Discussion:
French Jew drifting toward National Front Party
(too old to reply)
DoD
2014-09-29 16:01:38 UTC
Permalink
http://www.timesofisrael.com/more-french-jews-drifting-toward-natl-front-party/
Yisroel Markov
2014-09-29 16:51:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by DoD
http://www.timesofisrael.com/more-french-jews-drifting-toward-natl-front-party/
From a communist to a National Front supporter - quite a switch!

But it's not so surprising. Having one's security threatened often
awakens one's self-preservation instinct, which the modern state seeks
to attenuate (by calling it "lizard-brain," among other things :-)
Thus many American olim find themselves drifting to the right once
they perceive the threat personally.
--
Yisroel "Godwrestler Warriorson" Markov - Boston, MA Member
www.reason.com -- for a sober analysis of the world DNRC
--------------------------------------------------------------------
"Judge, and be prepared to be judged" -- Ayn Rand
Fred Goldstein
2014-09-29 18:15:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by Yisroel Markov
Post by DoD
http://www.timesofisrael.com/more-french-jews-drifting-toward-natl-front-party/
From a communist to a National Front supporter - quite a switch!
But it's not so surprising. Having one's security threatened often
awakens one's self-preservation instinct, which the modern state seeks
to attenuate (by calling it "lizard-brain," among other things :-)
Thus many American olim find themselves drifting to the right once
they perceive the threat personally.
Maybe they perceive NF as no threat to them. They figure NF will go
after homosexuals, go after communists, go after Muslims, but not go
after *them*.
Shelly
2014-09-29 22:15:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by Fred Goldstein
Post by Yisroel Markov
Post by DoD
http://www.timesofisrael.com/more-french-jews-drifting-toward-natl-front-party/
From a communist to a National Front supporter - quite a switch!
But it's not so surprising. Having one's security threatened often
awakens one's self-preservation instinct, which the modern state seeks
to attenuate (by calling it "lizard-brain," among other things :-)
Thus many American olim find themselves drifting to the right once
they perceive the threat personally.
Maybe they perceive NF as no threat to them. They figure NF will go
after homosexuals, go after communists, go after Muslims, but not go
after *them*.
I don't think they are Polish priests.
--
Shelly
m***@btinternet.com
2014-09-30 04:24:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by Fred Goldstein
Maybe they perceive NF as no threat to them. They figure NF will go
after homosexuals, go after communists, go after Muslims, but not go
after *them*.
Jews are seen by much of the far right as a lesser evil than blacks
and Muslims. It's impossible to predict what will happen if they
take over. They might see Israel as a natural ally on the "enemy
of my enemy" principle. Or the conspiracy theories, which are still
lurking but pretty marginal (you don't really need to posit a secret
cabal of international baddies when you've got al-Quaeda for
real), might come to the fore.
Yisroel Markov
2014-10-01 00:30:03 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 30 Sep 2014 04:24:30 +0000 (UTC),
Post by m***@btinternet.com
Post by Fred Goldstein
Maybe they perceive NF as no threat to them. They figure NF will go
after homosexuals, go after communists, go after Muslims, but not go
after *them*.
Jews are seen by much of the far right as a lesser evil than blacks
and Muslims. It's impossible to predict what will happen if they
take over. They might see Israel as a natural ally on the "enemy
of my enemy" principle. Or the conspiracy theories, which are still
lurking but pretty marginal (you don't really need to posit a secret
cabal of international baddies when you've got al-Quaeda for
real), might come to the fore.
You do if you want to blame some conspiracy for financial crises. "The
Jews control all the big money institutions everywhere" canard seems
alive and well.
--
Yisroel "Godwrestler Warriorson" Markov - Boston, MA Member
www.reason.com -- for a sober analysis of the world DNRC
--------------------------------------------------------------------
"Judge, and be prepared to be judged" -- Ayn Rand
cindys
2014-09-30 04:26:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by Fred Goldstein
Post by Yisroel Markov
Post by DoD
http://www.timesofisrael.com/more-french-jews-drifting-toward-natl-front-party/
From a communist to a National Front supporter - quite a switch!
But it's not so surprising. Having one's security threatened often
awakens one's self-preservation instinct, which the modern state seeks
to attenuate (by calling it "lizard-brain," among other things :-)
Thus many American olim find themselves drifting to the right once
they perceive the threat personally.
Maybe they perceive NF as no threat to them. They figure NF will go
after homosexuals, go after communists, go after Muslims, but not go
after *them*.
-----

From Marine Le Pen, National Front Leader, Vows Pork-Free Menu Ban For French Schools
The Huffington Post UK
Posted: 05/04/2014 10:28 BST Updated: 05/04/2014 10:59 BST


National Front leader Marine Le Pen has said her party will not pander to Jewish and Muslim children by offering non-Pork alternatives for lunch.

School canteens will no longer offer non-pork meal options in the 11 towns the far-right party won in local elections, because such arrangements are contrary to France's secular values, she said.


"We will not accept any religious demands in school menus," Le Pen told RTL radio. "There is no reason for religion to enter the public sphere, that's the law."


"We will not accept any religious demands in school menus," Le Pen told RTL radio. "There is no reason for religion to enter the public sphere, that's the law."

[...]

------
Best regards,
---Cindy S.
DoD
2014-09-30 04:53:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by cindys
National Front leader Marine Le Pen has said her party will not pander to
Jewish and Muslim children by offering non-Pork alternatives for lunch.
I am confused on why you posted this.... Good thing or bad thing?
henry.dot.goodman.at.virgin.net
2014-09-30 13:12:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by DoD
Post by cindys
National Front leader Marine Le Pen has said her party will not pander to
Jewish and Muslim children by offering non-Pork alternatives for lunch.
I am confused on why you posted this.... Good thing or bad thing?
How can it be good? Another reason for French Jews to vote against the national front.
Henry Goodman
DoD
2014-09-30 14:02:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by henry.dot.goodman.at.virgin.net
Post by DoD
Post by cindys
National Front leader Marine Le Pen has said her party will not pander to
Jewish and Muslim children by offering non-Pork alternatives for lunch.
I am confused on why you posted this.... Good thing or bad thing?
How can it be good? Another reason for French Jews to vote against the national front.
Henry Goodman
Because everyone in the U.S. is always yelling at the top of their lungs,
Sep of Church
and State..... Isn't this Sep of C and S ?
henry.dot.goodman.at.virgin.net
2014-09-30 14:32:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by DoD
Post by henry.dot.goodman.at.virgin.net
Post by DoD
Post by cindys
National Front leader Marine Le Pen has said her party will not pander
to
Jewish and Muslim children by offering non-Pork alternatives for lunch.
I am confused on why you posted this.... Good thing or bad thing?
How can it be good? Another reason for French Jews to vote against the
national front.
Henry Goodman
Because everyone in the U.S. is always yelling at the top of their lungs,
Sep of Church
and State..... Isn't this Sep of C and S ?
I have never lived in a country that has separation of Church and State but I think that if that means making it difficult for Jewish children (or adults, or other religions) to observe their religious requirements then it is a bad idea.
Henry Goodman
DoD
2014-09-30 14:51:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by henry.dot.goodman.at.virgin.net
I have never lived in a country that has separation of Church and State
but I think that if that means making it difficult for Jewish children (or
adults, >or other religions) to observe their religious requirements then
it is a bad idea.
***Neither do I,*** but I just want to see how consistent people are around
here. After all this is a "state school" and we should have STRICT sep of
church and state.
Shelly
2014-09-30 15:56:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by DoD
Post by henry.dot.goodman.at.virgin.net
I have never lived in a country that has separation of Church and
State but I think that if that means making it difficult for Jewish
children (or adults, >or other religions) to observe their religious
requirements then it is a bad idea.
***Neither do I,*** but I just want to see how consistent people are
around here. After all this is a "state school" and we should have
STRICT sep of church and state.
Agreed. That is why I, who am perhaps the most vocal here for the
separation, say that making it unavailable to Jews would be the
infringement and would violate the STRICT separation.
--
Shelly
W. Baker
2014-09-30 17:48:46 UTC
Permalink
DoD <***@gmail.com> wrote:


: "henry.dot.goodman.at.virgin.net" <***@gmail.com> wrote in
: message news:f11ba468-2e7e-44d3-b0a9-***@googlegroups.com...

: > I have never lived in a country that has separation of Church and State
: > but I think that if that means making it difficult for Jewish children (or
: > adults, >or other religions) to observe their religious requirements then
: > it is a bad idea.

: ***Neither do I,*** but I just want to see how consistent people are around
: here. After all this is a "state school" and we should have STRICT sep of
: church and state.
:

In France, do they have a Christmas and Easte vacatio in the schools or
do they deliberately have thier breaks at un-christmas or un-Easte? In
the US we do have such religiously timed breaks andusually some kidn of
celebrations at those imes before the break even if it is largely Santa
Claus and the Easter bunny .

I don't know but such are often not thought of by the majority as being
accomodating religions because"well, EVERPBODY celebrated , etc."

Wendy
DoD
2014-09-30 18:05:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by W. Baker
In France, do they have a Christmas and Easte vacatio in the schools or
do they deliberately have thier breaks at un-christmas or un-Easte? In
the US we do have such religiously timed breaks andusually some kidn of
celebrations at those imes before the break even if it is largely Santa
Claus and the Easter bunny .
I don't know but such are often not thought of by the majority as being
accomodating religions because"well, EVERPBODY celebrated , etc."
Dunno about France, but in the U.S. they do get two breaks.... One does coincide with Christmas... I am not sure spring break coincides with Easter... I actually think there should be three breaks, just like you have during the school day.... morning recess, lunch and afternoon recess. So it wouldn't be a bad thing to have a week break sometime in the fall. That is just my opinion.
Herman Rubin
2014-09-30 19:29:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by W. Baker
: > I have never lived in a country that has separation of Church and State
: > but I think that if that means making it difficult for Jewish children (or
: > adults, >or other religions) to observe their religious requirements then
: > it is a bad idea.
: ***Neither do I,*** but I just want to see how consistent people are around
: here. After all this is a "state school" and we should have STRICT sep of
: church and state.
In France, do they have a Christmas and Easte vacatio in the schools or
do they deliberately have thier breaks at un-christmas or un-Easte? In
the US we do have such religiously timed breaks andusually some kidn of
celebrations at those imes before the break even if it is largely Santa
Claus and the Easter bunny .
I don't know but such are often not thought of by the majority as being
accomodating religions because"well, EVERPBODY celebrated , etc."
Wendy
The Supreme Court has ruled that Christmas has become a ssecular
holiday. One can argue that the timed break is before New Year,
which is clearly secular. As far as "Easter" breaks, the time
often, but not always, is a convenient time for a one-week break
in the school term, and thus is an accommodation.

In public schools, including public universities, it is required
to accommodate religious holidays, and to consider any absences
as excused absences, with opportunity to make up any missed work.
--
This address is for information only. I do not claim that these views
are those of the Statistics Department or of Purdue University.
Herman Rubin, Department of Statistics, Purdue University
***@stat.purdue.edu Phone: (765)494-6054 FAX: (765)494-0558
mm
2014-09-30 20:32:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by W. Baker
: > I have never lived in a country that has separation of Church and State
: > but I think that if that means making it difficult for Jewish children (or
: > adults, >or other religions) to observe their religious requirements then
: > it is a bad idea.
: ***Neither do I,*** but I just want to see how consistent people are around
: here. After all this is a "state school" and we should have STRICT sep of
: church and state.
In France, do they have a Christmas and Easte vacatio in the schools or
do they deliberately have thier breaks at un-christmas or un-Easte? In
Good question.
Post by W. Baker
the US we do have such religiously timed breaks andusually some kidn of
When I was little in Pa. they were called Xmas vacation and Easter
vacation. In Indiana, or maybe I just read about it, they were called
winter vacation and spring vacation, but they were at the same time.

(Vacation = the British "holiday" I wonder if Americans don't call it
holiday, because most are in the summer when the Xians don't have any
holy days, afaik).

(Then the fuel oil/gasoline crisis hit and thei idea of closing school
for a week when it's the coldest took hold so schools closed for a week
in Jan. or Feb. But it often turned out that the planned week wasn't
very cold. Still, I think that must have used "vacation days" that
were meant for "Easter/spring vacation"
Post by W. Baker
celebrations at those imes before the break even if it is largely Santa
Claus and the Easter bunny .
1953 to 58, in Pa.** we had some sort of Xmas program, just before lunch
(there was no cafeteria. Everyone went home for lunch) for the whole
grammar school, grades 1 to 6. But something was different in
Indiana. Indiana where they didn't use the term "Christmas vacation"
they still sang religious songs at the Xmas program. The auditorium was
dark and at one point they all started to stand up. I thought maybe
there was a fire or something but they continued singing, and apparently
that song was important enough to stand up for. I don't know what it
was, but I'm sure it was religious and wouldn't be sung now except in
school districts that are ignoring Supreme Court decisions. And I'm
sure there are quite a few of those.

Rand Paul was on C-SPAN a couple nights ago. He'd spoken to the "Value
Voters Summit" I think it's called. Most of what he said, though I
would probably prefer the alternativie, I could still see good reason
for saying it. But he wanted schools where the students' God could be
openly announced (something like that). This hearkens to what Wendy says
in her next paragraph. When Paul and those Xians who want God audibly
and visibly back in schools say that, they're thinking of their God
only. They haven't considered, or they've considered and rejected,
making the same accomodation for a Hindu child or a child of any
religion that has a god whose name we haven't heard yet, or even a
Moslem child who has the same God but calls him by another name.
Post by W. Baker
I don't know but such are often not thought of by the majority as being
accomodating religions because"well, EVERPBODY celebrated , etc."
Wendy
Maryland used to close schools on "Easter Monday", because a lot of
people, parents and children, visited far-away family for Easter and
couldn't stay for dinnner and get back by Monday. I have a feeling
what ended that wasn't a court decision but the airplane. People
going for only a few days don't want to drive very far.
--
Meir
Yisroel Markov
2014-10-02 16:15:08 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 30 Sep 2014 20:32:14 +0000 (UTC), mm <***@bigfoot.com>
said:

[snip]
Post by mm
Rand Paul was on C-SPAN a couple nights ago. He'd spoken to the "Value
Voters Summit" I think it's called. Most of what he said, though I
would probably prefer the alternativie, I could still see good reason
for saying it. But he wanted schools where the students' God could be
openly announced (something like that). This hearkens to what Wendy says
in her next paragraph. When Paul and those Xians who want God audibly
and visibly back in schools say that, they're thinking of their God
only. They haven't considered, or they've considered and rejected,
making the same accomodation for a Hindu child or a child of any
religion that has a god whose name we haven't heard yet, or even a
Moslem child who has the same God but calls him by another name.
How do you know all that about "Paul and those Xians"? I read the
transcript of Paul's speech to the Value Voters Summit, and there was
nothing there about "schools where the students' God could be openly
announced."
www.politico.com/news/stories/0912/81226.html

[snip]
--
Yisroel "Godwrestler Warriorson" Markov - Boston, MA Member
www.reason.com -- for a sober analysis of the world DNRC
--------------------------------------------------------------------
"Judge, and be prepared to be judged" -- Ayn Rand
mm
2014-10-03 01:41:07 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 2 Oct 2014 16:15:08 +0000 (UTC), Yisroel Markov
Post by Yisroel Markov
[snip]
Post by mm
Rand Paul was on C-SPAN a couple nights ago. He'd spoken to the "Value
Voters Summit" I think it's called. Most of what he said, though I
would probably prefer the alternativie, I could still see good reason
for saying it. But he wanted schools where the students' God could be
openly announced (something like that). This hearkens to what Wendy says
in her next paragraph. When Paul and those Xians who want God audibly
and visibly back in schools say that, they're thinking of their God
only. They haven't considered, or they've considered and rejected,
making the same accomodation for a Hindu child or a child of any
religion that has a god whose name we haven't heard yet, or even a
Moslem child who has the same God but calls him by another name.
How do you know all that about "Paul and those Xians"?
'those Xians who want God audibly and visibly back in schools.'
Post by Yisroel Markov
I read the
transcript of Paul's speech to the Value Voters Summit, and there was
nothing there about "schools where the students' God could be openly
announced."
You're quoting me, but I didn't claim to be quoting him. And after the
words 'openly announced', I added, '(Something like that)'

Sometimes transcripts are not really transcripts. Sometimes they are
the advance copy given to the press of what the person intends to say,
even though he may say something different when he talks. OTOH,
sometimes they are transcribed llve or from a recording with no errors
or only tiny ones, So another possibility is that it was there but you
didnt' see it.

I stand by what I said he said. I heard it in his own voice, because
C-SPAN is light on commentary, if they give any at all, and concentrates
on full length** recordings of what people say.

As to what Paul and the Xians specified are thinking, do you think if
there is one Hindu in the school (or 100), on those occasions where they
want their faith in "Jesus Christ" announced, they will also want
Vishnu, Brahma, and Shiva announced too, let alone Saraswati, Lakshmi,
Parvati, and all the other gods and goddesses? Do you think they want
Allah announced? Well, I don't. Since the situation needed to
actually know how they would react is not occurring now, that's only my
opinion now -- I thought that was clear -- like it was your opinion that
iirc government can't create jobs and can't create wealth.

**Brian Lamb, the founder of C-SPAN, explained that he was inspired to
start the station after he heard Stokely Carmichael speak and then saw
how the news that night played back only the most incendiary parts of
his talk.
Post by Yisroel Markov
www.politico.com/news/stories/0912/81226.html
Oh, here's the problem. As the URL indicates, and for once an actual
date written on the page so readers of the page can see it also
indicates, this page is dated 9/14/12 2:24 PM EST. That's two years
ago. He said different things this time.

It's one of these two items.
http://www.c-span.org/search/?searchtype=All&query=Rand+paul+value+voters
Okay, the one on the left is the same date as your link above.

The one on the right is 18 minutes. "Clip From September 26, 2014 Values
Voter Summit, Opening Plenary Session, Part 1". I think "clip" means
not the whole thing, but it's probably what I heard a large part of on
the C-SPAN radio (an FM station in DC, and heard within a 50 mile radius
of DC)
Post by Yisroel Markov
[snip]
FWIW, Rand Paul was a topic on the Terry Gross show, Fresh Air, today,
Oct 2.
http://www.npr.org/2014/10/02/353253302/as-he-considers-a-run-for-president-rand-paul-tries-to-rebrand-himself
"The New Yorker's Ryan Lizza says the Republican's earlier views on
foreign policy and his opposition to the Civil Rights Act may dog him,
as well as the extreme libertarianism of his father, Ron Paul."

Apparently John McCain got Rand Paul to withdraw his opposition to aid
to Israel, but then Paul did things that McCain disliked a lot.

As an aside, almost all aid to Israel and every other country the US
gives to, miliary and non-military, is and has been in the form of
credits to be spent in the US. buying something or other from the US.
--
Meir
Yisroel Markov
2014-10-03 18:10:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by mm
On Thu, 2 Oct 2014 16:15:08 +0000 (UTC), Yisroel Markov
Post by Yisroel Markov
[snip]
Post by mm
Rand Paul was on C-SPAN a couple nights ago. He'd spoken to the "Value
Voters Summit" I think it's called. Most of what he said, though I
would probably prefer the alternativie, I could still see good reason
for saying it. But he wanted schools where the students' God could be
openly announced (something like that). This hearkens to what Wendy says
in her next paragraph. When Paul and those Xians who want God audibly
and visibly back in schools say that, they're thinking of their God
only. They haven't considered, or they've considered and rejected,
making the same accomodation for a Hindu child or a child of any
religion that has a god whose name we haven't heard yet, or even a
Moslem child who has the same God but calls him by another name.
How do you know all that about "Paul and those Xians"?
'those Xians who want God audibly and visibly back in schools.'
Post by Yisroel Markov
I read the
transcript of Paul's speech to the Value Voters Summit, and there was
nothing there about "schools where the students' God could be openly
announced."
You're quoting me, but I didn't claim to be quoting him. And after the
words 'openly announced', I added, '(Something like that)'
You were clearly relating what you've heard. And you stand by it.
Post by mm
Sometimes transcripts are not really transcripts. Sometimes they are
the advance copy given to the press of what the person intends to say,
even though he may say something different when he talks. OTOH,
sometimes they are transcribed llve or from a recording with no errors
or only tiny ones, So another possibility is that it was there but you
didnt' see it.
I stand by what I said he said. I heard it in his own voice, because
C-SPAN is light on commentary, if they give any at all, and concentrates
on full length** recordings of what people say.
As to what Paul and the Xians specified are thinking, do you think if
there is one Hindu in the school (or 100), on those occasions where they
want their faith in "Jesus Christ" announced, they will also want
Vishnu, Brahma, and Shiva announced too, let alone Saraswati, Lakshmi,
Parvati, and all the other gods and goddesses? Do you think they want
Allah announced? Well, I don't.
I don't, either. But what matters is not what politicians want, but
what they do. Do you think that all people who seek Jewish votes
actually care about Israel and other things that Jews care about? I'd
say it's definitely not all of them. But they want our money and our
votes, so they pander to our interests. That's what matters in a
polity.

Likewise, a Christian politician who wants students to be free to
announce their faith is most likely thinking primarily about his
fellow Christians, but in the American constitutional tradition he
will be compelled to support identical rights for others. Especially a
libertarian-leaning one like Paul.
Post by mm
Since the situation needed to
actually know how they would react is not occurring now, that's only my
opinion now -- I thought that was clear
Not really.
Post by mm
-- like it was your opinion that
iirc government can't create jobs and can't create wealth.
**Brian Lamb, the founder of C-SPAN, explained that he was inspired to
start the station after he heard Stokely Carmichael speak and then saw
how the news that night played back only the most incendiary parts of
his talk.
Post by Yisroel Markov
www.politico.com/news/stories/0912/81226.html
Oh, here's the problem. As the URL indicates, and for once an actual
date written on the page so readers of the page can see it also
indicates, this page is dated 9/14/12 2:24 PM EST. That's two years
ago. He said different things this time.
Ah, so that's where I goofed. Thanks! I found a transcript (I can read
a speech a lot faster than listen to it). He said: "Just as surely as
we seek to put our financial house in order and rebuild our nation's
defenses, so too we seek to protect the unborn, to end the
manipulation of school children by Utopian planners and permit the
acknowledgement of our supreme being in our classrooms." So your
recollection was close enough.

[snip]
Post by mm
As an aside, almost all aid to Israel and every other country the US
gives to, miliary and non-military, is and has been in the form of
credits to be spent in the US. buying something or other from the US.
As far as the expense to the taxpayer, this makes no difference. This
is true of all foreign aid - US dollars can be spent only in the USA.
(Primarily, that is; there are exceptions. There are commodities like
crude oil that trade in USD, and there are small countries that use
USD for their currency.)
--
Yisroel "Godwrestler Warriorson" Markov - Boston, MA Member
www.reason.com -- for a sober analysis of the world DNRC
--------------------------------------------------------------------
"Judge, and be prepared to be judged" -- Ayn Rand
Scott Ginsberg
2014-10-01 04:17:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by DoD
Post by henry.dot.goodman.at.virgin.net
I have never lived in a country that has separation of Church and State
but I think that if that means making it difficult for Jewish children (or
adults, >or other religions) to observe their religious requirements then
it is a bad idea.
***Neither do I,*** but I just want to see how consistent people are around
here. After all this is a "state school" and we should have STRICT sep of
church and state.
No in the US says we should have strict separation of chuch and state in
all circumstances. When they do say that there should be separation,
it's because either in fact of hypothetically, someone has stepped over
the line and is doing or urging something to be done that is improper.
LIke Christian prayers in public school, and lots of other things they
used to do.

They don't take the time to list all of the cases where less separation
is required, such as churches or shuls renting rooms in schools for
their services, on Friday night, Saturday, or Sunday, where there are no
kids using the classroom anyhow.

Or when religious clubs meet after school along with the drama club, the
Shakespeare club, the poetry club. Usually aiui there is a
requirement that clubs not start until 15 minutes after school lets out,
and they probably don't anyhow, and iirc that everyone leaves the room
and comes back specifically for the club, as opposed to some
teacher/club leader starting off with some religious thing when every
student is still sitting there because Spanish class ended 10 seconds
ago, and some kids will be too embarrassed to leave. You wouldn't want
that either, would you, if it were some religion you don't want to be a
part of, but there was peer pressure to stay?


I would guess that someone has oversimplified the situation for you,
because there have always been situations where there was a trade-off
between the free exercise of religion, even within government bulidings,
and the establishment of a government-endorsed religion

The current status of this issue was decided by the USSC in Lemon v.
Kurtzman in 1971, 43 years already. It's in three parts and it's known
as the Lemon test:

It "details the requirements for legislation concerning religion. It is
threefold:

The statute must not result in an "excessive government
entanglement" with religious affairs. (also known as the Entanglement
Prong)
The statute must not advance or inhibit religious practice (also
known as the Effect Prong)
The statute must have a secular legislative purpose. (also known as
the Purpose Prong)

If any of these prongs are violated, the government's action is deemed
unconstitutional under the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment
to the United States Constitution......."

Almost all people were satisfied the great majority of the time with the
results of the Lemon test, even though they allow some entanglement
between goverment and religion. In the last few years some have tried
to make it even easier to mix religion and government. . Eventually a
particularly difficult situation may arise which will strain the test
until it breaks, and a fourth clause may be added.

But there is no issue of consistency here. No one here has ever
suggested that the separation of church and state has to be absolute in
every situation.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lemon_v._Kurtzman
topazgalaxy
2014-10-01 13:14:29 UTC
Permalink
To my understanding, the good thing about separation of church and state is that it hopefully helps prevent the religious majority from using the government to superimpose its religion on a minority.
However, IMO, 'separation of church and state' should not be used to prevent
a religious minority from exercising it's religion when that exercising does not interfere with someone else's religion.
IMO, for example, offering kosher meals or pork free meals in a public school should be OK.
It does not mean that the entire menu should be made pork free.
I wonder what they would do if a child claimed he or she was allergic to pork?
Post by DoD
Post by henry.dot.goodman.at.virgin.net
I have never lived in a country that has separation of Church and State
but I think that if that means making it difficult for Jewish children (or
adults, >or other religions) to observe their religious requirements then
it is a bad idea.
***Neither do I,*** but I just want to see how consistent people are around
here. After all this is a "state school" and we should have STRICT sep of
church and state.
Harry Weiss
2014-10-01 18:48:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by topazgalaxy
To my understanding, the good thing about separation of church and state is that it hopefully helps prevent the religious majority from using the government to superimpose its religion on a minority.
However, IMO, 'separation of church and state' should not be used to prevent
a religious minority from exercising it's religion when that exercising does not interfere with someone else's religion.
IMO, for example, offering kosher meals or pork free meals in a public school should be OK.
It does not mean that the entire menu should be made pork free.
I wonder what they would do if a child claimed he or she was allergic to pork?
For a Jew eating non kosher beef or chicken is just bad a as pork.

I have never heard of an airborne peanut alergen.

A person who cannot eat the food they provide for religious, allergy on
whatever reason should be able to bring there own food,.
Post by topazgalaxy
Post by DoD
Post by henry.dot.goodman.at.virgin.net
I have never lived in a country that has separation of Church and State
but I think that if that means making it difficult for Jewish children (or
adults, >or other religions) to observe their religious requirements then
it is a bad idea.
***Neither do I,*** but I just want to see how consistent people are around
here. After all this is a "state school" and we should have STRICT sep of
church and state.
--
Harry J. Weiss
***@panix.com
Shelly
2014-10-01 19:26:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by Harry Weiss
For a Jew eating non kosher beef or chicken is just bad a as pork.
Pork is specifically prohibited in the Torah. Non-kosher beef (those
with cloven hoof and which chews their cud) or chicken depends upon
interpretations and rules put in after the Torah. So, IMO at least, they
are not "just" as bad.
--
Shelly
cindys
2014-10-02 02:21:15 UTC
Permalink
On Wednesday, October 1, 2014 2:48:21 PM UTC-4, ***@panix.com wrote:

snip
Post by Harry Weiss
I have never heard of an airborne peanut alergen.
-----
I have. Anecdotally, I have heard that there are schools where it is not permitted for any child in the entire school to bring anything that contains peanuts or peanut butter because there are apparently some children who are so allergic to peanuts that they will go into anaphylactic shock (throat closes up) if they even smell peanuts.
Best regards,
---Cindy S.
Harry Weiss
2014-10-02 04:23:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by cindys
snip
Post by Harry Weiss
I have never heard of an airborne peanut alergen.
-----
I have. Anecdotally, I have heard that there are schools where it is not permitted for any child in the entire school to bring anything that contains peanuts or peanut butter because there are apparently some children who are so allergic to peanuts that they will go into anaphylactic shock (throat closes up) if they even smell peanuts.
Best regards,
---Cindy S.
I meant pork allergy, but was thing of peanut being airborned,
Sorry for the goof,
--
Harry J. Weiss
***@panix.com
Turlough
2014-10-02 09:47:19 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 2 Oct 2014 02:21:15 +0000 (UTC), cindys
Post by cindys
snip
Post by Harry Weiss
I have never heard of an airborne peanut alergen.
-----
I have. Anecdotally, I have heard that there are schools where it is not permitted for any child in the entire school to bring anything that contains peanuts or peanut butter because there are apparently some children who are so allergic to peanuts that they will go into anaphylactic shock (throat closes up) if they even smell peanuts.
Best regards,
---Cindy S.
How do such children survive the outside world where you can't control
the presence of peanuts?
--
Francis Xavier Turlough
University of the Witwatersrand
Johannesburg
South Africa
W. Baker
2014-10-02 12:53:35 UTC
Permalink
Turlough <***@gmail.com> wrote:
: On Thu, 2 Oct 2014 02:21:15 +0000 (UTC), cindys
: <***@rochester.rr.com> wrote:

: >On Wednesday, October 1, 2014 2:48:21 PM UTC-4, ***@panix.com wrote:
: >
: >snip
: >>
: >> I have never heard of an airborne peanut alergen.
: >-----
: >I have. Anecdotally, I have heard that there are schools where it is not permitted for any child in the entire school to bring anything that contains peanuts or peanut butter because there are apparently some children who are so allergic to peanuts that they will go into anaphylactic shock (throat closes up) if they even smell peanuts.
: >Best regards,
: >---Cindy S.

: How do such children survive the outside world where you can't control
: the presence of peanuts?

: --

: Francis Xavier Turlough
: University of the Witwatersrand
: Johannesburg
: South Africa

With great concern and often hovering by parents and always having an
epipen available.

There was no peanut allergy that I heard of when I was a child. They are
nt sure why this has become such a problem in fairly recent years. It
often lessens as the child ages, but not all the time and often does not
totally disppear.

Wendy
m***@btinternet.com
2014-10-02 20:37:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by W. Baker
There was no peanut allergy that I heard of when I was a child.
They are not sure why this has become such a problem in fairly
recent years. It often lessens as the child ages, but not all
the time and often does not totally disappear.
Allergies have genuinely increased, and I don't want to imply
that it's all designer illnesses. However it's very common
for people to claim to be allergic or intolerant to something,
and it turns out that they've read some magazine article
which suggested cutting the allergen out. They did so, and
felt better.
However peanut allergy is so severe that it's clearly not a
figment of the imagination. It's a real mystery why it has
appeared.
Herman Rubin
2014-10-02 20:48:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by W. Baker
: On Thu, 2 Oct 2014 02:21:15 +0000 (UTC), cindys
: >
: >snip
: >>
: >> I have never heard of an airborne peanut alergen.
: >I have. Anecdotally, I have heard that there are schools where it
is not permitted for any child in the entire school to bring anything
that contains peanuts or peanut butter because there are apparently
some children who are so allergic to peanuts that they will go into
anaphylactic shock (throat closes up) if they even smell peanuts.
Post by W. Baker
: >Best regards,
: >---Cindy S.
: How do such children survive the outside world where you can't control
: the presence of peanuts?
: --
: Francis Xavier Turlough
: University of the Witwatersrand
: Johannesburg
: South Africa
With great concern and often hovering by parents and always having an
epipen available.
There was no peanut allergy that I heard of when I was a child. They are
nt sure why this has become such a problem in fairly recent years. It
often lessens as the child ages, but not all the time and often does not
totally disppear.
On this you are wrong. But it is likely that someone that allergic
would have died back then as an infant, with the cause of death not
traceable to allergies. I had food allergies as a child, and they
were difficult to diagnose. I have allergies now. Before and during
WWII, antihistamines were not in use.
Post by W. Baker
Wendy
--
This address is for information only. I do not claim that these views
are those of the Statistics Department or of Purdue University.
Herman Rubin, Department of Statistics, Purdue University
***@stat.purdue.edu Phone: (765)494-6054 FAX: (765)494-0558
mm
2014-10-03 04:19:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by W. Baker
There was no peanut allergy that I heard of when I was a child. They are
Nor when I was. In my public school, we didn't have birthday parties,
and no parent sent in food for the whole class (even though it was the
same 30 of us for 6 straight years) , but in JHS and HS everyone ate in
the school cafeterias. There were no warning signs of any sort. I
never heard of a peanut allergy until maybe 20, at most 30 years ago.
Post by W. Baker
nt sure why this has become such a problem in fairly recent years. It
I wonder if it's genetic, or evolutionary,
Post by W. Baker
often lessens as the child ages, but not all the time and often does not
totally disppear.
Wendy
--
Meir
Turlough
2014-10-07 13:16:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by W. Baker
: On Thu, 2 Oct 2014 02:21:15 +0000 (UTC), cindys
: >
: >snip
: >>
: >> I have never heard of an airborne peanut alergen.
: >-----
: >I have. Anecdotally, I have heard that there are schools where it is not permitted for any child in the entire school to bring anything that contains peanuts or peanut butter because there are apparently some children who are so allergic to peanuts that they will go into anaphylactic shock (throat closes up) if they even smell peanuts.
: >Best regards,
: >---Cindy S.
: How do such children survive the outside world where you can't control
: the presence of peanuts?
: --
: Francis Xavier Turlough
: University of the Witwatersrand
: Johannesburg
: South Africa
With great concern and often hovering by parents and always having an
epipen available.
There was no peanut allergy that I heard of when I was a child. They are
nt sure why this has become such a problem in fairly recent years. It
often lessens as the child ages, but not all the time and often does not
totally disppear.
I know why it has become a problem in recent years - children don't
play outside in the dirt like they used to. They spend all their time
in front of their computers or other hand-held devices. They never
get to develop the immunities that children used to develop.

You won't find many peanut allergies here in Africa.
--
Francis Xavier Turlough
University of the Witwatersrand
Johannesburg
South Africa
m***@actcom.co.il
2014-10-08 03:54:33 UTC
Permalink
On Tuesday, October 7, 2014 4:16:15 PM UTC+3, Turlough wrote:
I know many people who like me grew in Kiboetzim , thus played outside , worked in agriculture, many of us grew in a time when we did not have much ... and many have allergies ,,,
and those kids in Africa who have allergies , probably don`t live long enough,,,,to get in any such statistics if you have them .
mirjam
Post by Turlough
I know why it has become a problem in recent years - children don't
play outside in the dirt like they used to. They spend all their time
in front of their computers or other hand-held devices. They never
get to develop the immunities that children used to develop.
You won't find many peanut allergies here in Africa.
--
Francis Xavier Turlough
University of the Witwatersrand
Johannesburg
South Africa
m***@btinternet.com
2014-10-02 09:48:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by cindys
I have. Anecdotally, I have heard that there are schools where it is not permitted for
any child in the entire school to bring anything that contains peanuts or peanut butter
because there are apparently some children who are so allergic to peanuts that they
will go into anaphylactic shock (throat closes up) if they even smell peanuts.
That's the case.

Most claims of food intolerances and allergies are made on the basis of self-diagnosis,
the effects are hard to demonstrate medically, and the demographic profile of
people suffering from the allergy suggests that the status of allergy sufferer meets
social rather than medical needs.

But peanut allergy is very real, and even tiny amounts can have alarming effects.

Peanut butter was my staple diet as a child. Practically every single day I would make
myself a peanut butter sandwich to take to school. It's a great loss.
Shelly
2014-10-02 12:50:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by m***@btinternet.com
Post by cindys
I have. Anecdotally, I have heard that there are schools where it is not permitted for
any child in the entire school to bring anything that contains peanuts or peanut butter
because there are apparently some children who are so allergic to peanuts that they
will go into anaphylactic shock (throat closes up) if they even smell peanuts.
That's the case.
Most claims of food intolerances and allergies are made on the basis of self-diagnosis,
the effects are hard to demonstrate medically, and the demographic profile of
people suffering from the allergy suggests that the status of allergy sufferer meets
social rather than medical needs.
Have you never hear of "scratch tests"? I took allergy shots regularly,
at a doctor's office, from age 35 until age 49. I started again two
years ago at age 71. The are NOT (a) "on the basis of self-diagnosis"
nor (b) "the status of allergy sufferer meets social rather than medical
needs". There is nothing "social" about a sneezing fit, running noses,
tearing eyes, extreme chest pain, difficulty in breathing, nor
anaphalactic shock.

Besides my allergies that make me uncomfortable (sneezing, etc.), I have
an allergy to red wine and apple juice with preservatives. If I were to
drink an 8oz glass of either, I would LITERALLY die. Maybe some on this
group might consider that a social benefit :-), but I don't intend to
oblige.

Allergies are REAL. Come to Florida and see for yourself.
Post by m***@btinternet.com
But peanut allergy is very real, and even tiny amounts can have alarming effects.
Peanut butter was my staple diet as a child. Practically every single day I would make
myself a peanut butter sandwich to take to school. It's a great loss.
--
Shelly
henry.dot.goodman.at.virgin.net
2014-10-02 14:19:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by Shelly
Post by m***@btinternet.com
Post by cindys
I have. Anecdotally, I have heard that there are schools where it is not permitted for
any child in the entire school to bring anything that contains peanuts or peanut butter
because there are apparently some children who are so allergic to peanuts that they
will go into anaphylactic shock (throat closes up) if they even smell peanuts.
That's the case.
Most claims of food intolerances and allergies are made on the basis of self-diagnosis,
the effects are hard to demonstrate medically, and the demographic profile of
people suffering from the allergy suggests that the status of allergy sufferer meets
social rather than medical needs.
Have you never hear of "scratch tests"? I took allergy shots regularly,
at a doctor's office, from age 35 until age 49. I started again two
years ago at age 71. The are NOT (a) "on the basis of self-diagnosis"
nor (b) "the status of allergy sufferer meets social rather than medical
needs". There is nothing "social" about a sneezing fit, running noses,
tearing eyes, extreme chest pain, difficulty in breathing, nor
anaphalactic shock.
Besides my allergies that make me uncomfortable (sneezing, etc.), I have
an allergy to red wine and apple juice with preservatives. If I were to
drink an 8oz glass of either, I would LITERALLY die. Maybe some on this
group might consider that a social benefit :-), but I don't intend to
oblige.
Allergies are REAL. Come to Florida and see for yourself.
Post by m***@btinternet.com
But peanut allergy is very real, and even tiny amounts can have alarming effects.
Peanut butter was my staple diet as a child. Practically every single day I would make
myself a peanut butter sandwich to take to school. It's a great loss.
If you have an allergy to red wine you are allowed to make Kiddush and havdalah on white wine
Henry Goodman
Shelly
2014-10-02 14:37:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by henry.dot.goodman.at.virgin.net
If you have an allergy to red wine you are allowed to make Kiddush and havdalah on white wine
I use white wine for kiddush.
--
Shelly
Yisroel Markov
2014-10-02 16:15:03 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 2 Oct 2014 09:48:05 +0000 (UTC),
Post by m***@btinternet.com
Post by cindys
I have. Anecdotally, I have heard that there are schools where it is not permitted for
any child in the entire school to bring anything that contains peanuts or peanut butter
because there are apparently some children who are so allergic to peanuts that they
will go into anaphylactic shock (throat closes up) if they even smell peanuts.
That's the case.
Most claims of food intolerances and allergies are made on the basis of self-diagnosis,
Possibly.
Post by m***@btinternet.com
the effects are hard to demonstrate medically, and the demographic profile of
people suffering from the allergy suggests that the status of allergy sufferer meets
social rather than medical needs.
This seems unlikely.

I used to be allergic to a number of things as a kid, e.g., tomatoes
and egg whites. The skin reaction to consumption of any of these
things was quick and quite unrelated to anything social. All these
allergies cleared virtually overnight when I left the USSR, suggesting
that environmental pollution was at least a major contributing factor.

But I have a son who is seriously allergic to something in fish, and
it's quite easy to demonstrate - if he so much as touches salmon, the
skin at the point of contact breaks into a fierce red rash. He gets a
similar rash on his face and hands if he accidentally consumes some
other kind of fish. (Interestingly, though, he can eat as much tuna as
he wants.)

So I can't agree with what you said above.
Post by m***@btinternet.com
But peanut allergy is very real, and even tiny amounts can have alarming effects.
Peanut butter was my staple diet as a child. Practically every single day I would make
myself a peanut butter sandwich to take to school. It's a great loss.
--
Yisroel "Godwrestler Warriorson" Markov - Boston, MA Member
www.reason.com -- for a sober analysis of the world DNRC
--------------------------------------------------------------------
"Judge, and be prepared to be judged" -- Ayn Rand
Shelly
2014-10-02 16:31:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by Yisroel Markov
All these
allergies cleared virtually overnight when I left the USSR, suggesting
that environmental pollution was at least a major contributing factor.
I had allergies after a number of years in New England. I didn't in NYC,
but then again there was little greenery there to cause it. When I
moved to the Ft. Lauderdale area ALL my [airborne] allergies disappeared
entirely. That area is caled Zone 10 in the climatological map of the
US which indicates what type of vegetation is there. When I moved to
The Villages in \central Florida, which is Zone 9, my allergies
reappeared. I would agree with you wrt airborne (greenery) allergies
like hayfever and such being climatological.
--
Shelly
Fred Goldstein
2014-10-03 00:23:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by Yisroel Markov
On Thu, 2 Oct 2014 09:48:05 +0000 (UTC),
Post by m***@btinternet.com
Post by cindys
I have. Anecdotally, I have heard that there are schools where it is not permitted for
any child in the entire school to bring anything that contains peanuts or peanut butter
because there are apparently some children who are so allergic to peanuts that they
will go into anaphylactic shock (throat closes up) if they even smell peanuts.
That's the case.
Most claims of food intolerances and allergies are made on the basis of self-diagnosis,
Possibly.
Some are, but there is good testing now too.
Post by Yisroel Markov
Post by m***@btinternet.com
the effects are hard to demonstrate medically, and the demographic profile of
people suffering from the allergy suggests that the status of allergy sufferer meets
social rather than medical needs.
This seems unlikely.
I used to be allergic to a number of things as a kid, e.g., tomatoes
and egg whites. The skin reaction to consumption of any of these
things was quick and quite unrelated to anything social. All these
allergies cleared virtually overnight when I left the USSR, suggesting
that environmental pollution was at least a major contributing factor.
That or a difference in the product.

An interesting fact about peanut allergy that I once heard --it is very
rare in China. But Chinese people can be allergic to peanuts in America.
One not-unlikely possibility is that it's the way peanuts are processed.
In China, they're usually boiled. In America, they're usually roasted at
around 600F. The roasting process may produce allergens.

Fertilizers, pesticides, and other things in the food may produce
allergies too.
Post by Yisroel Markov
But I have a son who is seriously allergic to something in fish, and
it's quite easy to demonstrate - if he so much as touches salmon, the
skin at the point of contact breaks into a fierce red rash. He gets a
similar rash on his face and hands if he accidentally consumes some
other kind of fish. (Interestingly, though, he can eat as much tuna as
he wants.)
So I can't agree with what you said above.
Interesting. My son too is deathly allergic to fish, though tuna is no
less toxic than salmon. He once went into mild anaphylaxis eating soup
that had a little bit of fish broth in it. Now we don't normally eat or
keep fish at home, at least when he's living there. Something is making
us very prone to allergies these days.
Shelly
2014-09-30 15:55:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by henry.dot.goodman.at.virgin.net
Post by DoD
Post by henry.dot.goodman.at.virgin.net
Post by DoD
Post by cindys
National Front leader Marine Le Pen has said her party will not pander
to
Jewish and Muslim children by offering non-Pork alternatives for lunch.
I am confused on why you posted this.... Good thing or bad thing?
How can it be good? Another reason for French Jews to vote against the
national front.
Henry Goodman
Because everyone in the U.S. is always yelling at the top of their lungs,
Sep of Church
and State..... Isn't this Sep of C and S ?
I have never lived in a country that has separation of Church and State but I think that if that means making it difficult for Jewish children (or adults, or other religions) to observe their religious requirements then it is a bad idea.
Henry Goodman
Making it unavailable to Jews would be the infringement, not the other
way around.
--
Shelly
m***@btinternet.com
2014-09-30 17:20:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by henry.dot.goodman.at.virgin.net
I have never lived in a country that has separation of Church and State but I think that
if that means making it difficult for Jewish children (or adults, or other religions) to
observe their religious requirements then it is a bad idea.
The British system works well. You can send your children to a Jewish state school which
almost always also offers an excellent standard of secular education. Unfortunately it's
under threat because of the evolution issue, rules designed to prevent Christian
fundamentalists from teaching creationism have caught Jewish schools which wish not
to teach evolution (there's an important difference).
cindys
2014-09-30 19:15:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by m***@btinternet.com
Post by henry.dot.goodman.at.virgin.net
I have never lived in a country that has separation of Church and State but I think that
if that means making it difficult for Jewish children (or adults, or other religions) to
observe their religious requirements then it is a bad idea.
The British system works well. You can send your children to a Jewish state school which
almost always also offers an excellent standard of secular education. Unfortunately it's
under threat because of the evolution issue, rules designed to prevent Christian
fundamentalists from teaching creationism have caught Jewish schools which wish not
to teach evolution (there's an important difference).
-----
Over the course of the years you have been posting here, every time the topic is church/state separation issues vis-a-vis Jewish schools, you keep telling us that the main issue for Jewish schools is or could be that they would have to teach evolution and not be allowed to teach creationism (or something like that). Again, as I know I have personally explained to you in the past, evolution versus creationism is a truly insignificant part of a Jewish day school curriculum.

The Jewish day school curriculum revolves around prayers, learning about Jewish holidays and Jewish law, learning about Sabbath observance, keeping kosher, learning to read Hebrew, studying chumash, mishna, midrash, and talmud. A Jewish school is NOT a Christian school where (perhaps, since I know very little about Christian schools), the religious aspect is a focus on "bible study." That is NOT what a Jewish school is about at all, and nobody seems to be obsessing about this evolution/creation thing except you. In fact, my son learned all about evolution *in a black hat yeshiva* as part of the New York State Regents Life Science curriculum. So, there you go...

So, please stop saying that the big deal with church-state separation would be that Jewish day school students would have to learn about evolution and not creation. The issue is insignificant (not to mention that outside the black hat world, most Jews believe that evolution is a fact that can be reconciled with creation anyway).
Best regards,
---Cindy S.
Harry Weiss
2014-10-02 00:50:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by cindys
Post by m***@btinternet.com
Post by henry.dot.goodman.at.virgin.net
I have never lived in a country that has separation of Church and State but I think that
if that means making it difficult for Jewish children (or adults, or other religions) to
observe their religious requirements then it is a bad idea.
The British system works well. You can send your children to a Jewish state school which
almost always also offers an excellent standard of secular education. Unfortunately it's
under threat because of the evolution issue, rules designed to prevent Christian
fundamentalists from teaching creationism have caught Jewish schools which wish not
to teach evolution (there's an important difference).
-----
Over the course of the years you have been posting here, every time the topic is church/state separation issues vis-a-vis Jewish schools, you keep telling us that the main issue for Jewish schools is or could be that they would have to teach evolution and not be allowed to teach creationism (or something like that). Again, as I know I have personally explained to you in the past, evolution versus creationism is a truly insignificant part of a Jewish day school curriculum.
The Jewish day school curriculum revolves around prayers, learning about Jewish holidays and Jewish law, learning about Sabbath observance, keeping kosher, learning to read Hebrew, studying chumash, mishna, midrash, and talmud. A Jewish school is NOT a Christian school where (perhaps, since I know very little about Christian schools), the religious aspect is a focus on "bible study." That is NOT what a Jewish school is about at all, and nobody seems to be obsessing about this evolution/creation thing except you. In fact, my son learned all about evolution *in a black hat yeshiva* as part of the New York State Regents Life Science curriculum. So, there you go...
So, please stop saying that the big deal with church-state separation would be that Jewish day school students would have to learn about evolution and not creation. The issue is insignificant (not to mention that outside the black hat world, most Jews believe that evolution is a fact that can be reconciled with creation anyway).
Best regards,
---Cindy S.
You are correct both in my experience with myself and my children, (There
are some Yeshivot that have little or no secular subjects, but that is a
separate issue)

Secular clasees were independant, Usually when evolution is tought, one of
the students will ask their Morning (Judiaca) teachers about who will
discuss his view,

The one things that is not tought in many Yehivot is sex ed.
--
Harry J. Weiss
***@panix.com
mm
2014-10-02 03:29:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by Harry Weiss
Post by cindys
Post by m***@btinternet.com
Post by henry.dot.goodman.at.virgin.net
I have never lived in a country that has separation of Church and State but I think that
if that means making it difficult for Jewish children (or adults, or other religions) to
observe their religious requirements then it is a bad idea.
The British system works well. You can send your children to a Jewish state school which
almost always also offers an excellent standard of secular education. Unfortunately it's
under threat because of the evolution issue, rules designed to prevent Christian
fundamentalists from teaching creationism have caught Jewish schools which wish not
to teach evolution (there's an important difference).
-----
Over the course of the years you have been posting here, every time the topic is church/state separation issues vis-a-vis Jewish schools, you keep telling us that the main issue for Jewish schools is or could be that they would have to teach evolution and not be allowed to teach creationism (or something like that). Again, as I know I have personally explained to you in the past, evolution versus creationism is a truly insignificant part of a Jewish day school curriculum.
The Jewish day school curriculum revolves around prayers, learning about Jewish holidays and Jewish law, learning about Sabbath observance, keeping kosher, learning to read Hebrew, studying chumash, mishna, midrash, and talmud. A Jewish school is NOT a Christian school where (perhaps, since I know very little about Christian schools), the religious aspect is a focus on "bible study." That is NOT what a Jewish school is about at all, and nobody seems to be obsessing about this evolution/creation thing except you. In fact, my son learned all about evolution *in a black hat yeshiva* as part of the New York State Regents Life Science curriculum. So, there you go...
So, please stop saying that the big deal with church-state separation would be that Jewish day school students would have to learn about evolution and not creation. The issue is insignificant (not to mention that outside the black hat world, most Jews believe that evolution is a fact that can be reconciled with creation anyway).
Best regards,
---Cindy S.
You are correct both in my experience with myself and my children, (There
are some Yeshivot that have little or no secular subjects, but that is a
separate issue)
Secular clasees were independant, Usually when evolution is tought, one of
the students will ask their Morning (Judiaca) teachers about who will
discuss his view,
There are so many things to teach, I don't know why evolution has to be
taught one way or the other in public schools, and certainly not
creationism which is an inherently religious notion.

I went to public school through high school and they never said a word
about evolution. They also never got past the Civil War in American
History class. Some things people have to learn outside of school.
Post by Harry Weiss
The one things that is not tought in many Yehivot is sex ed.
I think it was the 8th grade, 1957, that there was a boys movie for the
boys and and a girls movie for the girls in the gymnasium, at different
times of course. The only thing I remember from the boys movie is that
if you ask a girl to go to the beach and she says no, don't assume she
doesn't like you. But we had no beach in Indianapolis.
--
Meir
cindys
2014-10-02 12:24:59 UTC
Permalink
On Wednesday, October 1, 2014 11:29:59 PM UTC-4, googy wrote:
snip
Post by mm
There are so many things to teach, I don't know why evolution has to be
taught one way or the other in public schools,
snip
Post by mm
I went to public school through high school and they never said a word
about evolution. They also never got past the Civil War in American
History class. Some things people have to learn outside of school.
------
But evolution is not and should not be one of them.

Evolution is THE cornerstone of any modern-day high school or college biology curriculum and is the basis for the study of genetics.

I think perhaps you are thinking of a time when relatively little was known about genetics, and the entire study of evolution and by extension genetics was limited to an isolated chapter in a standard high school biology book where there was a discussion that people and primates had a common ancestor, that different species demonstrated analagous features (i.e., that the human leg and wolf leg had similar structure and function) and that the finches on a certain island had differently shaped beaks because of natural selection. Genetics was limited to a discussion of Mendel's pea plants and maybe a fruit fly lab (once you got to college). This is all from a very long time ago (although I believe the finch beak study is still a part of middle school science).

The field and study of genetics has grown beyond our wildest dreams. And there really can be no study of genetics without study of evolution. And every year, our knowledge in the area of genetics grows exponentially. The study of evolution and genetics currently comprises at least 25% of the AP Biology curriculum, which is based on four "big ideas," the first of which is:

"The process of evolution drives the diversity and unity of life."

See: http://media.collegeboard.com/digitalServices/pdf/ap/10b_2727_AP_Biology_CF_WEB_110128.pdf


So, this is why evolution must be taught in public schools. To omit the study of evolution from science class would be like omitting the mention of the American Revolution or the Constitution or George Washington from American history class.
Best regards,
---Cindy S.
Herman Rubin
2014-10-02 20:39:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by Yisroel Markov
snip
Post by mm
There are so many things to teach, I don't know why evolution has to be
taught one way or the other in public schools,
snip
Post by mm
I went to public school through high school and they never said a word
about evolution. They also never got past the Civil War in American
History class. Some things people have to learn outside of school.
------
But evolution is not and should not be one of them.
Evolution is THE cornerstone of any modern-day high school or college
biology curriculum and is the basis for the study of genetics.
Post by Yisroel Markov
I think perhaps you are thinking of a time when relatively little was
known about genetics, and the entire study of evolution and by extension
genetics was limited to an isolated chapter in a standard high school
biology book where there was a discussion that people and primates
had a common ancestor, that different species demonstrated analagous
features (i.e., that the human leg and wolf leg had similar structure
and function) and that the finches on a certain island had differently
shaped beaks because of natural selection. Genetics was limited to
a discussion of Mendel's pea plants and maybe a fruit fly lab (once
you got to college). This is all from a very long time ago (although I
believe the finch beak study is still a part of middle school science).

Darwin and Wallace were even before Mendel; it was also fairly well known
that even in the absence of selection there could be genetic drift. The
mathematics of Mendelian genetics was typically not in high school biology,
because it required algebra to discuss easily, but it was considered a
standard topic in beginning college courses.
Post by Yisroel Markov
The field and study of genetics has grown beyond our wildest dreams. And
there really can be no study of genetics without study of evolution. And
every year, our knowledge in the area of genetics grows exponentially. The
study of evolution and genetics currently comprises at least 25% of the
AP Biology curriculum, which is based on four "big ideas," the first of
Post by Yisroel Markov
"The process of evolution drives the diversity and unity of life."
http://media.collegeboard.com/digitalServices/pdf/ap/10b_2727_AP_Biology_CF_WEB_110128.pdf
Post by Yisroel Markov
So, this is why evolution must be taught in public schools. To omit the study of evolution from science class would be like omitting the mention of the American Revolution or the Constitution or George Washington from American history class.
Best regards,
---Cindy S.
--
This address is for information only. I do not claim that these views
are those of the Statistics Department or of Purdue University.
Herman Rubin, Department of Statistics, Purdue University
***@stat.purdue.edu Phone: (765)494-6054 FAX: (765)494-0558
cindys
2014-10-03 00:43:25 UTC
Permalink
On Thursday, October 2, 2014 4:39:10 PM UTC-4, Herman Rubin wrote:
snip
Post by Herman Rubin
Darwin and Wallace were even before Mendel; it was also fairly well known
that even in the absence of selection there could be genetic drift. The
mathematics of Mendelian genetics was typically not in high school biology,
because it required algebra to discuss easily, but it was considered a
standard topic in beginning college courses.
-----
I just checked the website for really ancient NYS Regents exams. The oldest exam on the site is from June 1934, and it includes a question about dominant and recessive genes vis-a-vis crossbreeding a black mouse with a white one. So Mendelian genetics has been in the NYS high school biology curriculum *at least* as far back as 1934. And no, you don't need to algebra to discuss it, just a basic Punnett square.
Best regards,
---Cindy S.
Post by Herman Rubin
Post by cindys
The field and study of genetics has grown beyond our wildest dreams. And
there really can be no study of genetics without study of evolution. And
every year, our knowledge in the area of genetics grows exponentially. The
study of evolution and genetics currently comprises at least 25% of the
AP Biology curriculum, which is based on four "big ideas," the first of
Post by cindys
"The process of evolution drives the diversity and unity of life."
http://media.collegeboard.com/digitalServices/pdf/ap/10b_2727_AP_Biology_CF_WEB_110128.pdf
Post by cindys
So, this is why evolution must be taught in public schools. To omit the study of evolution from science class would be like omitting the mention of the American Revolution or the Constitution or George Washington from American history class.
Best regards,
---Cindy S.
--
This address is for information only. I do not claim that these views
are those of the Statistics Department or of Purdue University.
Herman Rubin, Department of Statistics, Purdue University
henry.dot.goodman.at.virgin.net
2014-10-03 13:16:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by cindys
snip
Post by Herman Rubin
Darwin and Wallace were even before Mendel; it was also fairly well known
that even in the absence of selection there could be genetic drift. The
mathematics of Mendelian genetics was typically not in high school biology,
because it required algebra to discuss easily, but it was considered a
standard topic in beginning college courses.
-----
I just checked the website for really ancient NYS Regents exams. The oldest exam on the site is from June 1934, and it includes a question about dominant and recessive genes vis-a-vis crossbreeding a black mouse with a white one. So Mendelian genetics has been in the NYS high school biology curriculum *at least* as far back as 1934. And no, you don't need to algebra to discuss it, just a basic Punnett square.
Best regards,
---Cindy S.
Don't American high schools teach Algebra (and Euclidean geometry)?
Gemar chatima tova

Henry Goodman
Shelly
2014-10-03 13:27:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by henry.dot.goodman.at.virgin.net
Don't American high schools teach Algebra (and Euclidean geometry)?
Gemar chatima tova
Henry Goodman
Of course! In high school (1955-1958), I had algebra (through advanced
algebra), geometry, trigonometry, and calculus.
--
Shelly
cindys
2014-10-03 15:01:17 UTC
Permalink
On Friday, October 3, 2014 9:16:21 AM UTC-4, henry.dot.goodman.at.virgin.net wrote:
snip
Post by henry.dot.goodman.at.virgin.net
Don't American high schools teach Algebra (and Euclidean geometry)?
Gemar chatima tova
------
Yes, they do.
Best regards,
---Cindy S.
Herman Rubin
2014-10-03 18:32:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by henry.dot.goodman.at.virgin.net
Post by cindys
snip
Post by Herman Rubin
Darwin and Wallace were even before Mendel; it was also fairly well known
that even in the absence of selection there could be genetic drift. The
mathematics of Mendelian genetics was typically not in high school biology,
because it required algebra to discuss easily, but it was considered a
standard topic in beginning college courses.
I just checked the website for really ancient NYS Regents exams.
The oldest exam on the site is from June 1934, and it includes a question
about dominant and recessive genes vis-a-vis crossbreeding a black mouse
with a white one. So Mendelian genetics has been in the NYS high school
biology curriculum *at least* as far back as 1934. And no, you don't
need to algebra to discuss it, just a basic Punnett square.
Post by henry.dot.goodman.at.virgin.net
Post by cindys
Best regards,
---Cindy S.
Don't American high schools teach Algebra (and Euclidean geometry)?
Gemar chatima tova
They all teach algebra, but usually dumbed down. As for Euclidean
geometry, it was standard until about 50 years ago, but now it is
an honors course, if taught at all.

Also, even before the dumbing down, many students took high
school biology without taking algebra first.

The high school dumbing down did not take place in the US
until after WWII.
Post by henry.dot.goodman.at.virgin.net
Henry Goodman
--
This address is for information only. I do not claim that these views
are those of the Statistics Department or of Purdue University.
Herman Rubin, Department of Statistics, Purdue University
***@stat.purdue.edu Phone: (765)494-6054 FAX: (765)494-0558
Shelly
2014-10-03 19:00:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by cindys
Post by henry.dot.goodman.at.virgin.net
Post by cindys
snip
Post by Herman Rubin
Darwin and Wallace were even before Mendel; it was also fairly well known
that even in the absence of selection there could be genetic drift. The
mathematics of Mendelian genetics was typically not in high school biology,
because it required algebra to discuss easily, but it was considered a
standard topic in beginning college courses.
I just checked the website for really ancient NYS Regents exams.
The oldest exam on the site is from June 1934, and it includes a question
about dominant and recessive genes vis-a-vis crossbreeding a black mouse
with a white one. So Mendelian genetics has been in the NYS high school
biology curriculum *at least* as far back as 1934. And no, you don't
need to algebra to discuss it, just a basic Punnett square.
Post by henry.dot.goodman.at.virgin.net
Post by cindys
Best regards,
---Cindy S.
Don't American high schools teach Algebra (and Euclidean geometry)?
Gemar chatima tova
They all teach algebra, but usually dumbed down. As for Euclidean
geometry, it was standard until about 50 years ago, but now it is
an honors course, if taught at all.
That is simply false. I taught high school math for four years
2003-2007. The first three were at an Orthodox Day School in North
Miama and the last was at a school here in central Florida. In both of
these Geometry was taught to ALL students as a required course. Also,
the Algebra I taught was the same as the first level Algebra I had some
fifty years earlier. Also, all three of my children had Geometry in the
public high schools in Framingham, Ma (1984 - 1995 being their high
school years). Also, the Algebra was the same as I was taught.

In all these high schools (four of them) Calculus was taught as an AP
course.

I don't know where you get your statistics, but at least on the eastern
seaboard I can tell you from first hand experience, as a parent and as a
teacher, that they are dead wrong.
Post by cindys
Also, even before the dumbing down, many students took high
school biology without taking algebra first.
I took Elementary Algebra in junior high school in NY (1953-5). In high
school I took Intermediate Algebra, Biology, and Chemistry in my
sophomore year (1955-1956; I entered high school in the sophomore year
because I was in a program to do 7-9 grades in two years). In my Junior
Year I had Advanced Algebra and Trigonometry along with Physics. In my
senior year I had Calculus. (This was before AP). Granted, I was at a
NYC city-wide, entrance exam, school but other schools throughout the
city were the same with the possible exception of Calculus.

The dumbing down you speak is not so much the public schools (yes, it is
there), but in colleges. For example, in my college Calculus was a one
year course. When I taught nights at Northeastern twenty years later, I
saw that it had become a two year course. Also, "open enrollment" meant
the destruction of good colleges by turning them into mediocre colleges.
There never used to be courses like "Remedial English" or "Remedial
Math" before in college. Those people simply did not go to college. (I
am not talking about "English as a Second Language courses designed to
teach people English).

I agree with you that promotion by age group is ridiculous. There
should be promotion by SUBJECT matter. So, a student might be in sixth
grade English and third grade Math, for example. Then, upon graduation,
give different kinds of diplomas, or a set of diplomas of varying
degrees based upon subject discipline.
Post by cindys
The high school dumbing down did not take place in the US
until after WWII.
See above.
--
Shelly
Herman Rubin
2014-10-05 23:42:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by Shelly
Post by cindys
Post by henry.dot.goodman.at.virgin.net
Post by cindys
snip
Post by Herman Rubin
Darwin and Wallace were even before Mendel; it was also fairly well known
that even in the absence of selection there could be genetic drift. The
mathematics of Mendelian genetics was typically not in high school biology,
because it required algebra to discuss easily, but it was considered a
standard topic in beginning college courses.
I just checked the website for really ancient NYS Regents exams.
The oldest exam on the site is from June 1934, and it includes a question
about dominant and recessive genes vis-a-vis crossbreeding a black mouse
with a white one. So Mendelian genetics has been in the NYS high school
biology curriculum *at least* as far back as 1934. And no, you don't
need to algebra to discuss it, just a basic Punnett square.
Post by henry.dot.goodman.at.virgin.net
Post by cindys
Best regards,
---Cindy S.
Don't American high schools teach Algebra (and Euclidean geometry)?
Gemar chatima tova
They all teach algebra, but usually dumbed down. As for Euclidean
geometry, it was standard until about 50 years ago, but now it is
an honors course, if taught at all.
That is simply false. I taught high school math for four years
2003-2007. The first three were at an Orthodox Day School in North
Miama and the last was at a school here in central Florida. In both of
these Geometry was taught to ALL students as a required course. Also,
the Algebra I taught was the same as the first level Algebra I had some
fifty years earlier. Also, all three of my children had Geometry in the
public high schools in Framingham, Ma (1984 - 1995 being their high
school years). Also, the Algebra was the same as I was taught.
In all these high schools (four of them) Calculus was taught as an AP
course.
I don't know where you get your statistics, but at least on the eastern
seaboard I can tell you from first hand experience, as a parent and as a
teacher, that they are dead wrong.
Post by cindys
Also, even before the dumbing down, many students took high
school biology without taking algebra first.
I took Elementary Algebra in junior high school in NY (1953-5). In high
school I took Intermediate Algebra, Biology, and Chemistry in my
sophomore year (1955-1956; I entered high school in the sophomore year
because I was in a program to do 7-9 grades in two years). In my Junior
Year I had Advanced Algebra and Trigonometry along with Physics. In my
senior year I had Calculus. (This was before AP). Granted, I was at a
NYC city-wide, entrance exam, school but other schools throughout the
city were the same with the possible exception of Calculus.
Most schools do not have such opportunities. The West Lafayette
high school, one of the best in Indiana, does have the classical
Euclid course, but most take a very much weaker one, which is more
computational and does not go into proofs very much. This includes
most college-bound students. Many of the good students take several
courses at Purdue before graduating high school, and these are the
stronger college courses.
Post by Shelly
The dumbing down you speak is not so much the public schools (yes, it is
there), but in colleges. For example, in my college Calculus was a one
year course. When I taught nights at Northeastern twenty years later, I
saw that it had become a two year course. Also, "open enrollment" meant
the destruction of good colleges by turning them into mediocre colleges.
There never used to be courses like "Remedial English" or "Remedial
Math" before in college. Those people simply did not go to college. (I
am not talking about "English as a Second Language courses designed to
teach people English).
These remedial courses go way back, and even good students often
had to take them. At the University of Oregon in the late 50's,
one of the co-winners of the prize for the best undergraduate, and
this was a program comparable to any, was a girl who took non-credit
courses in algebra and geometry, as when she was in high school her
father kept her out of math.

I have been told that induction has been dropped from "College
Algebra" courses. Alas, induction in some form is necessary to
understand the integers; Euclid, who had no way of using veriables
for numbers, used induction in the form that any set of ibtegers
had a least element. The idea of zero and negative integers would
not have occurred to him.
Post by Shelly
I agree with you that promotion by age group is ridiculous. There
should be promotion by SUBJECT matter. So, a student might be in sixth
grade English and third grade Math, for example. Then, upon graduation,
give different kinds of diplomas, or a set of diplomas of varying
degrees based upon subject discipline.
How about sixth grade reading, college level mathematics, and
first grade composition? Composition is not taught, except to
point out errors, but what happens if the student finds all the
errors, and thus does not put anything down?
Post by Shelly
Post by cindys
The high school dumbing down did not take place in the US
until after WWII.
Before then, there were different programs. Most students did
not take many of the college preparatory courses. There were
terminal home economics and shop programs. The elementary schools
at that time were essentially lockstop in the various subjects,
but the high schools had even more choice in subjects than the
colleges do now.
Post by Shelly
See above.
--
This address is for information only. I do not claim that these views
are those of the Statistics Department or of Purdue University.
Herman Rubin, Department of Statistics, Purdue University
***@stat.purdue.edu Phone: (765)494-6054 FAX: (765)494-0558
Arthur Kamlet
2014-10-06 00:18:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by Herman Rubin
I have been told that induction has been dropped from "College
Algebra" courses. Alas, induction in some form is necessary to
understand the integers; Euclid, who had no way of using veriables
for numbers, used induction in the form that any set of ibtegers
had a least element. The idea of zero and negative integers would
not have occurred to him.
And I suspect imaginary numbers would have simply remained imaginary.
--
ArtKamlet at a o l dot c o m Columbus OH K2PZH
mm
2014-10-03 04:18:47 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 2 Oct 2014 12:24:59 +0000 (UTC), cindys
Post by Yisroel Markov
snip
Post by mm
There are so many things to teach, I don't know why evolution has to be
taught one way or the other in public schools,
snip
Post by mm
I went to public school through high school and they never said a word
about evolution. They also never got past the Civil War in American
History class. Some things people have to learn outside of school.
------
But evolution is not and should not be one of them.
Evolution is THE cornerstone of any modern-day high school or college biology curriculum and is the basis for the study of genetics.
I think perhaps you are thinking of a time when relatively little was known about genetics,
I'm not that old.
Post by Yisroel Markov
and the entire study of evolution and by extension genetics was limited to an isolated chapter in a standard high school biology book
One can teach genetics without teaching evolution.
Post by Yisroel Markov
where there was a discussion that people and primates had a common ancestor
No, there was no such discussion in my high school biology book and the
teacher didn't say it either, and I didn't suffer for not hearing it in
public school. One can't do research in genetics based only on a high
school education anyhow.
Post by Yisroel Markov
, that different species demonstrated analagous features (i.e., that the human leg and wolf leg had similar structure and function) and that the finches on a certain island had differently shaped beaks because of natural selection.
No, the biology book didn't say that either.
Post by Yisroel Markov
Genetics was limited to a discussion of Mendel's pea plants and maybe a fruit fly lab (once you got to college). This is all from a very long time ago
I had biology in 1960-1, chemistry in 61-2, physics in 62-3. That may
be a long time ago to you, but the curriculum was adequate. Every
moment they didn't spend on evolution was time to spend on some other
aspect of biology. I can't emphasize that enough.

One can't do research in genetics based only on a high school education
anyhow. (Well he can but he won't find anything others havent' found
already.)
Post by Yisroel Markov
(although I believe the finch beak study is still a part of middle school science).
The field and study of genetics has grown beyond our wildest dreams. And there really can be no study of genetics without study of evolution.
That's not so. There is plenty of material regarding genetics that
doesn't need to include evolution. To prove this, note that most
discussions of genetic diseases with the intention of treating patients
who are seeking treatment now, and even among physicians concerned about
these same patients, discuss what gene or chromosome is missing, or
whatever, and what can be or coud have been done about it and spend no
time on evolution, and many more discussions beyond those have only a
passing reference to evolution.

Your statement is like saying "You can't understand American government
now without knowing the history of American government and of English
government before that." People say things like that too, and one can
certainly benefit from knowing the history of government, but there is
loads to learn about the government now without regard to any of its
history, let alone it's 19th and 18th century history.

Or,"You can't appreciate current-day impressionist paintings without
knowing paintings from the start of impressionism."
Post by Yisroel Markov
And every year, our knowledge in the area of genetics grows exponentially.
So what? Is the school board going to make people who took 9th grade
biology have a catch-up course before hight school graduation?
Post by Yisroel Markov
The study of evolution and genetics currently comprises at least 25% of the AP Biology curriculum,
You're mixing evolution and genetics here and I'm saying they don't have
to be mixed. But assuming they do have to be mixed, the AP Biology
curriculum is not carved in stone, and it was not written by the
Prophets. It, or some other curriculum, could eliminate all of
evolution, and any part of genetics if any that was somehow inextricably
bound to evolution, and then that would be the curriculum.
Post by Yisroel Markov
"The process of evolution drives the diversity and unity of life."
See: http://media.collegeboard.com/digitalServices/pdf/ap/10b_2727_AP_Biology_CF_WEB_110128.pdf
So, this is why evolution must be taught in public schools. To omit the study of evolution from science class would be like omitting the mention of the American Revolution or the Constitution or George Washington from American history class.
You're comparing the *study* of evolution with the *mention* of the
Revolution, et al. Shoudn't it be comparing the study with the study
or the mention with the mention?

A little more to add, but I've forgotten what it is, so I'll skip it.
:-)
Post by Yisroel Markov
Best regards,
---Cindy S.
Have a good Yom Kippur, Cindy, a good sealing, and a good year.
--
Meir
m***@btinternet.com
2014-10-03 13:17:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by mm
I had biology in 1960-1, chemistry in 61-2, physics in 62-3. That may
be a long time ago to you, but the curriculum was adequate. Every
moment they didn't spend on evolution was time to spend on some other
aspect of biology. I can't emphasize that enough.
Evolution is fundamental. Whilst you can study other aspects of biology without
it, you can't go very deep. Whether you're interested in behaviour, the fossil
record, genetics, host parasite interactions, sexual display and reproduction,
breeding for improvement, classification, or pretty much any subject, you soon
have to mention evolution.
cindys
2014-10-03 14:39:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by mm
On Thu, 2 Oct 2014 12:24:59 +0000 (UTC), cindys
Post by Yisroel Markov
snip
Post by mm
There are so many things to teach, I don't know why evolution has to be
taught one way or the other in public schools,
snip
Post by mm
I went to public school through high school and they never said a word
about evolution. They also never got past the Civil War in American
History class. Some things people have to learn outside of school.
------
But evolution is not and should not be one of them.
Evolution is THE cornerstone of any modern-day high school or college biology curriculum and is the basis for the study of genetics.
I think perhaps you are thinking of a time when relatively little was known about genetics,
I'm not that old.
Unless you were born within the last 20 years (or fewer), you are. And so am I. In 1972, Watson and Crick demonstrated the double helix structure of DNA. And that is certainly old news. The fluid mosaic model of a cell membrane was also established/accepted in 1972, which is also old news. And these are just two examples. When I was in high school, the field of genetics was in its infancy.

The human genome project embarked in 1990 and was completed in 2003. A tremendous amount of current scientific research revolves around the studying of oncogenes in the search for new treatments for cancer. And part of this research involves the study of similarities in the DNA of different organisms (i.e., studying "analogous structures" on a molecular level). For example, how does one account for the fact that mitochondria of eukaryotic cells carry their own DNA if not for the fact that prokaryotes were genetic precursors to eukaryotic cells?

Evolution is about the changing content of the genome. Genetic mutations drive evolution, and without evolution there is no diversity. Again, the study of evolution is THE cornerstone of any modern biology course.
Post by mm
One can teach genetics without teaching evolution.
You really can't except on a 1960s or 1970s level.
Post by mm
Post by Yisroel Markov
where there was a discussion that people and primates had a common ancestor
No, there was no such discussion in my high school biology book and the
teacher didn't say it either,
Well, it was certainly part of the standard high school biology curriculum by the mid 1970s.
Post by mm
and I didn't suffer for not hearing it in
public school.
Perhaps not, but just because you feel you didn't miss out on anything doesn't mean that current high school students should be denied what is today a fundamental part of their science education.
Post by mm
One can't do research in genetics based only on a high
school education anyhow.
Of course not. And one can't be an engineer not having learned any math beyond 9th grade algebra. But if one doesn't learn 9th grade algebra, he lacks the foundation to learn 10th grade math and 11th grade math and pre-calculus and calculus etc. The purpose of a high school education to provide a foundation for everything that is going to follow.
Post by mm
Post by Yisroel Markov
, that different species demonstrated analagous features (i.e., that the human leg and wolf leg had similar structure and function) and that the finches on a certain island had differently shaped beaks because of natural selection.
No, the biology book didn't say that either.
Well, my 1970s biology book did say it.
Post by mm
Post by Yisroel Markov
Genetics was limited to a discussion of Mendel's pea plants and maybe a fruit fly lab (once you got to college). This is all from a very long time ago
I had biology in 1960-1, chemistry in 61-2, physics in 62-3. That may
be a long time ago to you, but the curriculum was adequate.
For that time.
Post by mm
Every
moment they didn't spend on evolution was time to spend on some other
aspect of biology. I can't emphasize that enough.
One can't do research in genetics based only on a high school education
anyhow. (Well he can but he won't find anything others havent' found
already.)
See above.
Post by mm
Post by Yisroel Markov
(although I believe the finch beak study is still a part of middle school science).
The field and study of genetics has grown beyond our wildest dreams. And there really can be no study of genetics without study of evolution.
That's not so. There is plenty of material regarding genetics that
doesn't need to include evolution.
Yes, and one can write a geometric proof without knowing algebra.
Post by mm
To prove this, note that most
discussions of genetic diseases with the intention of treating patients
who are seeking treatment now, and even among physicians concerned about
these same patients, discuss what gene or chromosome is missing, or
whatever, and what can be or coud have been done about it and spend no
time on evolution, and many more discussions beyond those have only a
passing reference to evolution.
And I would be willing to bet that the above discussions include even fewer references to algebra and geometry. The point is that the study of evolution is a fundamental part of the modern high school biology curriculum. And public school students are entitled to a comprehensive education in high school science, which (for some of them) will then be a foundation for ongoing education in science at a college level. And since most high school students have not yet decided on what career they are going to pursue, all of them are entitled to have a complete science education without censorship of certain topics.
Post by mm
Your statement is like saying "You can't understand American government
now without knowing the history of American government and of English
government before that." People say things like that too, and one can
certainly benefit from knowing the history of government, but there is
loads to learn about the government now without regard to any of its
history, let alone it's 19th and 18th century history.
Sure. But I have never heard of anybody advocating that a school should make a point of NOT teaching about the American Revolution in American history class.
Post by mm
Or,"You can't appreciate current-day impressionist paintings without
knowing paintings from the start of impressionism."
Post by Yisroel Markov
And every year, our knowledge in the area of genetics grows exponentially.
So what? Is the school board going to make people who took 9th grade
biology have a catch-up course before high school graduation?
What?
Post by mm
Post by Yisroel Markov
The study of evolution and genetics currently comprises at least 25% of the AP Biology curriculum,
You're mixing evolution and genetics here and I'm saying they don't have
to be mixed.
And I'm saying they do. But even if they didn't have to be mixed, the study of evolution is a fundamental part of the study of biology, and public school students are entitled to have the best and most complete education the school is capable of providing.
Post by mm
But assuming they do have to be mixed, the AP Biology
curriculum is not carved in stone, and it was not written by the
Prophets. It, or some other curriculum, could eliminate all of
evolution, and any part of genetics if any that was somehow inextricably
bound to evolution, and then that would be the curriculum.
But why should they need to do that? Because some religious groups believe that evolution contradicts the bible? So, therefore, nobody should be allowed to learn about evolution in a public high school? This is a perfect example of why we need the separation of Church and State.

At the risk of sounding like Marine Le Pen, I don't think public schools should pander to religious groups who find scientific truths disagreeable. If the public high school my younger son attended had eliminated the study of evolution from the curriculum, the parents would have rioted, and I would have been at the head of line. Religion should not have a vote in deciding a public school curriculum.

snip
Post by mm
Have a good Yom Kippur, Cindy, a good sealing, and a good year.
Same to you, Meir. Have an easy fast.
Best regards,
---Cindy S.
W. Baker
2014-10-02 13:24:36 UTC
Permalink
mm <***@bigfoot.com> wrote:
: On Thu, 2 Oct 2014 00:50:05 +0000 (UTC), Harry Weiss <***@panix.com>
: wrote:

: >cindys <***@rochester.rr.com> wrote:
: >> On Tuesday, September 30, 2014 1:20:04 PM UTC-4, ***@btinternet.com wrote:
: >> > On Tuesday, September 30, 2014 3:32:48 PM UTC+1, henry.dot.goodman.at.virgin.net wrote:
: >> >
: >> > > I have never lived in a country that has separation of Church and State but I think that
: >> >
: >> > > if that means making it difficult for Jewish children (or adults, or other religions) to
: >> >
: >> > > observe their religious requirements then it is a bad idea.
: >> >
: >> > The British system works well. You can send your children to a Jewish state school which
: >> >
: >> > almost always also offers an excellent standard of secular education. Unfortunately it's
: >> >
: >> > under threat because of the evolution issue, rules designed to prevent Christian
: >> >
: >> > fundamentalists from teaching creationism have caught Jewish schools which wish not
: >> >
: >> > to teach evolution (there's an important difference).
: >> -----
: >> Over the course of the years you have been posting here, every time the topic is church/state separation issues vis-a-vis Jewish schools, you keep telling us that the main issue for Jewish schools is or could be that they would have to teach evolution and not be allowed to teach creationism (or something like that). Again, as I know I have personally explained to you in the past, evolution versus creationism is a truly insignificant part of a Jewish day school curriculum.
: >
: >> The Jewish day school curriculum revolves around prayers, learning about Jewish holidays and Jewish law, learning about Sabbath observance, keeping kosher, learning to read Hebrew, studying chumash, mishna, midrash, and talmud. A Jewish school is NOT a Christian school where (perhaps, since I know very little about Christian schools), the religious aspect is a focus on "bible study." That is NOT what a Jewish school is about at all, and nobody seems to be obsessing about this evolution/creation thing except you. In fact, my son learned all about evolution *in a black hat yeshiva* as part of the New York State Regents Life Science curriculum. So, there you go...
: >
: >> So, please stop saying that the big deal with church-state separation would be that Jewish day school students would have to learn about evolution and not creation. The issue is insignificant (not to mention that outside the black hat world, most Jews believe that evolution is a fact that can be reconciled with creation anyway).
: >> Best regards,
: >> ---Cindy S.
: >You are correct both in my experience with myself and my children, (There
: >are some Yeshivot that have little or no secular subjects, but that is a
: >separate issue)
: >
: >Secular clasees were independant, Usually when evolution is tought, one of
: >the students will ask their Morning (Judiaca) teachers about who will
: >discuss his view,

: There are so many things to teach, I don't know why evolution has to be
: taught one way or the other in public schools, and certainly not
: creationism which is an inherently religious notion.

: I went to public school through high school and they never said a word
: about evolution. They also never got past the Civil War in American
: History class. Some things people have to learn outside of school.
: >
: >The one things that is not tought in many Yehivot is sex ed.

: I think it was the 8th grade, 1957, that there was a boys movie for the
: boys and and a girls movie for the girls in the gymnasium, at different
: times of course. The only thing I remember from the boys movie is that
: if you ask a girl to go to the beach and she says no, don't assume she
: doesn't like you. But we had no beach in Indianapolis.
: --

: Meir

I am probably older than many in this group and I learned is simple ways
about evolution as early as third grade when we made big murals for the
school corridors each reresenting a different epoch in the development
of life on earth. A big sea one with all kinds of early shellfish and a
big giant repptile one full of dinasaurs anb big trees, etc and so on. We
also studied it in High School biology and some schools offered Earth
Science as a 9th grade subject. I didn't take that one.

As to Americah History, that was what I taught and we covered up to the
Civil War in the firt term of a two term course. what we had trouble
getting to at that time, was past WWII and the start of the Cold War. I
have been out of the field many years so I imagne they now do get into mor
post-war historyas it ic some 70 yearss tht we wold hate to have to
not cover. I never herd f a American History course in our time that only
got as far as the Civil War in the standard curriculum .

Wendy
mm
2014-10-02 20:54:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by W. Baker
: >> >
: >> > > I have never lived in a country that has separation of Church and State but I think that
: >> >
: >> > > if that means making it difficult for Jewish children (or adults, or other religions) to
: >> >
: >> > > observe their religious requirements then it is a bad idea.
: >> >
: >> > The British system works well. You can send your children to a Jewish state school which
: >> >
: >> > almost always also offers an excellent standard of secular education. Unfortunately it's
: >> >
: >> > under threat because of the evolution issue, rules designed to prevent Christian
: >> >
: >> > fundamentalists from teaching creationism have caught Jewish schools which wish not
: >> >
: >> > to teach evolution (there's an important difference).
: >> -----
: >> Over the course of the years you have been posting here, every time the topic is church/state separation issues vis-a-vis Jewish schools, you keep telling us that the main issue for Jewish schools is or could be that they would have to teach evolution and not be allowed to teach creationism (or something like that). Again, as I know I have personally explained to you in the past, evolution versus creationism is a truly insignificant part of a Jewish day school curriculum.
: >
: >> The Jewish day school curriculum revolves around prayers, learning about Jewish holidays and Jewish law, learning about Sabbath observance, keeping kosher, learning to read Hebrew, studying chumash, mishna, midrash, and talmud. A Jewish school is NOT a Christian school where (perhaps, since I know very little about Christian schools), the religious aspect is a focus on "bible study." That is NOT what a Jewish school is about at all, and nobody seems to be obsessing about this evolution/creation thing except you. In fact, my son learned all about evolution *in a black hat yeshiva* as part of the New York State Regents Life Science curriculum. So, there you go...
: >
: >> So, please stop saying that the big deal with church-state separation would be that Jewish day school students would have to learn about evolution and not creation. The issue is insignificant (not to mention that outside the black hat world, most Jews believe that evolution is a fact that can be reconciled with creation anyway).
: >> Best regards,
: >> ---Cindy S.
: >You are correct both in my experience with myself and my children, (There
: >are some Yeshivot that have little or no secular subjects, but that is a
: >separate issue)
: >
: >Secular clasees were independant, Usually when evolution is tought, one of
: >the students will ask their Morning (Judiaca) teachers about who will
: >discuss his view,
: There are so many things to teach, I don't know why evolution has to be
: taught one way or the other in public schools, and certainly not
: creationism which is an inherently religious notion.
: I went to public school through high school and they never said a word
: about evolution. They also never got past the Civil War in American
: History class. Some things people have to learn outside of school.
: >
: >The one things that is not tought in many Yehivot is sex ed.
: I think it was the 8th grade, 1957, that there was a boys movie for the
: boys and and a girls movie for the girls in the gymnasium, at different
: times of course. The only thing I remember from the boys movie is that
: if you ask a girl to go to the beach and she says no, don't assume she
: doesn't like you. But we had no beach in Indianapolis.
: --
: Meir
I am probably older than many in this group and I learned is simple ways
Yes, you are, but I'm catching up.
Post by W. Baker
about evolution as early as third grade when we made big murals for the
school corridors each reresenting a different epoch in the development
of life on earth. A big sea one with all kinds of early shellfish and a
big giant repptile one full of dinasaurs anb big trees, etc and so on. We
also studied it in High School biology and some schools offered Earth
Science as a 9th grade subject. I didn't take that one.
I think there's a big difference, then and now, between NYC public
schools and Indiana public schools. In fact my 26 year-old friend who
went to a modern-orthodox day school from grade 1 to 12 seems to have
learned a lot more about American history than was taught in my high
school, while at the same time having his mornings devoted to Jewish
subjects. I suspect the whole northeast does better than the whole
midwest (both definitions of midwest) with the possible exception of
Chicago, not that I have any info about Chicago. . .
Post by W. Baker
As to Americah History, that was what I taught and we covered up to the
Civil War in the firt term of a two term course. what we had trouble
getting to at that time, was past WWII and the start of the Cold War. I
have been out of the field many years so I imagne they now do get into mor
post-war historyas it ic some 70 yearss tht we wold hate to have to
not cover. I never herd f a American History course in our time that only
got as far as the Civil War in the standard curriculum .
The book went almost to when it was published, and there may have been a
printed curriculum somewhere, that wasn't shared with students, that
went all the way to the Cold War, but in practice, classroom content
never got beyond the Civil War. While some kids may have done so, no
one suggested we read the whole book, only the parts referred to in
class.
Post by W. Baker
Wendy
--
Meir
Herman Rubin
2014-10-02 21:14:52 UTC
Permalink
.....................
Post by W. Baker
I am probably older than many in this group and I learned is simple ways
about evolution as early as third grade when we made big murals for the
school corridors each reresenting a different epoch in the development
of life on earth. A big sea one with all kinds of early shellfish and a
big giant repptile one full of dinasaurs anb big trees, etc and so on. We
also studied it in High School biology and some schools offered Earth
Science as a 9th grade subject. I didn't take that one.
As to Americah History, that was what I taught and we covered up to the
Civil War in the firt term of a two term course. what we had trouble
getting to at that time, was past WWII and the start of the Cold War. I
have been out of the field many years so I imagne they now do get into mor
post-war historyas it ic some 70 yearss tht we wold hate to have to
not cover. I never herd f a American History course in our time that only
got as far as the Civil War in the standard curriculum .
Wendy
I will have to consider you a youngster. Before WWII, quite a
few elementary school history courses stopped not much after the
Civil War.
--
This address is for information only. I do not claim that these views
are those of the Statistics Department or of Purdue University.
Herman Rubin, Department of Statistics, Purdue University
***@stat.purdue.edu Phone: (765)494-6054 FAX: (765)494-0558
cindys
2014-09-30 17:21:03 UTC
Permalink
On Tuesday, September 30, 2014 10:32:48 AM UTC-4, henry.dot.goodman.at.virgin.net wrote:
snip
Post by henry.dot.goodman.at.virgin.net
I have never lived in a country that has separation of Church and State but I think that if that means making it difficult for Jewish children (or adults, or other religions) to observe their religious requirements then it is a bad idea.
Henry Goodman
------------------------
No, it doesn't mean that. Separation of Church and State just means that the government can't establish a State religion. In practice, it means that there can't be school-sponsored sectarian prayers in public schools, that government buildings can't display crosses, and things of this nature. It doesn't mean that a government institution is not permitted to try to accommodate someone's religious needs, especially where doing so doesn't infringe on the rights of others.

In the USA, it would be problematic if a public school were to have a policy that nobody was allowed to bring a ham sandwich for lunch because the Jewish and Muslim students would be offended by that. But there isn't any problem if a school offers vegetarian alternatives (e.g.) for anyone who wants them in addition to the regular meat menu.

Personally, I don't believe Marine Le Pen for one moment when she claims that her actions are motivated by a desire to "save secularism."' To me, she's just an odious antisemitic, anti-Muslim bigot who has found a place in French politics because the French are so upset about the Islamization of France that they are willing to overlook her evil. Twenty years ago, I don't think Marine Le Pen would have even been able to get her name on the ticket (or however nominations work in France).
Best regards,
---Cindy S.
DoD
2014-09-30 17:58:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by cindys
No, it doesn't mean that. Separation of Church and State just means that the government can't establish a State religion. In practice, it means that there can't be school-sponsored sectarian prayers in public schools, that government buildings can't display crosses, and things of this nature. It doesn't mean that a government institution is not permitted to try to accommodate someone's religious needs, especially where doing so doesn't infringe on the rights of others.
That is having your cake and eating it too....
m***@btinternet.com
2014-10-02 09:55:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by cindys
No, it doesn't mean that. Separation of Church and State just means that the government
can't establish a State religion. In practice, it means that there can't be school-sponsored
sectarian prayers in public schools, that government buildings can't display crosses, and
things of this nature. It doesn't mean that a government institution is not permitted to try
to accommodate someone's religious needs, especially where doing so doesn't infringe on
the rights of others.
The question is where you draw the line.

The government institution can have a policy that, in the cafeteria, a vegetarian option
must always be available. That will be acceptable to most Jews, as well as the vast majority
of people with otter special dietary requirements.

But not to my vegan sister. She'll be demanding that vegan food be cooked in a special
dish which has never been used for meat, given half a chance. An accommodation
becomes a demand for a religious act, avoiding the contact of her special food with
a mystical contaminant.
henry.dot.goodman.at.virgin.net
2014-10-02 13:23:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by m***@btinternet.com
Post by cindys
No, it doesn't mean that. Separation of Church and State just means that the government
can't establish a State religion. In practice, it means that there can't be school-sponsored
sectarian prayers in public schools, that government buildings can't display crosses, and
things of this nature. It doesn't mean that a government institution is not permitted to try
to accommodate someone's religious needs, especially where doing so doesn't infringe on
the rights of others.
The question is where you draw the line.
The government institution can have a policy that, in the cafeteria, a vegetarian option
must always be available. That will be acceptable to most Jews, as well as the vast majority
of people with otter special dietary requirements.
But not to my vegan sister. She'll be demanding that vegan food be cooked in a special
dish which has never been used for meat, given half a chance. An accommodation
becomes a demand for a religious act, avoiding the contact of her special food with
a mystical contaminant.
Kashrut observance has the same requirements e.g. milk must be cooked in a container never used for kosher meat let alone tref. In practice, many Jews compromise and will eat vegetarian food (or may be fish) in a non-kosher restaurant or canteen.
Henry Goodman
m***@btinternet.com
2014-10-02 21:09:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by henry.dot.goodman.at.virgin.net
Kashrut observance has the same requirements e.g. milk must be
cooked in a container never used for kosher meat let alone tref.
In practice, many Jews compromise and will eat vegetarian food
(or may be fish) in a non-kosher restaurant or canteen.
I know. It amuses me that my strongly atheist vegan sister has
come to exactly the same position, by a different route.

The snag is that really kosher food means a rabbi in the canteen
kitchen, supervising and telling the cooks that they can use
that dish or mustn't light the oven themselves for that bit of
baking. So it's not non-religious. It might not be technically
worship, but a kitchen employee who feels that he signed up for
a secular job in a secular environment would have an understandable
complaint.

I became worried when my sister started wanting separate pans.
It was clear that simply accommodating the vegetarianism wouldn't
work, the demands would become more and more extreme until she
finally achieved a situation where they were intolerable.
Shelly
2014-09-30 15:54:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by DoD
Post by henry.dot.goodman.at.virgin.net
Post by cindys
National Front leader Marine Le Pen has said her party will not
pander > to
Post by cindys
Jewish and Muslim children by offering non-Pork alternatives for
lunch.
I am confused on why you posted this.... Good thing or bad thing?
How can it be good? Another reason for French Jews to vote against the national front.
Henry Goodman
Because everyone in the U.S. is always yelling at the top of their
lungs, Sep of Church
and State..... Isn't this Sep of C and S ?
No. There is nothing religious about a meal without pork (or even being
kosher). IOW, non-Jews will eat kosher meals and not considering it an
infringement on their religious liberty. However, forcing a Jew to eat
pork, or making it extremely difficult for him to refuse it, IS an
infringement of their religious liberty. It is called "accommodation",
not "enforcement of religion" to provide an alternative. After all,
aren't the school lunches paid for with tax dollars. Making them
unavailable to Jews would be an infringement on religious freedom, not
the other way around.
--
Shelly
mirjam
2014-10-01 04:47:12 UTC
Permalink
On Tuesday, September 30, 2014 6:54:17 PM UTC+3, ***@thevillages.net wrote:

What are they going to do with Vegetarians ?,,,, are they going to provide such meals ? if they do than they should also provide Kosher meals ,,,
mirjam
Post by Shelly
Post by DoD
Post by henry.dot.goodman.at.virgin.net
Post by cindys
National Front leader Marine Le Pen has said her party will not
pander > to
Post by cindys
Jewish and Muslim children by offering non-Pork alternatives for
lunch.
I am confused on why you posted this.... Good thing or bad thing?
How can it be good? Another reason for French Jews to vote against the
national front.
Henry Goodman
Because everyone in the U.S. is always yelling at the top of their
lungs, Sep of Church
and State..... Isn't this Sep of C and S ?
No. There is nothing religious about a meal without pork (or even being
kosher). IOW, non-Jews will eat kosher meals and not considering it an
infringement on their religious liberty. However, forcing a Jew to eat
pork, or making it extremely difficult for him to refuse it, IS an
infringement of their religious liberty. It is called "accommodation",
not "enforcement of religion" to provide an alternative. After all,
aren't the school lunches paid for with tax dollars. Making them
unavailable to Jews would be an infringement on religious freedom, not
the other way around.
--
Shelly
DoD
2014-10-01 05:04:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by mirjam
What are they going to do with Vegetarians ?,,,, are they going to provide
such meals ? if they do than they should also provide Kosher >meals ,,,
I was just wonder something. Why would this even matter to most Jews in the
first place?
cindys
2014-10-01 12:18:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by DoD
Post by mirjam
What are they going to do with Vegetarians ?,,,, are they going to provide
such meals ? if they do than they should also provide Kosher >meals ,,,
I was just wonder something. Why would this even matter to most Jews in the
first place?
-----
I think it's an issue of principle more than anything else. Anybody who truly keeps kosher would not eat anything in a public school cafeteria (including the so-called "vegetarian" selection, which has still been prepared in the same kitchen, same pots and pans, same oven, may actually contain some non-vegetarian ingredients anyway and is being served with the same utensils). If you go to a public school, and you really keep kosher, you bring your own lunch. So, I don't think we're talking about bonafide kashrut here.

That said, I understand that there are many Jews who eat in treif restaurants, order vegetarian and consider that as "keeping kosher." So, here's my point: The Jews who "keep kosher" by eating vegetarian are mostly saying, "We don't want to eat bonafide treif meat, so please accommodate us by offering a non-meat alternative," and most American public schools are willing to do that. It's a matter of principle. If the school is unwilling to do that, it's like they're saying "You Jews [or other non-meat eaters] are insignificant. We don't care if you feel uncomfortable, unable to eat here. Your sensibilities are irrelevant to us." At least that's how I see it.
Best regards,
---Cindy S.
DoD
2014-10-01 14:15:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by cindys
Post by DoD
Post by mirjam
What are they going to do with Vegetarians ?,,,, are they going to provide
such meals ? if they do than they should also provide Kosher >meals ,,,
I was just wonder something. Why would this even matter to most Jews in the
first place?
-----
I think it's an issue of principle more than anything else. Anybody who
truly keeps kosher would not eat anything in a public school cafeteria
(including the so-called "vegetarian" selection, which has still been
prepared in the same kitchen, same pots and pans, same oven, may actually
contain some non-vegetarian ingredients anyway and is being served with
the same utensils). If you go to a public school, and you really keep
kosher, you bring your own lunch. So, I don't think we're talking about
bonafide kashrut here.
That said, I understand that there are many Jews who eat in treif
restaurants, order vegetarian and consider that as "keeping kosher." So,
here's my point: The Jews who "keep kosher" by eating vegetarian are
mostly saying, "We don't want to eat bonafide treif meat, so please
accommodate us by offering a non-meat alternative," and most American
public schools are willing to do that. It's a matter of principle. If the
school is unwilling to do that, it's like they're saying "You Jews [or
other non-meat eaters] are insignificant. We don't care if you feel
uncomfortable, unable to eat here. Your sensibilities are irrelevant to
us." At least that's how I see it.
Thank you for that answer and actually knowing what I was getting at. That
makes a lot of sense and I really do appreciate that. My follow up was/is
going to ask about what if Muslims want to have foot washing stations put in
schools? Or if a Christian wants something (can't think of anything) that
actually doesn't infringe upon anyone else as well. In the case of the foot
washing station, I don't see any infringement other than cost... But I
haven't put a lot of thought into it admittedly. How do you see that then?
Shelly
2014-10-01 15:16:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by DoD
Post by cindys
Post by DoD
Post by mirjam
What are they going to do with Vegetarians ?,,,, are they going to provide
such meals ? if they do than they should also provide Kosher >meals ,,,
I was just wonder something. Why would this even matter to most Jews in the
first place?
-----
I think it's an issue of principle more than anything else. Anybody who
truly keeps kosher would not eat anything in a public school cafeteria
(including the so-called "vegetarian" selection, which has still been
prepared in the same kitchen, same pots and pans, same oven, may actually
contain some non-vegetarian ingredients anyway and is being served with
the same utensils). If you go to a public school, and you really keep
kosher, you bring your own lunch. So, I don't think we're talking about
bonafide kashrut here.
That said, I understand that there are many Jews who eat in treif
restaurants, order vegetarian and consider that as "keeping kosher." So,
here's my point: The Jews who "keep kosher" by eating vegetarian are
mostly saying, "We don't want to eat bonafide treif meat, so please
accommodate us by offering a non-meat alternative," and most American
public schools are willing to do that. It's a matter of principle. If the
school is unwilling to do that, it's like they're saying "You Jews [or
other non-meat eaters] are insignificant. We don't care if you feel
uncomfortable, unable to eat here. Your sensibilities are irrelevant to
us." At least that's how I see it.
Thank you for that answer and actually knowing what I was getting at. That
makes a lot of sense and I really do appreciate that. My follow up was/is
going to ask about what if Muslims want to have foot washing stations put in
schools? Or if a Christian wants something (can't think of anything) that
actually doesn't infringe upon anyone else as well. In the case of the foot
washing station, I don't see any infringement other than cost... But I
haven't put a lot of thought into it admittedly. How do you see that then?
A foot washing station? Is this something that is usually available to
all students, like school lunches? They can go into the bathroom and
use the sinks that are already there. IMO putting in a special facility
so that they can perform a religious ritual WOULD be a violation of the
separation.

From what I have read this is to be done by them before prayers or
handling the Koran. This makes the foot washing a religious experience,
so what I said above applies.
--
Shelly
Harry Weiss
2014-10-02 01:01:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by DoD
Post by cindys
Post by DoD
Post by mirjam
What are they going to do with Vegetarians ?,,,, are they going to provide
such meals ? if they do than they should also provide Kosher >meals ,,,
I was just wonder something. Why would this even matter to most Jews in the
first place?
-----
I think it's an issue of principle more than anything else. Anybody who
truly keeps kosher would not eat anything in a public school cafeteria
(including the so-called "vegetarian" selection, which has still been
prepared in the same kitchen, same pots and pans, same oven, may actually
contain some non-vegetarian ingredients anyway and is being served with
the same utensils). If you go to a public school, and you really keep
kosher, you bring your own lunch. So, I don't think we're talking about
bonafide kashrut here.
That said, I understand that there are many Jews who eat in treif
restaurants, order vegetarian and consider that as "keeping kosher." So,
here's my point: The Jews who "keep kosher" by eating vegetarian are
mostly saying, "We don't want to eat bonafide treif meat, so please
accommodate us by offering a non-meat alternative," and most American
public schools are willing to do that. It's a matter of principle. If the
school is unwilling to do that, it's like they're saying "You Jews [or
other non-meat eaters] are insignificant. We don't care if you feel
uncomfortable, unable to eat here. Your sensibilities are irrelevant to
us." At least that's how I see it.
Thank you for that answer and actually knowing what I was getting at. That
makes a lot of sense and I really do appreciate that. My follow up was/is
going to ask about what if Muslims want to have foot washing stations put in
schools? Or if a Christian wants something (can't think of anything) that
actually doesn't infringe upon anyone else as well. In the case of the foot
washing station, I don't see any infringement other than cost... But I
haven't put a lot of thought into it admittedly. How do you see that then?
I could see the financial issue if plumbing needed to be changed, but to
allow someone to fill a pitcer form a regular sinck for washing feet would
be no problem,
--
Harry J. Weiss
***@panix.com
DoD
2014-10-02 04:37:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by Harry Weiss
I could see the financial issue if plumbing needed to be changed, but to
allow someone to fill a pitcer form a regular sinck for washing feet would
be no problem,
Stinky feet???
Shelly
2014-10-02 12:43:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by DoD
Post by Harry Weiss
I could see the financial issue if plumbing needed to be changed, but to
allow someone to fill a pitcer form a regular sinck for washing feet would
be no problem,
Stinky feet???
His typos were for "pitcher" and "sink".
--
Shelly
topazgalaxy
2014-10-01 13:15:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by DoD
Post by mirjam
What are they going to do with Vegetarians ?,,,, are they going to provide
such meals ? if they do than they should also provide Kosher >meals ,,,
I was just wonder something. Why would this even matter to most Jews in the
first place?
Mirjam of course can answer for herself; IMO her point is that people choose to eat vegetarian diets often on MORAL grounds ie, 'this is what I believe in, I believe it is wrong to kill an animal for food..."
And people choose to eat kosher meals often on MORAL grounds; for a observant Jew, the moral decision and the religious decision have alot of overlap.

One could argue if the system accommodates a person on moral grounds then
a vegetarian and a Jewish person should both be accommodated.
mirjam
2014-10-01 20:14:13 UTC
Permalink
On Wednesday, October 1, 2014 4:15:16 PM UTC+3, topazgalaxy wrote:
My point was that Different people have or might have different eating habit ,
I do not see a political party force Vegetarian kids to eat meat ....thus my point if they will provide Vegetarian food they must also provide Kosher food ,.,,
mirjam
Post by topazgalaxy
Mirjam of course can answer for herself; IMO her point is that people choose to eat vegetarian diets often on MORAL grounds ie, 'this is what I believe in, I believe it is wrong to kill an animal for food..."
And people choose to eat kosher meals often on MORAL grounds; for a observant Jew, the moral decision and the religious decision have alot of overlap.
One could argue if the system accommodates a person on moral grounds then
a vegetarian and a Jewish person should both be accommodated.
cindys
2014-10-02 04:21:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by mirjam
My point was that Different people have or might have different eating habit ,
I do not see a political party force Vegetarian kids to eat meat ....thus my point if they will provide Vegetarian food they must also provide Kosher food ,.,,
------
But the National Front's point is that people who eat only kosher or halal food are doing so for religious reasons, and their (the National Front's) goal is to prohibit any type of religious expressions in public schools. So, the reason they are refusing to provide kosher food is precisely because it does have a religious basis. Vegetarian food presumably does not have a religious basis.
Best regards,
---Cindy S.
Post by mirjam
Post by topazgalaxy
Mirjam of course can answer for herself; IMO her point is that people choose to eat vegetarian diets often on MORAL grounds ie, 'this is what I believe in, I believe it is wrong to kill an animal for food..."
And people choose to eat kosher meals often on MORAL grounds; for a observant Jew, the moral decision and the religious decision have alot of overlap.
One could argue if the system accommodates a person on moral grounds then
a vegetarian and a Jewish person should both be accommodated.
Harry Weiss
2014-10-02 04:26:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by Yisroel Markov
Post by mirjam
My point was that Different people have or might have different eating habit ,
I do not see a political party force Vegetarian kids to eat meat ....thus my point if they will provide Vegetarian food they must also provide Kosher food ,.,,
------
But the National Front's point is that people who eat only kosher or halal food are doing so for religious reasons, and their (the National Front's) goal is to prohibit any type of religious expressions in public schools. So, the reason they are refusing to provide kosher food is precisely because it does have a religious basis. Vegetarian food presumably does not have a religious basis.
Best regards,
---Cindy S.
The problem is that Jews are repeating the mistake of 80 years ago when
they though Hitler only wanted the smelly Jews with the peyos and beards
Post by Yisroel Markov
Post by mirjam
Post by topazgalaxy
Mirjam of course can answer for herself; IMO her point is that people choose to eat vegetarian diets often on MORAL grounds ie, 'this is what I believe in, I believe it is wrong to kill an animal for food..."
And people choose to eat kosher meals often on MORAL grounds; for a observant Jew, the moral decision and the religious decision have alot of overlap.
One could argue if the system accommodates a person on moral grounds then
a vegetarian and a Jewish person should both be accommodated.
--
Harry J. Weiss
***@panix.com
DoD
2014-10-02 04:44:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by Harry Weiss
Post by cindys
But the National Front's point is that people who eat only kosher or
halal food are doing so for religious reasons, and their (the National
Front's) goal is to prohibit any type of religious expressions in public
schools. So, the reason they are refusing to provide kosher food is
precisely because it does have a religious basis. Vegetarian food
presumably does not have a religious basis.
Best regards,
---Cindy S.
The problem is that Jews are repeating the mistake of 80 years ago when
they though Hitler only wanted the smelly Jews with the peyos and beards
I am not understanding.... In France this group is considered "right wing"?
Here, I am guessing, just by the religion stance
alone, I am not sure they would be liked by conservatives. Around here, it
is generally the left wing that pretty much wants
to make sure religion is removed completely from public.
Shelly
2014-10-02 12:41:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by DoD
Post by Harry Weiss
Post by cindys
But the National Front's point is that people who eat only kosher or
halal food are doing so for religious reasons, and their (the
National Front's) goal is to prohibit any type of religious
expressions in public schools. So, the reason they are refusing to
provide kosher food is precisely because it does have a religious
basis. Vegetarian food presumably does not have a religious basis.
Best regards,
---Cindy S.
The problem is that Jews are repeating the mistake of 80 years ago when
they though Hitler only wanted the smelly Jews with the peyos and beards
I am not understanding.... In France this group is considered "right
wing"? Here, I am guessing, just by the religion stance
alone, I am not sure they would be liked by conservatives. Around here,
it is generally the left wing that pretty much wants
to make sure religion is removed completely from public.
[Almost(*)] Absolutely correct!

It is the LEFT in the US that is taking a TRULY Conservative stance in
standing by the principles in the Constitution while those on the RIGHT
take the opposite stance and decry the separation (with many trying to
turn the US into a "Christian nation" rather than a nation where the
majority are Christians).

It is also the LEFT that takes the TRULY Conservative position that a
woman has the right control her own body while the RIGHT wants to
control it from the moment of fertilization.

It is the LEFT that takes the TRULY Conservative position of standing by
the Constitution while the RIGHT gives the government the ability to due
warrantless searches and imprisonment without the benefit of counsel
(the so-called Patriot Act).

The problem, David, is that you tend to see right and left solely in
economic terms (rather than libertarian terms) and the Yahoos like those
demonstrators. What we need is for Conservatives to return to being
like Goldwater and away from being like Falwell.

(*) It is not "completely removed from public". It is "completely
removed from government and government bodies (such as public schools or
schools funded by the government). There is a major difference there.
--
Shelly
Shelly
2014-10-02 12:25:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by Harry Weiss
The problem is that Jews are repeating the mistake of 80 years ago when
they though Hitler only wanted the smelly Jews with the peyos and beards
I guess no one caught on to my "they are not Polish priests" reply.
--
Shelly
Fred Goldstein
2014-10-02 14:22:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by Shelly
Post by Harry Weiss
The problem is that Jews are repeating the mistake of 80 years ago when
they though Hitler only wanted the smelly Jews with the peyos and beards
I guess no one caught on to my "they are not Polish priests" reply.
I'm not sure how many caught on to my allusion to "first they came
for...", either.
Shelly
2014-10-02 14:38:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by Fred Goldstein
Post by Shelly
Post by Harry Weiss
The problem is that Jews are repeating the mistake of 80 years ago when
they though Hitler only wanted the smelly Jews with the peyos and beards
I guess no one caught on to my "they are not Polish priests" reply.
I'm not sure how many caught on to my allusion to "first they came
for...", either.
Same thing.
--
Shelly
Yisroel Markov
2014-10-03 12:50:07 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 2 Oct 2014 14:22:22 +0000 (UTC), Fred Goldstein
Post by Fred Goldstein
Post by Shelly
Post by Harry Weiss
The problem is that Jews are repeating the mistake of 80 years ago when
they though Hitler only wanted the smelly Jews with the peyos and beards
I guess no one caught on to my "they are not Polish priests" reply.
I'm not sure how many caught on to my allusion to "first they came
for...", either.
IMHO both were easy enough to catch as to not warrant a response.
--
Yisroel "Godwrestler Warriorson" Markov - Boston, MA Member
www.reason.com -- for a sober analysis of the world DNRC
--------------------------------------------------------------------
"Judge, and be prepared to be judged" -- Ayn Rand
m***@actcom.co.il
2014-10-03 03:59:39 UTC
Permalink
On Thursday, October 2, 2014 7:21:47 AM UTC+3, cindys wrote:
When we were in the USA we were invited to a Co-Worker of my husband, His wife called and asked , if we were on a Jewish Diet ,,,,, i really liked her description ,,,, I think Vegetarians , Kashrut and Hallal can be described in these way.
mirjam


-----
Post by cindys
But the National Front's point is that people who eat only kosher or halal food are doing so for religious reasons, and their (the National Front's) goal is to prohibit any type of religious expressions in public schools. So, the reason they are refusing to provide kosher food is precisely because it does have a religious basis. Vegetarian food presumably does not have a religious basis.
Best regards,
---Cindy S.
Post by topazgalaxy
Mirjam of course can answer for herself; IMO her point is that people choose to eat vegetarian diets often on MORAL grounds ie, 'this is what I believe in, I believe it is wrong to kill an animal for food..."
And people choose to eat kosher meals often on MORAL grounds; for a observant Jew, the moral decision and the religious decision have alot of overlap.
One could argue if the system accommodates a person on moral grounds then
a vegetarian and a Jewish person should both be accommodated.
mm
2014-10-03 04:20:32 UTC
Permalink
When we were in the USA we were invited to a Co-Worker of my husband, His w=
ife called and asked , if we were on a Jewish Diet ,,,,, i really liked her=
description ,,,, I think Vegetarians , Kashrut and Hallal can be describe=
d in these way.=20
mirjam=20
I see what you mean. It's sort of like the Scarsdale Diet, but Jewish
instead.
--
Meir
topazgalaxy
2014-10-05 04:36:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by Yisroel Markov
Post by mirjam
My point was that Different people have or might have different eating habit ,
I do not see a political party force Vegetarian kids to eat meat ....thus my point if they will provide Vegetarian food they must also provide Kosher food ,.,,
------
But the National Front's point is that people who eat only kosher or halal food are doing so for religious reasons, and their (the National Front's) goal is to prohibit any type of religious expressions in public schools. So, the reason they are refusing to provide kosher food is precisely because it does have a religious basis. Vegetarian food presumably does not have a religious basis.
Best regards,
---Cindy S.
Post by mirjam
Post by topazgalaxy
Mirjam of course can answer for herself; IMO her point is that people choose to eat vegetarian diets often on MORAL grounds ie, 'this is what I believe in, I believe it is wrong to kill an animal for food..."
And people choose to eat kosher meals often on MORAL grounds; for a observant Jew, the moral decision and the religious decision have alot of overlap.
One could argue if the system accommodates a person on moral grounds then
a vegetarian and a Jewish person should both be accommodated.
We should also recall that France has had other laws earlier that might intersect with the idea of separation of church and state, as interpreted by French law--and this may not be the same as American law--


"Ban the Burka" law passed in 2010 and upheld in July 2014

http://thehumanist.com/news/international/france-upholds-ban-on-burqas

Muslim headscarves and all religious symbols were banned in schools in 2004

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2009/jun/22/islamic-veils-sarkozy-speech-france


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_law_on_secularity_and_conspicuous_religious_symbols_in_schools


I remember when that law came out, banning the wearing of overt religious symbols in schools in France. (IIRC no crosses to be worn, no skullcaps, etc)
m***@btinternet.com
2014-09-30 13:13:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by DoD
I am confused on why you posted this.... Good thing or bad thing?
Most Jews don't eat pork. It's one of the last elements of observance to go. Even Jews
who do eat pork are very wary of laws making it difficult to refuse pork.
cindys
2014-09-30 15:53:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by DoD
Post by cindys
National Front leader Marine Le Pen has said her party will not pander to
Jewish and Muslim children by offering non-Pork alternatives for lunch.
I am confused on why you posted this.... Good thing or bad thing?
------
It's a bad thing. Back in 2008, Marine Le Pen's father was sentenced to 3 months in jail and fined 10,000 Euros for Holocaust Denial. IIRC, he didn't actually deny the Holocaust but called it "an incidental" or something like that.

From: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1578053/Le-Pen-found-guilty-of-Holocaust-denial.html

--begin cite---
Le Pen found guilty of Holocaust denial
Jean-Marie Le Pen with his daughter Marine Le Pen


By Henry Samuel in Paris

12:01AM GMT 08 Feb 2008

Disgraced French far-Right leader Jean-Marie Le Pen was given a three-month suspended sentence on Friday for calling the Nazi occupation of France "not particularly inhuman".

The 79-year-old founder of the National Front party, not present for the verdict in a Paris court, was found guilty of denying a crime against humanity and complicity in condoning war crimes, both violations of France's Holocaust denial legislation.

Mr Le Pen was also fined 10,000 euros. His lawyer said he would appeal against the sentence, which was below the five months called for by the prosecution.

The charges relate to comments Mr Le Pen made in an interview with far-Right Rivarol magazine in 2005.

The court said Mr Le Pen had sought to "instill doubt" about Nazi persecution of Resistance members and Jews and their deportation.

It also ruled that he had "re-written history" to present the Gestapo in a favourable light, while making no mention of its crimes when referring to a 1944 massacre in the town of Villeneuve d'Ascq.

[...]

--end cite---

Any Jew (or Muslim) would have to be out of his mind to support either Marine Le Pen or her antisemitic, anti-Muslim National Front Party. For that matter, I don't understand why any non-Jewish, non-Muslim Frenchman would support the National Front Party either. Unless the French people who support Marine Le Pen and her National Front Party believe the Nazi occupation of France was a good thing and the Gestapo guys really weren't all that bad.
Best regards,
---Cindy S.
DoD
2014-09-30 18:40:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by Yisroel Markov
Post by DoD
Post by cindys
National Front leader Marine Le Pen has said her party will not pander to
Jewish and Muslim children by offering non-Pork alternatives for lunch.
I am confused on why you posted this.... Good thing or bad thing?
------
It's a bad thing. Back in 2008, Marine Le Pen's father was sentenced to 3
months in jail and fined 10,000 Euros for Holocaust Denial. IIRC, he
didn't actually deny the Holocaust but called it "an incidental" or
something like that.
Heh..... I heard it once called, Holocaust "contextualizing" or something of
the sort by someone who would "NEVER" go for someone like
Le Pen. In fact, I am going at it right now with another Frenchman (on
unmoderated) who would hate Le Pen yet doesn't seem to care much for Jews
either. Actually I am pretty sure I already stumped him a couple of times
and he won't reply to me anymore. LOL... it always works that way.
Yisroel Markov
2014-10-02 13:43:54 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 30 Sep 2014 04:26:42 +0000 (UTC), cindys
<***@rochester.rr.com> said:

[snip]
Post by cindys
National Front leader Marine Le Pen has said her party will not pander to Jewish and Muslim children by offering non-Pork alternatives for lunch.
School canteens will no longer offer non-pork meal options in the 11 towns the far-right party won in local elections, because such arrangements are contrary to France's secular values, she said.
"We will not accept any religious demands in school menus," Le Pen told RTL radio. "There is no reason for religion to enter the public sphere, that's the law."
"We will not accept any religious demands in school menus," Le Pen told RTL radio. "There is no reason for religion to enter the public sphere, that's the law."
Let's not forget that this is the country that outlawed wearing hijabs
and yarmulkas in public schools. This happened in 2004, with a
right-leaning president (Chiraq) and a right-wing majority in the
parliament. However, most of the left in the legislature voted for
that law, too. Authoritarians are found on both ends of the political
spectrum.
--
Yisroel "Godwrestler Warriorson" Markov - Boston, MA Member
www.reason.com -- for a sober analysis of the world DNRC
--------------------------------------------------------------------
"Judge, and be prepared to be judged" -- Ayn Rand
Yisroel Markov
2014-09-30 17:21:42 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 29 Sep 2014 18:15:54 +0000 (UTC), Fred Goldstein
Post by Fred Goldstein
Post by Yisroel Markov
Post by DoD
http://www.timesofisrael.com/more-french-jews-drifting-toward-natl-front-party/
From a communist to a National Front supporter - quite a switch!
But it's not so surprising. Having one's security threatened often
awakens one's self-preservation instinct, which the modern state seeks
to attenuate (by calling it "lizard-brain," among other things :-)
Thus many American olim find themselves drifting to the right once
they perceive the threat personally.
Maybe they perceive NF as no threat to them.
I'd say it's way more certain than "maybe" for such support to exist.
Post by Fred Goldstein
They figure NF will go
after homosexuals, go after communists, go after Muslims, but not go
after *them*.
At least according to the article, NF's main thrust is davka against
Muslims, and the party's leadership has made efforts to denounce
antisemitism and reach out to Jews. To the extent such parties thrive
on identifying and pursuing a scapegoat, these outreach efforts may
represent only a tactical shift. But I'd say that the relative sizes
and, more importantly, the activities of the scapegoat communities
you've listed make it fairly certain that the NF will find it
profitable to concentrate on Muslims in the foreseeable future.
--
Yisroel "Godwrestler Warriorson" Markov - Boston, MA Member
www.reason.com -- for a sober analysis of the world DNRC
--------------------------------------------------------------------
"Judge, and be prepared to be judged" -- Ayn Rand
DoD
2014-09-29 18:19:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by Yisroel Markov
Post by DoD
http://www.timesofisrael.com/more-french-jews-drifting-toward-natl-front-party/
From a communist to a National Front supporter - quite a switch!
But it's not so surprising. Having one's security threatened often
awakens one's self-preservation instinct, which the modern state seeks
to attenuate (by calling it "lizard-brain," among other things :-)
lol.....

Deb: How do you know he'll kill again?
Dexter: An alarm is going off inside my lizard brain.
Post by Yisroel Markov
Thus many American olim find themselves drifting to the right once
they perceive the threat personally.
Of course... I have heard over and over again that Israelis have different attitudes than American Jews. Nothing like the feeling of living under the gun...
topazgalaxy
2014-10-05 04:36:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by Yisroel Markov
Post by DoD
http://www.timesofisrael.com/more-french-jews-drifting-toward-natl-front-party/
From a communist to a National Front supporter - quite a switch!
But it's not so surprising. Having one's security threatened often
awakens one's self-preservation instinct, which the modern state seeks
to attenuate (by calling it "lizard-brain," among other things :-)
Thus many American olim find themselves drifting to the right once
they perceive the threat personally.
--
Yisroel "Godwrestler Warriorson" Markov - Boston, MA Member
www.reason.com -- for a sober analysis of the world DNRC
--------------------------------------------------------------------
"Judge, and be prepared to be judged" -- Ayn Rand
Has anyone else noticed as I have that as economic times get tougher in some of the developed nations, the political parties drift more to the extremes?

It is happening in the USA also, IMO. Sometimes here in the USA I wonder, where have the moderate politicians really gone? There are fewer of them or so it seems.
Yisroel Markov
2014-10-06 18:47:12 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 5 Oct 2014 04:36:00 +0000 (UTC), topazgalaxy
Post by topazgalaxy
Post by Yisroel Markov
Post by DoD
http://www.timesofisrael.com/more-french-jews-drifting-toward-natl-front-party/
From a communist to a National Front supporter - quite a switch!
But it's not so surprising. Having one's security threatened often
awakens one's self-preservation instinct, which the modern state seeks
to attenuate (by calling it "lizard-brain," among other things :-)
Thus many American olim find themselves drifting to the right once
they perceive the threat personally.
--
Yisroel "Godwrestler Warriorson" Markov - Boston, MA Member
www.reason.com -- for a sober analysis of the world DNRC
--------------------------------------------------------------------
"Judge, and be prepared to be judged" -- Ayn Rand
Has anyone else noticed as I have that as economic times get tougher in some of the developed nations, the political parties drift more to the extremes?
Yes. This phenomenon is as old as democracy.
Post by topazgalaxy
It is happening in the USA also, IMO. Sometimes here in the USA I wonder, where have the moderate politicians really gone? There are fewer of them or so it seems.
Politicians reflect the polity. I've seen an interesting poll
recently:

"In 1960, 5 percent of Republicans and 4 percent of Democrats said
that they would feel “displeased” if their son or daughter married
outside their political party. By 2010, those numbers had reached 49
percent and 33 percent. Republicans have been found to like Democrats
less than they like people on welfare or gays and lesbians. Democrats
dislike Republicans more than they dislike big business."

http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2014-09-22/partyism-now-trumps-racism
--
Yisroel "Godwrestler Warriorson" Markov - Boston, MA Member
www.reason.com -- for a sober analysis of the world DNRC
--------------------------------------------------------------------
"Judge, and be prepared to be judged" -- Ayn Rand
DoD
2014-10-06 21:28:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by Yisroel Markov
"In 1960, 5 percent of Republicans and 4 percent of Democrats said
that they would feel "displeased" if their son or daughter married
outside their political party. By 2010, those numbers had reached 49
percent and 33 percent. Republicans have been found to like Democrats
less than they like people on welfare or gays and lesbians. Democrats
dislike Republicans more than they dislike big business."
http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2014-09-22/partyism-now-trumps-racism
LOL.... Thank you for that....
cindys
2014-10-01 12:02:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by DoD
http://www.timesofisrael.com/more-french-jews-drifting-toward-natl-front-party/
----
As my second follow-up, I went to Youtube to listen to a couple of interviews with Marine Le Pen (not the ones that ran for 50 minutes because I didn't have that much time. I listened to two 7 or 9-minute interviews). After hearing those interviews, I can understand why some Jews are being duped by her (I think she's an antisemite lurking under a nice veneer):

She has two main issues that I can see:

1. The economy: Le Pen says that the E.U. is standing in the way of France's economic growth because the French people are paying the price for economic crises in other E.U. countries. She states that the only country that benefits economically from the E.U. is Germany. [I don't know or understand enough about the European economy to comment on this issue]. In one interview, she made a point of mentioning that "*Jews* are suffering economically just like everybody else)." I think she actually may have made this point when she was discussing her second topic, which was...

2. Immigration: "Immigration" is a buzzword for Muslims. She says there are too many "immigrants" in France, and they refuse to assimilate. And not only do they refuse to assimilate, but they expect the French to pander to their needs.

In one of the interviews I watched, she outlined that over the years, France has had immigrants from Poland, Portugal, Spain...(she listed 6 or 10 different countries) and said that all of these immigrants had all assimilated and become Frenchmen. She made the following analogy to the interviewer: "How would you feel if 10 strangers not only moved into your apartment but then started tearing down the wallpaper?" She said she found out that 50% of the meat currently being sold in France to "unsuspecting" Frenchmen is halal. [Cindy S comment: Assuming this statement is true, I guess I don't understand. Is halal meat poisoned? I also don't understand why some of the British are/were so upset to discover that British schoolchildren in a certain school were eating halal meat (the reason was that it was easier/cheaper for the school to buy meat from one source rather than two). Are the taxpayers paying a premium for this meat? It seems that the view of many non-Muslims is that the meat is spiritually tainted or something. Substitute the word "kosher" for "halal" and try that one on for size. What if Le Pen had said she found out that 50% of the meat currently being sold in France to "unsuspecting" Frenchmen was kosher?]

At any rate, she said that the economic issues were reversible, but once immigrants are allowed into the country, there is no going back on that.

The interviewer asked her "What about refugees? Would they be turned away?" She said of course France would be open to refugees but hinted that the refugee claims of some are bogus.

Then, she got onto the issue of antisemitism. She said that the "immigrants" are responsible for the bulk of the antisemitism in France [and while this is undoubtedly true, it was, IMO, her attempt to garner the Jewish vote..I don't believe for a second she is concerned about Jews or antisemitism].

In the last few years, French Jews have been the victims of a jump in antisemitic incidents at the hands of the Muslim population, and many of the Jews are feeling scared and desperate. It's understandable that Le Pen's "anti-immigrant" stance would appeal to Jews on this basis (in addition to her focus on improving the economy): She has made a point of expressing her concerns about antisemitism. She has expressed that she will stop the flow of "immigrants" into France. She has demonstrated that she will put the kibosh on accommodating the demands of the "immigrants" who are already there.

I think they (the Jews of France) are wrong to support this woman. I think she is putting on a show, and if she were elected in the next few years, I think the noose would end up tightening around the Jews' necks even as it would tighten around the Muslim's necks (just as the "no pork alternative in public schools affects Muslims, it would also affect Jews). She could kill two birds with one stone (so to speak) while all the while claiming she was really only targeting one of the birds.
Best regards,
---Cindy S.
Continue reading on narkive:
Search results for 'French Jew drifting toward National Front Party' (newsgroups and mailing lists)
44
replies
HOW TO BECOME A SHITSKIN MOSLEM - this is how: fuck goats, fuck your mother (nikomak), molest children, wear a beekeepers outfit all the time, never shower or bath, beat your wives, learn terrorist activities at a maddrassa, wipe your ass with stones, sell the donkey you fucked to a nearby village, marry a nine year-old , send your child off to an indoctrination camp, practice thighing with little kids, Hijack a plane, Hijack a ship, ............ Practice all those and you too could become a prophet !!
started 2009-12-11 20:19:19 UTC
talk.politics.mideast
43
replies
HOW TO BECOME A SHITSKIN MOSLEM - this is how: fuck goats, fuck your mother (nikomak), molest children, wear a beekeepers outfit all the time, never shower or bath, beat your wives, learn terrorist activities at a maddrassa, wipe your ass with stones, sell the donkey you fucked to a nearby village, marry a nine year-old , send your child off to an indoctrination camp, practice thighing with little kids, Hijack a plane, Hijack a ship, ............ Practice all those and you too could become a prophet !!
started 2009-12-11 20:19:19 UTC
soc.culture.pakistan
5
replies
USraeli Mass Murder & Dr.Steven Pinker of Harvard
started 2011-10-25 07:38:37 UTC
alt.religion.islam
78
replies
Blair acted like a 'white vigilante' by invading Iraq, says bishop
started 2003-12-30 13:17:05 UTC
alt.religion.christian.episcopal
48
replies
[Marxism] Fascist intellectuals?
started 2006-08-25 18:49:25 UTC
marxism@lists.csbs.utah.edu
Loading...