Ubuntu 11.10 makes Unity compulsory

[Cybe R. Wizard]

On Mon, 04 Apr 2011 16:21:59 +0100
Avi <lists at avi.co> wrote:

> (also, sorry, I think this hit your personal address earlier)

No problem; I know you don't make it a habit and that it was probably a
mistake.
> 
> Cybe R. Wizard wrote:
> > Have you looked at the Israeli flag or the Israeli emblem?
> > They are, respectively, the Star of David and the Menorah.  I
> > do believe that both of those are Jewish.
> 
> Equally, the Union Flag is composed of three crosses, but I don't
> think the UK and Christianity are at all the same thing. Even if
> England has its own church.

Really?  I see one, two if the background for the red cross is
considered to be such on its own.  OTOH, the cross(es) aren't the
proportions seen in the Christian cross.  Will any cross do?  How about
an, "X"?
OTOH, the Israeli flag /is/ the Star of David and its emblem /is/ the
Menorah.  ...both described as being so.
> 
> > "The name Israel has historically been used, in common and religious
> > usage, to refer to the Land of Israel, the biblical Kingdom of
> > Israel and the entire Jewish nation. According to the Bible, the
> > name "Israel" was given to the patriarch Jacob (Standard Yisraʾel,
> > Isrāʾīl; Septuagint Greek: Ἰσραήλ; "persevere with God") after he
> > successfully wrestled with an angel of God."
> This isn't specific to Judaism at all -

"The name Israel has historically been used...to refer to...the entire
Jewish nation."
That is, the name refers to the 'entire nation of Jews': Judaism.

That (Judaism) is not specific to Judaism?  I fail to see your
reasoning.

> 
> > How about the fact that Israel doesn't yet have a written
> > constitution because:
> > "The Religious Jews at the time opposed the idea of their nation
> > having a document which the government would regard as nominally
> > "higher" in authority than religious texts such as the Tanakh,
> > Talmud, and Shulkhan Arukh."
> 
> How is this Israel 'being' Judaism any more than it is Israel bending
> to the will of a religions group?

Bending to the will of a religious group usually doesn't include
defying /your own stated mandate/ to create a constitution.  That would
seem, at least to me, to be completely surrendering to the will of the
whole religion.
> 
> > "The concept of a national homeland for the Jewish people in the
> > British Mandate of Palestine was enshrined in Israeli national
> > policy and reflected in many of Israel's public and national
> > institutions. The concept was expressed in the Declaration of the
> > Establishment of the State of Israel on 14 May 1948 and given
> > concrete expression in the Law of Return, passed by the Knesset on
> > 5 July 1950, which declared: "Every Jew has the right to come to
> > this country as an oleh." This was extended in 1970 to include
> > non-Jews with a Jewish grandparent, and their spouses."
> 
> Yes, the concept of a Jewish homeland. It's worth bearing in mind
> that during the birth of modern Zionism, anti-semitism (let's call it
> that for now) was rife across Europe and Russia. The desire for a
> Jewish homeland was one for a country where Jews would be welcomed;
> one they could flee too from wherever they felt persecuted. That's
> still, to me, the essence of Israel's Jewishness.

Whatever the reason or reasoning, it is still a Jewish homeland for
Jewish people primarily and the government is a Jewish government.  It
is funny how one doesn't get this same denial from Israelis,
themselves.  They /know/ that Israel is a Jewish state for Jews.
> 
> > Here's a whole wikipedia page dealing with just that controversy:
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_state
> 
> That article flies almost exactly in the face of everything else
> you've been saying - acknowledging that even before we get to the
> idea that Israel might somehow be a part of Judaism, or vice-versa,
> there's discussion over whether it is indeed a Jewish state at all
> (which there must be if there's argument over what constitutes a
> 'Jewish state').

You must have skipped this part:

"Because Israel was created within the sphere of international law as
the instrument for Jewish self-determination, these polarities are
captured by the questions: should Israel /maintain and strengthen/
(emphasis mine) its status as a state /for the Jewish people/
(emphasis mine), or transition to being a state purely for "all of its
citizens", or identify as both?"

Let me clean it up a little:
"Israel was created...as the instrument for Jewish self-determination...
as a state for the Jewish people..."

The debate is about whether or not this is right and just, not about
whether it is or isn't.

Here's a further quote which you somehow missed:

"These two goals of Israel as a Jewish and a democratic state must
coexist and not contradict each other."

> >
> > Again, show me (please) how Israel and Judaism are no one and the
> > same.
> >
> 
> Because Judaism is one or both of:
> 
> a) A religion founded in a set of beliefs and traditions
> b) A people, defined by a hereditary covenant.
> 
> and Israel is a country.
...founded on Jewish beliefs (Jewish homeland) and for Jewish people
(Law of Return) and self-debating whether this is a right thing.
> 
> It's a similar but much less strong relationship to that between
> Iran, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, and Islam. Those are all Islamic
> countries much more convincingly than Israel is a Jewish one, yet I
> don't think anyone would try to claim they all have equivalence with
> Islam.
> 
They don't have equivalence because the Muslim countries are many.
Israel is one, singular and the /only/ country based upon Judaism,
promoting itself as the homeland of Jews and giving any Jew anywhere
worldwide (and /ONLY/ Jews) a chance at free citizenship.  What is
Israel if not by, for and about Judaism?

And how can rational people deny it when /Israel/ doesn't?

Cybe R. Wizard
-- 
Registered GNU/Linux user # 126326
Registered Ubuntu User # 2136