| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"David OLantern" |
| Date: |
19 Nov 2003 12:07:34 PM |
| Object: |
Proof That "Missionizing" Idiots Abound |
[I have no idea where this guy's posting from, but I took out
the Buddhist, Hindu and Kibological newsgroups because those
newsgroups are not about the "*Western* religious traditions."
I added alt.atheism, whose denizens might exceed me in brain-
power today, and set followups to MY newsgroup, alt.thedavid.]
On Wed, 19 Nov 2003, Baruch Gee wrote:
[...]
Religion is a fact of life.
That's what they used to say about TB, syphilis and bubonic plague.
Deal with it or find another planet to live on.
Funny, we eventually learned to *cure* TB, syphilis and the plague.
[...]
It is also a fact that far more people believe in some form of
religion than don't, so you are in the minority.
So? Young Baruch, people with Jewish first names are in the minority
among people who "believe in some form of religion." If you're not
a Sunni Muslim you'd better convert right away. (Not Shi'ite, they
are in the minority among the world's majority religion.)
"The majority rules! Praise Allah or die (after we rape your mother
in front of you, which we might do anyway)!"
Rejecters of religion are often, in fact, the safe beneficiaries
of Western religious traditions, which makes their spoutings
complete hypocrisy.
I see, you're enrolled in the Rush Limbaugh School of Theology.
Before you start prescribing for the rest of us, perhaps you'd
better reduce your own dosage enough to *think* a little.
One thing you conveniently forget to mention is that, in the world
dominated by your "Western religion traditions," scientists whose
findings ran contrary the orthodox dogma of the day were burned at
the stake. That is, unless Gallileo acknowledged that he was "the
safe beneficiary of Western religious traditions," they'd have tied
him to a big pole set in the ground, atop a big pile of flammables,
and set the pile on fire. After a few minutes the fat of the still-
living burning human being starts to melt and then catches fire.
In "the West" they quit burning people alive for "heresy" because
people who did not share your "religious traditions" kept at it,
dying in some cases by the thousands, until we eventually became
strong enough to overawe the murderous religious tyrants. So you,
poor Baruch, are the direct beneficiary of *those* traditions.
By the way, Baruch, there's a famous person alive today who thinks
like you do and who is fighting to make the whole world a place you
can understand. His name is Osama bin Laden.
--
Pointlessly incomprehensible.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
(C) `TheDavid^TM' 2003 | David, P.O. Box 21403, Louisville, KY 40221
.
|
|
| User: "Baruch Gee" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof That "Missionizing" Idiots Abound |
19 Nov 2003 06:13:36 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 19 Nov 2003, Baruch Gee wrote:
Religion is a fact of life.
That's what they used to say about TB, syphilis and bubonic plague.
Deal with it or find another planet to live on.
Funny, we eventually learned to *cure* TB, syphilis and the plague.
COMMENT ONE: Hmm, so by this argument all religious people and leaders
(priests, rabbis or pastors) are a 'disease' for which you have a
'cure'. What's the medicine by which you will wipe out the majority of
the world's population, Doc? It sounds suspiciously like a 'Final
Solution' to me.
It is also a fact that far more people believe in some form of
religion than don't, so you are in the minority.
So? Young Baruch, people with Jewish first names are in the minority
among people who "believe in some form of religion." If you're not
a Sunni Muslim you'd better convert right away. (Not Shi'ite, they
are in the minority among the world's majority religion.)
"The majority rules! Praise Allah or die (after we rape your mother
in front of you, which we might do anyway)!"
COMMENT TWO: I am sorry to have to interrupt your intense flow of
verbal self-stimulation, but what on earth are you talking about?
First of all, I am a man of over fifty years old, so 'Young Baruch'
(while flattering) is inaccurate. Second of all, I don't understand a
word of this Islamic fantasy. I take it that you have been reading too
many underground comics. You should get out more.
By the way, your Mom is quite safe: 'Honour thy father and thy
mother.'
Rejecters of religion are often, in fact, the safe beneficiaries
of Western religious traditions, which makes their spoutings
complete hypocrisy.
I see, you're enrolled in the Rush Limbaugh School of Theology.
Before you start prescribing for the rest of us, perhaps you'd
better reduce your own dosage enough to *think* a little.
COMMENT THREE: The only rush here appears to be the one that you are
giving yourself. You seem very angry that someone finds your
philosophical position unimpressive. In my view, there is a good
chance that what really irritates you is that we religionists don't
curl up and die with horror at our own self-evident irrelevance. Could
it then be that you haven't got all the answers?
One thing you conveniently forget to mention is that, in the world
dominated by your "Western religion traditions," scientists whose
findings ran contrary the orthodox dogma of the day were burned at
the stake. That is, unless Gallileo acknowledged that he was "the
safe beneficiary of Western religious traditions," they'd have tied
him to a big pole set in the ground, atop a big pile of flammables,
and set the pile on fire. After a few minutes the fat of the still-
living burning human being starts to melt and then catches fire.
COMMENT FOUR: I am well aware that errors and crimes are committed by
religious people. I guess that a number of atheists do the same, so
getting rid of us would hardly bring in the earthly paradise. I
suspect that your intolerance would have sounded quite familiar to the
perpetrators of such crimes, which I actually deplore. I do wonder
where you read the gory detail above.
In "the West" they quit burning people alive for "heresy" because
people who did not share your "religious traditions" kept at it,
dying in some cases by the thousands, until we eventually became
strong enough to overawe the murderous religious tyrants. So you,
poor Baruch, are the direct beneficiary of *those* traditions.
COMMENT FIVE: From improved industrial conditions to the abolition of
slavery, you will find religious people well to the fore. Generally,
love was their aim, not hate. Pardon me, but that seems to be coming
more from your own intolerant direction.
By the way, Baruch, there's a famous person alive today who thinks
like you do and who is fighting to make the whole world a place you
can understand. His name is Osama bin Laden.
COMMENT SIX:
In the midst of your verbal distribe you might stop to consider that
it is, in fact, you that wishes to stifle opinion. In the world you
inhabit, the religious majority are untidy. In my world, atheists live
freely and maybe one day waken up to a spiritual dimension and know
that there is Someone out there Who is bigger than their own
uninformed egos.
Peace,
Baruch Gee.
.
|
|
|
| User: "mephisto" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof That "Missionizing" Idiots Abound |
19 Nov 2003 10:58:23 PM |
|
|
Baruch Gee wrote:
In my world, atheists live
freely and maybe one day waken up to a spiritual dimension and know
that there is Someone out there Who is bigger than their own
uninformed egos.
Rubbish. Nothing is bigger than an uninformed ego.
.
|
|
|
| User: "David OLantern" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof That "Missionizing" Idiots Abound |
19 Nov 2003 11:10:32 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 20 Nov 2003, mephisto wrote:
Baruch Gee wrote:
In my world, atheists live
freely and maybe one day waken up to a spiritual dimension and know
that there is Someone out there Who is bigger than their own
uninformed egos.
Rubbish. Nothing is bigger than an uninformed ego.
And he should know. He married one!
D.
--
Pointlessly incomprehensible.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
(C) `TheDavid^TM' 2003 | David, P.O. Box 21403, Louisville, KY 40221
.
|
|
|
| User: "mephisto" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof That "Missionizing" Idiots Abound |
20 Nov 2003 01:23:11 AM |
|
|
David O'Lantern wrote:
On Thu, 20 Nov 2003, mephisto wrote:
Baruch Gee wrote:
In my world, atheists live
freely and maybe one day waken up to a spiritual dimension and know
that there is Someone out there Who is bigger than their own
uninformed egos.
Rubbish. Nothing is bigger than an uninformed ego.
And he should know. He married one!
You're not my type.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "jonah thomas" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof That "Missionizing" Idiots Abound |
20 Nov 2003 12:46:53 PM |
|
|
Baruch Gee wrote:
Religion is a fact of life.
That's what they used to say about TB, syphilis and bubonic plague.
Deal with it or find another planet to live on.
Funny, we eventually learned to *cure* TB, syphilis and the plague.
COMMENT ONE: Hmm, so by this argument all religious people and leaders
(priests, rabbis or pastors) are a 'disease' for which you have a
'cure'. What's the medicine by which you will wipe out the majority of
the world's population, Doc? It sounds suspiciously like a 'Final
Solution' to me.
He doesn't claim to have a cure for religion. He's making the
comparison that we *used to* consider those diseases merely facts of
life, and then found temporary solutions. Repressed sexuality as a
solution to syphilis didn't work well, but for 40 years or so penicillin
did. So the fact that people consider religion a fact of life that we
all have to accept, is not inevitable. Perhaps someday it might be
curable.
I'm not clear that it would be good for us to cure religion, though.
It's something we evolved with. It might be good for something.
Perhaps when humanity was first evolving there were other populations of
near-humans who were very much like us but who didn't have religion, and
they failed for the lack of it.
One of the big ways that religion has probably changed humanity is by
encouraging symbolic thinking. Anybody who can't keep up with the
symbolism is likely to be thrown out of the group. And anybody who
rejects it is also thrown out. So we can have groups that are large
enough that members don't all know each other by sight, and still they
know who belongs and who doesn't. And they all know what's good for
them and they know how to follow orders that don't make sense to them.
Could anyone pass as roman catholic who hasn't been trained? Hardly.
When I visit catholic churches I always seem to genuflect wrong or
something. (Not that I intended to pass as catholic.) Similarly, it
would take far more to pass as a particular kind of jewish than to just
learn hebrew. Once I talked with an old woman from an obscure
protestant sect who coached me on some of her traditions. You must
always strive to be Christlike. But you can't become Christlike,
implying that you might is far too proud and no good person would imply
that. Though you can occasionally act Christlike through the grace of
God, just never by your own actions. Still you must always strive to do
what you can never ever do. After some time listening to her I decided
that no matter how much of it you'd memorised, you'd never know how to
answer the next question that you hadn't memorised yet. You couldn't
logic it out, you just had to know.
Throughout history people have mistreated those who didn't belong to the
dominant religion, and have ruthlessly suppressed schisms -- except when
the schisms were successful and ruthlessly suppressed the old religions
in regions where they were dominant. All this has doubtless increased
the average intelligence considerably. Probably it has been going on
throughout prehistory too. Probably when language was first being
developed, the people who were worst at speech were sacrificed as
animals. And later, those who didn't understand the creation story well
enough to say it back, were also rejected.
Is this really something we need to be cured of? Sure, it's
inconvenient to smart-alecks who want to mouth off and not suffer any
consequences. But perhaps we have more of those than we need. Maybe
it's important to keep killing the people who are least able to practice
religion -- because those are the stupidest people around. And the ones
who could do it and who refuse even when they're threatened, are people
who have death-wishes.
.
|
|
|
| User: "cindys" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof That "Missionizing" Idiots Abound |
22 Nov 2003 06:09:32 PM |
|
|
"jonah thomas" <j2thomas@cavtel.net> wrote in message
news:MZ7vb.384$Qa7.29022@news.uswest.net...
Could anyone pass as roman catholic who hasn't been trained? Hardly.
When I visit catholic churches I always seem to genuflect wrong or
something. (Not that I intended to pass as catholic.) Similarly, it
would take far more to pass as a particular kind of jewish than to just
learn hebrew.
I don't know what you mean about *passing* for a *particular kind of
Jewish.* There is only one kind of Jewish. And a person is either Jewish or
not.
Best regards,
---Cindy S.
.
|
|
|
| User: "David OLantern" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof That "Missionizing" Idiots Abound |
22 Nov 2003 08:35:53 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 23 Nov 2003, cindys wrote:
[...]
There is only one kind of Jewish.
Which is which? Reform? Conservative? Samaritan? "Orthodox"? Hasidic?
And a person is either Jewish or not.
I forget, is Lisa Bonet's mother Jewish or is it her father? Is
she entitled to Return, or would she have to concert to Rabbanism
first (assuming she doesn't do that already)?
How good a Jew can Ariel Sharon be? His bald head shines on TV,
i.e. no yarmulke or hat. And his close shave can only come from a
*razor* on his face. And what *is* his mother tongue anyway? (We
know Begin's was Polish.)
I agree with you and Ms. Cohen about some things though: Jesus of
Nazareth, if he existed, was not the Jewish messiah nor the Son
of God. And I was circumcised, and I've been around a few kosher
kitchens and could do it myself (with some help and inspiration).
Prove I'm not Jewish, since you're such an expert. We've already
established that I *look* as Jewish as the "leader" of Israel.
D.
--
Pointlessly incomprehensible.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
(C) `TheDavid^TM' 2003 | David, P.O. Box 21403, Louisville, KY 40221
.
|
|
|
| User: "cindys" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof That "Missionizing" Idiots Abound |
22 Nov 2003 10:13:16 PM |
|
|
"David O'Lantern" <thedavid@shell.rawbw.com> wrote in message
news:20031122182055.N88472@shell.rawbw.com...
On Sun, 23 Nov 2003, cindys wrote:
[...]
There is only one kind of Jewish.
Which is which? Reform? Conservative? Samaritan? "Orthodox"? Hasidic?
Yes.
And a person is either Jewish or not.
I forget, is Lisa Bonet's mother Jewish or is it her father? Is
she entitled to Return, or would she have to concert to Rabbanism
first (assuming she doesn't do that already)?
I don't know what "Rabbanism* is. I presume it's an expression you made up.
How good a Jew can Ariel Sharon be? His bald head shines on TV,
i.e. no yarmulke or hat. And his close shave can only come from a
*razor* on his face. And what *is* his mother tongue anyway? (We
know Begin's was Polish.)
I agree with you and Ms. Cohen about some things though: Jesus of
Nazareth, if he existed, was not the Jewish messiah nor the Son
of God. And I was circumcised, and I've been around a few kosher
kitchens and could do it myself (with some help and inspiration).
So what?
Prove I'm not Jewish, since you're such an expert. We've already
established that I *look* as Jewish as the "leader" of Israel.
The fact that you're saying this proves your stupidity. How can one *prove*
whether one is or isn't Jewish on usenet? The way it is proved is through
lineage, and I don't know yours.
Best regards,
---Cindy S.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Susan Cohen" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof That "Missionizing" Idiots Abound |
23 Nov 2003 02:51:46 AM |
|
|
"cindys" <cstein1@rochester.rr.com> wrote in message
news:wtWvb.91793$1N3.66820@twister.nyroc.rr.com...
"David O'Lantern" <thedavid@shell.rawbw.com> wrote in message
news:20031122182055.N88472@shell.rawbw.com...
Prove I'm not Jewish, since you're such an expert. We've already
established that I *look* as Jewish as the "leader" of Israel.
The fact that you're saying this proves your stupidity. How can one
*prove*
whether one is or isn't Jewish on usenet?
Well, plenty of people give it away in their posts.
I'd bet this jerk isn't, tho'.
Susan
The way it is proved is through
lineage, and I don't know yours.
Best regards,
---Cindy S.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "David OLantern" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof That "Missionizing" Idiots Abound |
23 Nov 2003 02:00:45 AM |
|
|
On Sun, 23 Nov 2003, cindys wrote:
[...]
How can one *prove* whether one is or isn't Jewish on usenet?
The way it is proved is through lineage, and I don't know yours.
So the Nazis were right, and Jewishness is a race not a religion?
So how can someone of a Levite father and a Cohen mother who has
"accepted Jesus into his heart" cease being a Jew then? And why
go on about these 613 commandments -- all but 10 of them built as
a fence around the *real* Commandments -- if it's all hereditary?
And is a bad and unobservant Jew better than a pious, gentle and
charitable Gentile? Who would you rather trust your sick mother to?
The more I listen to people like you the gladder I am that we Jews
are not all like you. With Jews so harsh who needs anti-semites?
Unhalachically,
The Beloved of the House of Food
--
Pointlessly incomprehensible.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
(C) `TheDavid^TM' 2003 | David, P.O. Box 21403, Louisville, KY 40221
.
|
|
|
| User: "cindys" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof That "Missionizing" Idiots Abound |
23 Nov 2003 02:49:04 AM |
|
|
"David O'Lantern" <thedavid@shell.rawbw.com> wrote in message
news:20031122235309.X30248@shell.rawbw.com...
On Sun, 23 Nov 2003, cindys wrote:
[...]
How can one *prove* whether one is or isn't Jewish on usenet?
The way it is proved is through lineage, and I don't know yours.
So the Nazis were right, and Jewishness is a race not a religion?
Another projection. In what way is lineage connected with race? Lineage
involves knowing whether your mother and maternal grandmother were Jewish.
It's not about race at all.
So how can someone of a Levite father and a Cohen mother who has
"accepted Jesus into his heart" cease being a Jew then?
He doesn't. Who said he did?
And why
go on about these 613 commandments -- all but 10 of them built as
a fence around the *real* Commandments -- if it's all hereditary?
There are 613 real commandments. And whether a person follows them or not is
not the criterion for defining who is a Jew.
And is a bad and unobservant Jew better than a pious, gentle and
charitable Gentile? Who would you rather trust your sick mother to?
I never said anything at all about whether Jews were better or worse than
gentiles. You are making this up as you go along. You are concocting your
own hateful ideas about what I think, then insisting that your views of what
I think are accurate and going ballistic about it.
The more I listen to people like you the gladder I am that we Jews
are not all like you. With Jews so harsh who needs anti-semites?
I haven't been harsh at all except in your fabricated and convoluted
scenarios. If that chip on your shoulder got any bigger, you would fall
over.
Best regards,
---Cindy S.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Susan Cohen" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof That "Missionizing" Idiots Abound |
23 Nov 2003 02:58:34 AM |
|
|
"cindys" <cstein1@rochester.rr.com> wrote in message
news:4w_vb.132442$ji3.51922@twister.nyroc.rr.com...
"David O'Lantern" <thedavid@shell.rawbw.com> wrote in message
news:20031122235309.X30248@shell.rawbw.com...
On Sun, 23 Nov 2003, cindys wrote:
[...]
How can one *prove* whether one is or isn't Jewish on usenet?
The way it is proved is through lineage, and I don't know yours.
So the Nazis were right, and Jewishness is a race not a religion?
Another projection. In what way is lineage connected with race? Lineage
involves knowing whether your mother and maternal grandmother were Jewish.
It's not about race at all.
So how can someone of a Levite father and a Cohen mother who has
"accepted Jesus into his heart" cease being a Jew then?
He doesn't. Who said he did?
The Reform do - but what a Levite or a Cohen have to do with it I'm sure I
don't know.
And why
go on about these 613 commandments -- all but 10 of them built as
a fence around the *real* Commandments -- if it's all hereditary?
There are 613 real commandments. And whether a person follows them or not
is
not the criterion for defining who is a Jew.
And is a bad and unobservant Jew better than a pious, gentle and
charitable Gentile? Who would you rather trust your sick mother to?
I never said anything at all about whether Jews were better or worse than
gentiles. You are making this up as you go along. You are concocting your
own hateful ideas about what I think, then insisting that your views of
what
I think are accurate and going ballistic about it.
The more I listen to people like you the gladder I am that we Jews
We jews my aunt fanny. He's so full of it - why is it that theyall try the
same stupid trick??
are not all like you. With Jews so harsh who needs anti-semites?
I haven't been harsh at all except in your fabricated and convoluted
scenarios. If that chip on your shoulder got any bigger, you would fall
over.
My suspicion is that the chip is instead of a brain.
Susan
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "David OLantern" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof That "Missionizing" Idiots Abound |
23 Nov 2003 02:17:56 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 23 Nov 2003, cindys wrote:
[...]
Another projection. In what way is lineage connected with race?
Lineage is hereditary. So is race. In common English, as I thought
we're talking here, they're synonyms.
Lineage involves knowing whether your mother and maternal
grandmother were Jewish.
So if your mother was a convert born of a Jewish father and a
non-Jewish mother, and your father was a born "Orthodox" Jew,
and you grew up striving to practice all the 613 Commandments
and even believes in your G_d, you're STILL not a "*real* Jew"?
How many generations of atoning for some guy's "mistake" in
marrying a shiksa does it take to clean the "stain" away? The
Southern honky racists had a one-drop rule of 1/32 "impure";
what's yours? Assuming it's possible to do so, I mean.
(Jonah, can you explain this to me? It *sounds* like whole lines
of mitochondrial descent get summarily lopped off on that basis.)
It's not about race at all.
Whatever you call it, it's surely a VERY elite club.
An elite club I'm too good for, thank you very much.
D.
--
Pointlessly incomprehensible.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
(C) `TheDavid^TM' 2003 | David, P.O. Box 21403, Louisville, KY 40221
.
|
|
|
| User: "cindys" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof That "Missionizing" Idiots Abound |
23 Nov 2003 04:21:33 PM |
|
|
"David O'Lantern" <thedavid@shell.rawbw.com> wrote in message
news:20031123120022.H13442@shell.rawbw.com...
On Sun, 23 Nov 2003, cindys wrote:
[...]
Another projection. In what way is lineage connected with race?
Lineage is hereditary. So is race. In common English, as I thought
we're talking here, they're synonyms.
Except that one cannot change one's race whereas anyone can convert and
become Jewish.
Lineage involves knowing whether your mother and maternal
grandmother were Jewish.
So if your mother was a convert born of a Jewish father and a
non-Jewish mother, and your father was a born "Orthodox" Jew,
and you grew up striving to practice all the 613 Commandments
and even believes in your G_d, you're STILL not a "*real* Jew"?
Correct. Although the scenario you portray is highly unlikely. First of all,
I didn't know there were born *Orthodox* Jews. I thought there were born
*Jews* or born *non-Jews.* Secondly, it is highly unlikely that a Jew who
follows the 613 commandments would marry a non-Jew. Thirdly, even if such a
scenario were to occur, if the son/daughter in this scenario accepted the
yoke of the 613 mitzvot, then he/she would also accept the halachic
requirements for being a Jew and undergo the conversion process.
How many generations of atoning for some guy's "mistake" in
marrying a shiksa does it take to clean the "stain" away?
More fabrications. The only one who is using the word *stain* is you. And it
doesn't take *generations to atone.* There is nothing to atone. If a non-Jew
wants to be Jewish, all he needs to do is convert. The passage of
generations is irrelevant.
The
Southern honky racists had a one-drop rule of 1/32 "impure";
what's yours? Assuming it's possible to do so, I mean.
This is meaningless to Jews. Being Jewish is not a racial thing and is not
based on percentages. One is either Jewish or not.
(Jonah, can you explain this to me? It *sounds* like whole lines
of mitochondrial descent get summarily lopped off on that basis.)
It's not about race at all.
Whatever you call it, it's surely a VERY elite club.
No, it's not elite because anyone can convert and become Jewish. And this is
not the first time I've explained that. Nevertheless, no matter how many
times I say it, you dismiss it and insist it is a racial thing. You clearly
have your own demons, but Judaism is not the cause.
Best regards,
---Cindy S.
An elite club I'm too good for, thank you very much.
D.
--
Pointlessly incomprehensible.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
(C) `TheDavid^TM' 2003 | David, P.O. Box 21403, Louisville, KY 40221
.
|
|
|
| User: "Susan Cohen" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof That "Missionizing" Idiots Abound |
23 Nov 2003 06:14:27 PM |
|
|
"cindys" <cstein1@rochester.rr.com> wrote in message
news:Npawb.94989$1N3.70705@twister.nyroc.rr.com...
"David O'Lantern" <thedavid@shell.rawbw.com> wrote in message
So if your mother was a convert born of a Jewish father and a
non-Jewish mother, and your father was a born "Orthodox" Jew,
and you grew up striving to practice all the 613 Commandments
and even believes in your G_d, you're STILL not a "*real* Jew"?
Correct.
Nono - if your mother is a convert, it doesn't matter who her parents are, &
you are a Jew (I think you missed that).
Susan
.
|
|
|
| User: "cindys" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof That "Missionizing" Idiots Abound |
23 Nov 2003 09:24:02 PM |
|
|
"Susan Cohen" <flaviaR@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:D3cwb.10486$b91.1966@nwrddc01.gnilink.net...
"cindys" <cstein1@rochester.rr.com> wrote in message
news:Npawb.94989$1N3.70705@twister.nyroc.rr.com...
"David O'Lantern" <thedavid@shell.rawbw.com> wrote in message
So if your mother was a convert born of a Jewish father and a
non-Jewish mother, and your father was a born "Orthodox" Jew,
and you grew up striving to practice all the 613 Commandments
and even believes in your G_d, you're STILL not a "*real* Jew"?
Correct.
Nono - if your mother is a convert, it doesn't matter who her parents are,
&
you are a Jew (I think you missed that).
----------
I did miss it. Thank you for correcting me. I missed the word *convert.* Of
course if the mother converted, the child is Jewish.
Best regards,
---Cindy S.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "The Revd Terence Fformby-Smythe" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof That "Missionizing" Idiots Abound |
24 Nov 2003 04:35:37 AM |
|
|
On Mon, 24 Nov 2003 00:14:27 GMT, "Suzy the convert"
<flavia@verizon.net> wrote:
"cindys" <cstein1@rochester.rr.com> wrote in message
news:Npawb.94989$1N3.70705@twister.nyroc.rr.com...
"David O'Lantern" <thedavid@shell.rawbw.com> wrote in message
So if your mother was a convert born of a Jewish father and a
non-Jewish mother, and your father was a born "Orthodox" Jew,
and you grew up striving to practice all the 613 Commandments
and even believes in your G_d, you're STILL not a "*real* Jew"?
Correct.
Nono - if your mother is a convert, it doesn't matter who her parents are, &
you are a Jew (I think you missed that).
Suzy
Your mother wasn't a jew and, in spite of your 'conversion', neither
are you, Suzy.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Susan Cohen" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof That "Missionizing" Idiots Abound |
23 Nov 2003 06:15:24 PM |
|
|
"David O'Lantern" <thedavid@shell.rawbw.com> wrote in message
An elite club I'm too good for, thank you very much.
A compound lie.
Susan
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "David OLantern" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof That "Missionizing" Idiots Abound |
23 Nov 2003 09:04:01 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 23 Nov 2003, cindys wrote:
[...]
I didn't know there were born *Orthodox* Jews.
You never heard of Reform Jews? I've met some; I've even met
a Reform Jewish *rabbi*, son of Orthodox parents, who would
dispute your authorities' definition of *why* he were Jewish.
Some Reform rabbis are very upset because your kind won't
recognize their position as rabbis, nor will "Orthodoxers"
(my coinage) acknowledge those people they convert as Jews.
They find it insulting, I've read, to themselves as people,
as rabbis, and as Jews.
I thought there were born *Jews* or born *non-Jews.*
So you learned something today. Give yourself a good back-pat!
Secondly, it is highly unlikely that a Jew who follows the 613
commandments would marry a non-Jew.
Or a Reform Jew. Or a Conservative Jew. Or a "secular" Jew. Eh?
Yet it happens. It was the bane of the old women in my neighborhood
when I was a kid. Oh how they'd fuss and fume. "He might as well have
married a Baptist! A *schvartze* even!"
Thirdly, even if such a scenario were to occur, if the son/daughter
in this scenario accepted the yoke of the 613 mitzvot, then he/she
would also accept the halachic requirements for being a Jew and
undergo the conversion process.
Again: your elite sect, known in America as "Orthodox Jewry" (broadly
defined to include Hasidim, who were heretics 300 years ago in Poland
and who haven't changed all that much), are the only Jews who define
halacha as you do. Reform Jews do not, including Reform Jewish rabbis
and theologians, have different rules. Even "Conservative" Jews, who
acknowledge the 613 Commandments and etc. as a theoretical ideal, may
differ significantly from your kind on the subjects that you define
as constituting who is Jewish and what is Judaism.
E.g.: at a recent Elizabethan music concert, one of the singers
(a low tenor?) was a clean-shaven middle-aged man wearing a kippa --
and among the songs he participated in were Elizabethan Anglican hymns
in English and in Latin[1], including lyrics praising Jesus the Lamb
of God and the Holy Trinity and all that cockamamie folderol. I see
very few "obvious" Jews in Louisville -- and I've seen no Lubavichers
here -- yet I assume that this man was wearing a yarmulka in public
because he is Jewish, and I doubt by "Jewish" a clean-shaven kippa-
wearing Kentuckian would mean a "Jew for Jesus."[2] I would take him,
on my experience, to be a Reform or Conservative Jew, with a lovely
voice. Or perhaps he was an unusually broad-minded "Orthodox Jew",
assuming you and Ms. Susan "Cross-posting Rule-Maker" Cohen are as
typical of your sect as you tacitly present yourselves as being.
Furthermore, I'd take him to be more broad-minded than *I* am because
there's no way I'd sing "alleluia praise to Jesus our God" in public
like that no matter how pretty the music of it sounded. As anomalous
as it'd sound to my Usenet fans, there is some ***** I will not say.
SO: assuming this gentleman has some legitimate claim to be Jewish
that you and I might agree on, what about his performance tonight?
Be honest: wouldn't you wish you could wash his mouth out with soap,
and don't you feel that no "*good* *real* Jew" would (or *could*)
do such a thing? ("Of course," I picture you saying, "he can't be a
real Jew. Maybe his mother was Korean or something.")
Nu?
D.
[1] Yes, she was locking up and killing Papists but loved her
Latin Anglican masses. Anomalies abound in the messy world!
[2] Quite often Southern "My boss is a Jewish carpenter" types
have no "Jewish" in 'em anywhere, and they'll grow beards and
long hair trying to look like those "portraits" of Jesus, but
the only Hebrew they know is "Shalom!" which they pronounce
like something in the Winter Olympics, but they swear they're
as much Jews for Jesus as the confused young men in Flatbush.
How many generations of atoning for some guy's "mistake" in
marrying a shiksa does it take to clean the "stain" away?
More fabrications. The only one who is using the word *stain* is you. And it
doesn't take *generations to atone.* There is nothing to atone. If a non-Jew
wants to be Jewish, all he needs to do is convert. The passage of
generations is irrelevant.
The
Southern honky racists had a one-drop rule of 1/32 "impure";
what's yours? Assuming it's possible to do so, I mean.
This is meaningless to Jews. Being Jewish is not a racial thing and is not
based on percentages. One is either Jewish or not.
(Jonah, can you explain this to me? It *sounds* like whole lines
of mitochondrial descent get summarily lopped off on that basis.)
It's not about race at all.
Whatever you call it, it's surely a VERY elite club.
No, it's not elite because anyone can convert and become Jewish. And this is
not the first time I've explained that. Nevertheless, no matter how many
times I say it, you dismiss it and insist it is a racial thing. You clearly
have your own demons, but Judaism is not the cause.
Best regards,
---Cindy S.
An elite club I'm too good for, thank you very much.
D.
--
Pointlessly incomprehensible.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
(C) `TheDavid^TM' 2003 | David, P.O. Box 21403, Louisville, KY 40221
--
Pointlessly incomprehensible.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
(C) `TheDavid^TM' 2003 | David, P.O. Box 21403, Louisville, KY 40221
.
|
|
|
| User: "cindys" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof That "Missionizing" Idiots Abound |
23 Nov 2003 10:17:35 PM |
|
|
"David O'Lantern" <thedavid@shell.rawbw.com> wrote in message
news:20031123181449.Q28947@shell.rawbw.com...
On Sun, 23 Nov 2003, cindys wrote:
[...]
I didn't know there were born *Orthodox* Jews.
You never heard of Reform Jews? I've met some; I've even met
a Reform Jewish *rabbi*, son of Orthodox parents, who would
dispute your authorities' definition of *why* he were Jewish.
Which still doesn't change the definition of who is a Jew.
Some Reform rabbis are very upset because your kind won't
recognize their position as rabbis, nor will "Orthodoxers"
(my coinage) acknowledge those people they convert as Jews.
They find it insulting, I've read, to themselves as people,
as rabbis, and as Jews.
That's the crux of the problem. It's not that the Reform want to define for
themselves who is Jew. It's that they expect everyone else to accept their
definition of who is a Jew as well, despite the fact that their definition
runs contrary to halacha. Then they are *insulted.* Too bad.
I thought there were born *Jews* or born *non-Jews.*
So you learned something today. Give yourself a good back-pat!
As if I ever said anything else.
Secondly, it is highly unlikely that a Jew who follows the 613
commandments would marry a non-Jew.
Or a Reform Jew. Or a Conservative Jew. Or a "secular" Jew. Eh?
Probably not. People generally want to marry others whose belief system and
way of life mirrors their own. It usually makes for a healthy marriage when
both partners agree on these kinds of things. This is common sense.
Yet it happens. It was the bane of the old women in my neighborhood
when I was a kid. Oh how they'd fuss and fume. "He might as well have
married a Baptist! A *schvartze* even!"
Oh, I see. A subtle attempt to stir up a little antisemitism while you're at
it.
Thirdly, even if such a scenario were to occur, if the son/daughter
in this scenario accepted the yoke of the 613 mitzvot, then he/she
would also accept the halachic requirements for being a Jew and
undergo the conversion process.
Again: your elite sect, known in America as "Orthodox Jewry" (broadly
defined to include Hasidim, who were heretics 300 years ago in Poland
and who haven't changed all that much), are the only Jews who define
halacha as you do.
And we will continue to do so. Whether you like it or not.
Reform Jews do not, including Reform Jewish rabbis
and theologians, have different rules. Even "Conservative" Jews, who
acknowledge the 613 Commandments and etc. as a theoretical ideal, may
differ significantly from your kind on the subjects that you define
as constituting who is Jewish and what is Judaism.
The Conservatives do not differ from the Orthodox in their definition of who
is a Jew in terms of patrilineal descent. They do not accept the offspring
of a gentile mother as a Jew without a conversion. And even if they did,
their opinions do not impact on traditional Judaism.
E.g.: at a recent Elizabethan music concert, one of the singers
(a low tenor?) was a clean-shaven middle-aged man wearing a kippa --
and among the songs he participated in were Elizabethan Anglican hymns
in English and in Latin[1], including lyrics praising Jesus the Lamb
of God and the Holy Trinity and all that cockamamie folderol. I see
very few "obvious" Jews in Louisville -- and I've seen no Lubavichers
here -- yet I assume that this man was wearing a yarmulka in public
because he is Jewish, and I doubt by "Jewish" a clean-shaven kippa-
wearing Kentuckian would mean a "Jew for Jesus."[2] I would take him,
on my experience, to be a Reform or Conservative Jew, with a lovely
voice. Or perhaps he was an unusually broad-minded "Orthodox Jew",
assuming you and Ms. Susan "Cross-posting Rule-Maker" Cohen are as
typical of your sect as you tacitly present yourselves as being.
Furthermore, I'd take him to be more broad-minded than *I* am because
there's no way I'd sing "alleluia praise to Jesus our God" in public
like that no matter how pretty the music of it sounded. As anomalous
as it'd sound to my Usenet fans, there is some ***** I will not say.
I can't be an apologist for some guy that decided to wear a kippah and sing
about Jesus. If your story is true, I think what the guy did is disgraceful,
a chillul Hashem (desecration of God's name - whether he was wearing the
kippah or not, BTW).
SO: assuming this gentleman has some legitimate claim to be Jewish
that you and I might agree on, what about his performance tonight?
As I said, I am not apologist for other Jews who opt to do disgraceful
things. Why would you think I would be?
Be honest: wouldn't you wish you could wash his mouth out with soap,
Yes, I do feel that way.
and don't you feel that no "*good* *real* Jew" would (or *could*)
do such a thing?
Why do you keep saying *real Jew?* A *real* Jew is not defined by behavior
but by having been born of a Jewish mother or converting, as I have stated
at least half a dozen times by now. So stop fabricating that I ever implied
that any halachic Jew is not a *real* Jew (even if he behaves
inappropriately).
("Of course," I picture you saying, "he can't be a
real Jew. Maybe his mother was Korean or something.")
Since I don't know the guy, how would I know if he's a *real* Jew or not?
And why would having a Korean mother prevent the guy from being Jewish?
Maybe the mother converted.
Best regards,
---Cindy S.
.
|
|
|
| User: "David OLantern" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof That "Missionizing" Idiots Abound |
23 Nov 2003 11:18:20 PM |
|
|
Dear Cindy,
Damn, you are one little spitfire ain't you! Wind you up and watch
you go! It almost makes me hope you never do get a real boyfriend;
you're almost *too* much fun!
But tell me, can you COOK?
Seductively,
D.
--
Pointlessly incomprehensible.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
(C) `TheDavid^TM' 2003 | David, P.O. Box 21403, Louisville, KY 40221
.
|
|
|
| User: "yechidah" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof That "Missionizing" Idiots Abound |
23 Nov 2003 11:31:10 PM |
|
|
"David O'Lantern"
Take your perversions someplace else.
If you choose to be around Jews learn how to act with some dignity, man.
YS
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.516 / Virus Database: 313 - Release Date: 9/2/03
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "David OLantern" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof That "Missionizing" Idiots Abound |
23 Nov 2003 11:12:20 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 24 Nov 2003, cindys wrote:
[...]
Which still doesn't change the definition of who is a Jew.
Again: YOUR definition, according to YOUR elite sect's "laws."
Which has ruled out maybe 3/4 of American Jews as "not real Jews."
Lady, I thought *I* was arrogant and narrow-minded.
Amusedly,
D.
--
Pointlessly incomprehensible.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
(C) `TheDavid^TM' 2003 | David, P.O. Box 21403, Louisville, KY 40221
.
|
|
|
| User: "cindys" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof That "Missionizing" Idiots Abound |
23 Nov 2003 11:36:29 PM |
|
|
"David O'Lantern" <thedavid@shell.rawbw.com> wrote in message
news:20031123210808.C28947@shell.rawbw.com...
On Mon, 24 Nov 2003, cindys wrote:
[...]
Which still doesn't change the definition of who is a Jew.
Again: YOUR definition, according to YOUR elite sect's "laws."
Yes, the same laws that have existed for thousands of years.
Which has ruled out maybe 3/4 of American Jews as "not real Jews."
Since you continue to make this ridiculous statement in every post, in spite
of the fact that I have refuted it no less than half a dozen times in this
thread, I can only assume that:
A. You have a problem with reading comprehension.
B. You are a troll, a liar or worse.
Now, which is it?
Lady, I thought *I* was arrogant and narrow-minded.
Don't like the fact that Judaism (like all religions) has the right to
define itself? Too bad.
Best regards,
---Cindy S.
Amusedly,
D.
--
Pointlessly incomprehensible.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
(C) `TheDavid^TM' 2003 | David, P.O. Box 21403, Louisville, KY 40221
.
|
|
|
| User: "jonah thomas" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof That "Missionizing" Idiots Abound |
24 Nov 2003 03:00:35 AM |
|
|
cindys wrote:
"David O'Lantern" <thedavid@shell.rawbw.com> wrote
Which has ruled out maybe 3/4 of American Jews as "not real Jews."
Since you continue to make this ridiculous statement in every post, in spite
of the fact that I have refuted it no less than half a dozen times in this
thread, I can only assume that:
A. You have a problem with reading comprehension.
B. You are a troll, a liar or worse.
Now, which is it?
Those are not mutually exclusive -- he could be both.
And they don't cover all the possibilities either. So you have
presented a false either-or choice, false in both directions.
You haven't refuted his claim at all. You have merely contradicted it.
I get the impression you don't understand the difference.
To refute it, you might for example provide some reputable estimate of
the number of american jews, and then provide a reputable estimate of
how many of them are classed as nonjews by your criteria for what it
takes to be jewish. If it's less than 3/4 excluded, you have refuted
his claim.
HTH.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "jonah thomas" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof That "Missionizing" Idiots Abound |
23 Nov 2003 05:01:16 PM |
|
|
David O'Lantern wrote:
cindys wrote:
[...]
Another projection. In what way is lineage connected with race?
Lineage is hereditary. So is race. In common English, as I thought
we're talking here, they're synonyms.
Lineage involves knowing whether your mother and maternal
grandmother were Jewish.
So if your mother was a convert born of a Jewish father and a
non-Jewish mother, and your father was a born "Orthodox" Jew,
and you grew up striving to practice all the 613 Commandments
and even believes in your G_d, you're STILL not a "*real* Jew"?
David, do you need to hound this person?
This is someone who believes that they must accept the current
interpretation by a council of old men, of a collection of rules that
are hundreds of years old or even older. This is what people *mean*
when they say "orthodox". You're trying to argue logic when logic is
not the point, the point is obedience.
Sure, by your moral standards it's wrong for people to give up their own
ethics in favor of obedience to arbitrary external authority. But
that's just *your* moral standards. Eichmann would have disagreed and
so does this person. They both have the right to make their own moral
choices, to choose not to choose, to blindly follow somebody else. Your
disapproval has no more effect than they're willing to give it -- unless
you choose to enforce your will by sheer force, and then you still won't
convince them that you're right.
How many generations of atoning for some guy's "mistake" in
marrying a shiksa does it take to clean the "stain" away? The
Southern honky racists had a one-drop rule of 1/32 "impure";
what's yours? Assuming it's possible to do so, I mean.
(Jonah, can you explain this to me? It *sounds* like whole lines
of mitochondrial descent get summarily lopped off on that basis.)
No, I cannot. Which way will a cat jump? It isn't supposed to make
sense, it's supposed to separate those who *are* from those who *are not
and can never be*. Rules to decide who gets to join the club never make
particular sense.
It's not about race at all.
Whatever you call it, it's surely a VERY elite club.
An elite club I'm too good for, thank you very much.
<sigh> OK, here's how I'd imagine it should go. She'd say you can be
jewish by birth or jewish by conversion. Just like you're an american
citizen if you're born in the USA or to american parents, or you can
become nationalised over years of taking tests etc.
To be american you can be born in the USA or to at least one american
parent. But to be born jewish you need both your mother and your
grandmother to be jewish. (The rules don't need explanation, they're
just the way they are and you accept them or you don't accept orthodoxy,
but I note this would keep you from being jewish if your mother went to
the trouble of converting and then gave it up. It takes 2 generations.
If one woman could convert and then all her children and her
daughters' children and so on would be jewish from then on, by this time
likely the majority of the population would be jewish.)
But you can convert if you're willing to go to the trouble, without
anybody particularly encouraging you and specifically noting the story
of the circumcision of the Shechemites.
Once you're jewish, by this particular interpretation you're jewish for
life -- just like a lot of Baptists say that once you're Baptist you're
Baptist for life. In both cases, you can be bad jewish or baptist
person or a good one, but you don't get to choose not to be. It's a
one-way commitment. (You can get circumcised but you can't get
circumcision reversed. You can let baptists dunk you but you can't get
undunked.)
You can however act so rotten that nobody else who's jewish is willing
to have anything to do with you. Like my brother-in-law did by refusing
to support israel in their years of desperate need and brutal
occupation. It doesn't make you not jewish, it just makes you
unaccepted jewish. In the old days people this happened to got stoned
to death. Everybody said that God was telling them to stone them to
death, but there was still a difference between a foreigner getting
killed and an israelite getting killed. They weren't denying the
relationship, they accepted that it was an israelite who had committed
such sins that he had to be killed.
.
|
|
|
| User: "David OLantern" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof That "Missionizing" Idiots Abound |
24 Nov 2003 01:34:57 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 23 Nov 2003, jonah thomas wrote to me of CindyS:
[...]
David, do you need to hound this person?
Not really, but it was so much fun for a while: I got to learn a
few interesting facts, to blurt out silly things, and to practice
my person-winding skills. ("Wow, look how far she'll go on two
short paragraphs! Maybe if I mention a *specific* Nazi "thinker"
I'll find out that Rabbi So-and-so of Krakow refuted Rosenberg
by *name*!") It's an interesting game for a while, but if nobody's
going to move to Kentucky to make me *fresh* gefilte fish ....
It's not like I have a religion to convert anyone to, and like
I said, I'm perfectly okay with someone who says she's Jewish
saying she's Jewish. All that ever mattered to *me* concerning
Jewishness is how far she'd go with a Goy boy, what her dietary
restrictions are, and whether she's open-minded enough to agree
not to stab me either. (Politics couldn't matter much there,
since my own views are likely to be shared by a tiny part of
those available anyway: even most anarchists won't agree that
BDSM is contrary to anarchy -- and L'Opossum, e.g., VOTES.)
It's an interesting point though that I've found very few Jewish
*men* who'll debate as hard with me about Jewishness and Cindy
and Susan do; I'm not sure why that is, maybe woman in general
just "sense" that any man who'd do such things in such a way has
got to be *tremendously* "hung". (Which I'm not, of course, and
if anybody asks for specifics ahead of time I'll supply them.)
And of course all this is academic now since my dominatrix has
been patiently waiting to vacuum for an hour. If I push her any
farther she might vacuum ME.
D.
--
Pointlessly incomprehensible.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
(C) `TheDavid^TM' 2003 | David, P.O. Box 21403, Louisville, KY 40221
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "jonah thomas" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof That "Missionizing" Idiots Abound |
23 Nov 2003 02:35:14 AM |
|
|
cindys wrote:
"jonah thomas" <j2thomas@cavtel.net> wrote
Could anyone pass as roman catholic who hasn't been trained? Hardly.
When I visit catholic churches I always seem to genuflect wrong or
something. (Not that I intended to pass as catholic.) Similarly, it
would take far more to pass as a particular kind of jewish than to just
learn hebrew.
I don't know what you mean about *passing* for a *particular kind of
Jewish.* There is only one kind of Jewish. And a person is either Jewish or
not.
It appears you are ignorant of the big cultural variation within
judaism. I won't try to describe it to you. I'll just let this one go.
.
|
|
|
| User: "cindys" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof That "Missionizing" Idiots Abound |
23 Nov 2003 12:10:07 PM |
|
|
"jonah thomas" <j2thomas@cavtel.net> wrote in message
news:ki_vb.101$%Z.78183@news.uswest.net...
cindys wrote:
"jonah thomas" <j2thomas@cavtel.net> wrote
Could anyone pass as roman catholic who hasn't been trained? Hardly.
When I visit catholic churches I always seem to genuflect wrong or
something. (Not that I intended to pass as catholic.) Similarly, it
would take far more to pass as a particular kind of jewish than to just
learn hebrew.
I don't know what you mean about *passing* for a *particular kind of
Jewish.* There is only one kind of Jewish. And a person is either Jewish
or
not.
It appears you are ignorant of the big cultural variation within
judaism. I won't try to describe it to you. I'll just let this one go.
----------------------------
Yes, there are culture perceptions, but I'm not talking about culture. There
is an halachic definition of who is a Jew. A person either fits the
definition or he doesn't.
Best regards,
---Cindy S.
.
|
|
|
| User: "jonah thomas" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof That "Missionizing" Idiots Abound |
23 Nov 2003 01:29:19 PM |
|
|
cindys wrote:
"jonah thomas" <j2thomas@cavtel.net> wrote
cindys wrote:
"jonah thomas" <j2thomas@cavtel.net> wrote
Could anyone pass as roman catholic who hasn't been trained? Hardly.
When I visit catholic churches I always seem to genuflect wrong or
something. (Not that I intended to pass as catholic.) Similarly, it
would take far more to pass as a particular kind of jewish than to just
learn hebrew.
I don't know what you mean about *passing* for a *particular kind of
Jewish.* There is only one kind of Jewish. And a person is either Jewish
or not.
It appears you are ignorant of the big cultural variation within
judaism. I won't try to describe it to you. I'll just let this one go.
Yes, there are culture perceptions, but I'm not talking about culture. There
is an halachic definition of who is a Jew. A person either fits the
definition or he doesn't.
I should probably just let this go but OK, once more through the mill.
Catholics tell me there's only one kind of catholic. If you aren't a
member of the church then you aren't catholic. But they are too polite
to say there's only one kind of christian. They accept that anybody who
performs miracles in the name of Christ is a christian. But you sound
like a catholic telling me that there's only one kind of christian.
My brother-in-law got basicly thrown out of temple when he criticised
israel's actions in the West Bank and refused to send money to israel.
So when my sister converted she converted to Reform. And when I visited
their services I felt comfortable, it was a lot like protestant
services. Some of the prayers and songs were in hebrew. The children's
stories had a different flavor, a lot more emphasis on "helping those
less fortunate then ourselves". They were searching for a new leader,
just as protestant churches do perpetually and the political maneuvering
the search committee did looked just like what I'd seen before (from the
outside in all cases). The radical lesbian women who organised the
children's group my nephew went to, seemed just like their protestant
opposite numbers. (I don't know that they were lesbians. They dressed
lesbian. They acted like the others. One of them flirted with me and
the other one looked indignant, but maybe she was indignant that I
wasn't jewish more than that I was male. I didn't ask.) One of the big
differences was that food was served every single time, and not just a
coffee get-together. Also the food tended to have a lot of onions. But
apart from some little details it mostly felt familiar.
My nephew's half-brother is half-japanese, and his mother never
converted to judaism. My sister sent both boys to japanese culture
school and also to hebrew school so they could stay in touch with their
traditions, and both have had their bar mitzvahs. Some of the older
brother's relatives from japan came to his bar mitzvah and one of them
gave a little speech. He said that they had a similar ceremony in japan
where the boy became a samurai, and he understood that the intentions
were similar and he approved. And the boy's mother did take him back to
japan later where he had that ceremony.
It sounds like you'd say that my sister's step-son isn't really jewish
just because his mother didn't convert. I'd agree that he isn't
orthodox, he's never been orthodox. But not jewish? Who are you to
tell all these reform people who's jewish and who isn't? The Pope
doesn't tell my sister she isn't christian, just because she's jewish
and unitarian and wiccan.
I think you're being very provincial. But I may have misunderstood what
you're saying.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
