go through life, son.

    • Mooser
      July 20, 2010, 1:04 pm

      “By not valuing Jewish society your comments regarding the future of Israel will be seen by Israelis as coming from a stranger with totally unJewish or anti Jewish values rather than from a friend”

      Why, ol’ Wondering is getting positively Witty, is he not?

  20. wondering jew
    July 20, 2010, 5:49 am

    Roha- Since you belong to the human race, the most traumatic event that has occurred in the recent past was either WWII, when the world population took a 1% dip over the course of 6 years, or else the environmental crisis, which threatens the human race, but cannot be detected with the bare eye.

    • wondering jew
      July 20, 2010, 5:52 am

      I value the human race, but I don’t see what I can do to affect the environmental crisis. I also value the Jewish civilization that seems more malleable and might survive rather than disappear. I don’t know why that should bother anyone else unless they value the Bible or the Koran in which case the survival of the Jewish people might be a positive or a negative depending on their interpretation of those texts.

      • RoHa
        July 20, 2010, 5:59 am

        Why not have concern for human civilization in general?

        What actually is so special about Jewishness that makes it more more important to you than humanity?

      • eljay
        July 20, 2010, 6:22 am

        >> What actually is so special about Jewishness that makes it more more important to you than humanity?

        Good question. I hope WJ provides a concrete reply (as opposed to an ethereal, RW-esque non-answer).

    • RoHa
      July 20, 2010, 5:53 am

      But what has that got to do with it? How does that answer my questions?

      • wondering jew
        July 20, 2010, 7:02 am

        After suffering a trauma an individual is thrown unto his survival instinct and cannot consider outside forces, merely himself. I know that to you 65 years is a long time, but to the Jewish civilization 65 years is a blink. We suffered a serious trauma and now is not the time to consider dissolution, but rather the time to concentrate on survival. Maybe we Jews are doing a poor job at it, but it seems rather natural that survival would be a priority 65 years after the trauma.

        (And do me a favor, hold your “Get over it!” to another discussion.)

      • lysias
        July 20, 2010, 7:42 am

        If you’re concerned about survival, surely the intelligent way for the Jews of Israel to survive is to reach an accommodation with the Palestinians and the surrounding powers.

        And if 65 years is a blink, I guess one can’t tell the Palestinians to forget about 1948.

      • eljay
        July 20, 2010, 7:48 am

        >> 5:24 a.m. – “Jewish society”
        >> 5:52 a.m. – “Jewish civilization”

        Impressive growth in just half an hour! ;-)

        >> We suffered a serious trauma and now is not the time to consider dissolution, but rather the time to concentrate on survival. Maybe we Jews are doing a poor job at it, but it seems rather natural that survival would be a priority 65 years after the trauma.

        Hey, that bit of victimhood is right out of RW’s playbook! ;-) Aside from the fact Jews are not “struggling to survive” 65 years after the Holocaust, using self-perpetuated, “generation to generation” fear to justify insularity and the oppression of others does seem like “a poor job”.

      • eljay
        July 20, 2010, 7:54 am

        And RoHa’s question (July 20, 2010 at 5:39 am) remains unanswered.

      • wondering jew
        July 20, 2010, 8:24 am

        eljay- Please leave RW out of it. This picking on RW seems to be blatantly junior high school. Either you were a bully in junior high school and have never changed or you were bullied in junior high school and are now getting your revenge. Either way it is very juvenile and makes this comments section tres stupid. If you wish to say that i am using victimhood, say it. don’t give me the RW playbook shit.

        You want the Jewish people to disappear. You are asking me to justify why the Jewish people would wish to remain on the world stage. I told you my answer. You think it’s victimhood. Fine. Good for you. You don’t like my answer. Sue me. I’ll give you the name of a good lawyer. he’s cheap.

        And which question of Roha’s questions didn’t I answer.

      • wondering jew
        July 20, 2010, 8:42 am

        lysias- I explicitly stated “maybe we jews are doing a poor job at it” regarding survival.

        As far as 1948, I’ve never told the Palestinians to forget about it. I’ve told them that if they want to sign a two state solution peace treaty in the near term they will have to quantify the extent of the right of return and not leave it as an open ended demand. If they prefer not to have a two state solution they need not sign anything at this point in time.

        As regards to white civilization I suppose white people could be upset if their young ‘uns marry black people. but is the current intermarriage rate with blacks 50%. I think not. Is it closer to 2%? (Just picked a number out of the air). But i’d bet ten thousand dollars it’s in single digits.

        the Jewish civilization has been wandering around the earth for 2 thousand years and yet survives. One of its survival mechanisms has been endogamy (in marriage). 520 years ago in Spain Jews chose to be burnt at the stake (or exile) rather than give up their faith. Now they’re supposed to smile when their grandchildren eat the Eucharist and make the symbol of a cross. Excuse me if I see a disconnect here.

      • thankgodimatheist
        July 20, 2010, 9:17 am

        “As regards to white civilization I suppose white people could be upset if their young ‘uns marry black people.”

        ?!!

        “Now they’re supposed to smile when their grandchildren eat the Eucharist and make the symbol of a cross.”

        ?!!

      • thankgodimatheist
        July 20, 2010, 9:19 am

        Excuse me if I’m lost for words..

      • eljay
        July 20, 2010, 9:28 am

        >> eljay- Please leave RW out of it. This picking on RW seems to be blatantly junior high school. Either you were a bully in junior high school and have never changed or you were bullied in junior high school and are now getting your revenge. Either way it is very juvenile and makes this comments section tres stupid. If you wish to say that i am using victimhood, say it. don’t give me the RW playbook shit.

        Well, since you put it so “eloquently”, sure: You’re resorting to victimhood to justify your position.

        >> You want the Jewish people to disappear.

        Please show me where I said that.

        >> You are asking me to justify why the Jewish people would wish to remain on the world stage.

        Not only was that not the question, I wasn’t the one who asked it. RoHa asked: “What actually is so special about Jewishness that makes it more more important to you than humanity?”

        >> I told you my answer.

        You provided an answer. You didn’t answer RoHa’s question.’

        >> You think it’s victimhood. Fine. Good for you. You don’t like my answer. Sue me. I’ll give you the name of a good lawyer. he’s cheap.

        Now look who’s making this section look “tres [sic] stupid”.

        >> And which question of Roha’s questions didn’t I answer.

        Which part of “And RoHa’s question (July 20, 2010 at 5:39 am) remains unanswered.” were you unable to comprehend?

      • Bumblebye
        July 20, 2010, 9:34 am

        wj, your “white people” suggestion suggests your world is 15m (or less, cos maybe black & brown jews are also something else) your “special race” vs over 6BN against whom it is acceptable to be prejudiced, biased, racist, (take your pick). Not very edifying. A more enlightened person would surely be concerned about the quality of their offsprings relationships, and whether the future partner was a decent honorable human being. All the other stuff is different shades of bigotry.

      • eljay
        July 20, 2010, 9:42 am

        >> the Jewish civilization has been wandering around the earth for 2 thousand years … 520 years ago in Spain Jews chose to be burnt at the stake (or exile) rather than give up their faith.

        Promoted from “society” to “civilization” in 30 minutes, demoted from “civilization” to “faith” in one paragraph. Shocking.

        That being said, Spanish Jews should not have been given a life-or-death choice between two imaginary beings. No one should have to die for someone else’s beliefs. Not Jews, not Palestinians, not Iranians, not anyone.

      • Antidote
        July 20, 2010, 10:01 am

        White Americans/suprematists don’t just feel threatened by blacks and intermarriage – add Hispanics, Asians and immigration –the equivalent in the Jewish sate is the Palestinian ‘right of return’ and keeping down the number of non-Jewish Israelis, or resisting a one state solution.

        You write:

        “One of its survival mechanisms has been endogamy (in marriage). 520 years ago in Spain Jews chose to be burnt at the stake (or exile) rather than give up their faith. Now they’re supposed to smile when their grandchildren eat the Eucharist and make the symbol of a cross. Excuse me if I see a disconnect here.”

        Disconnect indeed: Those Spanish Jews are long dead, they made their choice, and to imagine them smiling or frowning at their ‘grandchildren’ now seems creepy to me.

        Also note that the pressure for Jews to convert to Christianity no longer exists. When it did, it not only affected Jews. In fact, Pagans, Christians and Muslims frequently, if inconsistently, showed more toleration of Jews than to other minorities. The core of some of the most vitriolic anti-semitic rants of that historical period, by Luther, for instance, is the insistence of Jews to be different from anybody else (the ‘chosen people’ syndrome), not racial prejudice against Jews.

        The Waldensians and many others did not even get the option to convert and live. They were just burned at the stake, together with thousands of non-Jewish heretics and witches accused of a conspiracy against Christianity. Actually, Himmler was obsessed with the idea that the early modern witch craze was orchestrated by Jews to eradicate ‘ancient Germanic knowledge’ and had dozens of historians working on finding proof for this crackpot hypothesis. Plenty of Jews did convert to one faith or the other, or no faith at all, during the past 2000 years, under pressure or voluntarily. Some of them are called Palestinians now.

        A rather weak argument for

      • annie
        July 20, 2010, 10:10 am

        the Jewish civilization has been wandering around the earth for 2 thousand years and yet survives. One of its survival mechanisms has been endogamy (in marriage). 520 years ago in Spain Jews chose to be burnt at the stake (or exile) rather than give up their faith. Now they’re supposed to smile when their grandchildren eat the Eucharist and make the symbol of a cross. Excuse me if I see a disconnect here.

        sure, i’ll excuse you because you are disconnected from reality. it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out one obvious survival mechanism of the jewish faith is assimilation whereby one marries outside ones faith, their mate converts and all the children are raised jewish. if 52% of american jews have married outside their faith how many of those marriages included conversions? the reason american jews are so up in arms about this new law before the knesset is because obviously in impacts a huge number of jews who are having their jewishness called into doubt. that would not be the case under the premise of your argument. assimilation has led to more people identifying as jewish, not less. and it is due to jews assimilating and sharing their culture that the culture around them have merged to a degree that ensures their safety instead of threatening it.

        furthermore assimilating jews are not being asked by anyone to ‘give up their faith’. ‘their faith’ (the rabbis and the state of israel) are threatening jews who are the spawn of converts to ‘give up’ their jewishness (or having it stolen away from them). assimilation doesn’t mean their children will necessarily be making the sign of the cross, in the least. i seriously doubt most assimilated jews have become christian.

        As regards to white civilization I suppose white people could be upset if their young ‘uns marry black people. but is the current intermarriage rate with blacks 50%. I think not. Is it closer to 2%?

        jews either are or are not a race, make up your mind. you can’t grab these analogies when they suit your purpose and reject them by claiming jews are not a race when others argue israel is racist (which it is). besides, very few black people in this country whose african ancestors were brought over as slaves are ethnically ‘pure’. almost all of them have caucasian relatives in their lineage. this has led to MORE black people, not less. so it ruins your argument.

      • annie
        July 20, 2010, 10:18 am

        i seriously doubt most assimilated jews have become christian.

        i am not speaking historically but about present day.

      • wondering jew
        July 20, 2010, 10:20 am

        eljay- here are roha’s questions

        paraphrased first question:

        I quite agree that intermarriage will weaken Jewish society. But so what?

        Answer: it doesn’t matter to you. It matters to me.

        Why would it matter if Jewish society disappeared?

        Answer: It doesn’t matter to you. It matters to me. Why? Because even if I have lost the faith in the divinity of the Bible that I had in my youth, I have not lost the emotion that desires for the Jewish people/faith/civilization/society/sociological grouping to survive.

        Would the world be a notably worse place?
        It’s tough to predict that it would be a worse place.

        Would it be a better place? It would be a less interesting place. The current problem vis a vis Israel Palestine in fact threatens the world, but aside from that, which won’t be solved by intermarriage in any case. I don’t think the world would be a better place without Jews

        I know you think that Jewishness is more important than humanity, but why should anyone else share that peculiar idea?

        Answer: If one believes in the Bible or the Koran certain interpretations would yield an appreciation for the existence of the Jewish people. If one counts up what Jewish individuals yielded in the 20th century specifically, then there is some intensity and talents that may be lost to the world if the Jewish people disappear.

      • wondering jew
        July 20, 2010, 10:33 am

        Annie- If the statistics I just looked at are accurate- 70% of the children of intermarriage are not being raised as Jews. Is that making Jewish society stronger? Even if most of them are being raised unaffiliated is that making Jewish society stronger? If 51% of them were being raised Jewish then you might have a point, but they’re not. My emphasis on those being raised as Christians was a polemical point. Urban society in America is primarily secular except at Christmas time.

      • eljay
        July 20, 2010, 10:39 am

        >> eljay- here are roha’s questions

        Thank you for taking the time to reply.

      • Antidote
        July 20, 2010, 10:45 am

        “If one counts up what Jewish individuals yielded in the 20th century specifically, then there is some intensity and talents that may be lost to the world if the Jewish people disappear.”

        It would not be ‘lost’ unless you equate ‘disappear’ with genocide. Would Einstein have become a lesser genius had he converted to Christianity? And what influence does the ‘host country’ have on the emergence of Jewish talent and achievement?

        I think Annie makes a very valid point about assimilation aiding Jewish survival. Note that the majority of the several thousand Berlin Jews who survived the Nazi period outside of prison and concentration camps were mixed marriage spouses and children.
        Exogamy has always been employed to forge bonds between families/tribes and countries (political marriages). Remember the old Habsburg motto: Let others wage wars, you, happy Austria, marry!

      • Antidote
        July 20, 2010, 10:51 am

        Christmas is essentially a pagan holiday, and not just in recent history. Always has been

      • wondering jew
        July 20, 2010, 10:57 am

        Einstein had Jewish genes from both his parents, was raised with Jewish values and German values. There is no guarantee what produces an Einstein or a Freud or a Kafka, or even the Marx Brothers or Woody Allen, Jonas Salk, Bob Dylan or Buddy Hackett. Mahler had mixed genes, Proust had mixed genes. There is no proof what combination produces those who contribute to our culture. There is a possibility that something would be lost.

        As far as survival of individuals, I have already asserted that it is in the interest of the individual to place no obstructions in front of intermarriage. My argument is regarding Jewish society. There is a possibility that intermarriage can yield some new Jewish “offshoot”, less polytheistic than Christianity, less dogmatic than Judaism. This is in the category of unintended consequences. That is something that cannot be foreseen at this time. But from what I see a Christmas tree in the home weakens Jewish society, it doesn’t strengthen it.

      • potsherd
        July 20, 2010, 10:57 am

        Chinese Jews look like Chinese. Ethiopian Jews look like Ethiopians. European Jews look like Europeans (I don’t think Abraham had any blond genes in his makeup).

        It’s pretty clear that what’s been going on is exogamy, even if Jews have liked to pretend otherwise.

      • potsherd
        July 20, 2010, 10:59 am

        “white civilization”???

        There is no such thing.

      • lysias
        July 20, 2010, 11:24 am

        Remember the old Habsburg motto: Let others wage wars, you, happy Austria, marry!

        That’s a nice hexameter line in the original Latin: Bella gerant alii, tu, felix Austria, nube!

        Einstein may not have converted, but two other Jewish geniuses, Heine and Mahler, did. I don’t think Heine had much belief in any religion, except maybe humanism, so I would agree that his conversion was merely nominal. Leonard Bernstein argues in his DVD about Mahler, The Little Drummer Boy, that Mahler’s conversion was just a sham, about which he felt guilty. I have my doubts about that. I don’t think someone who was not at least partially Christian in his beliefs could have composed something like the Resurrection Symphony.

        I’ve just ordered a recent biography of Alma Werfel-Mahler from amazon.de. Maybe it will tell me something about Mahler’s true beliefs. (Apparently the gorgeous adagietto in Mahler’s Fifth Symphony was an expression of Mahler’s love for Alma.)

      • Mooser
        July 20, 2010, 11:25 am

        “But from what I see a Christmas tree in the home weakens Jewish society, it doesn’t strengthen it”

        Well then, all we gotta do is replace the Christmas tree gene with the Menorah gene and problem solved! What the hell is it with you and the Christmas trees? And Christianity is “polytheistic”?

        Holy shit, could you be any more stupid, misinformed, and bigoted? And the pretentiousness and condescension with which you offer these stupidities, misinformation, and bigotries just freezes my blood.

        But please, tell us more about “Jewish genes” and “mixed genes”! What do you think is the best mixture?

      • Mooser
        July 20, 2010, 11:28 am

        “As regards to white civilization I suppose white people could be upset if their young ‘uns marry black people.”

        “white civilisation”? I am reporting him for bigotry and stupidity.

      • Mooser
        July 20, 2010, 11:37 am

        “so I would agree that his conversion was merely nominal.”

        Yeah, cause when you really, really convert, your genes change!

      • Mooser
        July 20, 2010, 11:42 am

        Maybe the Jewish / will survive, according to you that’s most of our identity, that and the genes.

        Wondering Jew thinks embroidered genes are still in fashion.

      • Chu
        July 20, 2010, 11:43 am

        WJ,

        For all the religious value During Christmas, there are other components that make it special bringing together a large family. This country is made up of Judeo Christian values, and your message doesn’t do justice to this catch phrase.
        With all this fervor to return to the holy land, do you think this will breed a new Jewish society that will eventually integrate into the middle east? It’s unclear when the Israeli leaders will say we are comfortable with our map here in the mid-east.

      • Mooser
        July 20, 2010, 11:48 am

        “My argument is regarding Jewish society”

        Nothing like arguing about something you refuse to, and cannot, define.

        But, you know, Wondering Jew, I think you are doing a lot for this site. I can’t imagine anyone reading your comments will ever be intimidated by the fabled Jewish intelligence ever again, and you will convince many, many people that we desperately need help.

      • Psychopathic god
        July 20, 2010, 12:02 pm

        potsherd, what do Europeans look like?

        I’m Italian — first generation in this land of opportunity where gold could be harvested from the streets, were it not suicidal to cross the taxi congestion.
        You can tell I’m Italian– which I think counts as European — by my green eyes and light brown hair. Is that what Europeans look like?

      • Antidote
        July 20, 2010, 12:08 pm

        Thanks for the Latin version.

        Heine was indifferent to religion. His conversion was an ultimately unsuccessful career move, and he did have regrets. He was still considered a Jew in Germany, baptized or not, and retaliated against German contemporaries who stressed his Jewishness by exposing their homosexuality (Platen-affair).

        Mahler’s ‘true beliefs’ are probably as difficult to determine as Alma’s ‘true love’?

      • Psychopathic god
        July 20, 2010, 12:14 pm

        wj, re: the Jewish civilization has been wandering around the earth for 2 thousand years and yet survives.

        WHICH Jewish civilization?
        The “Jewish civilization” that wiped out Sechem because Dinah fell in love with one of their clansmen?
        The “Jewish civilization” of Shabatei Zvi?

        You want to claim the “Jewish genes” of Einstein but not the tattered undies of Rabbi Kahane.

        give yourself a break: admit that Jewish genes are just as twisted as the rest of the human genome, helixically speaking.

        if you can’t do that, give the rest of us a break and stop denigrating OUR traditions. There’s only so much insult we poor, failed, flops of humanity can tolerated from our genetic superiors.

      • Psychopathic god
        July 20, 2010, 12:31 pm
      • Mooser
        July 20, 2010, 12:41 pm

        “We suffered…”

        Was it hard for you during the war, Cherie? Was it hard?

        How did you get out of the camps and the Warsaw ghetto? Hol;y crap, what ziocaine does to a person. “We suffered…”

        Wondering, have you absolutely no respect for the victims of the Holocaust? Yep, I’m sure your life has taught you exactly what “we suffered…”
        You make me sick.

      • Mooser
        July 20, 2010, 12:49 pm

        “There’s only so much insult we poor, failed, flops of humanity can tolerated from our genetic superiors.”

        Phil is right, and I take back every cynical thing I ever said about Mondoweiss. Or Phil’s posts about his own upbringing and cultural indoctrination, I’m starting to see why they are important, even tho they don’t have any sex. An open conversation would destroy the American Zionists! They’ed be hooted out of town.

      • Mooser
        July 20, 2010, 12:50 pm

        They’ed? I mean they’d.

      • Psychopathic god
        July 20, 2010, 12:56 pm

        Tolerated? I meant tolerate.

        for you, Mooser, a mistake is inexcusable.
        for me? mah.

        I meant meh.

      • Mooser
        July 20, 2010, 12:58 pm

        “Because even if I have lost the faith in the divinity of the Bible that I had in my youth”

        I shouldn’t wonder you have, because the story of the Jews, and their relationship with God, and where that relationship had gotten to, and how the Jews fit into the world is pretty plain. And it sure as hell doesn’t support Zionism.

        So basically, you eat lots of bagels, use catch phrases, mimic the bigotry and misinformation you hear, and think maybe you can get something out of Zionism, if you play your cards right. You are so much worse off then I am, Wondering Jew. When Judaism fails as a state, you won’t be able to go back to the religion, it’s “divinity” having failed you. I wonder why that happened?

      • lysias
        July 20, 2010, 1:01 pm

        Yes, indifference to religion is the impression I get from Heine’s writings too.

        I wonder, though, what his point was in writing Die Heil’gen Drei Könige aus Morgenland [The Three Kings From the East]:

        Die Heil’gen Drei Könige aus Morgenland,
        Sie frugen in jedem Städtchen:
        “Wo geht der Weg nach Bethlehem,
        Ihr lieben Buben und Mädchen?”

        Die Jungen und Alten, sie wußten es nicht,
        Die Könige zogen weiter;
        Sie folgten einem goldenen Stern,
        Der leuchtete lieblich und heiter.

        Der Stern blieb stehn über Josephs Haus,
        Da sind sie hineingegangen;
        Das Öchslein brüllte, das Kindlein schrie,
        Die Heil’gen Drei Könige sangen.

        Was he willing to put himself into a religious frame of mind just for the purpose of writing a lyric, or is he making some nonreligious point in the poem?

        Richard Strauss’s setting of that poem, by the way, is beautiful.

      • demize
        July 20, 2010, 1:01 pm

        Hanah Arendt said I don’t care about peoples I care about people.

      • lysias
        July 20, 2010, 1:03 pm

        Interesting that “peoples” and “people” are completely different words in German: Vöker and Menschen.

      • lysias
        July 20, 2010, 1:04 pm

        Sorry, that came out wrong: Völker. Oh, how I wish we had a preview or an edit function.

      • Mooser
        July 20, 2010, 1:28 pm

        So nue , so Sioux!

      • Mooser
        July 20, 2010, 1:59 pm

        “Please leave RW out of it.”

        Why, you’ve decided to settle into the word-salad niche if Witty doesn’t come back?

      • Mooser
        July 20, 2010, 2:03 pm

        ” If one believes in the Bible or the Koran certain interpretations would yield an appreciation for the existence of the Jewish people. “

        Oh look, Wondering Jew got his “divinity” back!

      • Mooser
        July 20, 2010, 2:06 pm

        Well, we’ve gone all the way back from “civilisation” and now it’s been whittled down to “intensity” and “talents”.

        I can’t see why you people can’t accept that Jews are just better, in some way or all ways, than other people! Goddamit, I comment here, isn’t that proof enough!

      • Psychopathic god
        July 20, 2010, 2:29 pm

        um, Mooser sweetie, you misspelled “Goddamit.”

        I point this out because heaven forefend you should be mistaken for a goy. or worse yet, a dumb Pollack.

      • Antidote
        July 20, 2010, 2:31 pm

        Non-religious point would be my guess. Actually, Heine (hardly unique in this respect) often used biblical characters allegorically and ironically – the three kings for Catholic clergy/Prussian royalty , for instance. I don’t know the exact context of this poem, but note the roaring oxen/Öchslein. No doubt Heine was aware, as were his educated contemporaries,that the animals in the stable have no scriptural basis in the NT, even though they are part of an iconographical tradition going back to the Middle Ages, and perhaps even the early Christians in Rome. Materialism versus idealism, fertility/reproduction versus resurrection – the child as savior. Pretty common in German/European literature in the pre-Darwinian century.

      • thankgodimatheist
        July 20, 2010, 8:20 pm

        “white civilization”???

        “There is no such thing.”

        Exactly. I initially assumed he meant white people and that shocked me but my impression now is that he meant white supremacists, in which case he had made sense.

      • thankgodimatheist
        July 20, 2010, 9:04 pm

        “This country is made up of Judeo Christian values, and your message”
        Last year I heard Shlomo Sand on French TV debating a French right wing Zionist (who serves as an advisor to Netanyahu). Sand was vehemently opposed to the at the notion of “Judeo Christian” values. His point was that the two faiths/religions are not closer to each other than Islam to either one..and that the impact of the Islamic contribution to Christian civilisation is as important as the Jewish one..I have no link as it was a tv program in French..

      • demize
        July 20, 2010, 9:38 pm

        I hear Edith Piaf while reading your comment.

      • Citizen
        July 21, 2010, 6:48 am

        How about leute?

      • RoHa
        July 22, 2010, 8:13 am

        I almost feel I owe you an apology. I intended to submit your replies to my cool logical analysis. Instead, you got hit by the wrath of Mooser.

        However, I will give you a bit of my analysis. I’ll have to feed it to you in dribs and drabs, since I am pretty busy these days, and this issue needs time for me to get the phrasing right.

        Your analogy between the survival of an individual and the survival of “The Jewish People” is too weak to support any serious argument. When an individual dies (stops surviving) that person’s stream of consciousness ceases to be associated with that particular body. (I will ignore the debate about what happens to that consciousness.) But there is no consciousness associated with “The Jewish People” any more than there is a consciousness associated with the West Brisbane Cheesecake Photography Club. When the club is disbanded, no stream of consciousness is interrupted. Similarly, if the “The Jewish People” all said “Sod this for a game of soldiers” and gave up the funny hats and the klezmer music and stopped teaching their children to hate everyone, no stream of consciousness would be interrupted. The survival of the individuals is not threatened.

        My analogy between the West Brisbane Cheesecake Photography Club and “The Jewish People” is a bit better. At least it avoids the error of comparing groups with individuals.
        When the club is disbanded, it members lose some benefits of the club. (I’m going to miss those benefits!) However, no positive harm is done to them, and they actually benefit from the saving in membership fees and a slight reduction in snide comments from their wives. The rest of the world would hardly notice the difference. Some might suggest that society would benefit from the end of an organization that exploits sweet, innocent, vulnerable young women. (Ahem.)

      • demize
        July 22, 2010, 12:42 pm

        Heh. This would be so for the “Latvian Spoke-Shavers apprentice” as well I take it?

      • RoHa
        July 23, 2010, 7:38 am

        As far as I can tell, you are offering three reasons for wanting “The Jewish People” to continue. They are your emotional attachment to Jewsihness, that it makes the world more interesting for you, and the old “Jewish creativity” line. I’ll say a word or two about that first.

        If there were something specially creative resulting from Jewishness, we would expect to see it in those individuals with the highest level of Jewishness. In fact, the Jewishest don’t seem to be particularly creative. The examples offered are frequently only slightly Jewish. Also, we see that when middle and upper class Northern Europeans in general are creative, middle and upper class Northern European Jews are creative. Lower class Jews show little creativity. Jews in other parts of the world show little creativity. It seems that the creativity is not a matter of Jewishness, but of social influence.
        (Incidentally, you seem not to have rhapsodised about the contributions of Bernie Madoff, Lehmann Brothers, or Goldman Sachs.)
        You are aware how flimsy an argument it is, and yet you condemn people to maintain Jewishness just because “something might be lost”.

      • RoHa
        July 23, 2010, 7:39 am

        It makes the world more interesting? So this nasty system of Jewish separatism, with all its concomitant evils, has to be perpetuated for your entertainment?
        Is Jewishness worth the price that Jews have paid for it?
        Is it worth the price that the world has paid for it?
        Suppose that, a thousand years ago, all Jews had given it up and assimilated. The world would not be a perfect place, but there would be no anti-Semitism, no pogroms, no Holocaust. No-one now suffers from anti-Etruscanism. No-one is persecuted for following the religion of Baal. Of course there are other causes for human misery, but why add to them?
        According to you, Jews have suffered for centuries because they were Jews. Surely the decent thing for parents to do is to follow the lead of Isaac D’Israeli, and not impose Jewishness on their children, but free them from it. What sort of parent ties a “kick me” sign on his child, and sends him to school?

        Clearly, you think it is a good idea. You do not value the well being of Jews. You only value Jewishness.

      • RoHa
        July 23, 2010, 7:41 am

        demize, let’s stick with the West Brisbane Cheesecake Photography Club. If we bring up the Latvian Spoke-Shavers apprentice again, WJ might think I was mocking him.

  21. Psychopathic god
    July 20, 2010, 8:05 am

    This is a serious question that will probably get me in trouble: I don’t know much about LGBT issues. It seems to me, though, that Jewish people are at the forefront of the debate. I originally thought it was part of the “standing up for rights of the marginalized” theme, but recently I learned that discussion of gays and their place in Jewish society/religion goes back a long, long way — Talmud – long.
    Any suggestions where I could learn more about the status of gays in Jewish history?

    • Mooser
      July 20, 2010, 11:39 am

      “Any suggestions where I could learn more about the status of gays in Jewish history?”

      Oh, you know how it is, you’re either on top or on the bottom. It’s the same for everybody.

      • Antidote
        July 20, 2010, 12:27 pm

        wouldn’t the grave sin of Onan apply to gay sex? Can’t imagine Jews being more tolerant of homosexuality than Christians. Rabin’s assassin was granted reproductive rights in prison (via artificial insemination of his wife). No seed must go to waste. Thank God political views are not hereditary.

      • Mooser
        July 20, 2010, 12:42 pm

        Why was “Yentl” such a big hit?

      • Antidote
        July 20, 2010, 12:57 pm

        I meant historically, not in the modern period, although the later 20th century was not the first time gender roles were a major topic of discourse in the Judeo-Christian world

      • Mooser
        July 20, 2010, 1:32 pm

        The grave sin of Onan? From what I’ve heard, they’re pretty reliable.

      • Antidote
        July 20, 2010, 2:15 pm

        You can rely on the fact that the great majority of semen is wasted, no matter where you put it, and whether we are talking about ancient or modern males, Hebrew or otherwise. Put a democracy in charge of the Sahara, Milton Friedman said, and sand itself will become scarce. That’s perhaps not far off the approach of patriarchy to male seed. May be the solution to the I/P conflict, not to mention the traditional religious barriers to Jewish intermarriage? There have been alarmist rumors about declining sperm counts among IDF soldiers due to uranium exposure. Cell phones are also suspected to be counter-reproductive:

        link to redactednews.blogspot.com

      • demize
        July 20, 2010, 9:42 pm

        Lulz! What an unfortunate name.

    • Mooser
      July 20, 2010, 2:09 pm

      “but recently I learned that discussion of gays and their place in Jewish society/religion goes back a long, long way — Talmud – long.”

      You are right, so I went and looked up the discussion. The Rabbis came to a unanimous conclusion: ‘From this, you shouldn’t know, don’t ask!’

  22. Kathleen
    July 20, 2010, 9:20 am

    “Though some of the barriers Hillary describes are erected by Jews. Elliott Abrams wrote in his book Faith or Fear that Jews who marry non-Jews should be shunned. Even powerful Jews have valorized such social coercion. Shame.”

    I have noticed over my 58 years that many Jewish families are far more prejudiced against non Jews than the other way around. Glad you address this Phillip

  23. Mooser
    July 20, 2010, 11:01 am

    Oy! I can die happy now! I’ve been lectured about marriage by a very dull, unmarried Zionist virgin! Could life hold a more ineffable pleasure? It’ll be all downhill from here.

  24. LanceThruster
    July 20, 2010, 11:03 am

    Rob Eshman over at LA Jewish Journal speaks of the possibility of Chelsea converting, but doesn’t even entertain the notion that the husband would consider it. Seems rather one-sided.

  25. Psychopathic god
    July 20, 2010, 12:33 pm

    what is it with Jewish men? why do they tolerate that Jewishness is determined matrilinially?

    • Antidote
      July 20, 2010, 12:37 pm

      pater semper incertus est

    • demize
      July 20, 2010, 9:30 pm

      “what is it with Jewish men? why do they tolerate that Jewishness is determined matrilinially?” Cause Mom said so?

  26. Antidote
    July 20, 2010, 12:43 pm

    I should add that uncertainty of paternity is an anachronism, at least in the technologically advanced world, where genetic testing can determine paternity

  27. Citizen
    July 20, 2010, 1:14 pm

    Gee, do I need to worry about the latest stats from the US federal education department? Maybe not because religion is not involved?

    From 1980 to 2005, the resident population of Asians/Pacific Islanders grew 260 percent, from 3.6 million to 12.8 million. The Hispanic population grew 192 percent, from 14.6 million to 42.7 million. During the same time period, American Indians/Alaska Natives increased by 68 percent, from 1.3 million to 2.2 million, while Blacks had the slowest growth of the minority groups (39 percent), from 26.1 million to 36.3 million. In comparison, the White population grew by 10 percent between 1980 and 2005.

    • Mooser
      July 20, 2010, 1:39 pm

      ” In comparison, the White population grew by 10 percent between 1980 and 2005″

      The white population grew to? And what is the number of whites compared to the 94 million minorities noted? Let’s see 308 million total population, minus 94 million minos, leaves 224 million “whites”

      No, I don’t think you have to worry, yet. But keep trying.

      • bijou
        July 20, 2010, 9:41 pm

        Now if we were to adopt an Israeli strategic approach to these “alarming” demographic trends, we would do everything in our power to maintain the “correct” percentage…

      • Citizen
        July 21, 2010, 6:56 am

        Here’s another recent stat from your federal government: Percentage of births by unmarried mothers: Blacks: 73%, Latinos: 53%, Whites: 33%. In 1970,
        the Blacks was 33%. (Under ObamaCare, Medicaid benefits increase, Medicare benefits decrease [while premiums rise].)

  28. hophmi
    July 20, 2010, 9:44 pm

    I’m tempted to say to people who don’t understand why intermarriage is a problem for some Jews (for most it unfortunately is not) by saying that it’s a Jewish thing; you wouldn’t understand. For the record, I don’t endorse shunning people who intermarry; I have intermarried couples in my family, and I think shunning is counterproductive.

    It is generally silly to compare what intermarriage means for Jews to what it means for Christians. There are around 14 million Jews in this world, and over one billion Christians. Roughly 76 percent of Americans identify as Christians; roughly 2 percent of Americans identify as Jewish. Within my family, I have intermarried couples who tried to raise children with both religions. Judaism is losing out because the broader culture is more Christian than Jewish, and I’m sorry, I can’t see raising Jewish children with Santa and a Christmas tree. The wider world reinforces Christian symbols more than it does Jewish ones. The numbers speak for themselves; there is a stark inverse correlation between the level of Jewish education a person has and the intermarriage rate.

    I don’t think intermarriage is indicative of assimilation so much as it is indicative of absorption. True assimilation means adding your own background to the greater fabric, not losing one’s self completely inside of it. Jews that marry other Jews are no less assimilated than anyone else is.

    • Antidote
      July 21, 2010, 7:41 pm

      hophmi – it isn’t that long ago that a marriage between a Catholic and a Protestant was considered a ‘mixed marriage’, and highly problematic for one group or the other, or either one

    • Mooser
      July 21, 2010, 8:55 pm

      “For the record, I don’t endorse shunning people who intermarry;”

      O gosh, isn’t that big of you! You’re a regular liberal, huh!
      But you say this hophmi, like somebody gives a husky frick. Who do you think that might be.

  29. wondering jew
    July 21, 2010, 2:17 pm

    I think the operative question vis a vis Phil Weiss is whether he is pro Jewish on any single question. I suppose because of the validity of questions raised regarding how Israel is to survive, ultimately his position on Israel is neither pro Jewish nor anti Jewish. But if one favors intermarriage, an acceptable or even an admirable position vis a vis the individual or vis a vis America, most people would accept that it is corrosive to Jewish survival. So then on what issue is Phil Weiss pro Jewish? When a Jew is nominated to the Supreme Court we can count on two people to raise questions: Pat Buchanan and Phil Weiss. So then on what issue is Phil Weiss pro Jewish? Because he does not advocate passing laws against Jews or burning books written by Jews? Does this make him pro Jewish?

    So the lack of pro Jewish voices in the comments section is a reflection of the blog’s bias, not just a reflection of the commenters’ bias.

    • demize
      July 21, 2010, 2:57 pm

      It seems to me that “Pro-Jewish” is a rather amorphous descriptor. Who defines that metric?

      • wondering jew
        July 21, 2010, 3:03 pm

        True, it is amorphous. but then I offered two issues: the nomination of Kagan and the issue of intermarriage and on neither of them can Weiss’s reaction be termed pro Jewish. If you disagree and think they can be termed pro Jewish, go right ahead and argue your case.

      • tree
        July 21, 2010, 3:27 pm

        If you can’t define the term other than in an “amorphous” way, then you haven’t made the point that Weiss’ reactions in these cases were not “pro-Jewish”.

        Since you won’t define the criteria you use, its hard to make a case for either position, something that you have failed to do. Instead you have just begged the question.

        However, since Jewishness is, as you have defined it, not limited to those who follow the faith, one could make a cae for intermarriage being beneficial to the number of Jews by increasing their numbers. If two couples marry and each one of them has one Jewish spouse then there are potentially two sets of Jewish children, whereas if the two Jewish spouses marry each other there is only a potential for one set of Jewish children. Also, intermarriage can lead to greater understanding between religions, both on the part of non-Jews and on the part of Jews. I would think that would be a net benefit to Jews.

        As for Kagan, I haven’t really followed Weiss’ opinion in detail so forgive if I state it wrongly, but I think that a case can certainly be made for demanding a Supreme Court nominee be of the highest caliber. Picking a lesser qualified Jewish person (or in this case, a lesser qualified woman as well) , because of political connections, is no more “pro-Jewish” or “pro-woman” than picking or supporting Clarence Thomas was “pro-black”.

        I’ve worked for decades in a field that is mostly men. Trust me when I say that hiring an unqualified woman, or a minority, solely on the basis of their minority or gender status, really does no favor to the struggle for equality for women or minorities, and that would include Jews as well.

      • Mooser
        July 21, 2010, 4:35 pm

        And what if we think the question is too stupid for words? Cause it is.
        But I know how it is, Wondering, when the ziocaine is flowing, you’re the King Jew, ready to judge and condemn anybody, especially other Jews, as not “pro-Jewish”.
        Holy shit, when the discussion of Zionism goes open and inclusive it’s going to be very embarassing, I’m going to have to steel myself to it, since I know how things are discussed here in the US. But it’ll be worth it.

      • wondering jew
        July 21, 2010, 8:02 pm

        tree- Let’s leave the Kagan choice out of this for the moment. I don’t think she is the highest qualified nominee ever made, but certainly becoming dean of the Harvard Law School does not put her in the category of mediocre or unqualified.

        On the question of intermarriage. On the understanding between Jews and nonJews, I think an intermarriage rate of 22% would do the job just fine and we Jews don’t really need an intermarriage rate of 50% in order to improve a greater understanding between the religions.

        As far as the greater number of Jews created by intermarriage, I think this is a phony argument. If indeed 70% of intermarried couples raise their kids unaffiliated or Christian, I don’t think that the benefits to the Jewish people are what you claim for them to be. I don’t think your argument is meant as an honest argument. It sounds purely hypothetical offered by someone who doesn’t really care about the Jewish people at all and is offering it as some kind of mathematic proof. If I felt you were honestly concerned about the Jewish people then I would try to relate to your argument, but I think you are just playing games here.

      • Mooser
        July 21, 2010, 8:11 pm

        Define “the Jewish people”.

      • Antidote
        July 21, 2010, 8:14 pm

        Frankly, any such attempts at demographic engineering and reproductive politics have either been completely ineffectual, counterproductive or outright disastrous, regardless of the ethnic group involved – from Augustus to Mao and Hitler. You can’t breed people like horses. And even horse-breeding is tricky

      • wondering jew
        July 21, 2010, 8:18 pm

        Mooser- If I believed that you were interested in a discussion I would engage you. I have no reason to believe that. You are just playing games.

      • Mooser
        July 21, 2010, 8:40 pm

        Oh please! You can’t define “the Jewish people” as you use it in your discussion?
        So basically, it means whatever you want it to mean, at any given time.
        And what would you call your little disquisition on “Jewish genes” and “sweaty undershirts”? Serious inquiry?
        Not to mention your hideously smarmy and obviously phony llittle blurtings on intermarriage, a subject about which you know less than nothing? No game there.

      • Mooser
        July 21, 2010, 8:45 pm

        “If I felt you were honestly concerned about the Jewish people”

        Did I hear you say that “if you were honestly concerned about the Jewish people” you would make it your business to get a wife selected for you by your rabbi, and have some Jewish children?
        Apparently Jewish women aren’t good enough for you, Wondering Jew.
        But of course, you would never let the needs of the Jewish people interfere with your selfish pleasures, would you? What a phony.

      • wondering jew
        July 21, 2010, 8:52 pm

        Mooser- you treat this blog like the school yard of your junior high school.

      • Mooser
        July 21, 2010, 9:08 pm

        Ha, ha ,ha Wondering, I didn’t go to junior high school. I dropped out in sixth grade to help support my family.
        But why aren’t you married, to a nice Jewish girl, of course, and making multi-Jewish babies with special genes.
        To help preserve the Jewish people you won’t even get married?
        What’s a matter, Wondering, would it take away too much money from your selfish pleasures?
        A nice Jewish girl can be supplied, God knows, we’ve got those, but it’s selfish, non-caring-about-the-future-of-the-Jewish-people men like you that are wiping us off the face of the earth!
        And you know it’s true, Wondering, all the Jewish publications say so, and I’ve seen it myself, good, pretty Jewish girls, some of them “all three” going begging, wasting away, old maids at 25 because of guys like you!
        Please don’t ever posit yourself as s Jew who cares about the Jewish people again!
        And frankly, Wondering Jew, you treat this blog like a toilet, you shit into it, and expect everybody to clap their hands and tell you what a good boy you are.
        But I better stop before my equanimity is capsized and I become immoderate.

      • Mooser
        July 21, 2010, 9:13 pm

        Well I can define “Jewish society”, that one is easy! If you have your Bar (or Bat) Mitzvah at home, and your Mom makes the food, you are one of “the Jewish people”. If your family hires a hall, and has a fancy caterer and maybe a band, that, of course is “Jewish society”. So that’s settled.

      • Bumblebye
        July 21, 2010, 9:22 pm

        That wj. drops his fizzly little smoke-screen bombs then runs away! If he does come back, it’s usually only to lob another. I think there must be a “virtual (utopian) Israel” somewhere on the web, because he doesn’t seem to live in the real one.

      • wondering jew
        July 21, 2010, 9:29 pm

        What do you want bumblebye?

      • wondering jew
        July 21, 2010, 9:29 pm

        Are you part of mooser’s junior high school thugs?

      • Bumblebye
        July 21, 2010, 9:34 pm

        You ran away after making your absurd predictions, didn’t respond to the Q’s they prompted.

      • wondering jew
        July 21, 2010, 9:35 pm

        Go back there, Bumblebye. I’m sorry I’m not quick enough for you. I answered your questions.

      • Mooser
        July 21, 2010, 9:18 pm

        “It seems to me that “Pro-Jewish” is a rather amorphous descriptor. Who defines that metric?”

        It’s a pretty easy division, demize. A guy who gets married to a Jewish woman, and has Jewish kids, is “pro-Jewish”. He’s procreating Jewish as fast as he can. A guy who won’t get married, and won’t have Jewish children, is “anti-Jewish”, especially when he’s easily able to afford it, and is just selfish.
        You agree, Wondering? What could be more valuable than making Jewish children with their special genes?

  30. Mooser
    July 21, 2010, 4:37 pm

    Wondering Jew, I was just wondering, are you married? How long? How many Jewish children you got? Since I know you for a shameless prevaricator, please substantiate.
    And if you aren’t married, why not?

    • wondering jew
      July 21, 2010, 5:12 pm

      mooser- i’m not married and i have no kids.

      • Mooser
        July 21, 2010, 8:35 pm

        That one little thing, and such a pleasure, too, you can’t do for the Jews? Why are you deliberately withholding your special Jewish genes from the Jewish people? If you are too busy with work, or business requires you move, see your Rabbi, and he will arrange something.
        But if it doesn’t matter to you, that’s okay. Whether Jewish children got born didn’t matter to the Nazis either, DID IT???? And I guess the Nazis are okay with you then, too!

      • maximalistNarrative
        July 21, 2010, 9:32 pm

        Mooser,

        That comment above is wholly inappropriate and utterly immoral

      • maximalistNarrative
        July 21, 2010, 9:34 pm

        I will ask again for my comments not to await moderation. Why is it that Mooser can make personal comments about whether or not a certain poster has children, even going so far as to equate that with Nazi-ism and I am censored for what exactly For being a Zionist? For being a Jew? At least explain this unfair and unjust action of censorship

  31. wondering jew
    July 21, 2010, 5:19 pm

    mooser- do i get to ask you personal questions too?

    • Mooser
      July 21, 2010, 8:20 pm

      Am I posing as an expert on marriage, every other goddam topic in the world and presuming to judge the religious bona fides of everybody and anybody? Do I presume to always know what is best for “the Jewish people”? When I do those things, you can ask me personal questions. Until then, go pound sand. Frankly, Wondering, just between you and me, I am not entirely convinced you aren’t a clever and persistent anti-Semite, out to make Jews look as bad as possible.
      But I have a philo-Semitic streak actually, so I might not be a fair judge.

      But just as I though, not married, no kids. And for once, I have a reasonable confidence you are telling something of the truth.

      • potsherd
        July 21, 2010, 9:33 pm

        iirc, that makes WJ a 2nd-rate Jew according to his own definition.

      • wondering jew
        July 21, 2010, 9:36 pm

        potsherd- You’ve already defined me as not worthy of dialogue. But apparently I am worthy of piling on. Nice work, joining with the junior high mondoweiss thugs.

      • Chaos4700
        July 21, 2010, 9:50 pm

        You must be pretty lonely, now that yonira, Witty and Julian have fled, huh?

      • Mooser
        July 21, 2010, 9:55 pm

        You want to see piling on, Wondering Jew, you want to see some piling on? For heavens sake, let some of the matrons at schul or the Jewish Community Center now you’re not married, and they’ll be piling on! They’ll pile elegible Jewish girls on your doorstep, and you can choose among them. All you have to do is sniff their underwear and you’ll know when your love comes on strong.
        Noww, “eee” (remember him?) was going to “roll his own” that is get a non-Jewish girl and make a Jewish girl out of her. You may not be up for that, but really, there’s no need for it. Just let the yentas know your situation, and stand back!

      • potsherd
        July 21, 2010, 10:12 pm

        WJ – you have criticized Phil’s Judaism on the grounds that producing Jewish children is one of the primary criteria for first-class Jewishness. Assuming you are of legal age to marry and procreate, how does this make you anything but a hypocrite?

      • Antidote
        July 21, 2010, 10:17 pm

        What if WJ is gay? Are gay Jews automatically hypocrites or anti-Jewish? Just wondering

      • Chaos4700
        July 21, 2010, 10:20 pm

        Don’t expect any help from our end of the sexual orientation spectrum, if you are, WJ, incidentally. Your friend yonira burned that bridge quite a while ago with his comments about meth use and pedophilia.

      • wondering jew
        July 21, 2010, 10:27 pm

        I criticized Phil’s Judaism based on his advocacy of intermarriage. If Phil was married to a Jewess and had no kids. If Phil was not married. If Phil was married to a Gentile and pleaded, this is the woman I fell in love with and I was not willing to squelch my individuality for the sake of the Jewish people, those would all fit under a different category. But Phil is in favor of intermarriage. He doesn’t advocate it openly because he says, love is a battlefield and whoever you love is okay with him, but in his heart of hearts he wants to see all Jews intermarry.

        My individuality and Jewish societal needs have so far fought to a typical soccer score 0-0; and thus I have not married. This is not advocacy. This is an individual leading the life that I am leading. Phil Weiss wants to see the Jewish people disappear. His intermarriage is ideological not just circumstantial. I do not wish to see the Jewish people disappear. My unmarried status is circumstantial.

        (And I’m sure the junior high school thug will butt in his two cents, but this is meant for you, potsherd.)

      • Antidote
        July 21, 2010, 10:33 pm

        “If Phil was married to a Jewess ”

        Is that still a common term: Jewess

      • wondering jew
        July 21, 2010, 10:39 pm

        Antidote-No, not a very common term. I don’t think it’s something one needs to apologize for, but it is indeed uncommon.

      • Antidote
        July 21, 2010, 10:42 pm

        WJ – ok

      • Mooser
        July 21, 2010, 10:43 pm

        Antidote, our special Jewish genes make us proof against gayness. There are no Jewish homosexuals, it is simply not possible because of the genes. Little birds should come from Jewish wombs?
        No, WJ can’t be gay, he’s a swinger, already. What does he need with a good balboosta? If he married a good clean wholesome Jewish girl, he might have to sell his sports car, and get rid of his playboychik pad.
        What a phony! The simplest, most basic thing, every Jewish man’s duty, and what duty could be more pleasure? But no, then WJ couldn’t spend every penny he makes on himself!

        If we lose the Jewish race, the blame can be laid squarely at the feet of Wondering Jew’s closed fly!

      • Mooser
        July 21, 2010, 10:46 pm

        “Is that still a common term: Jewess”

        No, it’s not, and in fact is considered perjorative. Call a modern Jewish woman a “Jewess” and watch what happens, but don’t forget to duck!
        No wonder he’s not married, he can’t even talk about women decently.

      • Mooser
        July 21, 2010, 10:51 pm

        “If Phil was married to a Gentile and pleaded…”

        Excuse me idiot, but who does he have to “plead” with? Oh, those ziocaine fantasies of omnipotence!

        “My individuality and Jewish societal needs have so far fought…”
        As I thought, way too selfish, doesn’t give a crap about “the Jews”. Millions of Jews have died, and millions more will, but WJ will get married when his “needs” are met. I hope there is still a Jewish women left by that time! But will he get married, and have a Jewish daughter, so that when he grows up there will be somebody for him to marry? No, that’s not good enough for WJ!

      • Mooser
        July 21, 2010, 10:53 pm

        Put it this way, Antidote, you will get about as far with “Jewess” as you will with “Negress”.
        I’d keep away from it.

      • Antidote
        July 21, 2010, 10:55 pm

        Mooser – call it female intuition, but that’s how I would react if I were Jewish and called a ‘Jewess”

      • Antidote
        July 21, 2010, 10:59 pm

        “There are no Jewish homosexuals…”

        Isn’t that what Ahmadinejad says about Iran, and Israel is the liberal gay paradise, comparing favorably to the Muslim arch-enemy? Never mind the hilltop youth

      • Mooser
        July 21, 2010, 10:59 pm

        “My unmarried status is circumstantial.”

        Is that all it is? Good Lord WJ, that kind of oversight happens, now and again. No one says you have to undergo it without anesthetics. and appropriate pain medication during recovery.
        You’re actually in a good spot, in a way WJ, because you will have control over the operation. I was just a baby, of course, and the mohel (damn him!) was blind drunk, and he botched the job, badly. Happens a lot, I hear. Maybe yours passed out altogether?
        But it can be taken care of. And before you know it, you’ll be putting the ol’ Vibram to the goblet, baby

      • Mooser
        July 21, 2010, 11:14 pm

        but in his heart of hearts he wants to see all Jews intermarry

        Ah, that special ziocaine omnipotence which allows Jews to see into the “heart of hearts”.

        While WJ, of course, remains completely inscrutable and mysterious to us!

      • wondering jew
        July 21, 2010, 11:26 pm

        a quote from the Phil Weiss’s post: “The other night a friend said that I urge Jews to marry non-Jews.” Phil goes on to partially deny this, but not wholeheartedly.

      • wondering jew
        July 21, 2010, 11:31 pm

        Antidote-I use the term Jew only as a shorthand. If I were speaking my convictions I would use the term, Yehudi for Jew and Yehudiya for Jewish female. The term Jew is a slur, a shortened version, that I believe is derived from the French “Juif”. Any version of the word Yehudi that doesn’t include the “dalet” (as in Plan Dalet) is a slur in my idealized version. but then again some people can use the term “yid” and mean it as a slur. “zhid” is definitely a slur. but I use the term Jew for ease and I used the term Jewess because it was easier than writing Jewish female.

      • Antidote
        July 21, 2010, 11:37 pm

        WJ

        I’m German married to a non-German. I have two kids who don’t feel either German (their mother) nor American (their father) but identify with the country in which they were born and raised (which is neither Germany nor the US). Are we, the parents, traitors to our people? If so, we don’t give a damn. The Germans, unlike the Americans, do feel they may be on their way out, ethnically and culturally. But I haven’t been called back yet, or asked to produce more children and bring them up as Germans. Nor would I feel I’d have to oblige them in any way.

      • Schwartzman
        July 21, 2010, 11:41 pm

        Nelson Mandela was circumcised as a teen w/ out anesthetics.

      • wondering jew
        July 22, 2010, 12:11 am

        Antidote- The Jewish people is a unique combination of religion and nationality. As a religion its strong point is that it is the oldest of the monotheistic religions. Both Christianity and Islam are more universal than Judaism. Islam is more purely monotheistic than Judaism (whose roots in a more polytheistic point of view can even now be seen if one studies the Kabbala). Its outstanding character is its age and its survival despite circumstances. When Jews left Europe for America their parents told them “Stay Jewish”. The mere survival of the people is cited by some rabbis as proof of God’s existence and of the Jews’ chosenness. There is something irrational about the Jewish stubbornness to remain Jewish. This has been so for over a thousand years. That Jews today (not all but some or almost half) seek to maintain their Jewishness is a tribute to this stubbornness being handed down.

        Some people think that the Jewish stubborn grip on their Jewish identity is holding the world back from the nirvana of world peace. It ain’t so. Even if Israel were to disappear from the world and even if all the Jews would intermarry tomorrow, world peace would be just as far away. (Not to minimize the danger of the Israel Palestine conflict, but world peace is not around the corner.) Nationalism has not disappeared from the world. Germany having brought disaster on Europe in 1939 through 1945 brought the necessity of an American occupation and the cold war rather than a hot war reduced nationalism in a few European countries. But nationalism is alive and well in much of the world. As long as nationalism lives, some of us Jews will hold tight to our religion and our people. That’s our fate, our duty, our destiny. I’m overstating it, (so to be sure to get a bad reaction from the local junior high school thug), but i’m overstating it just by a bit.

      • RoHa
        July 22, 2010, 8:03 am

        Antidote, as I understand it, Ahmadinejad said that the phenomenon of homosexuality did not exist in Iran in the way that it exists in the United States. And if my interpretation is correct (can Farsi speakers comment, please?) he is quite right. Homosexuals in Iran can face the noose, or declare themselves women and get state-supported sex-change operations.

      • Antidote
        July 22, 2010, 8:25 am

        RoHa – don’t speak Farsi, but your interpretation makes sense. I didn’t know it was death OR conversion (sex change). Wow!

      • RoHa
        July 22, 2010, 8:38 am

        Quite different from homosexuality in the U.S. Depending on where they live, and their status, American homosexuals can put on strange leather garb and march in the streets, live quiet, ordinary lives among people who couldn’t give a hoot about their sexuality, or get beaten up and dragged behind trucks.

        But no way will the U.S. Government stump up half the cost of an operation!

      • Mooser
        July 22, 2010, 10:16 am

        So you would think it would be easy for Wondering Jew. Won’t get married, and claims circumstances are beyond his control!
        Some Jew!

      • Antidote
        July 22, 2010, 7:03 pm

        “Even if Israel were to disappear from the world and even if all the Jews would intermarry tomorrow, world peace would be just as far away…. Nationalism has not disappeared from the world.”

        No, nationalism hasn’t disappeared, and I don’t think world peace would break out if the I/P conflict was resolved either. But do I have to defend, appreciate, condone nationalism, and hyper-nationalism, just because it has been, still is, and will be around in one form or another? How long has it been around in the blood-and-soil- version? 19th century?

        Let me overstate the case, just a bit: I do consider nationalism a disease, so the fact that it has been and will be around does not mean one has to tolerate, support, glorify it.

        Fate, duty, destiny? Why? What if Hitler had actually been shot by one of his many assassins? What if Begin had been assassinated, instead of Rabin? What if the Cold War had turned hot on one of several possible occasions and close calls? It didn’t, but it could have. We were unlucky/lucky. That’s all.

        Jewish stubbornness and defiance? Fine, as a minority in the diaspora. But as a bully in the ME with nuclear weapons, it’s a different story.

        The Jews. Jewish identity. What’s that? Two Jews, three opinions. Noam Chomsky and Meir Kahane, Norman Finkelstein and Alan Dershowitz, Hannah Arendt and Menachem Begin, etc.

        “The Jewish people is a unique combination of religion and nationality ” There is no single interpretation of Judaism, nor a single ‘nationality’. Jewish people are ethnically diverse. What does, for instance, determine Lieberman’s racism and extreme nationalism? The fact that he is a Jew, a Russian, or a former bouncer?

      • wondering jew
        July 22, 2010, 7:14 pm

        antidote- You say “Jewish stubbornness and defiance. Fine as a minority in the diaspora.” but there’s nothing to indicate that you really mean it. The essence of your message is- I gave up my nationalism, why don’t you give up yours.

        Granted, it is difficult to deal with the Jewish issue, particularly on this blog, without dealing with Israel, but try.

        Actually it’s not just you. People on this blog give lip service to supporting the Jews as long as they aren’t Zionists, but that’s all it is, lip service. Of course there are the few who are honest and up front, they hate pushy nepotistic Jews and prefer that they will disappear or accept the limitation of their small numbers, so that whites or other minorities can get their fair share of senate seats or places in the Ivy leagues.

        The fact is that people here are either pro American or pro individualism and anything that smacks of tribalism, even if it has nothing to do with Middle East real estate, turns them off. Are you the same or different. Just a pro forma- “fine, if it’s in the diaspora” doesn’t prove it. Nothing you have said other than that sentence backs the sentiment of that sentence up a bit.

      • Bumblebye
        July 22, 2010, 8:01 pm

        wj
        I thought you weren’t Israeli born & bred, but did you grow up encouraged to think of Israel as your true homeland & real nationality? Do you not think that would & should lead to accusations of “dual loyalty” for those who do not leave the lands of their birth, but do rise to positions of power therein? As well as, all too often, having excessive favor bestowed upon them by their “other” nation? If not also having “dual” employment roles in that country. It seems just as wrong and dangerous as Catholicism demanding first loyalty to Rome and the Pope in centuries past. That led to massive injustice in the past, and still leads to political interference today. Judaism is one faith among many, its adherents cannot be considered a race, even if certain inheritance can be shown, and it certainly isn’t a nationality. Cursory research shows that “Zionism” is quite an ugly political creed, no part of the religion – it can’t just be boiled down to meaning a homeland for the Jews, because it is continuing despite the achievment of that goal, and in the same ugly manner in which it was first implemented.
        Generally, one can only give up one nationality by adopting another and rejecting the former. What if, like 5 million of your neighbors, you had none recognized?

      • Mooser
        July 22, 2010, 8:29 pm

        If Mandela can do it, so can Wondering Jew! Schwartzman, all he needs is a little encouragement, and you’re the only one he will listen to! Plead with him! Show him your’s, and how neat and tidy it is.

      • wondering jew
        July 22, 2010, 8:31 pm

        Bumblebye- I don’t see where I wrote anything that led to this question. I don’t see that it’s relevant to the topic of intermarriage. It seems to me that because I am here, therefore you have a right to ask me any question and therefore you ask it.

        Zionism has achieved a country, but the struggle between the Palestinians and the Israeli Jews continues, so if there is cruelty and there is, it is not because Zionism dictates it (necessarily) but because conflict dictates it.

        There are many confusions involved in Zionism and to point out the dual loyalty question is to point to one of them. I used to “resolve” this issue by saying I have two parents, one in dire need (Israel) and one rich and gigantic and unworried (america) and so naturally the parent with the dire need is the one who would get the attention. At this point it seems that at times the needs of my two parents are contradictory. what is good for Israel is not necessarily good for America. In fact I am not sure what is good for israel and what is good for America. Is a two state solution good for israel. I think so, but I can’t know for sure. is a two state solution good for America? I think so, but I cannot know for sure. What about if a two state solution is not reached by the end of a second Obama term?

        To a large degree I feel helpless. I do not get to decide. I merely get a vote. If Israel chooses the path of the Likud and the path of the Likud leads to more conflict, this is not my choice. My path would be different. but I only get one vote. If I go to a protest rally, that changes nothing, it represents a small percentage of Israel’s population.

        I sense hatred from Arabs all the time. Not from all Arabs. there is also curiosity and common humanity. but there is also hatred. If I could wave a wand and be told that I get to decide what would I do? First thing I would call up Yossi Alpher bitterlemons.org to advise me. I’d also call Aluf Benn to advise me.

        The five million of my neighbors that you seem to count includes citizens of Israel. I don’t think that they are unrecognized per se. I think that the situation of the West Bank makes the situation unstable and therefore creates conflict. There is conflict contained in Zionism as is expressed in the term “demographic problem”, but it is my belief, that may never get tested that if there is a two state solution that Israel’s Jews and Arabs would be able to reach an understanding. But without some solution to the conflict vis a vis the West Bank, there will be no understanding between Israel’s Jews and Arabs.

        If the United States had a law that did not allow dual citizenship I would not have given up my American citizenship to take up Israeli citizenship. I would have taken up residence without giving up my American citizenship. The American law was what allowed me to take up dual citizenship. I do not know the history of the development of that law. If I had been allowed to have my way when I was 19 or so, I would have joined the Israeli army and at that time I would have chosen Israeli citizenship over American citizenship, but things didn’t work out that way and I lived in America from the age of 19 to the age of 51. There is a conflict between my loyalties. I confess it. at this point in time there is still a possibility of a two state solution. I am intrigued by the new thinking expressed by the Israeli right wing. But this does not resolve the conflict between American interests and Israeli interests.

        I think that aside from Israel Iran’s nuclear device is a threat to American interests in the region, so I am not convinced that America’s interests are that divergent from Israel’s interests on all issues. I happen to think that war is a bad idea both for Israel and for the United States and so there is not a divergence of interests on that front either. I think the settlement enterprise was stupid and ultimately cruel and therefore evil. Of course the nakba that took place before I was born was cruel and therefore evil. I was taught (indoctrinated, if you wish) that Israel could not have been born with such a large hostile population in its midst. It is impossible for me to tell if this is true. If the doors to the United States had remained open to immigration in the 20’s and 30’s and Germany had not followed the Hitler path I think the Jewish population in the land (I/P) would have stayed under 200,000 and the rulers of this land would have been primarily Arab. I don’t think the Mufti was a man of peace and I wonder who would have been here to have seen a different path. But the fact is that the gates of America were relatively closed and Germany took the Hitler path and Israel was born and the nakba took place. I can’t undo the facts. Amira Hass told of her father’s dream of the return of the refugees. Maybe this is a good dream. I have been indoctrinated to see it as a pure threat, maybe it isn’t. I don’t think one can be naive. At this point in my life I have dual citizenship and I realize other americans resent my dual loyalties. But again, it is American law that allowed me to take this dual citizenship.

      • Bumblebye
        July 22, 2010, 8:36 pm

        Oddly enough, that teeny little op’s the only one pop had under general anaesthetic. Even this year’s hip replacement was under epidural.

      • Mooser
        July 22, 2010, 8:40 pm

        “some of us Jews will hold tight to our religion and our people.”

        So which one of our people you holding tight to? You don’t hold tight to our people by not getting married and not having children. You are commanded by our religion to marry and have children (“be fruity and multiply”)
        Or maybe you’re some kind of celibate Jewish priest or something?

      • Bumblebye
        July 22, 2010, 8:52 pm

        wj
        It was the nationality thing you raised replying to Antidote (the one that’s popped in under your reply to me was to Mooser). I think the conflict continues because one side in particular is completely unwilling to seek a just solution, and has corrupted the political sphere of several countries – tho’ one in particular – in pursuit of its ultimate aim. The injustice is festering, and more and more people want to see an end to it. Hey, no questions! :D

      • potsherd
        July 22, 2010, 9:14 pm

        “Jew” in English comes from “Judean” in Latin, which comes from the kingdom of Judah – “Yehudhah”. There’s nothing of a slur in anglicizing the name.

      • Antidote
        July 23, 2010, 10:41 pm

        WJ —

        “The essence of your message is- I gave up my nationalism, why don’t you give up yours.”

        I didn’t give up anything, and I’m not asking you to give up anything either. I don’t find your views offensive or hypocritical.

        “Granted, it is difficult to deal with the Jewish issue, particularly on this blog, without dealing with Israel, but try.”

        Would it be difficult for you to deal with the German issue, without dealing with Nazi Germany?

        I’m not saying Nazism and Zionism are identical. But there are similarities that I find hard to stomach, no matter how different in scope. And no, that doesn’t mean that I want either Germans or Jews to ‘disappear’.

      • wondering jew
        July 24, 2010, 12:06 am

        Antidote- The world Jewish population was approximately 18 million before WWII. Today it is approximately 14 to 15 million. I assume (I may be wrong) that no other group has failed to recoup its loss of population in the 65 years since WWII. I think that a negative reaction to intermarriage by Jews given those facts is understandable.

        Since intermarriage was the topic raised by Phil Weiss in the initial post, I felt that an attempt to discuss the topic without raising Israel would be a worthy effort.

        Phil Weiss in his original post only respects two values- individual choice and Americanism. The survival of the Jewish group does not enter into his value system whatsoever.

        As far as Nazism vis a vis Germany I would say one thing. In a way the Germans were fortunate that Nazism was as evil as it was. As such it was short lived. Hitler’s thousand year Reich only lasted 12 years and the negativity that he wreaked upon Germany’s neighbors or the rest of Europe only lasted from 1938 (Austria and Czechoslovakia) until 1945. In its aftermath the combination of the Cold War and the American occupation “cured” Germany of the Nazism disease. (The Soviet occupation was not quite as benevolent and I assume that East Germany is still suffering from its after effects.)

        Zionism in its current form (1948 until present) has colonialist aspects that never figured out how to deal with the indigenous population. As such it assumed that it could exile a large population of the indigenous and “get away with it”. To move into an Arab neighborhood and kick out the local Arabs and expect anything but continual war seems to be wishful thinking. Conceivably if the 67 war had been followed by a strict regime forbidding Jewish settlement in the West Bank and encouraging Palestinian autonomy, maybe, just maybe the sin of 48 might have been not forgotten but diluted. But true autonomy was never encouraged and Jewish settlement was not forbidden by various governments that could not look past the present tense and the short term coalition agreements. The result has been cruelty and an intensification of the sin of 48 instead of its dilution.

      • Antidote
        July 24, 2010, 12:24 am

        WJ – read this, and I’ll get back to you later

        link to palestinechronicle.com

  32. Antidote
    July 22, 2010, 9:05 am

    ‘no way will the U.S. Government stump up half the cost of an operation’

    hardly surprising in a country where many consider universal health care to be a socialist aberration. And would that be considered a ‘pre-existing condition’?

  33. Mooser
    July 22, 2010, 10:17 am

    WJ, Unmarried, uncut and stupid is no way to go through life.

  34. MRW
    July 22, 2010, 10:55 am

    Ah, the wag-wag-wag of the finger at Iran for its homosexual stance.

    Israel has this:

    An Israeli man of Arab descent has been convicted of rape after allegedly duping a Jewish woman into having consensual sex with him.

    30-year-old Sabbar Kashur was sentenced to 18 months in prison on Monday after a Jerusalem court ruled he was guilty of rape by deception. According to the complaint filed by the woman, Kashur, an Arab living in East Jerusalem, introduced himself in September 2008 as a Jewish bachelor seeking a serious relationship.

    and

    Dana Pugach, head of the Noga Center for Victims of Crime, felt differently. “It is a person’s right to have sexual relations with a person knowing the facts about those characteristics. I see no difference between impersonating a Jew if you are an Arab and a wealthy pilot when you are penniless, if those are relevant characteristics to the decision to have sex.”

    So the right to fuck for money, or anything else for that matter, is protected by law in Israel?

  35. demize
    July 22, 2010, 9:01 pm

    WJ. I vehemently disagree with you, but, I do give you credit for being honest and always trying to make a cogent and civil argument.

  36. hophmi
    July 24, 2010, 2:24 am

    “zionist orchestrated Armenians genocide”

    Listen, Eva, get lost, will you?

    Can someone get rid of this schmuck, please?

Leave a Reply