Gosh, are you maybe trying to get a point across here? You might want to rephrase it because I just don’t think I quite understand what you’re getting at.
You may have misunderstood what I meant.
You wrote that the men congregate at the entrance while the women take the kids to the swimming area. I was suggesting that since you’ve said that these people object to girls in standard swim-suits, it’s possible that the men don’t go further into the park - and thus remain at the entrance area - to avoid them.
This is ridiculous.
Some detail from the NY Times: State Aid Formula Said to Hurt in a District Where Most Go to Yeshivas
No, it’s not.
“Jews” comes across as clipped & intentionally unstatedly derogatory to my ears, “Jewish Parents …” would have come across less inflammatory to my (lapsed Catholic) ears.
I would have preferred “local Hasidic Jews” to just “Jews”, but it absolutely it’s a scheming cabal of Jews, who are scheming due to their interpretation of Judaism.
That could be random, or just an accident of geography. But in this case, their organizing principle is their Judaism.
Yeah, I can see this perspective.
I think that’s quite different, as Madoff acted out if personal greed, and not in an attempt to brainwash his children into his religion.
By the way, speaking as a Jew who has perhaps followed these groups more than some of you, I believe these communities are dangerous to their neighbors and to their non-Hasidic members. They absolutely try to bend (or break) the rules to further their agenda at the expense of everyone else. I’ve heard people in related communities brag about it.
I don’t want to be associated with them, either. Maybe I should be more offended by the title than I was. Dunno.
Thanks, did not know that.
Fundamentalist Christians are a subset as well, but I wouldn’t find the article titled “Christians in Kansas working to stop evolution from being taught in schools”; in the East Ramapo School district Orthodox Jews (both Hasidic and non-Hasidic Orthodox) are concentrated in large numbers and don’t represent a small subset of the local Jewish population.
Further, they are Jews, just like Pentecostals and Snake-handlers are Christians. Maybe not Christians the rest are super happy to share a religion with, but that’s the way it works.
Which isn’t something unique to Jews; Christians deal with this all the time. There are many Christian groups that are trying to change or break society’s rules to accommodate a set of religious beliefs that are incompatible largely with modern American laws and values. In much greater number than this brand of Orthodox Judaism, of course. But it’s fair to call them all Christians, in my mind, just as it’s fair to call all of the Jews, Jews. Sometimes it’s useful to be more precise, but sometimes it’s not really necessary.
In 20/20 hindsight, a better title would have been “Hasidim defund secular schooling in East Ramapo”.
Well, I might agree “Orthodox Jews defund secular schools” would work. As per TAL and other articles, while a huge portion of the community involved is Hasidic there are non-Hasidic Orthodox on the school board and who support their actions because they are also sending their kids to private Jewish schools and don’t want to pay high property taxes to fund public schools they do not use.
You’re right. You wouldn’t find it, unless the site had an anti-Christian slant. How is that supposed to be a defense? Did you leave out “I wouldn’t [be offended to] find”?
And, yes, anti-Christian slants are a bit less offensive. Because, get this, Christians and Jews are not the same thing! For one thing, Christians are a majority, not a persecuted minority. For another, Christianity is just a religion, while “Jew” describes both a religion and an ethnicity. Being anti-religion is a bit more acceptable.
But only a bit. If your title was “Muslims take over East Ramapo School District and Defund It,” I would almost certainly think you were anti-Muslim and anti-Arab, because the word is used to mean both, especially in that part of America.
But, even if you didn’t realize this at first, you’ve been told multiple times that your title was interpreted as racist. It got moved to the Pit, when fucking Construct’s bullshit doesn’t get moved to the Pit.
You’ve been told by actual Jewish people that what it implies. You’ve been given a way to fix it. You refuse to take it, instead arguing that everyone else is wrong. How dare they be offended?
You do realize that these are the arguments racists make, right?
I’d really hoped you’d maybe realized this since then, that you were just defensive and would see the light when your head cleared. But, now, you say something bigoted, then you stand behind it 100%.
Even full well knowing that it detracted heavily from the point of what you were saying, offended people, and got people to think worse of you. But your fucking title with “Jews” in it is just that important.
Thanks for that.
It does seem that the funding system is a bit fakakta. Having a large number of students in private schools results in the district being significantly underfunded, especially given that the district is responsible for special education costs for all students, public and private alike.
It in no way excuses the mismanagement by the board that appears to be pretty well established but it does also seem that not all of the district’s woes are due to them alone: there is shared culpability.
Issues that seem pertinent that I do not have answers to personally -
Districts across the country vote in incompetent school boards who do all kinds of stupid shit. What level of incompetence and/or malfeasance is required for a state to step in versus respecting a local district to elect the representation they deserve?
Does the motivation of the voters matter in that regard? That is, should there be a different standard if the voters were motivated by being older and believing that too much is being spent on schools, a service they do not use, as opposed to senior services, versus if the voters were motivated by religious fundamentalism and want creationism taught in the school and not evolution, or want the district to fight so that they do not have to choose between getting their child the special education services they need and are entitled to (whether they are enrolled in a public school or not) and the religious school environment they are willing to pay for out of pocket?
Is an elected school board the best option given the traditional low turn-out in those elections?
How many ways of fucked-up does this case illustrate the current funding system is?
This East Ramapo Haredi Jewish fundamentalist take-over is not quite the same as other fundamentalist controlled school board circumstances. In those circumstances the goal is often to impose a set of religious teachings on all within the district, or minimally to avoid any teachings that conflict with revealed religious truth to all. In this case those taking over are fine with other students being taught whatever in the public schools, they will keep out of there. What they mismanage to achieve is being able to keep their own children out of there, inclusive of those with special education needs, but they still want the special education services that they feel they, having paid tax dollars, are entitled to. They are correct that they are entitled to special education services, but not correct that they are entitled to have the services where they want them. Still the contrast to other fundamentalist inspired school boards is of note.
Note though that the headline “Christians in Kansas working to stop evolution from being taught in schools” is equivalent to “Jews in East Ramapo take over School District and Defund It” which, while not completely accurate, would have not raised eyebrows.
The headline “Christians working to stop evolution from being taught in schools” would have very different implication and no question would imply an anti-Christian slant.
It would be better, but again, better yet would have been “Orthodox Jews in East Ramapo defund secular schools”
But the key question then is about context. Are these mismanagement issues really egregious in this district, or are they the type of petty issues and low level borderline corruption that you would find in any district, but which are being highlighted in this district because of 1) intense political battles, and 2) having an extraordinarily high level of oversight?
IOW, it’s possible that absent the state underfunding issue, this district would be pretty much unremarkable.
OTOH, the counterclaim is that the alternative locations for special ed services are both more comfortable for the kids and also - according to the BOE - cost the district no more money than the in-house services. (If this is correct, then you really have to wonder about the motivations of those who persist in making this an issue, and you wonder if their thinking is that some of these parents will withdraw their kids from special-ed entirely rather than send them in-house, thus saving money from the budget for things like marching bands etc.)