Israel approves controversial loyalty oath

[Gil Hamilton]

What I'm trying to get across is that "Jew", as used in this context, is a mix between an ethicity and a religion - you can be a Jew by birth, and remain so whether or not you follow the eligion; alternatively, you can convert into the religion, at which point you automatically become part of the Jewish ethnic group.

Then it is NOT an ethnic thing, it is a religious thing. You just claimed that this wasn't, then you claim that the only way to become a Jew is to convert to the religion. That makes my original point correct, that notion of a Jewish state is a religious one primarily. You can't have it both ways, claiming that the thing is secular, but require people to convert to a religion in order to join.

[Rogue 9]

I would just like to point out that all this hyperventilating is jumping the gun anyway; it passed the Cabinet, not the Knesset, and is not (yet?) law.

[eyl]

What I'm trying to get across is that "Jew", as used in this context, is a mix between an ethicity and a religion - you can be a Jew by birth, and remain so whether or not you follow the eligion; alternatively, you can convert into the religion, at which point you automatically become part of the Jewish ethnic group.

Then it is NOT an ethnic thing, it is a religious thing. You just claimed that this wasn't, then you claim that the only way to become a Jew is to convert to the religion. That makes my original point correct, that notion of a Jewish state is a religious one primarily. You can't have it both ways, claiming that the thing is secular, but require people to convert to a religion in order to join.

You're problem is that you're assuming that the Jewish ethnicity and Judaism the religion are two entirely seperate concepts.

Under normal definitions, you can't join an ethnic group period (except perhaps by adoption in some cases). In this case, the ethnic group known as Jews has a religion associated with it, and it's possible to join the ethnicity by joining the religion. Nevertheless, the notion of a Jewish state, at least as most people regards it, refers to Jews by ethnicity, regardless of whether you belong to that ethnic group by birth (in which case it doesn't matter if you're religious or not) or by conversion into the religion.

[Molyneux]

What I'm trying to get across is that "Jew", as used in this context, is a mix between an ethicity and a religion - you can be a Jew by birth, and remain so whether or not you follow the eligion; alternatively, you can convert into the religion, at which point you automatically become part of the Jewish ethnic group.

Then it is NOT an ethnic thing, it is a religious thing. You just claimed that this wasn't, then you claim that the only way to become a Jew is to convert to the religion. That makes my original point correct, that notion of a Jewish state is a religious one primarily. You can't have it both ways, claiming that the thing is secular, but require people to convert to a religion in order to join.

You're problem is that you're assuming that the Jewish ethnicity and Judaism the religion are two entirely seperate concepts.

Under normal definitions, you can't join an ethnic group period (except perhaps by adoption in some cases). In this case, the ethnic group known as Jews has a religion associated with it, and it's possible to join the ethnicity by joining the religion. Nevertheless, the notion of a Jewish state, at least as most people regards it, refers to Jews by ethnicity, regardless of whether you belong to that ethnic group by birth (in which case it doesn't matter if you're religious or not) or by conversion into the religion.

I would say more that it's a religious group that is trying real hard to become an ethnicity - and has to some extent succeeded, given the level of isolation in breeding between Jews and non-Jews up until these past few decades. Self-isolating the group leads to divergence from the non-Jewish population over time.

[eyl]

I would say more that it's a religious group that is trying real hard to become an ethnicity - and has to some extent succeeded, given the level of isolation in breeding between Jews and non-Jews up until these past few decades. Self-isolating the group leads to divergence from the non-Jewish population over time.

Wrong tense - said "trying" took part a long time in the past, it's pretty much established that way by now.

In terms of a Venn diagram, think of the Jewish ethnic group as being a union of the intersecting sets "Jews by blood" and "Jews by religion" (that's an oversimplification, of course)

[Soldier of Entropy]

Conservative Jews, like the ones who made the policy, expressly DON'T think that someone who isn't born into it can ever BECOME Jewish.

Source this, please. I'm going to guess that you mean 'conservative' not 'Conservative' (Conservative with a capitol C is a specific subgroup of Judaism which, depending on congregation, actually tends to range from center-left to center-right). However, I have never heard of any non-extremely ludicrous fringe group (or, for that matter, even any of those) that says that sufficient study of the religion, introspection, and the proper rituals are not enough to make one Jewish. Now, different groups may say that following the procedures of a more permissive group is insufficient, and regardless of group, the conversion process is almost certain to be far, far longer than that of a 'belief->salvation' religion such as Christianity, but there will still be a means of conversion.

[Gil Hamilton]

You're problem is that you're assuming that the Jewish ethnicity and Judaism the religion are two entirely seperate concepts.

Under normal definitions, you can't join an ethnic group period (except perhaps by adoption in some cases). In this case, the ethnic group known as Jews has a religion associated with it, and it's possible to join the ethnicity by joining the religion. Nevertheless, the notion of a Jewish state, at least as most people regards it, refers to Jews by ethnicity, regardless of whether you belong to that ethnic group by birth (in which case it doesn't matter if you're religious or not) or by conversion into the religion.

Of course ethnicity and religion are seperate concepts. Ethnicity is derived from descent, that is, a group of people from a common heritage, language, and culture. A religion is a codified set of beliefs in the worship of a god or gods. Are not Sephardic jews, Ashkenazi jews, and Mizrahi jews all part of separate ethnic groups, but all part of the same basic religion? If what you are saying is true, then the mere act of being Jewish automatically makes them part of the same ethnic group, but that is clearly not true.

Besides, you yourself mentioned marriage in Israel. If Jewish here doesn't refer to the religion, why is there no provision in the Jewish state for marriage, a legal contract between two individuals by the government, have to go through the religious institution and be to Orthodox standards? Clearly, "Jewish" means "religiously Jewish" there, not "ethnic". You would think the Jewish State, if it merely refered to the "ethnicity", would have some provision for ethnic Jews to marry who aren't part of the religion, but it does not.

[Cecelia5578]

That is not true of being Jewish. Conservative Jews, like the ones who made the policy, expressly DON'T think that someone who isn't born into it can ever BECOME Jewish.

I know of no Jewish sect throughout history, wherever on the spectrum of orthodoxy, that has ever said that its impossible to convert to Judaism. Now, the Orthodox, for example, may not recognize conversions performed in Reform Judaism, but they still admit that its possible to be validly converted by an Orthodox rabbi.

[eyl]

Of course ethnicity and religion are seperate concepts. Ethnicity is derived from descent, that is, a group of people from a common heritage, language, and culture. A religion is a codified set of beliefs in the worship of a god or gods. Are not Sephardic jews, Ashkenazi jews, and Mizrahi jews all part of separate ethnic groups, but all part of the same basic religion? If what you are saying is true, then the mere act of being Jewish automatically makes them part of the same ethnic group, but that is clearly not true.

By your definition, atheist (including those who never held any religious beliefs, not jsut religious "drop-outs") Jews shouldn't exist. At the very least, they shouldn't be counted as Jews - but they are, even by religious Jews.

Besides, you yourself mentioned marriage in Israel. If Jewish here doesn't refer to the religion, why is there no provision in the Jewish state for marriage, a legal contract between two individuals by the government, have to go through the religious institution and be to Orthodox standards? Clearly, "Jewish" means "religiously Jewish" there, not "ethnic". You would think the Jewish State, if it merely refered to the "ethnicity", would have some provision for ethnic Jews to marry who aren't part of the religion, but it does not.

Well, first of all, we were talking about the frame of reference of the framers of the law in the OP - as one of the party in question's campaign promises is to enable legal marraige, obviously they don't equate Jewishness with the religion.

What I'm trying to get across is that Jewish ethnicity* and religion are intertwined to a great degree, but they do not mean the same thing. Bear in mind that most of the founders of Israel were not religious - the lack of civil marriage in Israel is largely due to coalitional deal-making with the religious political groups ever since the state was established. Said groups believe that all Jews should be also be religious, thus their insistence on only a religious ceremony being available - but they don't consider that all Jews are religious. Also consider that if a Jewish woman converts to, say, Christianity, her subsequent children will still be considered Jews even by said religious groups - again, something which shouldn't happen if "Jewish" is just a religion.

*Since it's possible to join the Jewish group, "ethnicity" is perhaps not the most accurate term - but I don't know of a better one (since it certainly isn't "Religion") and whatever the formal definition, Jews can usually be considered an ethnic group for practical purposes.

[Gil Hamilton]

By your definition, atheist (including those who never held any religious beliefs, not jsut religious "drop-outs") Jews shouldn't exist. At the very least, they shouldn't be counted as Jews - but they are, even by religious Jews.

How can there be? That's the same as saying there are athiest Catholics. I'm sure there are athiest Ashkenazim, for example, but they aren't part of the Jewish religion. A religion is the organized and codified worship of a God or Gods, with Judaism worshipping a particular Abrahamic god. If the individuals in question don't happen to worship that God, then they aren't Jews and more than someone who doesn't venerate the Pope and Jesus can be a Catholic.

Well, first of all, we were talking about the frame of reference of the framers of the law in the OP - as one of the party in question's campaign promises is to enable legal marraige, obviously they don't equate Jewishness with the religion.

What I'm trying to get across is that Jewish ethnicity* and religion are intertwined to a great degree, but they do not mean the same thing. Bear in mind that most of the founders of Israel were not religious - the lack of civil marriage in Israel is largely due to coalitional deal-making with the religious political groups ever since the state was established. Said groups believe that all Jews should be also be religious, thus their insistence on only a religious ceremony being available - but they don't consider that all Jews are religious. Also consider that if a Jewish woman converts to, say, Christianity, her subsequent children will still be considered Jews even by said religious groups - again, something which shouldn't happen if "Jewish" is just a religion.

*Since it's possible to join the Jewish group, "ethnicity" is perhaps not the most accurate term - but I don't know of a better one (since it certainly isn't "Religion") and whatever the formal definition, Jews can usually be considered an ethnic group for practical purposes.

And the state acquiesed. You claim that that is deal making, but the results are the same, they made was should be a civil matter entirely under the auspices of the religion. That is defining Jewishness in terms of the religion. If Jewish meant an ethnicity, then those athiests you are claiming are Jews wouldn't have to meet Orthodox standards in order to enter into a legal contract (marriage) with another person, would they?

That's the thing here, you are claiming that under the rules, even those people who leave the religion are Jews, that they can be athiest Jews, but those rules are from the religion itself. You can't claim "The ethnicity and religion are seperate, because the religious definiton of what ethnicity is says so!" That only applies to internal logic of the Jewish system, not necessarily to reality. I can't define myself to be my own ethnicity, because my own internal rules say so, I have to actually meet the agreed upon definition.

[Soldier of Entropy]

Now you're just nitpicking. I agree that it is more proper for an 'ethnic Jew' to say that they are ethnically Ashkenazi, Sephardi, or Mizrahi (or Ethiopian Jewish, or that delectably Jewish group from India, etc etc.), but all that means is that 'ethnically Jewish' refers to a gestalt of those groups. What's so terrible about that?

[Gil Hamilton]

Now you're just nitpicking. I agree that it is more proper for an 'ethnic Jew' to say that they are ethnically Ashkenazi, Sephardi, or Mizrahi (or Ethiopian Jewish, or that delectably Jewish group from India, etc etc.), but all that means is that 'ethnically Jewish' refers to a gestalt of those groups. What's so terrible about that?

Because the term Jewish State has real consequences. If Israel is defined as a Jewish state, then it is attaching itself to the religion and leads to more tension and conflict than it would if Israel was formally a secular state. The marriage thing is just one consequence of that. This loyalty oath is another, that you have people swearing loyalty to the state in its religious capacity, which is naturally not going to be acceptable for very many people who aren't in the religion (I'm sure part of this "loyalty oath" thing actually is it being an F-You to muslims who live in Israel).

Trying to dress it up as an ethnic group is attempting to confound that, as though the claim (which Purnell made during this thread, which I disagree with) that states exist to serve an ethnic group ultimately (true or not) applies and is valid for Israel. As "Jew" isn't an ethnic group, that doesn't apply. You guys said it yourself, you've got to convert to the religion to become a Jew, which means the religion is inseperable. Even if someone falls off the religious bus and becomes an athiest or something, it was the religion in the first place that got them there. This is NOT the same thing as an ethnicity. You can be Spanish without you or your ancestors ever being Catholic, even though most Spaniards are Catholic and up till recently, Catholicism was the official religion of Spain (now its officially secular). You don't have to have Anglican parents to be English, nor have to study with a vicar to be English. But you can't be a Jew without some religious descent or else by hard work via a rabbi to get you into the religion to become what you are declaring to be an ethnicity.

Israel COULD HAVE from the get go been a secular state, and even still had a healthy amount of nationalism (France manages, the US manages), but it did not. Even the speech that David Ben-Gurion gave dedicating the state of Israel is covered in religious language. Face it, when the phrase Jewish State is said, it's religious, not any sort of ethnic, because even by the admission of people in the thread, the religion is inseperable from the group.

[eyl]

Now you're just nitpicking. I agree that it is more proper for an 'ethnic Jew' to say that they are ethnically Ashkenazi, Sephardi, or Mizrahi (or Ethiopian Jewish, or that delectably Jewish group from India, etc etc.), but all that means is that 'ethnically Jewish' refers to a gestalt of those groups. What's so terrible about that?

Because the term Jewish State has real consequences. If Israel is defined as a Jewish state, then it is attaching itself to the religion and leads to more tension and conflict than it would if Israel was formally a secular state. The marriage thing is just one consequence of that. This loyalty oath is another, that you have people swearing loyalty to the state in its religious capacity, which is naturally not going to be acceptable for very many people who aren't in the religion (I'm sure part of this "loyalty oath" thing actually is it being an F-You to muslims who live in Israel).

Trying to dress it up as an ethnic group is attempting to confound that, as though the claim (which Purnell made during this thread, which I disagree with) that states exist to serve an ethnic group ultimately (true or not) applies and is valid for Israel. As "Jew" isn't an ethnic group, that doesn't apply. You guys said it yourself, you've got to convert to the religion to become a Jew, which means the religion is inseperable. Even if someone falls off the religious bus and becomes an athiest or something, it was the religion in the first place that got them there. This is NOT the same thing as an ethnicity. You can be Spanish without you or your ancestors ever being Catholic, even though most Spaniards are Catholic and up till recently, Catholicism was the official religion of Spain (now its officially secular). You don't have to have Anglican parents to be English, nor have to study with a vicar to be English. But you can't be a Jew without some religious descent or else by hard work via a rabbi to get you into the religion to become what you are declaring to be an ethnicity.

Israel COULD HAVE from the get go been a secular state, and even still had a healthy amount of nationalism (France manages, the US manages), but it did not. Even the speech that David Ben-Gurion gave dedicating the state of Israel is covered in religious language. Face it, when the phrase Jewish State is said, it's religious, not any sort of ethnic, because even by the admission of people in the thread, the religion is inseperable from the group.

Again, thoughm can you belong to a religion solely because your parents belonged to the religion, even while you yourself follow a different creed? Is the Muslim son of Christian parents considered Christian? how about three generations down the line?

The point I'm trying to convey isn't that Judaism and Jewish ethnicity are entirely seperate concepts, but rather that Jews have aspects of both and not everyone fits into both categories. As I said, "ethnic group" may be a misnomer, but defining it solely as a religion doesn't fit either.

How can there be? That's the same as saying there are athiest Catholics. I'm sure there are athiest Ashkenazim, for example, but they aren't part of the Jewish religion. A religion is the organized and codified worship of a God or Gods, with Judaism worshipping a particular Abrahamic god. If the individuals in question don't happen to worship that God, then they aren't Jews and more than someone who doesn't venerate the Pope and Jesus can be a Catholic.

Exept that they do exist and do consider themselves to be Jewish (in addition to being Ashkenazim or whatever, which are considered as subgroups of Jews, not individual groups in and of themselves).

[eyl]

Update to the OP:

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu instructed Justice Minister Ya'akov Ne'eman on Monday to prepare a new bill extending the loyalty oath, which is currently aimed at non-Jews, to include Jewish immigrants as well.

"We expect that every person wishing to become an Israeli citizen recognize Israel as a Jewish and democratic state," Netanyahu said on Monday evening.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu speaking at the opening of the Knesset’s winter session on October 11, 2010.

"There is broad approval among the Israeli public regarding the Jewish and democratic identity of Israel, and that is not incidental. The state of Israel was founded as the sovereign state of the Jewish people and as a democratic state in which all its citizens – Jews and non-Jews alike – enjoy equal rights. Any person wishing to become an Israeli citizen must recognize these two key principals."

Last week, cabinet ministers approved by a majority vote a controversial amendment to the Citizenship Law which would require every non-Jew wishing to become a citizen of Israel to pledge loyalty to "the State of Israel as a Jewish and democratic state."

At the time, Ne'eman suggested rewording the draft of the proposed loyalty oath to include Jews and non-Jews alike.

On Monday, Netanyahu has decided to have Ne'eman draft a proposal wherein Jewish immigrants who are granted citizenship under the Law of Return to also be required to say the loyalty oath.

According to sources close to the prime minister, Netanyahu has not changed his stance on the bill. Apparently, Netanyahu already showed his support of this addition to the bill during the cabinet meeting in which the initial loyalty oath bill was approved.

Following Diaspora Minister Yuli Edelstein's hesitations on the bill, Netanyahu asked Ne'eman during the meeting to examine the option of extending the loyalty oath to Jews as well.

In response to Netanyahu's request, Ahmed Tibi, Chairman of the United Arab List-Ta’al,
said "the idea in its original form is bad."

"There is no place for this version, not for Jews or for Arabs, unless someone feels the need to give in to Lieberman's whims or to battle his fascism," said Tibi. "Forcing a principal ethical identity on Jews and Arabs as one is completely unnecessary. It is redundant and is an attempt to enforce an ideology which Jews and Arabs need to adamantly oppose."


Last week, leader of the opposition and Kadima chairwoman Tzipi Livni condemned the loyalty oath bill, calling it "politics at its worst."

Hadash chairman Mohammed Barakeh blamed Netanyahu and Barak for supporting and promoting "mega-racist legislation."

Israeli Arab MK Talab al-Sana said that "the amendment is a serious blow to democracy and will cause the exclusion of 20 percent of the country's citizens... [It] will situate Israel as the successor of Apartheid-era South Africa."

Doesn't really make it better, but maybe slightly less worse.

[Darth Yan]

This isn't like other instances of ethnic discrimination, like, say, the German government aiming to murder all the Jews. Because in this case, the ethnic group being targeted actually does include a large number of members who want to destroy Israel.

It's easy for us in Europe and America to condemn the Israeli attitude; no one is blowing up OUR nightclubs and cafes.

One problem; it's saying that you must accept that it is a jewish state, making non jews second class citizens in all but name. Most jews are not in favor of a jews only state. To all the people trying to assimilate it's essentially a massive "Fuck you". And the number of palestinians killed by israelis far exeeds the amount of israelis killed by palestinians. And do you really think all palestinains are terrorists, or that there are other ways to stop the terrorism (such as, hmmm I don't know, actually giving them a legitimate deal rather then a one sided bantustan?) No offense, but you do come across as somewhat racist.