Comments on: The writing was plastered all over the wall, signed by Rabbis http://israleft.org/?p=70 Airing out Israel's dirty laundry Mon, 23 Aug 2010 21:57:18 -0700 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: Brown Brownie http://israleft.org/?p=70&cpage=1#comment-98 Brown Brownie Wed, 05 Aug 2009 11:53:40 +0000 http://israleft.org/?p=70#comment-98 @<a href="#comment-96" rel="nofollow">Or Bareket</a>: You have every right to call yourself a Rabbi - this title is free to use, and unregulated. I promise to respect your title as a Rabbi just like I do with any other Rabbis. @Or Bareket: You have every right to call yourself a Rabbi – this title is free to use, and unregulated. I promise to respect your title as a Rabbi just like I do with any other Rabbis.

]]> By: Or Bareket http://israleft.org/?p=70&cpage=1#comment-96 Or Bareket Wed, 05 Aug 2009 09:20:03 +0000 http://israleft.org/?p=70#comment-96 I think I'd like being a rabbi - I can say whatever I want without any accountability. there will always be the ones to explain how I was misunderstood, "you don't know the halacha" "he actually meant this" etc.etc. I think I’d like being a rabbi – I can say whatever I want without any accountability. there will always be the ones to explain how I was misunderstood, “you don’t know the halacha” “he actually meant this” etc.etc.

]]> By: Rod Avissar http://israleft.org/?p=70&cpage=1#comment-95 Rod Avissar Wed, 05 Aug 2009 07:26:22 +0000 http://israleft.org/?p=70#comment-95 @<a href="#comment-94" rel="nofollow">Pinchas</a>: A. You claim <i>"Consider this: The leading Rabbis in Israel have published hundreds of books and given thousands of lectures, and you haven’t been able to find one clear statement where a leading Rabbi encourages or even permits one to murder a homosexual"</i> That is not true. Elad brought many examples of Israeli leading religious figures permitting the blood of Homosexuals. You don't need to go any further than calling them Amalekites, really. I'm sure I don't have to tell you what that means. That's exactly the point. You're claiming, and not for the first time, that unless a rabbi stated "Dear followers of mine, do kill homosexuals" this isn't incitement. Would you have felt the same way towards a priest saying Jews are like a limping horse? Probably not. Saying that a pride parade must be stopped and that this time, we are all Phinehas, means just that - that we should all perform the very same act of zeal. What other commentary can you possibly find to this sentence? Saying, as did Nissim Ze'ev, that Homosexuals should be treated like avian flu - please, explain to me how this is not incitement. Saying that homosexuals pose a grave danger to Jews wherever they are (Anyone said Moyser?) - that's permitting their killing, as any sane person knows that they are allowed to kill a person who puts them in grave danger. B. <i>"Instead you have opted to put together a series of statements interspersed with your own mindless interpretations and innuendo to confuse the uninitiated.</i> Oh, no one in his right mind would even need Elad's insightful comments, though I'm glad he shared them with us. The series of statements, as you so eloquently put it, is clear enough within itself to anyone who knows who Phinehas was or what Amalekites mean. C. <i>"If leading Rabbis such as Ovadiah Yosef (who you called “arguably the most popular of them all”) had been calling for gays to be killed, incidents like these would be routine or else no one listens to the Rabbis altogether and you would have nothing to worry about anyway"</i> That is fantastically untrue, and the sad thing is I am sure that you knew it was when you wrote it. A few months ago, Rabbi Yuval Sharlo raised quite a stir when he permitted, under certain circumstances, pregnancy via artificial insemination. Women weren't lining up for donations. The reason is, of course, the gap between "Permitted" and "Ordered". Permitting something is not ordering it. In our case, it is enough that several of Israel's important rabbis permitted - gave spiritual license to - the killing of homosexuals, for them to be trialed for incitement, which obviously didn't happen. An old joke says that in Soviet Russia, what wasn't forbidden was mandatory, and the trick was to remember which is which. Surely you're not holding that Judaism works the same way, are you? Furthermore, you're claiming that the only way to see if rabbis have incited is after their words are carried out. If there aren't many cases of religious people killing homosexuals, you're holding, that means words that are unquestionably harsh aren't that harsh at all. Fortunately, you're dead wrong. Yelling "Fire" in a theatre is wrong even if no one listens to you, or no one gets hurt during evacuation. It's wrong a-priori. Moreover, I can turn that argument around so fast your head will spin. In 2005, a young Charedi by the name of Yishai Schlisel tried to stab pride parade participants, injuring three. Since he did that, and since he is a believer, and since you hold that people follow their rabbis <i>en masse in corpore</i>, that means that obviously he was pushed towards this by his rabbis. He would not have done it if they had told him otherwise, right? D. <i>"A very important aspect of Orthodox Judaism is “Yitamu Chatoim min Hooretz” and the Talmud’s interpretation “Chatoim veloi choiteim” i.e. sin should die but not sinners. These Rabbis are calling in no uncertain terms for homosexuality to be wiped out insofar as they believe it to be a sin."</i> Fortunately, in Hebrew - much like in English - the subject of a sentence is clear. When rabbis say "Otam", "Hem" (They, them) they mean just that - the people. Calling homosexual<b>s</b> Amalekites (And not, as you hold, calling homosexual<b>ity</b> "Amalekites", which both makes no sense in a sentence and also is not what the text reads) means homosexuals, not homsexuality, should be wiped off the face of Earth, because it is Amalekites, not Amaelikiteness, who should be wiped. We are not illeterate. Oh, and by the way, finish your sentence. "Vetamu chataim mehaaretz vehareshaim on einam" - And evil people are no more. Which, of course, is later used to explain "Mitzva Le'abed" - the order to kill people who practice Avoda Zara. We know our Judaism around here. E.<i>"Ovadiah Yosef was calling for people to publicly protest what he see’s as immorality, and Moshe Shternbuch was calling for homosexuality to wiped out. As someone who has listened to hundreds of Rabbinical lectures, this is obvious. How many Rabbinical lectures have you listened to? You might want to listen to a few yourself before you position yourself as their interpretors."</i> I love this argument, because it is dead wrong twice. First, I listened to dozens of rabbinical lectures. In Hebrew, mind you. I speak the language fluently, and I know for sure that rabbis say what they mean, and quite clearly. In fact, it's a Jewish principle. Not only is what you're saying not obvious from the texts which you have never laid eyes upon, it is quite entirely NOT what they have said, as I have shown above. But let's suppose you are right. Let's suppose no one who had listened to a single rabbinical lecture would even dare think that calling homosexual Amalekites means it is a mitzva to kill them (Although, that exactly what it means). What happens with all of those who never attended a rabbinical class in their lives? These things weren't said in a classroom filled with educated students. They were plastered all over the wall, said on TV and radio. They can be understood as a cry for murder - in fact, the person who put up the plaster photos Elad linked to to begin with is a religious person, and he understood them as such - and people should exercise more care when talking in public. Especially, since religious people have been known to attempt physical assaults on homosexuals before. F. <i>"Blaming Rabbis for for the murders of gays because they speak out against homosexuality is like blaming Priests for the murder of abortionists because they call them murderers (If you properly understood the Rabbinical position this analogy would make more sense)."</i> So, if priests all over the US start calling Jews traitors and saying it might be nice if Judaism ceased to exist, you wouldn't blame them when a crazed believer goes on a shooting spree in a schull? Surely, being anti-Judaism doesn't mean one wants to kill Jews, right? And the nice thing about this example, apart from showing Jewish double standards to their full extent, is that it's not even close to what was really published. Because, once again, rabbis called loud and clear to wipe off homosexuals, not homosexuality. So, if a priest would say that Jews are the modren Amalekites and Christian followers are the modern Jews, you'd say it's OK, right? Because, you know, anyone who had attended Sunday school knows that the priest was talking about Judaism, not Jews, even though he used the word Jews, and thus the priest cannot be held responsible if one of his followers actually went and killed Jews, right? G. <i>"And you are completely wrong once again when you state that, “If Israel had Halakha-law, gays might be put to death, like in Iran.” Comparing the death penalty in the Koran to that of the bible is a favorite tactic of those seeking to demonize the bible. But little could be further from the truth."</i> Go look at Leviticus 20:13. Read carefully. You say that comparing the death penalty in the Kuran and in the bible is wrong. Do explain what the difference is between the texts. H. <i>"There are far too many conditions to satisfy the death penalty by a Jewish court so gays would have roughly the same chance of being put to death for homosexuality in Texas as they would have in a Rabbinic court 2000 years ago, much less today." </i> First off, as someone who had attended hundreds of rabbinical lectures, you didn't pay close attention. These "Limitations" are in the Talmud, not the bible. They are the limitations on any death penalty, not special for homosexuals - You need Sanhedrin, you need a temple (Surely, under Halacha law, those will be around) and two witnesses who had also warned the horrible sinner who dared loving someone from the same sex about his actions. You do NOT need a king. In fact, Sanhedrin was operating and handing out death penalties even after Herodes had died. Get your facts together. Now, Elad claimed that "If Israel had Halacha law, gays might be put to death". That sentence is entirely true. You're claim - that it won't be as easy as it is in Iran - is nice, although arguable, but entirely irrelevant. Elad's statement is valid and true. Halacha law punishes homosexualism with stoning to death. Better luck next time, though. @Pinchas:
A. You claim “Consider this: The leading Rabbis in Israel have published hundreds of books and given thousands of lectures, and you haven’t been able to find one clear statement where a leading Rabbi encourages or even permits one to murder a homosexual”
That is not true. Elad brought many examples of Israeli leading religious figures permitting the blood of Homosexuals. You don’t need to go any further than calling them Amalekites, really. I’m sure I don’t have to tell you what that means. That’s exactly the point. You’re claiming, and not for the first time, that unless a rabbi stated “Dear followers of mine, do kill homosexuals” this isn’t incitement. Would you have felt the same way towards a priest saying Jews are like a limping horse? Probably not. Saying that a pride parade must be stopped and that this time, we are all Phinehas, means just that – that we should all perform the very same act of zeal. What other commentary can you possibly find to this sentence? Saying, as did Nissim Ze’ev, that Homosexuals should be treated like avian flu – please, explain to me how this is not incitement. Saying that homosexuals pose a grave danger to Jews wherever they are (Anyone said Moyser?) – that’s permitting their killing, as any sane person knows that they are allowed to kill a person who puts them in grave danger.
B. “Instead you have opted to put together a series of statements interspersed with your own mindless interpretations and innuendo to confuse the uninitiated.
Oh, no one in his right mind would even need Elad’s insightful comments, though I’m glad he shared them with us. The series of statements, as you so eloquently put it, is clear enough within itself to anyone who knows who Phinehas was or what Amalekites mean.
C. “If leading Rabbis such as Ovadiah Yosef (who you called “arguably the most popular of them all”) had been calling for gays to be killed, incidents like these would be routine or else no one listens to the Rabbis altogether and you would have nothing to worry about anyway”
That is fantastically untrue, and the sad thing is I am sure that you knew it was when you wrote it. A few months ago, Rabbi Yuval Sharlo raised quite a stir when he permitted, under certain circumstances, pregnancy via artificial insemination. Women weren’t lining up for donations. The reason is, of course, the gap between “Permitted” and “Ordered”. Permitting something is not ordering it. In our case, it is enough that several of Israel’s important rabbis permitted – gave spiritual license to – the killing of homosexuals, for them to be trialed for incitement, which obviously didn’t happen. An old joke says that in Soviet Russia, what wasn’t forbidden was mandatory, and the trick was to remember which is which. Surely you’re not holding that Judaism works the same way, are you?
Furthermore, you’re claiming that the only way to see if rabbis have incited is after their words are carried out. If there aren’t many cases of religious people killing homosexuals, you’re holding, that means words that are unquestionably harsh aren’t that harsh at all. Fortunately, you’re dead wrong. Yelling “Fire” in a theatre is wrong even if no one listens to you, or no one gets hurt during evacuation. It’s wrong a-priori.
Moreover, I can turn that argument around so fast your head will spin. In 2005, a young Charedi by the name of Yishai Schlisel tried to stab pride parade participants, injuring three. Since he did that, and since he is a believer, and since you hold that people follow their rabbis en masse in corpore, that means that obviously he was pushed towards this by his rabbis. He would not have done it if they had told him otherwise, right?
D. “A very important aspect of Orthodox Judaism is “Yitamu Chatoim min Hooretz” and the Talmud’s interpretation “Chatoim veloi choiteim” i.e. sin should die but not sinners.
These Rabbis are calling in no uncertain terms for homosexuality to be wiped out insofar as they believe it to be a sin.”
Fortunately, in Hebrew – much like in English – the subject of a sentence is clear. When rabbis say “Otam”, “Hem” (They, them) they mean just that – the people. Calling homosexuals Amalekites (And not, as you hold, calling homosexuality “Amalekites”, which both makes no sense in a sentence and also is not what the text reads) means homosexuals, not homsexuality, should be wiped off the face of Earth, because it is Amalekites, not Amaelikiteness, who should be wiped. We are not illeterate.
Oh, and by the way, finish your sentence. “Vetamu chataim mehaaretz vehareshaim on einam” – And evil people are no more. Which, of course, is later used to explain “Mitzva Le’abed” – the order to kill people who practice Avoda Zara. We know our Judaism around here.
E.“Ovadiah Yosef was calling for people to publicly protest what he see’s as immorality, and Moshe Shternbuch was calling for homosexuality to wiped out.
As someone who has listened to hundreds of Rabbinical lectures, this is obvious. How many Rabbinical lectures have you listened to? You might want to listen to a few yourself before you position yourself as their interpretors.”
I love this argument, because it is dead wrong twice. First, I listened to dozens of rabbinical lectures. In Hebrew, mind you. I speak the language fluently, and I know for sure that rabbis say what they mean, and quite clearly. In fact, it’s a Jewish principle. Not only is what you’re saying not obvious from the texts which you have never laid eyes upon, it is quite entirely NOT what they have said, as I have shown above.
But let’s suppose you are right. Let’s suppose no one who had listened to a single rabbinical lecture would even dare think that calling homosexual Amalekites means it is a mitzva to kill them (Although, that exactly what it means). What happens with all of those who never attended a rabbinical class in their lives? These things weren’t said in a classroom filled with educated students. They were plastered all over the wall, said on TV and radio. They can be understood as a cry for murder – in fact, the person who put up the plaster photos Elad linked to to begin with is a religious person, and he understood them as such – and people should exercise more care when talking in public. Especially, since religious people have been known to attempt physical assaults on homosexuals before.
F. “Blaming Rabbis for for the murders of gays because they speak out against homosexuality is like blaming Priests for the murder of abortionists because they call them murderers (If you properly understood the Rabbinical position this analogy would make more sense).” So, if priests all over the US start calling Jews traitors and saying it might be nice if Judaism ceased to exist, you wouldn’t blame them when a crazed believer goes on a shooting spree in a schull? Surely, being anti-Judaism doesn’t mean one wants to kill Jews, right?
And the nice thing about this example, apart from showing Jewish double standards to their full extent, is that it’s not even close to what was really published. Because, once again, rabbis called loud and clear to wipe off homosexuals, not homosexuality. So, if a priest would say that Jews are the modren Amalekites and Christian followers are the modern Jews, you’d say it’s OK, right? Because, you know, anyone who had attended Sunday school knows that the priest was talking about Judaism, not Jews, even though he used the word Jews, and thus the priest cannot be held responsible if one of his followers actually went and killed Jews, right?
G. “And you are completely wrong once again when you state that, “If Israel had Halakha-law, gays might be put to death, like in Iran.”
Comparing the death penalty in the Koran to that of the bible is a favorite tactic of those seeking to demonize the bible. But little could be further from the truth.”
Go look at Leviticus 20:13. Read carefully. You say that comparing the death penalty in the Kuran and in the bible is wrong. Do explain what the difference is between the texts.
H. “There are far too many conditions to satisfy the death penalty by a Jewish court so gays would have roughly the same chance of being put to death for homosexuality in Texas as they would have in a Rabbinic court 2000 years ago, much less today.” First off, as someone who had attended hundreds of rabbinical lectures, you didn’t pay close attention. These “Limitations” are in the Talmud, not the bible. They are the limitations on any death penalty, not special for homosexuals – You need Sanhedrin, you need a temple (Surely, under Halacha law, those will be around) and two witnesses who had also warned the horrible sinner who dared loving someone from the same sex about his actions. You do NOT need a king. In fact, Sanhedrin was operating and handing out death penalties even after Herodes had died. Get your facts together.
Now, Elad claimed that “If Israel had Halacha law, gays might be put to death”. That sentence is entirely true. You’re claim – that it won’t be as easy as it is in Iran – is nice, although arguable, but entirely irrelevant. Elad’s statement is valid and true. Halacha law punishes homosexualism with stoning to death.

Better luck next time, though.

]]> By: Pinchas http://israleft.org/?p=70&cpage=1#comment-94 Pinchas Wed, 05 Aug 2009 03:24:50 +0000 http://israleft.org/?p=70#comment-94 Consider this: The leading Rabbis in Israel have published hundreds of books and given thousands of lectures, and you haven't been able to find one clear statement where a leading Rabbi encourages or even permits one to murder a homosexual Instead you have opted to put together a series of statements interspersed with your own mindless interpretations and innuendo to confuse the uninitiated. If orthodox Jews had twisted these statements as much as you have, these murders would be more common. But your elaborate conspiracy theory is demonstrably wrong for several reasons. If leading Rabbis such as Ovadiah Yosef (who you called "arguably the most popular of them all") had been calling for gays to be killed, incidents like these would be routine or else no one listens to the Rabbis altogether and you would have nothing to worry about anyway. Many many people hang off every word he says, and follow his instructions to the letter. A very important aspect of Orthodox Judaism is “Yitamu Chatoim min Hooretz” and the Talmud's interpretation “Chatoim veloi choiteim” i.e. sin should die but not sinners. These Rabbis are calling in no uncertain terms for homosexuality to be wiped out insofar as they believe it to be a sin. Ovadiah Yosef was calling for people to publicly protest what he see's as immorality, and Moshe Shternbuch was calling for homosexuality to wiped out. As someone who has listened to hundreds of Rabbinical lectures, this is obvious. How many Rabbinical lectures have you listened to? You might want to listen to a few yourself before you position yourself as their interpretors. Blaming Rabbis for for the murders of gays because they speak out against homosexuality is like blaming Priests for the murder of abortionists because they call them murderers (If you properly understood the Rabbinical position this analogy would make more sense). The fact that these incidents are so rare is proof positive that orthodox Jews don't interpret these statements the way you have. And the few madmen that carry out these acts have more serious problems than just a lack of religious spirit. And you are completely wrong once again when you state that, "If Israel had Halakha-law, gays might be put to death, like in Iran." Comparing the death penalty in the Koran to that of the bible is a favorite tactic of those seeking to demonize the bible. But little could be further from the truth. There are far too many conditions to satisfy the death penalty by a Jewish court so gays would have roughly the same chance of being put to death for homosexuality in Texas as they would have in a Rabbinic court 2000 years ago, much less today. Not to mention that the death penalty cannot be carried out without a sanhedrin, temple, sacrifices, king etc. etc. according to Jewish law itself. Consider this: The leading Rabbis in Israel have published hundreds of books and given thousands of lectures, and you haven’t been able to find one clear statement where a leading Rabbi encourages or even permits one to murder a homosexual

Instead you have opted to put together a series of statements interspersed with your own mindless interpretations and innuendo to confuse the uninitiated. If orthodox Jews had twisted these statements as much as you have, these murders would be more common. But your elaborate conspiracy theory is demonstrably wrong for several reasons.

If leading Rabbis such as Ovadiah Yosef (who you called “arguably the most popular of them all”) had been calling for gays to be killed, incidents like these would be routine or else no one listens to the Rabbis altogether and you would have nothing to worry about anyway. Many many people hang off every word he says, and follow his instructions to the letter.

A very important aspect of Orthodox Judaism is “Yitamu Chatoim min Hooretz” and the Talmud’s interpretation “Chatoim veloi choiteim” i.e. sin should die but not sinners.
These Rabbis are calling in no uncertain terms for homosexuality to be wiped out insofar as they believe it to be a sin. Ovadiah Yosef was calling for people to publicly protest what he see’s as immorality, and Moshe Shternbuch was calling for homosexuality to wiped out.
As someone who has listened to hundreds of Rabbinical lectures, this is obvious. How many Rabbinical lectures have you listened to? You might want to listen to a few yourself before you position yourself as their interpretors.

Blaming Rabbis for for the murders of gays because they speak out against homosexuality is like blaming Priests for the murder of abortionists because they call them murderers (If you properly understood the Rabbinical position this analogy would make more sense). The fact that these incidents are so rare is proof positive that orthodox Jews don’t interpret these statements the way you have.
And the few madmen that carry out these acts have more serious problems than just a lack of religious spirit.

And you are completely wrong once again when you state that, “If Israel had Halakha-law, gays might be put to death, like in Iran.”
Comparing the death penalty in the Koran to that of the bible is a favorite tactic of those seeking to demonize the bible. But little could be further from the truth.
There are far too many conditions to satisfy the death penalty by a Jewish court so gays would have roughly the same chance of being put to death for homosexuality in Texas as they would have in a Rabbinic court 2000 years ago, much less today. Not to mention that the death penalty cannot be carried out without a sanhedrin, temple, sacrifices, king etc. etc. according to Jewish law itself.

]]> By: elad-vav http://israleft.org/?p=70&cpage=1#comment-93 elad-vav Tue, 04 Aug 2009 11:56:27 +0000 http://israleft.org/?p=70#comment-93 I wish Aner Ravon was here. He would explain to us how we're Jewish because society thinks we're Jewish, and thus our organs *must* be buried with our body since otherwise it offends other Jews; who are our brothers, since society considers us Jewish. Actually, coming form that frame of mind, that's a damn good argument. I wish Aner Ravon was here. He would explain to us how we’re Jewish because society thinks we’re Jewish, and thus our organs *must* be buried with our body since otherwise it offends other Jews; who are our brothers, since society considers us Jewish.

Actually, coming form that frame of mind, that’s a damn good argument.

]]> By: Rod Avissar http://israleft.org/?p=70&cpage=1#comment-92 Rod Avissar Tue, 04 Aug 2009 11:44:21 +0000 http://israleft.org/?p=70#comment-92 @<a href="#comment-89" rel="nofollow">rationalbob</a>: I wonder. If Zaka are all about selfless acts of humanity, why is it I cannot choose where and how my body will be disposed of? Selfless acts of humanity are rarely forced down their recievers' throats. @rationalbob: I wonder. If Zaka are all about selfless acts of humanity, why is it I cannot choose where and how my body will be disposed of? Selfless acts of humanity are rarely forced down their recievers’ throats.

]]> By: elad-vav http://israleft.org/?p=70&cpage=1#comment-91 elad-vav Tue, 04 Aug 2009 10:53:29 +0000 http://israleft.org/?p=70#comment-91 @<a href="#comment-89" rel="nofollow">rationalbob</a>: Thanks for the well-thought-out critique. You're obviously wrong. :) Zaka performs "selfless acts of humanity". Yes, much like the Mormons who baptize Holocaust victims after their death are doing selfless acts of humanity. That is, these acts are considered good by the people doing them. In particular, I hereby ask that when I die, my body not be handled by Zaka people. (I was actually planning to write about this in my Hebrew blog). If there's blood and gore, let the police clean it up, like in a modern country. Really, actually, who gave ZAKA the permission to collect bodies? Seriously, I do not appreciate ZAKA's favours. There are a lot of people in Israel that think they do me good by collecting my remains, or forcing me to have a religious wedding if I want to get married, or protecting my future children from the sodomite abomination. If you want your remains collected, you ask ZAKA to do it. For those who want it, it will indeed be a selfless acts of humanity (by the way, we all know the significance of mitzas, right? they're never really selfless; selflessness as a rule has been tainted long ago -- you're supposed to collect mitzvahs, in your metaphorical mitzvah-box, in order to go to heaven or such). Anyway, the Lord save me from people who think they're doing me favours. You want their favor,s you ask them. By the way, did you know that the head of ZAKA, Yehuda Meshi-Zahav, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cremation#Judaism" rel="nofollow">applauded</a> the arson of the only body-crematorium in Israel? ZAKA were suspected of the arson, but nothing was proved (as in the case of many right-wing crimes). Or maybe one can claim that we don't know who set it on fire -- it could have been the illegitimate love-child of the chimney and the coals. Incidentally, I actually didn't have anything against ZAKA before I started researching for this post. You discover new ways in which government coerces you via Judaism (or the other way around) every day. As for your second paragraph, if you think that “slaying of the homosexual plague" (and, as you conveniently forgot, saying "We are all Phinehas", not to mention citing Amalek) does not equal “killing of homosexuals”, then we have really lost touch. Leave the straw man alone, he's been through enough. Care to explain why saying "We are all Phinehas" does not ask for murder? Should Obadia Yosef also have specified an exact time and place of the murder in order to be considered hate-speech? @rationalbob: Thanks for the well-thought-out critique. You’re obviously wrong. :)

Zaka performs “selfless acts of humanity”. Yes, much like the Mormons who baptize Holocaust victims after their death are doing selfless acts of humanity. That is, these acts are considered good by the people doing them. In particular, I hereby ask that when I die, my body not be handled by Zaka people. (I was actually planning to write about this in my Hebrew blog). If there’s blood and gore, let the police clean it up, like in a modern country. Really, actually, who gave ZAKA the permission to collect bodies?

Seriously, I do not appreciate ZAKA’s favours. There are a lot of people in Israel that think they do me good by collecting my remains, or forcing me to have a religious wedding if I want to get married, or protecting my future children from the sodomite abomination. If you want your remains collected, you ask ZAKA to do it. For those who want it, it will indeed be a selfless acts of humanity (by the way, we all know the significance of mitzas, right? they’re never really selfless; selflessness as a rule has been tainted long ago — you’re supposed to collect mitzvahs, in your metaphorical mitzvah-box, in order to go to heaven or such).

Anyway, the Lord save me from people who think they’re doing me favours. You want their favor,s you ask them.

By the way, did you know that the head of ZAKA, Yehuda Meshi-Zahav, applauded the arson of the only body-crematorium in Israel? ZAKA were suspected of the arson, but nothing was proved (as in the case of many right-wing crimes). Or maybe one can claim that we don’t know who set it on fire — it could have been the illegitimate love-child of the chimney and the coals.

Incidentally, I actually didn’t have anything against ZAKA before I started researching for this post. You discover new ways in which government coerces you via Judaism (or the other way around) every day.

As for your second paragraph, if you think that “slaying of the homosexual plague” (and, as you conveniently forgot, saying “We are all Phinehas”, not to mention citing Amalek) does not equal “killing of homosexuals”, then we have really lost touch. Leave the straw man alone, he’s been through enough. Care to explain why saying “We are all Phinehas” does not ask for murder? Should Obadia Yosef also have specified an exact time and place of the murder in order to be considered hate-speech?

]]> By: rationalbob http://israleft.org/?p=70&cpage=1#comment-89 rationalbob Tue, 04 Aug 2009 06:09:51 +0000 http://israleft.org/?p=70#comment-89 You are really scraping the bottom of the barrel to criticize Zaka. "Little" is a relative term, and this individual may have been comparing it to more bloody bomb attacks. This is the kind of hatred you get from the left who refuse to believe that the ultra-orthodox are actually capable of doing good things let alone such selfless acts of humanity. You claim that these rabbi's call for homosexuals to be murdered. This is a serious accusation which should not be made without citing a source. There is a massive difference between calling for the "killing of homosexuals" and the "slaying of the homosexual plague," and if you have to resort to such a straw man argument, you've clearly lost touch. You are really scraping the bottom of the barrel to criticize Zaka. “Little” is a relative term, and this individual may have been comparing it to more bloody bomb attacks. This is the kind of hatred you get from the left who refuse to believe that the ultra-orthodox are actually capable of doing good things let alone such selfless acts of humanity.

You claim that these rabbi’s call for homosexuals to be murdered. This is a serious accusation which should not be made without citing a source. There is a massive difference between calling for the “killing of homosexuals” and the “slaying of the homosexual plague,” and if you have to resort to such a straw man argument, you’ve clearly lost touch.

]]> By: elad-vav http://israleft.org/?p=70&cpage=1#comment-87 elad-vav Tue, 04 Aug 2009 02:41:21 +0000 http://israleft.org/?p=70#comment-87 By the way, Mel, if you read Hebrew you might be interested in Yossi Gurevitz' Hebrew blog. It's harshly worded at times, but very much to the point, and discusses exactly such issues: http://www.hahem.co.il/friendsofgeorge/ There are many other Hebrew blogs, that I guess we should put in the links section. Rod's blog is one of them, also dealing with similar subjects, from a different perspective: http://nimrodavissar.com/blogica By the way, Mel, if you read Hebrew you might be interested in Yossi Gurevitz’ Hebrew blog. It’s harshly worded at times, but very much to the point, and discusses exactly such issues:
http://www.hahem.co.il/friendsofgeorge/
There are many other Hebrew blogs, that I guess we should put in the links section. Rod’s blog is one of them, also dealing with similar subjects, from a different perspective:
http://nimrodavissar.com/blogica

]]> By: elad-vav http://israleft.org/?p=70&cpage=1#comment-86 elad-vav Tue, 04 Aug 2009 02:16:16 +0000 http://israleft.org/?p=70#comment-86 Mel: Thank you. I have to say that, sadly, there's plenty more. And it's not directed only at the gays. Women, leftists, Arabs. They all get it. The concept of The Other has never been more vivid. I also wanted to translate a full quote of Nissim Zeev. This is as good a place as any: He said about a member of parliament: "In his chambers, there is a homoist [sic], that everyone is disgusted to go near to. A homo, according to the Halakha, is worse than cattle [behema, derogatory] and you put a homo in your chamber. He is your main adviser, and because of him, it is impossible for people who want to approach your chambers to come speak to you. You're [effectively] blocking them, since he's gay. The chambers should be clear of people like that." http://www.ynet.co.il/articles/1,7340,L-2703253,00.html These are the words of a member of the Israeli parliament. Looking at the parliament, Israel really seems like a 3rd-world country. Part of the problem is lack of accountability. No one really expects anything from these people. Or at least that's what the left tells itself. The alternative is that they really represent the public. But that can't be, right? Right? Mel: Thank you. I have to say that, sadly, there’s plenty more. And it’s not directed only at the gays. Women, leftists, Arabs. They all get it. The concept of The Other has never been more vivid.

I also wanted to translate a full quote of Nissim Zeev. This is as good a place as any:
He said about a member of parliament: “In his chambers, there is a homoist [sic], that everyone is disgusted to go near to. A homo, according to the Halakha, is worse than cattle [behema, derogatory] and you put a homo in your chamber. He is your main adviser, and because of him, it is impossible for people who want to approach your chambers to come speak to you. You’re [effectively] blocking them, since he’s gay. The chambers should be clear of people like that.”

http://www.ynet.co.il/articles/1,7340,L-2703253,00.html

These are the words of a member of the Israeli parliament. Looking at the parliament, Israel really seems like a 3rd-world country. Part of the problem is lack of accountability. No one really expects anything from these people. Or at least that’s what the left tells itself. The alternative is that they really represent the public. But that can’t be, right? Right?

]]>