Polls of Jews in both the US and in Israel consistently show a two-thirds majority in favor at a two state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. How can J Streets advocacy of such a position be regarded as "out of the mainstream"? This is "Orwellian doublespeak". The Conference of Presidents has thus made a laughingstock of itself and has thereby demonstrated itself to be a doddering, ossifide irrelevance.
Engaging in ad hominem attacks on an author is a tell-tale sign of ones intellectual bankruptcy. The heart of the issue is simply that of academ ic freedom. If one values it, what better place to let it flourish than at a college, and especially in a Jewish college organization. I f one is afraid of "the corruption of mind" that such a freewheeling discussion might have, perhaps ones persuasions are fatally flawed.
O.K., I woulld agree that Torah study was central to the survival of the Jewish people and religion, but did devotion to it's study prevent The Holocaust? And remember that courageous fighting men (and women, like Hannah Senesh), and including many Christians as well, who fought and often died, prevented the total annihilation of the Jews at that moment in history..........and not the piety and prayer and literacy of the Chartedim. Also, devotion to Torah does not preclude one from protecting oneself or one's people. Though I probably do not know as much Jewish history as "the average Charedi", I do seem to recall some historical Jews who also contributed to Jewish survival like, David, Samson, Joshua, The Maccabees, and Simeon Bar Kochba.
I fully support their First Amendment rights to free speech and assembly to redress grievances. But they all assembled in Lower Manhattan facing a bland office building to protest a bill pending in the Israeli Knesset? Does this make sense to anyone other then them? Do they really believe that "Israel exists because of miracles brought about by those who study the Torah" , and not because of the courage and sacrifice of "The Zionists" or the Haganah or the IDF? Maybe their "prayer" assemblage would be more effective if they gathered around the Knesset Building, or just maybe way more effective if they gathered at the foot of Mount Sinai (the one in the Middle East, not the one in Manhattan).
Why they don't act that way in the USA? It's pretty simple. It's all in the numbers. The ultra-orthodox in Israel make up 20% of the population while in the USA much less than 1%. There is strength in numbers....and given the opportunity, their religious intolerance would likely surface in tne public sphere here as well. Additionly, Israel in a self declared Jewish state while the USA, although de jure a secular state, has always been dominated by Christians, giving them two more incentives to behave civilly here.
The central issue here is the rights of corporations, specifically whether or not they have a "religious conscience" which should be respected under the U.S. Constitutuion. I maintain that the term "corporate conscience" is an oxymoron. Corporations were first recognized by U.S. law in the 1840's to allow business entities to make a profiit while limiting their liabiliy to just their net worth .They exist for one purpose only : to maximize their profits. Only a conscientious person can have a conscience.
Pretty touchy about a little "adjective." I thought the ultra-orthodox didn't care what " the others" think. I, however propose a compromise: howse about "The Only Real Jews".
Let me get this straight: people have rights; corporations are people; then ,corporations have rights, like "life, liberty, and the pusuit of happiness" (preface to the U.S. Declaration of Independence), and First Amendment rights such as speech and religion. Well , when real people violate our laws, they can be jailed or even executed. What happens to corporations acting in a criminal way: at worst a fine, often trivial in terms of the damage they cause (e.g. big banks, oil and coal companies, etc .) When a "corporation can be jailed or executed or sent to the Valley of Gehenna, I too will support their claimed rights. Albert Einstein wrote "it is only to the individual that the soul is given". In the meantime, the ultra-orthodox have entered into common cause with Evangelical Christians, Mormons and Opus Dei Catholics to restrict the legal rights of all Americans. And they have more in common with these goyim then with the 'other" 90% of American Jews.This is more about religious "intolerance" than " religious tolerance".
The mayor seems baffled on how to protect vulnerable infants from the dangerous ritualized practice of " MBP", which frankly should be his " job #1". I think it is simple: enforce the strong existing New York State laws against child abuse/neglect (which MBP clearly falls under as it subjects infants unnecessarily to a life and limb threatening act). Any and all person or persons who are complicit it in perpetrating this offense before the fact should be prosecuted for conspiracy or , if covering up the act after the fact, should be prosecuted for conspiracy to obstruct justice. But first try community education . The best solution is vigorous community education (including requirements of hospitals and obstetricians to formally notify in writing of the known risks), licensing of mohels , followed by proper prior legal notice and vigorous prosecution if that fails.
This is not a numbers game. If even a single child''s life or health is protected by banning this invidious practic e (which at the same time is both reckless and indefensible) then it would be a wise and moral public policy. What about the fundamental precept of Jewish morality that a person who saves a single life will be seen as saving the entire universe?
![[Avatar]](/images/avatar26.png){kind=avatar}
Production