Eh, Argent, of course it makes no sense at all. There is absolutely no rational way to spin that quote into bigotry let alone a belief that anybody is worthless garbage.
Give it up, Jake.
Do you feel liberals who refuse to date conservatives are bigots?
Also, how about hot women who refuse to date ugly men or vice versa?
You know better than that. Unlike many other religions, Jews don’t believe non-Jews are going to hell or are treated any differently after death, are less loved by God, or any kind of stuff you are assuming.
If one believes in God, it comes with the territory. I believe your kids are being raised Catholic, right? If you refused this, what would have happened?
Maybe they’re just not that into her.
Can we lay off with the religious angle? How many Jews in this thread are very religious?
Can non-religious Jews, Indians, Italians, Greeks, etc, who would like it if their kids marry their own ethnicity please make yourself known?
As I said before, this is more than just about religion, but from all the comments in this thread it looks like all the Jews of the SDMB suddenly became very devout, at least in order to justify the “I will only marry a Jew” statement.
:rolleyes:
I would have liked to marry another Jew. I tried hard enough. And I am far from devout. It is a cultural thing, and not a deal breaker, though it might have been a lot more so in a different family. My aunt married a Catholic in the 1930s, and my grandfather, who I think was actually an atheist, was fine with it. But that was pretty rare back then.
Since so many secular Jews don’t have a problem with it, I don’t see how you can understand where this woman was coming from without considering religion. It has nothing to do with pretending to be devout. Hardly anyone is athier than me, but people do believe, and I think it is fine to make these decisions in light of these beliefs.
I once said I wouldn’t marry a woman with an IQ lower than 140.
My aunt said “Get two 70s.”
Best advice in the thread.
Are you saying that no secular Jews are adamant about marrying only Jews? From other nationalities, I see that some secular people from those nationalities/ethnicities want to only marry within their group and are adamant about it, even though they are not religious.
If there are secular Jews who are adamant about marrying only Jews, then are they “worse”/more bigoted than religious Jews who are adamant about marrying only Jews?
If no Jew, secular or religious, can be considered bigoted for being adamant about marrying only Jews, then why is this thread only focusing on the religious reasons?
Why aren’t people also defending the secular Jews who feel this way. Keep in mind that most arguments in support of secular Jews being adamant about this carry over to secular people from any other nationality/ethnicity who feel similarly (Except of course “have been persecuted for centuries and suffered the Holocaust”)
I thought I was. I have no problem defending either of the secular Jews I dated in college who ultimately were uncomfortable with both the fact I was religious AND the fact I didn’t keep kosher. I believe, personally, that differences in dietary restrictions alone are good enough reason to not want to marry a class of people, be that class Gentiles or Carnivores.
Is wanting to only marry someone who turns you on a form of bigotry?
What if only women with a certain characteristic turn you on? Are you then a bigot against all women who don’t have it? Does that mean you consider them “worthless garbage?”
Diogenes, what was it about your wife that made you want to marry her? Identify those things - then ask yourself, do you consider all the women who don’t have them to be worthless garbage?
If you had just said simply that you thought it was “small minded” to only want to marry someone from your culture, I wouldn’t have even thought twice about your post. I can understand that viewpoint, though I don’t agree with it. But it was your contention - a very large leap indeed - that people who only want to marry individuals from their own cultural background view everyone not from that background as “worthless garbage.” With those two very strong words you went from rational into irrational territory.
Do that often enough and you get frequent “flyer” miles.
Heck, I’m only ever willing to date or marry men. And right now, I’m only willing to date and marry one man. If being at all selective about characteristics makes someone a bigot, I don’t see how marriage isn’t inherently bigoted.
Do you honestly not see the flaw in this “Logic”?
Joe Bookkeeper is only ever willing to work for business owners. And right now, he is only willing to work for one business person. Therefore if Joe Bookkeeper refuses to work for Chicks who own their own business, he is not bigoted.
After all if being at all selective about characteristics makes someone a bigot, I don’t see how being a bookkeeper isn’t inherently bigoted.
Jim Investor is only ever willing to give loans to people who are employed. And right now, he is only willing to give a loan to one person. Therefore if
Jim Investor refuses to give loans to a * Kikes *who is employed, he is not bigoted.
After all if being at all selective about characteristics makes someone a bigot, I don’t see how being an investor isn’t inherently bigoted.
Jane Surgeon is only ever willing to operate on *people *who require liver transplants. And right now, she is only willing to operate one person. Therefore if Jane Surgeon refuses to operate on a *Nigger *who requires a liver transplant, she is not bigoted.
After all if being at all selective about characteristics makes someone a bigot, I don’t see how being a surgeon isn’t inherently bigoted.
Everybody has relevantcriteria that they set for everything all the time. That does not mean that extending those criteria to encompasses irrelevant racial and religious groups is anything less than bigoted.
Refusing to marry someone because you do not find them sexually attractive or because you are unable to reproduce with them is a relevant selection criteria because sex and reproduction are integral parts of marriage. Refusing to give someone a loan because they have no stable income is a relevant criterion because sufficient income to repay the loan is re integral part of the loan arrangement.
Refusing to marry someone because they are a certain race is not a relevant selection criteria because race is not an integral part of marriage. Refusing to give someone a loan because they are a certain religion is not a relevant selection criteria because race is not an integral part of a loan arrangement.
So yeah, if you refuse to marry someone simply because they are Jewish you are bigoted.
Reproduction is an integral part of marriage? I’m sure all of the gay and lesbian couples will be very surprised to hear that. As will all of the heterosexual couples who choose to be childless.
The term “bigoted” here is getting twisted and distorted to the point where it has no meaning left.
:rolleyes:
Yes, and transportation is an integral part of automobile design. So all those cars that are in private collections and museums that are never driven are therefore not automobiles.
Because of course “integral” means that it pertains in 100% of instances.
Oh hang on, no it doesn’t. Integral means “inherent part of the entire package”.
“A person who is intolerant of any differing creed, belief, or opinion.”
If I will not tolerate marriage to a person of a differing creed or belief, what am I?
What? Everyone who you don’t think would be a good marriage partner is worthless garbage? Gosh, how you must hate everyone in the world who isn’t a straight woman you’re attracted to!
I know many people who I don’t want to marry but who I value much more than “worthless garbage”. I call them “friends” and “acquaintances” and “family”.
Seriously, China Town.
Dio has staked out a hill to die on and that’s the final word on the subject.
Most folks will notice the rather sloppy sleight of hand going on there. In your example, someone is not at all intolerant of different creeds, beliefs, or opinions. Indeed, there’s no evidence provided that they wouldn’t like them, be friends with them, break bread with them, etc…
You’ve created your own idiosyncratic classification of “tolerant of marriage to” in order to absolutely twist the concept of bigotry in order to fit a point you were trying to make otherwise, but could not.
But being tolerant of someone’s differences does not mean that you would marry them and raise children with them. Straight people are not bigoted against and intolerant of their same gender, gays are not bigoted against and intolerant of the opposite gender. That you’ve formulated a rationalization in which virtually everybody on the planet is a diehard bigot and virulently intolerant of half of the known world? It just shows how utterly absurd your claims are.
And no, they don’t become any less absurd if you create your own arbitrary and subjective criteria of what you believe is “relevant” in marriage partners and then try to demand that others share the same criteria when it comes to committing to a lifetime with another person and having/raising children with them.
You can’t claim that correct claims are logical “flaws” and then provide utter bullshit like that. The discussion so far has centered on people having qualifications that they require for marrying someone and having children with them. I think most of us are clear on the fact that marriage and having babies is slightly different than providing medical services, investing, or being an employee. That you’re even comparing them, again, shows how desperately your argument is attempting to bend what’s reasonable into what’s truly surreally nonsensical in order to make a point that’s unsupportable.
Even with that being the case, your examples are disingenuous. None of the examples anybody else has been discussing so far were “I hate blacks, so I won’t marry them” but “I prefer people who have these qualities, so those are the people I want to marry.” The difference is so massively obvious that one wonders how people keep missing it.
If someone says “I am really in the mood for pizza tonight” do you normally respond “Why do you have such an irrational and all consuming hatred for burgers?!?”
A preference for certain qualities in someone who you commit to spend the rest of your natural life with, and raise children with, is hardly beyond the pale.
One wonders what sort of randomized lottery system the “marriage is bigotry!” crowd would have to accept to get rid of the vile “bigotry” of personal preference in mates.
Do you have some sort of objective metric designed to invalidate people’s personal preferences on who they will marry and create/raise children with, or do you just use the powers of your own subjective opinions to determine what’s a valid and “relevant” set of criteria for someone looking for a mate, and what they should be ashamed of?
Someone who wants to marry someone who’s into fitness and eating right, they are bigot? Someone who likes the outdoors and wants someone who is also into camping and hiking and stuff, they a bigot too? Someone who finds redheads sexy, bigot? Someone who really likes athletic body types and is only sexually attracted to people with a ‘swimmer’s build’, they a bigot fixated on non-relevant details? Or do you simply declare that it’s “bigoted” when someone enjoys being with people who have a similar upbringing to them, were raised in similar traditions, have the same thoughts/opinions/beliefs about issues of cosmic significance, then it’s just fucking awful?
Even ignoring the disingenuous shift you’ve just performed from having a positive list of traits that you require in a mate to having a negative list of races who you don’t like, and the fact that Jews in specific allow conversion, utterly eliminating the “wrong race” claim you’ve using, this still makes no sense. The discussion has not been about refusing to marry people because they come from one race, but only wanting to marry people with very specific traits. And no, you don’t get to decide what is or should be relevant to someone else when they decide who to spend the rest of their life with and what sort of a household their children should be raised in.
It’s the very, very obvious difference between “Christianity is very important to me and I’d want my children raised by two committed, strong Christian parents.” and “I hate Jews”. That you’re conflating the two concepts is beyond bizarre.
**Finn **vs. Dio.
Unstoppable force, meet immovable object.