Pacific Jewish Center | Rabbi » anti-semitism

Hey San Francisco, 1930′s Germany Called – They Want Their Anti-Semitic Propaganda Back!

rabbifink — Sun, 05 Jun 2011 17:55:46 +0000

I posted brief thoughts on this issue on Friday on Facebook. For the benefit of the non-Facebookers and for the sake of having a more permanent record of my

When the San Francisco ban on circumcision was first proposed months ago I wrote two posts defending one’s right to circumcise their son. One was from a legal perspective: Is a Ban on Circumcision Constitutional? Probably Not and the other from a moral perspective: Circumcision Follow Up (or why circumcision is not barbaric for Orthodox Jews).

Since that time, I have had several conversations in the comments on my blog as well as other Internet forums with the proponents of the ban. These folks call themselves Intactivists and they are a voice that needs to be reckoned with.

As Rabbi Adlerstein wrote in two places, the battle against circumcision is in essence a battle against religion. I don’t agree with every word of Rabbi Adlerstein’s essays but the fact remains that the reason Intactivists exist is because they believe religion is a myth. They believe that following the precepts of the Torah, New Testament, Quran or any other religious text that claims to be the word of God is backwards and ridiculous. By extension, any religious practice based on the words of these religious texts is similar to taking instruction from a fairy tale.

I can understand that position. I vehemently disagree. But I can understand it.

They reason that if the Torah is a fraud then following the Torah is silly. And if the Torah says to circumcise then circumcision is silly.

These people have the right to believe as they do.

They can even try to have the practice banned. A conversation will need to take place regarding the limits of governmental interference on a widespread religious practice. Medical data will be used but in reality be useless as the medical community takes no official position on the benefits or harms of circumcision. In the end, the likely result will hopefully be a better mutual understanding of the positions in this discussion and a legal conclusion.

I am happy to have the discussion with Intactivists. I believe a discussion benefits everyone.

However, a recent comic book seems to completely change the game.

A comic book called Foreskin Man has been published to promote the circumcision ban. The comic book is a propaganda piece that turns doctors and mohels into villains. The content is pure appeal to emotion. There is no logic, no discussion, no argument in favor of the ban. It is a good vs. evil story with the good cast as the Intactivists and the evil cast as those who circumcise. This would bad enough as far as propaganda goes.

But the comic book takes it a step further. Moving the conversation away from circumcision, the comic book taps into centuries of anti-Semitic propaganda using caricatures that haven’t been used since the Holocaust. Further, the comic book portrays the “good” side as blond, Aryan-looking and white. It looks like a KKK or Aryan Brotherhood comic book. The pictures are obscene and message to me is clear.

This is not about circumcision. This is not even about religion. This is about anti-Semitism.

Those who know me can attest, I am the last person to assert anti-Semitism. I am an optimist and don’t believe that the non-Jewish public hates Jews. But this comic book is anti-Semitic. Res ipsa loquitur.

The best case scenario for the Intactivists would be to claim that this comic book is NOT representative of their true views. It is one unhinged madman. That may be true, but until that is asserted or shown to be true, Foreskin Man casts the entire Intactivist operation under the shadow of anti-Semitism. Unless it can show otherwise, there is no longer any room for discussion. Once you use racial bias, epithetic imagery and ugly caricatures to make your point, you’ve lost the right to be a part of the conversation.

To be clear, I understand the Atheist’s position on circumcision. I welcome conversation about whether a circumcision ban is legal or moral or ethical or whatever. But the conversation is over until this disgusting anti-Semitic rhetoric ends and ends for good.

The Evidence: (lifted from Foreskinman.com)

Notice the fighting children each grabbing for a toy. This subtlety hearkens the slur of the “money grabbing Jew”.

Clearly a villain, this is Mohel Monster. I kid you not.

Being portrayed with no pupils, the artist is implying that the Mohel is not human.

Holding the holy book above the child is no only factually incorrect, but reminiscent of sacrifice.

The focus on metzitza is a gratuitous pot shot here. Also, note the hero’s very white, blond appearance.

Again, note the terrified baby, the tight grip on its arms and focus on the word sacrifice.

Finally, as if any proof was needed, this is exactly the kind of conflagration that is associated with the KKK and Kristallnacht. If they hadn’t before, they tipped their bigoted hand on the final panel. Disgraceful.

Lessons in Anti-Semitism From Jewish Pirates of the Caribbean

rabbifink — Tue, 06 Jul 2010 17:15:18 +0000

A little while ago I read the unfortunately mis-titled book, Jewish Pirates of the Caribbean.

I say unfortunately mis-titled because the book was excellent but it really was not about Jewish Pirates and certainly was not limited at all to the Caribbean.

The book was good because it tells the story of some of the most famous Converso Jews following the Spanish and Porteguese Inquisition. The well footnoted text gave me a better appreciation for the 15 century Mediterranean Jews, their struggles and their success.

Perhaps above all, as I was reading the book I found myself with a greater appreciation for Sephardi Jews.

I read Jewish Pirates of the Caribbean piecemeal. Every few weeks I would pick it up again and read another section. Meanwhile, in the real world, the Rubashkin saga has been dominated Jewish headlines. All the while, playing the victim card and charges of anti-Semitism in the legal system abound. The contrast of the Rubashkin campaigns and the reactions of the Conversos was striking.

Following decades of persecution and systematic genocide, the Jews of Spain and Portugal were forced northward. Many settled in Amsterdam. The local government tolerated the Jews but there were some blatantly anti-Jewish laws. The Jews were able to practice Judaism and in many respects they thrived there. For these refugee Jews, life was tough. It was not easy being Jewish.

The book follows the story of some of the Amsterdam Jews.

Not once, did I see a reference to “anti-Semitism”. The Meditteranean Jews did not deal with their persecution by labeling it as anti-Semitism. I did not see any attempt to portray themselves as victims or the “lamb among the lions”.

Ashkenazic Jews were also persecuted heavily. They were ousted from many countries and killed in many genocides. To cope with the hate and bloodshed, anti-Semitism was “blamed”.

This got me thinking. My impression of the current Sephardic Jewry landscape is very similar. I don’t recall hearing accusations of anti-Semitism when it comes to Sephardic Jews. Just last summer Solomon Dwek was arrested on Federal charges of bank fraud. This criminal pled guilty and awaits sentencing. I did not hear a peep about any anti-Semitism in his investigation.

Dwek is Sephardic.

Contrast that with the bank fraud that Rubashkin has been charged with. I have spoke to otherwise reasonable people who are convinced the whole thing is a plot by the anti-Semitic government. They say things like “this is how it was in Germany 1935″.

Rubashkin is not Sephardic.

I have a feeling that they heritage play a role in our collective reactions.

On one level, it seems that Sephardic Jewry never had a culture of blaming anti-Semitism while Ashkenazik Jewry has been crying about anti-Semitism for six centuries and using the term for around 150 years. Thus, we still react differently today.

On a deeper level, there also exists an anto-Sephardic bias in the Ashkenazik community (see: Somewhat On The Lighter Side). Perhaps the Ashkenazic community does not consider anti-Jewish activity that harms Sephardic Jews “anti-Semitism”.

Perhaps not. It’s just a thought.

(Either way, I recommend Jewish Pirates of the Caribbean. It’s a fun read and I plan another post about the episode in the book that had the biggest impact on me.)

Oh How I Yearn For The Anti-Semites of Yore

rabbifink — Tue, 22 Jun 2010 05:11:04 +0000

Cross-posted to DovBear here:

There is a healthy nostalgia built into Judaism. “Chadesh yameni k’kedem” – renew our days to the way things were, we say. Of course, like any good thing, too much nostalgia is a bad thing.

After reading the famous case of Brandenburg v. Ohio I find myself pining for the anti-Jewish sentiment as expressed in 60′s as opposed to today.

Brandenburg was a Ku Klux Klan leader in Ohio. At a KKK rally, men dressed in robes and hoods burned a cross and made public declarations of hate. Among their offensive epithets:

“Bury the niggers”, “Freedom for the whites”, “Let’s get them back to the dark garden”,

(see FN1 in the Court opinion for the complete list) all clearly anti-black statements that are highly offensive.

Of course, no good KKK rally is complete without some anti-Jewish fun as well. These KKK Jew haters proclaimed:

“Send the Jews back to Israel”

Today’s anti-Jewish proclamations are more likely to echo Helen Thomas and say “Get the Jews out of Israel”.

Oh how I yearn for the anti-semites of yore. They were so much nicer to us…

Is the Rubashkin Saga / Trial Anti-Semitic?

rabbifink — Fri, 14 May 2010 05:55:11 +0000

This post has been cross-posted to DovBear. More discussion there. (Link)

If you are like me, you have been reading about the Rubashkin saga for months. What began with a Federal raid at a meat processing plant to ferret out hundreds of illegal alien employees is now culminating with a federal and state trial. (Link)

If you are like me, you have been hearing that the raid was “disproportionate” and fueled by anti-semitism.

If you are like me you have been hearing that he was denied bail because of an anti-semitic fear that Rubashkin was a flight risk and would flee to Israel.

If you are like me, you have been hearing that his federal sentencing recommendation was anti-semitic. (Link)

If you are like me, you have been hearing how the county jail was anti-semitic in not providing food that was kosher “to Rubashkin’s standards” and not permitting him to wear religious garb (tzitzis / tzitzit). (Link)

I have three things I want to say.

1) I feel terribly for Rubashkin. I feel terribly for any criminal who is sentenced to prison but more-so when the criminal is a family member of mine. As a fellow Jew, Rubashkin is family and it pains me to see him in this state. I support asking for leniency is a mentshlach way.

2) Rubashkin is the cause of much of the animosity towards him from the prosecution and judiciary. It is NOT, I repeat, NOT because he is Jewish, nor is it anti-semitic.

3) Even those who cry anti-semitism in this case are grossly misusing the term.

I think #1 is a well represented opinion throughout the Jewish community. It does not require any more attention from me. Consider me to have said “ditto”.

Number 2 is something that has been so wildly misunderstood it almost seems blatant. The reason Rubashkin’s plant was raided was NOT due to a plan hatched in the bowels of a Ku Klux Klan facility. The reason his plant was raided was because he snubbed the Unions by hiring illegals and the Unions were none-too-happy. They made the infractions known to the Feds and they raided the plant. Were there too many helicopters and fancy weapons? Probably. Was it anti-semitic? Probably not. The people who make these kinds of choices don’t, actually, CAN’T have vendettas against minorities. This is the Federal Government of the most benevolent host the Jewish people have ever had. Use your noodle people! There is no conspiracy! Who was president at the time? Our best friend George W. Bush. The federal agents were in his employ. Dare we think that the “anti-semitic raid” was orchestrated by our dear friend? Of course not.

Rubashkin was considered a flight-risk because agents found $10,000 cash in a packed bag with passports. Under normal circumstances that is a flight-risk. A packed bag with cash and passports could be reasonably interpreted as a “just-in-case” bag. Maybe it was a “just-in-case Moshiach comes bag”. I am willing to believe that was the case. But what would you think if you saw that bag and he wasn’t a frum Jew? Is it anti-semitism to draw the logical conclusion from finding that bag and denying him bail? Certainly not.

The sentencing recommendation was well within Federal guidelines. I was talking about the case to a lawyer friend of mine who works for the Court of Appeals and who knew nothing about the case. I told him some of the facts about the bank fraud. His immediate reaction was, “that’s a life sentence”. He didn’t know the crook was a Jew. He didn’t know the crook was accused of other crimes. He only knew about the bank fraud and he said “that’s a life sentence”. Is he anti-semitic? Who cares?! He didn’t know the cases involved a Jew when he said a life sentence was what the crook deserved!

Also, much has been made of “comparable criminals”. It is an unfair comparison because Rubashkin has not been cooperative. He was not willing to accept any plea deals. He maintains his complete, 100% innocence and is a difficult person for the court to deal with. He has many special requests and claims he is being victimized. He has offered only one half-baked apology since this saga began and has not taken any responsibility.

While in jail, Rubashkin has made special requests. Some have been honored and some have not. Some of the requests that have been honored and he has stated that he not satisfied with the kashrus of the food. It is kosher, just not kosher enough. Is it anti-semitic if they give him kosher food that most orthodox Jews would eat?

Also, Rubashkin will not walk without wearing Tzitzis. He states that his religion will not allow him to walk. So he has been carried around so that he will not violate this religious law. The problem is that he is with ignorant of the law or is just trying to be annoying. The law is that when one wears a four-cornered garment (think of a poncho or rectangular wrap) the garment must have a certain formula of strings attached to the garment at the corners. One is not required to wear such a garment. However it has become customary to wear one of these garments with the strings attached for prayer as well as during the day. But if you are not wearing a four-cornered garment the law does not require that you wear the strings (like a button-down shirt or blazer don’t need the strings). So why is Rubashkin making a stink out of an issue that is not religious? Is it anti-semitic if the jail does not cooperate with this?

I think it is clear enough that for every “anti-semitic” act against Rubashkin, there is a plausible non-anti-semitic explanation as well. Let’s just stop with the anti-semitism cries.

As for #3, I dare you to look a Holocaust survivor in the eye and call this anti-semitism. Try telling it to a Jew who was thrown out of Spain and Portugal for not bowing to the Cross. Or how about Jews who were slaughtered during pogroms? Being prosecuted for actual crimes is not anti-semitism. Anti-semitism is hatred and cruelty to Jews for no reason other than the fact that they are Jewish. That is not the case here.

I have more to say about anti-semitism in general. Stay tuned…

Is The Cartoon of Elena Kagan Anti-Semitic?

rabbifink — Wed, 12 May 2010 18:03:22 +0000

A very similar post has been cross-posted to DovBear. More discussion there.

Nothing like a Supreme Court of the United States nomination to get me to blog again.

Elena Kagan has been nominated for the SCOTUS. I have no opinion about her. I do have an opinion about some of the people opposing her…

I have been planning a brief series on anti-semitism. This post will be the first of a few that deal with various specifics and nuances of anti-semitism in my opinion.

Have you seen the cries of anti-semitism connected with Kagan? They come from Orthodox Jews who have trouble dealing with their own insecurities. Why?

Most RW Jews are very conservative politically. Kagan is not. Her existence and certainly her appointment the SCOTUS is not viewed favorably in their eyes. Subconsciously, they need a way to protest her appointment and the first thing that pops into their minds is the old “anti-semitism card”.

People point to the caricature of her as anti-semitic. People think that it is reminiscent of Nazi propaganda.

It’s not.

Nazi propaganda was general. It showed Jews as having certain features and overemphasized those features in order to make a separate point. “Jews steal”, “Jews are like vermin”, “Jews run the world”, etc. The caricature was to paint a villain with gross features and then label the villain with gross acts. It works better than painting the villain with gross acts with a face like Clooney or Pitt…

The cartoon of Kagan is just a cartoon. It exaggerates her features because those are HER features. It’s the same way a Leno cartoon has a huge chin and Bush cartoon has a squat head and long ears. It pokes fun at their appearance but is in no way anti-long chin or anti-squat head with long ears. Accentuating Kagan’s features in a cartoon can’t be off limits because she happens to be Jewish.

A second thing about all this anti-semitism talk is very ironic. I have not seen any reports from mainstream media that even mentions that Kagan is Jewish. It is not an issue for most people. Why do we think that it is an issue? It’s like we invent an issue to get upset about. Kagan was chosen because of her credentials and the diversity she brings to the court. Doesn’t that champion minorities like Jews? How is that anti-semitic!?

The last thing I want to address is the complaint lodged by a commenter on DovBear’s post. Mamzer Talmid Chacham said “I’d still like it better if he nominated someone who was actually a judge”. It so happens that one of the greatest SCOTUS justices of all time, Justice Warren, was not a judge. One large criticism of the SCOTUS is the seemingly similar paths all the justices took to get to the court. Choosing Kagan adds another element of much needed diversity to the court.

Crosses Honor Fallen Soldiers of All Faiths

rabbifink — Mon, 19 Oct 2009 07:01:43 +0000

We took the family to Santa Monica Pier on Sunday and our six year old son proved to be smarter than a Supreme Court Justice!

It is so beautiful to walk along the beach and observe all the excitement along the boardwalk and pier. As always, we had a great time in Santa Monica.

For the last few years there has been a protest / exhibit just north of the pier. The protestors are against war in general, the Iraq war in specific and pretty much the entire defense budget of the United States.

They call it Arlington West and they have set up a faux graveyard in the sand representing the fallen soldiers in what they call a criminal war.

It can be quite powerful when you see it.

As we walked by the lines and lines of crosses on this occasion, my 6 year old son asks, “How do they know all the soldiers who died were Christian? If they were Jewish or Muslim or ‘nothing’ they probably wouldn’t want a cross.”

Excellent point kiddo! Score one for the six year old.

In fact you may have heard about this exact issue arising in the Supreme Court of the United States in Salazar v. Buono. The issue in the case is an eight-foot high cross that was erected as a memorial to fallen soldiers in foreign wars.

The case made recent headlines when Justice Scalia could not fathom that a non-Christian would perhaps be offended by a Christian symbol as a memorial for the dead. The exchange between Justice Scalia and ACLU lawyer Peter J. Eliasburg went something like this:

JUSTICE SCALIA: The cross doesn’t honor non-Christians who fought in the war? Is that — is that –

MR. ELIASBERG: I believe that’s actually correct.

JUSTICE SCALIA: Where does it say that?

MR. ELIASBERG: It doesn’t say that, but a cross is the predominant symbol of Christianity and it signifies that Jesus is the son of God and died to redeem mankind for our sins, and I believe that’s why the Jewish war veterans –

JUSTICE SCALIA: It’s erected as a war memorial. I assume it is erected in honor of all of the war dead. It’s the — the cross is the — is the most common symbol of — of — of the resting place of the dead, and it doesn’t seem to me — what would you have them erect? A cross — some conglomerate of a cross, a Star of David, and you know, a Moslem half moon and star?

MR. ELIASBERG: Well, Justice Scalia, if I may go to your first point. The cross is the most common symbol of the resting place of Christians. I have been in Jewish cemeteries. There is never a cross on a tombstone of a Jew. (Laughter.)

MR. ELIASBERG: So it is the most common symbol to honor Christians.

JUSTICE SCALIA: I don’t think you can leap from that to the conclusion that the only war dead that that cross honors are the Christian war dead. I think that’s an outrageous conclusion.

MR. ELIASBERG: Well, my — the point of my — point here is to say that there is a reason the Jewish war veterans came in and said we don’t feel honored by this cross. This cross can’t honor us because it is a religious symbol of another religion.

(Credit: Huffington Post)

DovBear posted about this last week (Impeach Scalia) click for discussion there.

What amazes me is how my 6 year old son can see something so patently obvious and yet Justice Scalia can’t seem to process the concept…

Incredible.

Confirming Our Suspicions That Jews Do Run The World

rabbifink — Fri, 28 Aug 2009 14:20:58 +0000

A few months ago, the New York Jets football team made headlines when they moved they 4 PM Sunday game on Erev (the day before) Yom Kippur to 1 PM. This time change would give Jewish people wishing to observe Yom Kippur the opportunity to be home before the start of Yom Kippur at sundown on Sunday evening.

This was a nice gesture. It was also, completely unnecessary as Jews are comfortable with and used to compromising to satisfy their Religious beliefs. Jews who keep kosher often cannot eat at business lunches and Shabbos observant Jews miss live college football every Saturday in the fall. Missing a Jets game the day before Yom Kippur is not that big a deal. Plus, it is like a badge of courage to miss an event for your religion. Just ask Sandy Koufax. Missing the game is not that big a deal. Yet, the change was made.

Now it seems that this decision by the Jets is causing a bit of a problem.

NY Times Arts Beat Blog is reporting that this minor schedule change by the Jets is affecting thousands of people. The award winning band, U2 had scheduled a concert in the same stadium the Jets use (ironically, called Giants Stadium) for the Friday before Yom Kippur. Thousands of fans made travel plans, inlcuding flights and hotels ot make thier U2 pilgrimage and see the band’s live show. That Friday night show has been canceled and moved two days earlier to Wednesday. According to U2′s piblicist, the change was needed to make the show logistically possible, due to the now earlier Jets game, they were concerned that the field would not be ready for the Jets on Sunday.

As U2 lead singer and social activist, Bono, croons in “City of Blinding Lights“, blessing’s not just for the ones who kneel, luckily. Meaning, all prayers are valuable, not just the “kneelers” (I assume “ones who kneel” means Christians for whom the kneel is a contemporary prayer pose). So, Bono is just respecting the Jews right? Maybe.

But, there is an elephant in the room. Thousands of U2 fans are being inconvenienced. Thousands of U2 fans are going to need to make alternate travel plans and will lose money because of this change in schedule.

That is not fair. It may even be grounds for a law suit. Who knows? Ask your local lawyer for some insight into promissory estoppel and breach of contract.

More importantly, for people like me this has spawned an outrage from U2 fans and others on the NY Time Arts Beats Blog and I am sure other places as well. Now I get to read Jew friendly comments like this and this from rightfully angry fans.

Disturbing as well, is the headline for the blog post on NY Times: It’s a Mitzvah”, insinuating that changing the concert date is a good deed. I disagree. It is not a mitzvah to cause financial harm to innocent U2 fans.

There is one more thing that nags at me about all this. The Jets made their change months ago. U2 knew about the change months ago. Changing the date now may be necessary but it should have been done at the time the Jets made their schedule change. By not making the change and then crossing their fans by changing the date after fans have already made plans and then “blaming” it on a Jewish holiday (it says in the press release “out of respect for the Jewish faith”) gives Jew haters (like this guy) the opening they need to spew their venom. That is just not right.

Take the blame yourself. Don’t blame it on us. That is certainly not a mitzvah.

Mesira (The Jewish Informant) in Halacha

rabbifink — Wed, 12 Aug 2009 13:25:27 +0000

This post has been cross-posted to DovBear – more discussion there.

The topic of mesira is complex. I do not claim expertise on the subject of who is a moser, but I have heard a discourse from an expert on Jewish and American Law named Rabbi Breitowitz. Aside from teaching law at University of Maryland, Rabbi Breitowitz is a practicing Rabbi in Silver Spring Maryland. When I lived in Baltimore, I heard Rabbi Breitowitz speak on the topic of mesira and I was able to find the same speech online to refresh my memory.

This is my basic understanding of his take on mesira.

He mentions three contemporary positions, Reb Moshe Feinstein, the Aruch HaShulchan and Rav Wosner.

He begins with Reb Moshe. Reb Moshe holds that there is a prohibition of mesira when the secular punishment is worse than the Torah’s punishment. A moser has a halachic status of a rodef, one who is trying to kill another, and must be stopped from his mesira. There are 3 big exceptions. 1) When the person about whom the moser is speaking of is a rodef himself. This is because a person who kills a rodef is not a killer nor is his act of attempting to kill the rodef is not considered a rodef. As an aside, a sexual or physical abuser is considered a halachic rodef and thus there is no prohibition of mesira in those situations. 2) If the moser is preventing a major communal disaster then there is no prohibition. 3) If it one’s job to inform, then mesira will not apply.

This is the most narrow view of when one is permitted to be moser that Rabbi Breitowitz mentions.

The Aruch Hashulchan says in a footnote to section 318 in Choshen Mishpat that in a benevolent and fair country where there is a justice system that does not unfairly imprison Jews, one is not guilty of mesira by informing the government of a fellow Jew’s crimes. He continues by saying “for example in wonderful Czarist Russia”. There is a question as to the seriousness of this footnote as he could not have possibly meant that Czarist Russia was fair and benevolent. The question is whether the entire footnote has value or if the entire thing was a false gesture of good faith to the Czar. It is not likely that the Aruch Hashulchan would add a deliberately misleading footnote and the reasoning of his footnote stands whether his country was wonderful or not. Thus, the Tzitz Eliezer holds that the Aruch Hashulchan means that wherever there is a “procedural justice” there is no mesira.

The third opinion is that of Rav Wosner. His approach integrates the rules of dina d’malchusa dina with mesira. His reasoning is that when the non-Jews follow the Noachide law of creating a set of laws it becomes a halachic basis for the Jew to obey those laws. Thus, he concludes that it cannot be possible to violate the prohibition of mesira if one is following the laws of their country. Since, he must follow the laws of that country his mesira is not against halacha. This does not mean one is required to be a moser, rather the reporting is not a violation of mesira.

It is necessary to define when dina d’milchusa dina constitutes to determine when mesira is not prohibited according to Rav Wosner. The Mechaber says that dina d’malchusa dina is limited to government interests. The Rama disagrees and says that it applies to anything that is designed to promote the well being of society. Most poskim agree with this definition which includes but is not limited to, criminal law, minimum wage laws, environmental laws and child labor laws.

In conclusion, mesira is a term bandied about to protect our own criminals. In reality, it is very difficult to pin down a halachic moser according to the Aruch Hashulchan or Rav Wosner and although it is possible according to Reb Moshe to be a moser it is still unlikely. We need to be honest with ourselves and stop hiding behind archaic halachic terms to justify false ideas.

To listen to the entire discourse online click here.

Reversing A Trend | A Kiddush Hashem Story

rabbifink — Mon, 10 Aug 2009 16:52:51 +0000

Lately, all the Jews in the News have been getting into trouble with the law or dying. It has been troubling.

Sometimes, we wonder what other people are saying about us. In light of the last few weeks, it just can’t be good.

This recent (true) anecdote is a change of pace and hopefully it can start a new trend.

Jessica* was driving her car down a Monsey road. Her route was taking her past a non-Jewish camp called Camp Sunshine*. On this particular day Camp Sunshine had a camp trip and as it happens, the buses with the campers was a little late and the camp parents were waiting to pick up their children.

A woman was directing traffic. Her concern was that the parents should not get into the camp before the buses arrived because the buses would not be able to enter to camp. She was stopping traffic in all directions and tryiong to direct the buses around the cars so that the buses could enter and then she would allow the cars to enter.

Unluckily for her, no one was listening to her. People were driving by at high speeds cursing her out as they passed. Irate camp parents were yelling at her as if she could magically conjure the buses into the camp.

Jessica was not going to Camp Sunshine but as she passed the woman who was directing traffic told her to stop. Jessica followed instructions and stopped as people behind her swerved around her ignoring the traffic directing woman. Eventually, people began to stop and order was restored. As the lines of cars waited peacefully for the buses.

The woman struck up conversation with Jessica, they lamented the lack of order, but Jessica reassured her that it was okay, no one is really upset with her and she was doing the right thing. They had a nice 10-15 minute conversation while the buses made their way into camp.

Eventually, traffice was ready to resume and Jessica was being directed into the camp. She stuck out her head and told the woman, “I am actually going somewhere else, can I pass?”. The woman nearly fell over. She exclaimed “You mean, you waited this entire time and you are not even coming into Camp Sunshine?”. Jessica replied in the affirmative.

The woman came over to Jessica’s car and said: “I see that you are an Orthodox Jew. Everyone around here has been talking about the Jewish criminals, the dishonesty and anti-social behavior that we have seen around town. You know what? I am going to tell them all about you. I see that not all Orthodox Jews are like that. They need to know that there are people like you too.”

It is the small things that show the world that we are not represented by some hooligans on CNN.

As Ghandi said “Be the change you wish to see in the world”.

Be the Kiddush Hashem you want to see in others.

And yes, everyone is watching us.

*names have been changed

A Jewish Black Woman's "Henry Gates" Situation

rabbifink — Sun, 02 Aug 2009 02:32:35 +0000

As a Law Student, there are things I find interesting that may not interest “clients” (non-Lawyers, hehe). The following article interests me and will probably interest any lawyer or law student, anyone Jewish, or anyone that has been following the Gates Saga.

I invite you to contribute your opinion in the comments.

The article originally appeared in this week’s Jewish Press as an OP-ED. The writer is Nathan Lewin (read more about him here).

WHAT IF GATES WERE AN UNRENOWNED JEWISH BLACK WOMAN?

Nathan Lewin

Posted Jul 29 2009

Soon after Cambridge police arrested and handcuffed Harvard professor Henry Louis Gates Jr. on a disorderly conduct charge, they realized the black man they wanted to prosecute was a renowned academic. As a result, he was released and the charges against him were dropped.

The ensuing public debate – in which Cambridge authorities now try to justify arresting a man because he refused to comply in his own home with police directions and deny that race had any influence on how the police reacted – suggests that if an ordinary black homeowner, rather than a Harvard professor, had been arrested under these circumstances, the criminal charges would not have been dropped so readily.

Consider the pending case of Rivka – a black, very dark-skinned, extremely devout Orthodox Jewish woman. Rivka is employed in New York, spends Shabbat in Washington, and her work frequently takes her on extended trips overseas. Being single and in her mid-fifties, she rented a 3-bedroom apartment on the West Side of Manhattan, and advertised on Craigslist for female roommates willing to accept short subleases. All applicants were informed by Rivka that the apartment was strictly kosher. A special page prescribing the kashrut rules was added to the lease that each roommate signed.

The rules were followed by a series of women Rivka accepted as roommates. In July 2007, a white blond-haired girl named Brooke answered Rivka’s ad and signed a five-month lease with the kashrut provisions. Brooke promptly violated the kashrut rules and admitted, in sworn testimony, that she brought nonkosher food into the apartment in knowing violation of her signed agreement. Rivka told Brooke she would have to leave.

Having e-mailed Brooke that she had arranged, at her – Rivka’s – expense, for a hotel room where Brooke could stay while she was looking for other accommodations, and believing that Brooke had agreed to have her belongings transported to the other location, Rivka began moving Brooke’s clothing to the hotel. Brooke arrived at the apartment unexpectedly and called the local precinct, reporting, “My roommate is currently stealing stuff out of my room.”

When Rivka returned after depositing Brooke’s belongings in the reserved hotel room, she found two policemen at the apartment with Brooke. The senior police officer (who is white), testified that Rivka showed them the lease and the e-mail she had sent to Brooke, and explained that she had moved Brooke’s belongings to the nearby hotel because she had an agreement with Brooke to do so. Rivka insisted to the officers that she wanted Brooke out of the apartment. The officers testified that Rivka interrupted her conversation with them to spend ten minutes in prayer.

Rivka then left the officers and retreated to her bedroom and locked her door. The officers demanded that she come out. On her cell phone, Rivka called a friend from the Georgetown Synagogue in Washington who had a law degree but was not in private practice. He told her to ask the officers for a warrant and for their precincts and badge numbers. The white policeman said in his testimony that he “did not recall” whether he gave his precinct and badge number.

When Rivka did not emerge voluntarily from her bedroom, the sergeant called the Emergency Services Unit – the police department’s riot squad. They came in full force, with more than one dozen policemen. They broke down the door to Rivka’s bedroom, dragged her into the hall and up against the wall at gunpoint, handcuffed her, and then took her downstairs to a waiting ambulance.

The ambulance drove to a nearby hospital. One of the officers tried to have her committed to the psychiatric unit. After an examination, the hospital said there was no basis to admit her. The police then took Rivka to the police precinct, where she was permitted one phone call. She called a person she had befriended while regularly attending Shabbat services at the Georgetown Synagogue, but the arresting police officer hung up the telephone in the middle of Rivka’s call.

Rivka was then taken to another hospital, where she was handcuffed to a bed. Next morning, she was returned to the precinct. The rabbi at the New York synagogue she attends on weekdays heard of her plight and brought a kosher meal to the precinct – the first meal Rivka had since her arrest the day before.

Rivka was charged with “Obstruction of Governmental Administration in the Second Degree” and with “Unlawful Eviction.” The New York D.A.’s office refused to dismiss the charges even after all the facts were presented. The young prosecutor first demanded that Rivka plead guilty and perform community service and ultimately was willing to accept an unconditional “Adjournment in Contemplation of Dismissal.” Rivka refused to accept any terms other than outright dismissal because she insisted she had done nothing wrong.

The case went to a nonjury trial before a (white) judge who was a former prosecutor. He excluded much defense testimony as irrelevant and hearsay and rejected out of hand Rivka’s right to remain in her own bedroom after her discussion with the police. At the end of the trial, he found Rivka guilty on both counts and fined her $500. Rivka is appealing.

Would the police have broken the bedroom door of a white gentile and charged her with crimes after being called to a dispute between her and a roommate? Is this another instance – as the Gates arrest is said to be – of injustice against blacks, aggravated by Rivka’s Jewish identity?

Rivka is suing New York City, the policemen, and Brooke in federal court. The docket number of her case is 08 Civ. 10065. I am her lawyer.

Nathan Lewin is a Washington attorney who has represented Jewish communities in litigation in federal courts.

Shame on Gizmodo | Shame on Us Too

rabbifink — Mon, 20 Jul 2009 03:21:20 +0000

One of my favorite gadget blogs ran a despicable headline for a post yesterday. Gizmodo is a great blog when it comes to getting information, reviews and opinions on the latest technology and gadgets. Unfortunately, yesterday they disgraced their reputation with a pretty offensive headline.

The headline garnered enough attention that they ultimately changed it to something less offensive.

There is a normal Orthodox Jewish couple who have a vacation home. Originally, the building did not have motion sensing lights but recently changed the system to a motion sensing system. On Shabbos the couple did not wish to be forced to walk in a hallway that would trigger the lights on. They requested the building swap the new system for the old one at their expense. The building refused. The couple sued.

Gizmodo posted the following headline: “Orthodox Couple Imprisoned By Superstition Blame Motion Sensing Light Instead”.

Proof:

Subsequently, the headline was changed to “Orthodox Jewish Couple Sues Over Motion Sensing Light“.

I posted the link on Facebook hoping to get some comments from my Facebook friends. I got a few interesting responses.

One commenter hit the two points that I want to discuss on this blog.

1 – The halachic ramifications of motion sensors and Shabbos for the Orthodox Jew.

2 – The reaction of a non-Jew to a halacha adherent Jew.

I do not want to get into a nitty gritty halachic discourse of motion sensors on Shabbos. Suffice to say, the issue is not black and white. On Shabbos one may not act in a way that will automatically produce a desired result that violates Shabbos. Completing a circuit to turn on a light is a violation of Shabbos. By activated the sensor, one automatically produced the desired result of turning on the light.

There is leeway when the result is not automatic or when the result is not desired.

I am all for striving to keep halacha. When I am met with a choice between what I want and what halacha demands I try my best to choose halacha. So for example, if I am driving late at night and I pull into a rest stop and they have a fast food joint serving burgers that are not kosher I have a choice. I want a burger but halacha demands that my burgers be kosher. I choose to leave the rest stop burgerless. I will not sue the restaurant for not providing kosher burgers. Right?

Now, I know this is a little different from the vacation home. But, it is the same principle. If halacha will not allow for me act a certain way, guess what? I am not going to act that way. Even if I really, really, really want to. So, I know that in the vacation home there are other factors, such as broken promises and flawed reasoning. However, if it were me, or anyone that I advise I would trade that place for a new one.

Adhering to halacha is about making a choice to allow halacha to control your life and not your whims and desires at any given moment. There will be times where the choice is hard or the alternative is very tempting, those are the times where you show your strength of character by making what you believe to be the right choice. Those are not the times to sue because you have been made uncomfortable in your adherence to halacha.

There may be great merit to the lawsuit. I find that all irrelevant. I think, avoiding a legal brouhaha over halacha is more important than the principle of who is right and who is wrong in this situation.

Second, the offensive headline that originally appeared on Gizmodo bothered me. I am NOT an overly sensitive person. I do not cry “Anti-Semitism at every opportunity I get (ala Uncle Leo). I don’t even call this “Anti-Semitism”, I call this insensitivity.

There is nothing against Jewish people, per se, when calling religion a superstition. But there is a tremendous breach of sensitivity.

Gizmodo writer, Jack Lofton doesn’t believe in religion in general and that’s okay. I am not going to call him names about his lack of faith or question his theology publicly. That is just not appropriate for a gadget blog. If he were writing on a religion blog, or even an anti-religion blog then Jack’s opinion about religion might be relevant. Here, it was not and inserting his bigoted opinion was insensitive.

I do not read the headline as an affront to Judaism or even religion in general. I read the headline as an affront to civility.

We live in a big world, with a lot of people. Not everyone is going to agree. You can try and convince everyone you are right or lash out against those who do not. But ultimately, we are not all going to agree. So let agree on this, let’s choose not to fight about our disagreements and otherwise be friends. I mantioned this revolutionary concept on this blog a little while ago. We have more in common than not. Let’s stop fighting about God, or anything else we feel strongly about and move on.

Also, Jack, Gizmodo is the wrong place to make your point about religion.

Time and place, Jack. Showing your prejudice against religion is ugly, it is especially ugly when it is not at all connected to the content of your post. I read Gizmodo for technology news and content. Just because you have a soapbox does not mean you can shout whatever you want whenever you want. Time and place.

Jack, please don’t make fun of other people’s beliefs on one of my favorite gadget blogs. Thanks.

Update: To his credit, the writer apologized.

I Am So Disturbed

rabbifink — Fri, 26 Jun 2009 01:19:34 +0000

UPDATE: Friday morning 6/25/09 I updated the post to more accurately reflect the protagonist’s personality.

I am so disturbed right now.

My wife and I have a summer camp for pre-school children in Monsey NY. That is why we left Los Angeles / Venice for the summer. We don’t own our own camp grounds so during the year we store everything in a shed at my in-laws’ home in Monsey.

Sometime before camp begins we need to get everything from the in-laws to our summer location. Today was moving day. What I heard during the move was disturbing enough to share with you.

We hired a fellow who runs a local moving outfit called B!ny@m!n the Shlepper (BTS). He’s been doing this for 20 years and he basically manages the move while he sits in his truck and his workers do the “Shlepping”, he pays them quite well for their work and then takes his profit. Much of his work is in the Frum community. BTS is not known as a cordial guy to most (he is not a jerk, just not the most personable guy) (AND I think they are wrong) and has had his share of run-ins (customers refusing to pay, customers yelling at him etc) with his customers.

Today, I made an error in my estimated items needing to be moved. Immediately his sensors go off – “is this another Frum guy trying to rip me off?”. Of course it was an honest mistake and I was willing to pay for the extra work.

I apologized profusely. He goes off on a (perfectly understandable) tirade, “you don’t think I am a person”, “you people always try to cheat me” etc. I continued to apologize and we began to talk.

BTS tells me horrible stories of externally observant Jews who have cheated him, spoken rudely with him and treated him like a second class citizen. He drives a large moving truck and when he drives and traffic is jammed, he notes that he gets cut off all the time. He also notes that he gets cut off all the time by religiously dressed Jews. “Why can’t they just let me go first?”.

Now, Binyamin is actually not Frum himself. Very spiritual and personal growth, but not religious. What he can’t understand is why people who claim to be religious and perform mitzvos all the time, very often lack common courtesy and decency.

As we talk I see past the outer crust of his personality and beyond the veneer he is truly a wonderful guy. We laughed together, told some great stories and even a little bit of Torah was discussed. We really had a great conversation and I was actually disappointed when the job was over and our shmooze had to end.

In response to his complaints about externally religious Jews, I remarked that they are so busy being religious they forget to be human! ©

The truth is, I was embarrassed that this Jewish guy had such a bad feeling about religious Jews.We spoke for a while and I tried to assure him that he doesn’t notice all the great things. I also tried to remind him that all the negative stuff he hears sticks out to him, but people don’t remember when others act appropriately.

Bottom line, it was damage control.

Folks, get your priorities straight!

Step One: Act like decent human being. – Derech Eretz Kadma L’Torah, common courtesy precedes Torah.

Step Two: Integrate Torah and Mitzvos into your life.

Rinse, wash, repeat.

If you dress like a religious Jew, you are expected to act like it. It boggles my mind how insensitive, unaware and obtuse some Torah observant Jews can be. The same Torah that says keep Kosher, lay Tefillin, observe Shabbos, study Torah, Shofar, Lulav, Yom Kippur ALSO says to treat people with respect, honor our planet, act humanely towards animals and love your neighbor. We need to work on keeping all of those.

Please, I beg you, realize that you are representing the Jewish people. Act like it.

Thanks.

What Is The Appropriate Reaction?

rabbifink — Tue, 16 Jun 2009 15:02:18 +0000

This post has been cross-posted to DovBear. – more discussion there.

In addition to my work as the Rabbi at Pacific Jewish Center at the Shul on the Beach I am also a Law Student at Loyola Law School in Los Angeles. I am part of the evening program and completed my first year of evening classes in May.

In December I was subjected to mid-terms in each of my courses. Many Law School exams are long fact patterns that require the student to analyze the facts and apply all the law that is relevant to the facts and then argue why the law should or should not apply to those facts. Usually these fact patterns are fiction and these essays are typically 3 – 4 hours in duration.

My torts professor gave us a very interesting fact pattern. The basics of the case were, two young boys named Israel and Jacob enter an elevator on their way to school. Along the way the elevator malfunctions and the boys are suspended between the 10th and 11th floor. The doors malfunction as well and the doors are opened. The younger boy, Jacob is 5 and he tries to jump from the stuck elevator to the 10th floor below. Jacob jumps and does not “stick the landing“. Unfortunately, he stumbles off the 10th floor and plummeted 10 stories beneath the elevator down the shaft to his death. Israel is eventually rescued.

There were many more legally operative facts in the fact pattern and our professor wanted us to analyze the claims against the building landlord, owner and elevator maintenance company.

It was a pretty shocking case for all of us. When we returned to school after the break our professor told us that the fact pattern was basically a true story with some of the facts changed to make a clearer essay. Immediately I “googled” “Jacob Israel Elevator”. I found the original NY Times article with the tragic story.

Yesterday the Times had another article on the ongoing litigation. Apparently, the defense wants young Israel, who is 10 and traumatized to testify. This is horrible as any memories of the tragedy could alter his psychological well being tremendously. The case is being litigated as you read this.

I told this entire saga to two people I know. They are both very caring and sensitive people. They both had the same reaction and that reaction is what prompted this post.

When I told the story over, both people had serious looks on their faces and clearly empathized with the poor child.

Then I told them, by the way, the little boys were Chasidish children from Williamsburg.

They both had the same second reaction. Their jaws dropped and they exclaimed Oy! That’s terrible! A much harsher reaction reaction than before they knew the boys’ ethnicity.

At first I was disturbed. Do we care more about some poor Chasidish kids from Williamsburg than anyone else? Is this tragedy worse to us because they are Jewish?

Is this a good attitude? Could this bother non-Jews and provoke anti-semitism?

Or, perhaps it is normal for us to care more about our Jewish brethren. Maybe, we should feel more compassion for our fellow Jews. After all, it is a rule of Jewish law that we are responsible for one another.

This has been gnawing at me for a little while now. Should we care more about a Jewish tragedy than a non-Jewish tragedy?

Even if we are allowed to care more about a Jewish tragedy should we try and mask our feelings to be more politically correct?

Aren’t we outraged when non-Jews do not care about Jewish tragedy as much as non-Jewish tragedy?

Where Is The Outrage? | The Plight of Middle Eastern Jewry

rabbifink — Wed, 10 Jun 2009 11:43:46 +0000

This post has been cross posted to DovBear – great discussion there.

Do Anglo/American Jews care enough about our middle-eastern Jewish brothers and sisters?

Yesterday DovBear posted a really great Op-Ed piece from the NY Times.

In fact. before checking his blog I even emailed the article to him as I assumed he would find it interesting.

Of course, I was too late as it had already been posted!

What occurred subsequent to his posting of the article was even more interesting.

But first let’s go to the NY Times column. An exiled Egyptian Jew recounts the persecution his family experienced in Egypt. His issue is that President Obama took the time to mention the suffering of Palestinians and ignored the suffering of middle-eastern Jews outside of Israel. A worthwhile read.

DovBear posted the article and it got very little attention from the commenters. As opposed to a three day running argument about Mesorah (Part 1, Part 2, Part 3) that got hundreds and hundreds of comments.

On Twitter DovBear posted this observation:

Egyptian Jew criticizes Obama in Times oped. TBF [to be fair], when was the last time any Ashkenazi Jew shed a tear for what happened to MidEastJews?

I responded with my experience:

R’ Herman Neuberger dedicated YEARS of his life to save Iranian Jews. TBF – he not only shed tears, but years and saved thousands.

Which DovBear countered with a hilarious (and sad) take:

kol hakovod [kudos] for your yachid [individual]. Average cholent fresser [eater] from flatbush doesn’t know and doesnt care.

It seems to me that DovBear is right. Where is the outrage from Ashkenazic Jews? Why does it seem like we don’t care?

The rest of this post is dedicated to bringing awareness to the plight of middle-eastern Jewry and an invitation for those of you may have first hand information regarding living as a Jew in Iran, Iraq, Egypt or any other middle-eastern country to contribute.

My first step was to contact a grandson of the aforementioned Rabbi Herman Neuberger.

Eli Neuberger relayed the following history of Iranian Jewry that is related to his grandfather’s involvement. (I have edited his comments for brevity, grammar and overall fluidity.)

The traditional Iranian Jewish schools were run by an umbrella organization called Otzar HaTorah.In the mid 70′s the Shah and his government decided to nationalise all religious schools, Jewish and Islam alike in order to curb the radical influence that was gaining traction amongst the Muslims. My Grandfather was approached by a Mr. Sasson from London, to travel to Iran to negotiate with the Government in order to minimize secular influence on religious studies.

While in Iran, my Grandfather visited the community in Shiraz. He thought that if a group of promising Iranians would come to learn at the Ner Israel Rabbinical College (NIRC), where he was the Dean. Then they could return to Iran and become the Klei Kodesh (spiritual leaders) that could lead the community.The first group arrived in 1977.

Meanwhile in 1979 the Shah was overthrown by radical Islamists.The students in NIRC could not expect to return home. At the time, many Iranian Jews were able to leave Iran and when they arrived in Austria, Italy etc. they were granted refugee status and were able to continue on to the US.

The situation became far more dire in 1980 when the Iran-Iraq war started.Boys as young as 12-13 were sent to the front lines to be used as mine sweepers. Many Jews were smuggled to Turkey or Pakistan. These trips were fraught with danger, even after they were able to leave Iran. My grandfather was instrumental in assuring good treatment in Turkey and safe passage to Europe. He made many trips to the corridors of power in DC to speak to Congressman,Senators and Diplomats to be able to insure this continuing clandestine exodus.

Many of the boys that made the harrowing trip came to study Torah in NIRC.

All this good work was done behind the scenes and with very little fanfare.

According to the never accurate Wikipedia, Rabbi Neuberger was instrumental in saving 60,000 Iranian Jews.

I contacted another friend of mine, Natan Davoodi. His family is Iranian (in LA they are called Persian).

He told me that as far as he knows the non-Jews only tolerate the Jews of they can exploited for the benefit of the non-Jew. That doesn’t sound very good.

I would be remiss if I did not mention Roger Cohen. A NY Times columnist, Cohen has a thing for the Iranians. He thinks all is honky-dory in Iran. He writes about it here and here. Absolute disgrace.

I would like to hear from you if you know of any injsutice to Jewish people in middle-eastern countries (outside of Israel). Just telling those stories will get the ball rolling.

We are all brothers and sisters and there is no excuse for ignoring their plight.

Irresponsible Journalism From the New York Times

rabbifink — Fri, 03 Apr 2009 22:26:10 +0000

the NY Times has a section in their online newspaper called “The Lede”. It is often chock full of interesting links and thought on the news of the times. I have been inspired to post links to The Lede before in my blog post about “Bus Ads in London proclaiming there is no GD”.

Today, The Lede has a tremendously misleading post about women’s rights. Women have been fighting for equality of rights in America for years. Their right to vote was only recently (relatively) added to the Bill of Rights. Title VII and Title IX are recent acts of legislature to attempt to enforce equality for women.

It is not as if the United States has ALWAYS treated women equally. But now that we do treat women equally in America we are permitted to look down upon anyone who does not (sarcasm emphasized).It is so short sighted to act as if women have been equal to men in the United States forever. It also, somehow, gives rise to the right to point at any other culture which does not share our equality of women. I think it is deplorable that any culture not give women access to all rights that exist for men.

Many people point to Judaism as a culture which looks down upon women. In fact one of the egregious acts which The Lede cited was a Jewish newspaper using Photoshop to remove 2 women from a photo of Knesset members. The press has portrayed this as some sort of protest against women in government. Nothing could be further from the truth.

The newspaper is distributed exclusively in the very religious neighborhoods where men do not look at women who are not their immediate family. Never. This is not a matter of rights, it is a matter of being careful with their sexuality. These people are holy people. These people do not want to have thought of women racing through their minds. These people want to maintain a purity which can only be achieved by removing all distractions from their lives. It is to admired and yet, it is not a lifestyle for most of us. They do not ask that we behave this way, they do not punish those who think differently, they merely feel that looking at women could be bad for their souls.

Personally, I don’t think this is the right way to observe Judaism. I do not approve of this way of life. I explain it only to demonstrate that these are peace loving people who try to keep to themselves and do not wish to look at women.

I have a different way of approaching women in Judaism and I will be talking and writing about it in the coming weeks. One who looks into the stories of the Torah and Talmud sees women as being above men. Men are constantly deferring to women in the Torah, as we shall learn together.

The Lede feels that this is somehow newsworthy to the point that it is in the same article as flogging women and homosexuals in Pakistan and a severe curtailing of rights in Afghanistan. That is preposterous. No one is hurt by men wishing not to see women. Women have the same rights as men. It is not out of chauvanism or disrespect that holy men refrain from looking at women. Yet, it somehow reaches the same level of audacity as flogging women and homosexuals!!!

Shame on The Lede for this article. It really bothers me. And yet, I disagree with the mentality of those very religious Jews – but I respect their culture. The NY Times does not.

Don't Be A Hater

rabbifink — Thu, 12 Feb 2009 23:51:21 +0000

Here is a video for you.

Those who know me personally will attest that I am not a card carrying member of the “Woe is us, anti-anti-semitism” club. However, I did recently blog about tolerance and therefore this video clip is relevant. I do not endorse any comments made by the person who posted this video on You Tube. The only reason I am posting this video is to illustrate that Hate exists. Hate is ugly and Hate needs to stop.

I make these comments to address those who may hate me or us from outside of Judaism and equally to my Jewish brethren. We have enough people who hate us, we can’t afford any discord amongst ourselves. We have too much in common to focus on the differences. When you watch this video I think you should consider if there is too much hate in your life. If there is too much hate – you gotta get rid of it.

Try this mantra: “Don’t be a hater”.

It may help…

Video is below.

<a href="http://youtube.com/watch?v=QBF-1uc-SYc&eurl">http://youtube.com/watch?v=QBF-1uc-SYc&eurl</a>

This is in America, in Chicago. What do you think is going on in Europe and the Middle East?

Jew-kipedia and Tolerance

rabbifink — Tue, 10 Feb 2009 23:55:37 +0000

Last week I was checking out Wikipedia and I was browsing the “Main Page”. You can always find an article by searching Wikipedia but you can also browse interesting tidbits on Main Page. Sections like “On this day” and “Did you know” display linked Wikipedia articles for your enjoyment. This page changes frequently, at least several times per day.

At the precise moment that I was looking at the page I saw this:

As you can see, there are 8 bullet points. Three of the eight articles directly relate to something Jewish. That is a very high percentage (38%).

The Jewish population is estimated at around 13 million. The world population is at around 6.8 billion. Some quick math puts the Jewish world population at just under .2%.

The sampling of those Wikipedia articles is way disproportionate to the number of Jewish people in the world. Maybe we should just call it Jew-kipedia.

It is not surprising though. There have been 180 Jewish Nobel Prize winners (that’s a lot) and we have been around for a long time. The impact the Jewish people have had on the world has been the topic of many books. Perhaps the best of those books is “A History of the Jews” by Paul Johnson who is a scholar on Christianity.

What is somewhat troublesome however is the still rampant anti-semitism that exists. The Jewish population is so small yet still garners hatred and disdain from so many. It’s 2009 people, time to move on! This article is particularly troubling. 31% of Euros think that the Jewish people are responsible for the economic crisis! How is that even possible? Where do they come up with this stuff?

If you need more and you’re a glutton for punishment, then read this article.

Really, all you need to do is a google search for “Jew”.

Our world has progressed so much and yet we remain so backwards in so many ways. One word that needs to be taught and emphasized over and over again is tolerance.

Within the Jewish community we are just as guilty of this. We need to be tolerant of each other and our various customs as well. We have to find the common ground between us. Harmony and love will bring our world to a better place. Divisiveness and scorn certainly won’t.

Say it: Tolerance, tolerance, tolerance.

Now do it: Tolerate, tolerate, tolerate.