Hmmm; I mean, if you’re taking the “Jewish history” and “Jewish philosophy” part seriously, you’re including the Septuagint in Jewish Koine Greek, and Hellenistic Judaism in general. (And of course, in the earlier periods other neighboring societies such as the Babylonians and the Egyptians are relevant.) There isn’t really such a thing, AFAICT, as serious scholarly study of Judaism without incorporating significant knowledge of other intellectual/cultural traditions of the regions and periods involved.
I concur, though, that this is not the approach that modern Haredim take towards their subjects of study. Any more than congregational Bible study in some evangelical congregation, for example, considers it necessary to study the history of different ancient Near Eastern world-inundation narratives in order to read the Biblical story of Noah’s ark.
Besides the fact that nobody should be forced to join the military anywhere?
I agree it seems like a double standard. And it’s true there are conscientious objectors in every country, but I’m unaware of an entire class of people preemptively made exempt from service because of it, except in this case.
But as I alluded, the exemption should be extended to everyone, not restricted further to force these fundamentalist Luddites (seemingly?) to fight against their will.
Given that there is compulsory military service, and given their reasons for claiming exemption, I’d be fine with not allowing them to vote, either, as a tradeoff.
Quakers and Mennonites were historically exempted from military service. Sometimes the exemption was preemptive and categorical. Sometimes the exemption required alternate service or payment of a fee.
I see a distinction between, say, Quakers and Haredim. The Quakers are pacifists, against war in most or all cases. Haredim just don’t want to contribute to the wars that they essentially vote for and encourage.
This isn’t saying you’re wrong, but just replying to your post because it mentions the Quakers.