Comments on: Jew is as Jew does

By: Chaim

Chaim — Sun, 27 Dec 2009 17:03:33 +0000

http://www.chiefrabbi.org/ReadArtical.aspx?id=1584
An interesting spin..

By: Francis

Francis — Tue, 22 Dec 2009 22:58:37 +0000

Hi Jewinthefat, the JFS lost its appeal to the UK Supreme Court (5-4 decision). I haven’t had a chance to the read the decision yet. The thing that still bugs me about this is that it is an intra-Jewish argument. To put the cat amongst the pigeons (insert any other relevant cliche here), why do non-Orthodox converts want their children to attend a school with a policy based on Orthodox principles? When you convert non-Orthodox, it is very clear that you won’t be considered Halachically Jewish – nobody hides this fact. I don’t know much about the UK school system – maybe there are limited non-Orthodox Jewish school options?

By: When Everything need in Words » Blog Archive » A Few Choice Yiddish Words

Tue, 24 Nov 2009 12:56:54 +0000

[...] Galus Australis » Jew is as Jew does [...]

By: gedalia

gedalia — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 09:50:13 +0000

It is very worthwhile to obtain and read the actual court case for Carmel School in Perth. It shows how the reform Rabbi stood up in the public court and starting mocking Jewish values and denigrating Judaism itself.

The UK case would do well to reference the Perth one, as the same principle issues sit behind the debate, and very similar cirucmstances.

Until this issue of Who is a Jew is resolved, and it can only be resolved by a change in practice and standards by non-orthodox movements, then Jewish unity in our generation will be unobtainable. We keep ignoring the issue, but it has to be the number one concern for our community. More important than interfaith dialogue is intrafaith dialogue!

regards
Gedalia

By: Francis

Francis — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 06:29:42 +0000

I don’t quite agree with your characterisation that this case is ‘basically proposing that rather than a religion, being Jewish is purely a blood-line’. There has been nothing in the judgements so far to suggest that UK law considers that Judaism is not a religion. As you noted, the case being argued (by the Jewish applicants themselves) on the basis of the UK racial discrimination Act. To the extent that being Jewish is based on ‘blood-line’, that is obviously based on the Halachic criterion (as well as Orthodox conversion, if that is what you believe). If passing something through birth (i.e. Halachic criterion) is not based on ‘blood-line’, then what is? The question the secular judges are considering is whether this criterion breaches the UK Act.

If we do not want to be defined by such notions (and fair enough), then should we rely on racial discrimination legislation here to prosecute anti-semites? Isn’t that accepting the of antisemitism as race hatred (rather than religion hatred)? I guess what I am asking is, can we have it both ways? This was of great concern to the UK judges, and it will take the wisdom of Solomon for the appeal judges to sort this one out.

By: jewinthefat

jewinthefat — Mon, 23 Nov 2009 22:32:09 +0000

Chaim

I hope that the judges are as level headed as the case in Perth. It is my concern that in a society that is beginning to lean towards regarding the freedoms of the individual as paramount, over and above the potential ramnifications for the group as a whole, we may not see such a considered approach.

By: Chaim

Chaim — Mon, 23 Nov 2009 16:20:56 +0000

The problem is public funding of the religious schools. I do not have a problem with this as these kids would otherwise be in public school and everyone benefits from improved education. BUT then, the schools have to then abide by secular court rulings by judges which do not always understand Judaism nor have its best interests at heart. If the schools gives up the funding then they can do whatever they want.

Also I mentioned on the previous article regarding this: Carmel school in Perth had a similar court case. They actually did open up admission willingly prior to the court case for Jews who were not halachically not Jewish but the boys were not allowed aliyahs to the Torah. The court ruled in favour of the school – “positive” discrimination.

The findings: “It is the nature of religious freedom that what is thought to be important is essentially a matter for those concerned with the traditions of the faith to determine, rather than outsiders. The educational institution is excused from liability if, in good faith, it is generally upholding the religious cause it seeks to advance.”

I also remember Jewish kids who went to Christian schools in Perth were forced to go to Chapel services… but not forced to say anything…..