# Implications of John Kerry Speech **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [December 29, 2016, 6:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/implications-of-john-kerry-speech/775855 "2016-12-29T18:30:56Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 16\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [December 30, 2016, 12:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/implications-of-john-kerry-speech/775855/41 "2016-12-30T00:45:13Z")
> [@madsircool](#): > > That is only to qualify for automatic Israeli citizenship. Atheists born from a Jewish (by birth) mother qualify. Yes, because that satisfies the **halachic** definition of Jewishness: i.e., in accordance with religious law. Just because the religious-law qualification doesn’t involve personal belief doesn’t mean it’s not still part of religious law. [QUOTE=madsircool] There has to be some definition of what constitutes Jewishness just as there is a definition of what constitutes Britishness for the purpose of qualifying for citizenship. [/QUOTE] Sure. But why in the case of Jewishness does it have to be a **religious-law** definition? If it’s about being culturally Jewish, then why not just define it to mean self-identifying as culturally Jewish? You can’t use a halachic definition of Jewishness for your citizenship qualification and then say that the qualification has nothing to do with religion. > [@Grumman](#): > > Over half of the Palestinian population is openly in favour of exterminating religious minorities. Cite? I have read survey results that nearly half of the Israeli Jewish population is openly in favor of [ethnically cleansing Arabs from Israel](http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/almost-half-of-israeli-jews-want-ethnic-cleansing-palestinians-wake-up-call-survey-finds-a6919271.html). And I’ve seen survey results that 40% of Israeli Jews [**believe** that Palestinians want to conquer Israel and exterminate the Jews](http://www.bicom.org.uk/analysis/latest-israeli-palestinian-peace-poll-professor-tamar-herman-analyses-the-findings/). But where is your cite supporting the claim that that’s actually what the Palestinians advocate? ---
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [December 30, 2016, 12:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/implications-of-john-kerry-speech/775855/42 "2016-12-30T00:49:32Z")
> [@Aji\_de\_Gallina](#): > > Egypt’s Copts are scared shitless every day, and they are 40%. 😕 Your numbers are still in an alternate reality, ISTM. **All** of Egypt’s Christians, of whom about half are Copts, make up only about 10% of Egypt’s total population. [QUOTE=Ají de Gallina] By exclusively Muslim I mean that the government is Muslim and enforces Islam over other faiths. [/quote] And how does [Lebanon](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lebanon#Government_and_politics) fit into this definition for you? > [@](#): > > Lebanon is a parliamentary democracy, which implements a special system known as confessionalism. […] High-ranking offices are reserved for members of specific religious groups. The President, for example, has to be a Maronite Christian, the Prime Minister a Sunni Muslim, the Speaker of the Parliament a Shi’a Muslim, the Deputy Prime Minister and the Deputy Speaker of Parliament Eastern Orthodox. […] > > Lebanon’s national legislature is the unicameral Parliament of Lebanon. Its 128 seats are divided equally between Christians and Muslims, proportionately between the 18 different denominations and proportionately between its 26 regions. ---
**Author:** ![Aji\_de\_Gallina](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aji_de_gallina/32/260_2.png) [@Aji\_de\_Gallina](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aji_de_Gallina)\ **Post date:** [December 30, 2016, 1:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/implications-of-john-kerry-speech/775855/43 "2016-12-30T01:05:46Z")
> [@Kimstu](#): > > 😕 Your numbers are still in an alternate reality, ISTM. **All** of Egypt’s Christians, of whom about half are Copts, make up only about 10% of Egypt’s total population . Massive brainfart. Read the 40% from Lebanon and typed it. > [@](#): > > And how does [Lebanon](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lebanon#Government_and_politics) fit into this definition for you? My bad, as stated in a previous post. Lebanon is the canonical exception. ---
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [December 30, 2016, 1:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/implications-of-john-kerry-speech/775855/44 "2016-12-30T01:19:41Z")
> [@Aji\_de\_Gallina](#): > > Lebanon is the canonical exception. How does [Tunisia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tunisia#Politics) fit into your blanket assertion that, except in Lebanon, “the government is Muslim and enforces Islam over other faiths. Try being an active Christian anywhere else.”? > [@](#): > > Tunisia has a sizable Christian community of around over 25,000 adherents, mainly Catholics (22,000) and to a lesser degree Protestants. Berber Christians continued to live in Tunisia up until the early 15th century. International Religious Freedom Report for 2007 estimates thousands of Tunisian Muslims have convert to Christianity. Judaism is the country’s third largest religion with 900 members. One-third of the Jewish population lives in and around the capital. […] > > The constitution declares Islam as the official state religion and requires the President to be Muslim. Aside from the president, Tunisians enjoy a significant degree of religious freedom, a right enshrined and protected in its constitution, which guarantees the freedom of thoughts, beliefs and to practice one’s religion. > > The country has a secular culture where religion is separated from not only political, but in public life. […] > > Individual Tunisians are tolerant of religious freedom and generally do not inquire about a person’s personal beliefs. (I would point out, for comparison, that [Denmark likewise has an official state religion](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_of_Denmark), the Lutheran Church of Denmark, to which the Danish royal head of state is required to belong. Other western democracies also have official state religions. So while actual persecution of religious minorities is indeed a symptom of religious intolerance in many Muslim-majority countries, the mere fact of having Islam as an official state religion is not.) ---
**Author:** ![Grumman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/43a26b/32.png) [@Grumman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Grumman)\ **Post date:** [December 30, 2016, 1:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/implications-of-john-kerry-speech/775855/45 "2016-12-30T01:19:52Z")
> [@Kimstu](#): > > Cite? [Cite.](http://www.pewforum.org/files/2013/04/worlds-muslims-religion-politics-society-full-report.pdf) 89% of Palestinians support Sharia law (page 18). And of those, 66% are in favour of the death penalty for apostasy (page 55). 66% of 89% is 58.7% in favour of making it law that converting to another religion is punishable by death. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [December 30, 2016, 1:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/implications-of-john-kerry-speech/775855/46 "2016-12-30T01:26:13Z")
> [@aldiboronti](#): > > These Israel haters A sufficiently inaccurate assessment that damages the credibility of your other arguments. ---
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [December 30, 2016, 1:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/implications-of-john-kerry-speech/775855/47 "2016-12-30T01:28:16Z")
> [@Grumman](#): > > 66% of 89% is 58.7% in favour of making it law that converting to another religion is punishable by death. :dubious: So, your assertion depends on conflating “apostates” with “religious minorities”. Got it. Mind you, I condemn in the strongest terms the illiberal and oppressive position of advocating the death penalty or any legal penalty for religious conversion. But I don’t think that justifies dishonestly exaggerating or misrepresenting that position, illiberal and oppressive though it may be. ---
**Author:** ![madsircool](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/madsircool/32/3432_2.png) [@madsircool](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/madsircool)\ **Post date:** [December 30, 2016, 1:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/implications-of-john-kerry-speech/775855/48 "2016-12-30T01:38:46Z")
> [@Kimstu](#): > > Yes, because that satisfies the **halachic** definition of Jewishness: i.e., in accordance with religious law. Just because the religious-law qualification doesn’t involve personal belief doesn’t mean it’s not still part of religious law. > Sure. But why in the case of Jewishness does it have to be a **religious-law** definition? If it’s about being culturally Jewish, then why not just define it to mean self-identifying as culturally Jewish? > > You can’t use a halachic definition of Jewishness for your citizenship qualification and then say that the qualification has nothing to do with religion. Would you prefer the Nazi biological definition? The reason your self-identification definition wouldnt work is because anyone could ‘self-identify’ as Jewish; including those who want to dwestroy Israel and Jews. Please remember why Israel is in the first place. As a haven for Jews who have been persecuted, murdered or expelled elsewhere in the world. And do any Jew or their family have a right to return to tha Arab states that expelled them? > **[Jewish exodus from the Muslim world](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_exodus_from_Arab_and_Muslim_countries)** > > In the 20th century, approximately 900000 Jews migrated, fled, or were expelled from Muslim-majority countries throughout Africa and Asia. Primarily a consequence of the 1948 Arab–Israeli War, the mass movement mainly transpired from 1948 to the early 1970s, with one final exodus of Iranian Jews occurring shortly after the Islamic Revolution in 1979–1980. An estimated 650000 (72%) of these Jews resettled in Israel. > A number of small-scale Jewish migrations began in many countries of the Middl... ---
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [December 30, 2016, 1:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/implications-of-john-kerry-speech/775855/49 "2016-12-30T01:45:00Z")
> [@madsircool](#): > > Would you prefer the Nazi biological definition? No. Are that and the halachic definition the only two options? [QUOTE=madsircool] The reason your self-identification definition wouldnt work is because anyone could ‘self-identify’ as Jewish [/quote] Well, my point here isn’t to personally advocate for any particular definition of “Jewishness”. I’m just pointing out that your claim, that Jewishness as defined by the Israeli state is “cultural” rather than “religious”, is a distinction without a difference, since in fact that definition is based in Jewish religious law. ---
**Author:** ![madsircool](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/madsircool/32/3432_2.png) [@madsircool](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/madsircool)\ **Post date:** [December 30, 2016, 1:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/implications-of-john-kerry-speech/775855/50 "2016-12-30T01:57:02Z")
> [@Kimstu](#): > > No. Are that and the halachic definition the only two options? > Well, my point here isn’t to personally advocate for any particular definition of “Jewishness”. I’m just pointing out that your claim, that Jewishness as defined by the Israeli state is “cultural” rather than “religious”, is a distinction without a difference, since in fact that definition is based in Jewish religious law. So what? The religion or lack of religion of anyone claiming to be Jewish under that definition is unimportant. Jewishness is not defined by the religious belief of the individual. ---
**Author:** ![jacobson](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/85f322/32.png) [@jacobson](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jacobson)\ **Post date:** [December 30, 2016, 2:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/implications-of-john-kerry-speech/775855/51 "2016-12-30T02:06:21Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > IMO, everything that Kerry (and Obama) are saying is clearly correct (unless I’ve missed something). Problem is that what the Israelis are saying is also correct. You can say things that are completely correct, but which can have negative consequences. (This is a big part of what diplomacy is about.) And a big part of that is how the various players take what you’re saying and react to it. > > In this case, as in many others, the core problem would be in what is said versus what’s not said, and what the focus is on versus what it’s not. Meaning, if the focus is on promoting peace by pressuring Israel to change their actions versus promoting peace by pressuring both sides to do this. > > But it’s also magnified by the pre-existing dynamic. > > The problem is that the Palestinians feel they have the UN and much of the world at their back, and this emboldens them to take a harder line than they might otherwise take. The US being a strong Israel supporter somewhat levels the field, and this would have the impact of tempering Palestinian expectations and push them to be more conciliatory than they might otherwise be. But if the US is joining the anti-Israel side - in the sense of focusing on Israeli actions as the underlying cause of the issue versus Palestinian ones - then this would make Palestinian concessions less desirable/harder, since they would have the sense that momentum and world support is on their side, and they can rely on others to push the Israelis in their direction versus the other. > > So the net impact of votes and speeches of this sort is not to make peace any more likely, but rather to make whatever peace deal can be worked anyway more favorable to the Palestinian’s position than that of the Israelis. The main problem between Israel and Palastine is the settlements which were unlawful since 1967. Rabine almost had the peace and a 2 stste problem fixed, but Netanyahu’s party had Rabine assainated. ---
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [December 30, 2016, 2:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/implications-of-john-kerry-speech/775855/52 "2016-12-30T02:09:52Z")
> [@madsircool](#): > > So what? The religion or lack of religion of anyone claiming to be Jewish under that definition is unimportant. Jewishness is not defined by the religious belief of the individual. But as I said, the fact that it’s not about **the religious belief of the individual** doesn’t mean that it’s not still **a religious definition**. A definition based in religious law is a religious definition. Trying to equate a religious-law definition of Jewishness with a much broader concept of “cultural Jewishness” is disingenuous. ---
**Author:** ![asahi](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/asahi/32/8693_2.png) [@asahi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/asahi)\ **Post date:** [December 30, 2016, 2:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/implications-of-john-kerry-speech/775855/53 "2016-12-30T02:19:47Z")
> [@Aji\_de\_Gallina](#): > > The idea that Palestinians want a two-state solution in which Jews can live with the same rights as Arabs do in Israel is severely deluded to say the least. There is no solution that Palestinians will accept that preserves Israel as a Jewish state, period. And before anyone complains about theocracies, all Arab countries are in fact exclusively Muslim and vehemently so. > > In the year 2000 the Palestinians were offered the best deal since 1948 (basically Kerry’s idea) and they rejected it. > > Dennis Prager put it best. > If the Palestinians decided to stop fighting, there would be peace. > If the Israelis decided to stop fighting, there would be genocide. Why would there be genocide? ---
**Author:** ![up\_the\_junction](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/f1d935/32.png) [@up\_the\_junction](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/up_the_junction)\ **Post date:** [December 30, 2016, 7:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/implications-of-john-kerry-speech/775855/54 "2016-12-30T07:19:51Z")
> [@Grumman](#): > > [Cite.](http://www.pewforum.org/files/2013/04/worlds-muslims-religion-politics-society-full-report.pdf) > 89% of Palestinians support Sharia law (page 18). And of those, 66% are in favour of the death penalty for apostasy (page 55). 66% of 89% is 58.7% in favour of making it law that converting to another religion is punishable by death. They also support Rule of Law, a Premiership football team and - I know this cos I carried out a carefully structured, non-agenda survey. btw, Donald Trump can’t win the election, either. ---
**Author:** ![up\_the\_junction](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/f1d935/32.png) [@up\_the\_junction](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/up_the_junction)\ **Post date:** [December 30, 2016, 7:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/implications-of-john-kerry-speech/775855/55 "2016-12-30T07:22:17Z")
> [@jacobson](#): > > The main problem between Israel and Palastine is the settlements which were unlawful since 1967. Rabine almost had the peace and a 2 stste problem fixed, but Netanyahu’s party had Rabine assainated. These days, Likud looks pretty much an extension of the Israeli military. ---
**Author:** ![Jackmannii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jackmannii/32/311_2.png) [@Jackmannii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jackmannii)\ **Post date:** [December 30, 2016, 7:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/implications-of-john-kerry-speech/775855/56 "2016-12-30T19:51:19Z")
The Kerry speech is a hybrid of Administration legacy maneuvering, politics, and another attempt to hem Trump in a bit. Kind of like what the Republican legislature did in North Carolina, only less smelly and egregious. When and if Trump’s more pro-Israel policy backfires, this sudden concern about settlements can be used as an I-told-you-so in support of the Democratic candidate in 2020. Realistically, the speech and the U.N. resolution can’t be expected to have much practical effect beyond finger-wagging. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/implications-of-john-kerry-speech/775855.md?page=2)