[Black Knight from The Holy Grail having one leg and both arms chopped off] All right, we’ll call it a draw. [/BK]
The simple truth is, that Israel accepts anyone who could potentially be persecuted for being Jewish. Since some antisemitism is religion based, and some antiemitismis raicially based, Israel accepts immigrants who can claim either Jewish faith or Jewish descent.
That’s all.
Thats right. Tom made the ridiculous statement that ethnicity has nothing to do with a discussion of the state of Israel. I think anyone with an honest take on the issue knows that is ridiculous.
**Tom **is also lying about what I have said. He has tried to misconstrue my words to say that Israeli law is based solely on that criteria. That is not my point. The point is that when saying ethnicity has no part in discussion of Israel, Tom is being an ignorant pro-semitic jack ass.
An ethnic connection by way of genetic proof is one of the easiest tickets to Israel. I have not said it is the root of all evil in the world. But it is the truth. Tom is informed enough about this subject that his claim of ethnicity having no bearing on the state of Israel is nothing short of a lie.
So you want to use the narrow definition? If you consider ethnic as a genetic term then I must ask: Are we all descendants of Adam and Eve or are we all part of the same evolutional pattern? Your use of the word that limits its use to genetic terms would make us all of the same ethnicity no matter what you believe in the theory of our origins. In either case we are all related. That is why ethnicity includes other factors. Those factors of culture and religion are the only things that seperate us. To consider that ethnicity does not pertain to culture, religion and affiliations is useless.
It isn’t so terrible that Israel does it. It is terrible that Tom knows they do it but denies it in the face of the truth. You don’t have to convince me that Israel, Ireland or any other country uses ethnic croteria for legal purpose. Convince Tom . He is the one claiming otherwise.
Define “Race”.
I have to say, Hank, that if you don’t stop using the phrase “pro-semite” - which implies that hating Jews as valid as supporting them - I’ll be forced to go mideastern on your ass.
I like the term “pro-semitic” to describe people that support Jews above other ethnicities.
Thn use some other term for it. “Jewish Nationalist”, maybe. And be sure that you’re very, very careful when you accuse someone of it. For instance, patriotism isn’t a form of bigotry.
You’re using a term which can only mean “pro-Jewish” as an insult, and that’s pissing me off. A civil person wouldn’t do that.
Mmm-kay?
Hank, you really have no reading comprehension, do you? tomndebb has been taking you to task over this statement:
which you made way back on page 2, in response to something I said about Israel not caring about the ethnicity of the Jews making aliyah. It is obvious that tomndebb and I are using the everyday definition of ethnicity, which generally revolves around area of origin and language groups and of which descent is a major factor. I have made it very clear that in my definition, one can not just pick an ethnicity and join it.
You are using a very different definition of the word – I call it “ethnicity.” You define Jewish as an “ethnicity”, while I don’t think many others in the world would. In fact, I think it smacks of dishonesty to claim that, based on a loose translation of a Hebrew word, Israel is being racist in its immigration policies. With my definition, one can’t just pick and choose which ethnic group they would like to join and do it. I can become Catholic or Muslim, but I can’t become Irish or Arab.
The confusion lies in the fact that the language is so muddled. “The Jewish race” or “Jewish ethnicity” are really not well thought out terms. Judaism is a religion and a shared tradition first and foremost, despite whatever anybody says. Like other religions and shared traditions, it is passed from generation to generation. But this doesn’t make it an ethnicity.
Don’t get tomndebb and me started on race. We have been down this road many many times. Race and ethnicity are social constructs with little or no basis in genetics, although they have quite a lot of descent implied within the definition.
Why is it OK to use the term pro-Semitic to mean valuing Jews over everybody else and not use the term antisemitic to mean one who hates Jews? The term “antisemite” was coined to mean “one who hates Jews.”
I am not about to stop using “pro-semitic” because it pisses you off. It is not an unreasonable term. I haven’t directed it at you, yet.
If someone hates Jews I think anti-semitic is the pertfect term. It stands to reason that someone valuing Jews over others could be called pro-semitic.
Yes it does make it an ethnicity. As a matter of fact, shared religions and traditions passed from generation to generation are exactly what ethnicity is. I have said it several times now. Look it up.
So what is the big argument here? This has been my contention all along. Why are you arguing with me and then reversing your use of the word?
Ethnicity is paramount in Israeli immigration law.
Because they’re using the “weasel” definition of anti-semite.
Furthermore, that incident mentions that the people involved were “Israeli nationals,” not Jews. If I am not mistaken, an Arab can be an Israeli national. The Palestinians who did not flee the country after the 1948 war were offered Israeli citizenship. Hell, an Arab named Bishara is in the Knesset.
No you are using an inherently biased definition of Semite. Both Arabs and Jews ethnically are Semites, ne c’est pas? I mean, aren’t they all descended from Abraham? The Jews have hijacked the term anti-Semite. Americans who hate Arabs are also anti-Semites. Americans who are racist toward Africans could be called anti-Hamites, I suppose.
This is similar to the way people from the United States of America have hijacked the term “American.” Logically, people from both North America, Central America, and South America should all be called Americans. But “USAans” think that they are the only ones who deserve to be called Americans.
So this notion that Jews and Americans have that they are somehow special, is that narcissistic, racist, and just prejudiced?
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Hank Fescue *Yes it does make it an ethnicity. As a matter of fact, shared religions and traditions passed from generation to generation are exactly what ethnicity is. I have said it several times now. Look it up.
[/quote[
Would you define Episcopalian as an ethnicity? If you would, then we have no argument, just a vastly different concept of the word ethnicity.
No, but you are, especially the “racist” and “just prejudiced” part. Don’t you have some white sheets to wash?
mystic2311:Furthermore, that incident mentions that the people involved were “Israeli Nationals” not Jews. If I am not mistaken an Arab can be an Israeli national.
And from that same IndyMedia link it claims in big 36pt black letters across the screen: “The Arabs Are Not To Blame For WTC The Attack”
So if it was an Israeli, but not the Arabs (and therefore not Arab-Israelis) then I wonder who it could’ve been? The Druze perhaps?
I have not said anything in this discussion that could be considered racist or prejudiced. I am simply trying to point out the inherent bias in the discourse about Jews and Arabs. Hank is the only here who understands my use of the term pro-semitic. You are the one who should be putting on the white sheet. You are like a white supremacist, who when accused of being pro-white by a black man, responds by calling the black man a racist.
The Jews, eh? Funny how a German anarchist named Wilhelm Marr coined the term to replace the German Judenhass, or Jew-hatred, to give it a more “sophisticated” air.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by edwino *
**
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Hank Fescue *Yes it does make it an ethnicity. As a matter of fact, shared religions and traditions passed from generation to generation are exactly what ethnicity is. I have said it several times now. Look it up.
[/quote[
Would you define Episcopalian as an ethnicity? If you would, then we have no argument, just a vastly different concept of the word ethnicity. **[/QUOTE]
No, I wouldn’t consider Episcopalian as an ethnic group. As far as I know they don’t use bloodline to determine who belongs to thier religion.
Judasim uses bloodline to determine who belongs to them. And please don’t get into the convert arguement. I know you can be converted. That doesn’t nullify the descent laws.