• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Who is a Jew - right of return to Israel

sun rise

The world is on fire
Premium Member
This is a political question with religious roots. The 1950 right of return did not use the strict definition of who is a Jew for immigration to Israel. This is now controversial. It goes along with the ultra-Orthodox not thinking of Conservative and Reform folk as really practicing Judaism. It reminds me of the Islamic fanatics who attack those who they consider to be not really Muslims. Of course the actions are different but the basic orientation is the same: who is OK and who is not. But violence is building in Israel over this clash.

Israel’s far right targets Law of Return to restrict Jewish immigration

Bezalel Smotrich, Religious Zionism’s leader, promised earlier this month to change Israel’s immigration policy, which was passed unanimously in 1950 to deliver on the promise of a Jewish homeland in the aftermath of the Holocaust.

“It is a social and Jewish time bomb that must be dealt with,” Smotrich said of the policy in an interview with the ultra-Orthodox radio station Kol Barama this month.

Israel’s Law of Return guarantees citizenship to any Jew, from any country in the world, who is able to prove a connection to at least one Jewish grandparent. It enabled the immigration of some 900,000 Jews from other parts of the Arab world, more than 1 million Jews escaping the collapse of the Soviet Union, and tens of thousands fleeing religious persecution in Ethiopia.

But Avi Maoz, head of the ultranationalist Noam party, said in a recent statement that the policy “is absurdly used to bring gentiles into the State of Israel, and to systematically lower the percentage of Jews in the State of Israel. It’s time to fix this thing, and that’s what we’ll do.”
...

According to data from Israel’s Central Bureau of Statistics, most of the Jews who have immigrated to Israel from former Soviet countries would not have qualified under Maoz’s proposed criteria, which is based on halacha, or Jewish law, rather than state law.
...

The rift between American Jews and Israel has been widening for a long time, according to Rabbi Rick Jacobs, the president of the Union for Reform Judaism, which represents the largest denomination of Judaism in the United States but is considered illegitimate by the Orthodox rabbinate in Israel.
...
At last month’s Rosh Hodesh prayer, activists holding umbrellas emblazoned with the slogan “When we pray, it soars” were physically assaulted by unidentified men who wrestled away the umbrellas, breaking some of them.

Women of the Wall will start its first day of self-defense training on the day the new government is sworn in.

 

Harel13

Am Yisrael Chai
Staff member
Premium Member
This is now controversial
Now? It's being embroiled in controversy for many decades.

The Right of Return as it stands now allows several million non-Jews (according to any denomination you ask) to apply for Aliyah. Goodbye Jewish State, the whole reason the state was founded.
 

sun rise

The world is on fire
Premium Member
Now? It's being embroiled in controversy for many decades.

The Right of Return as it stands now allows several million non-Jews (according to any denomination you ask) to apply for Aliyah. Goodbye Jewish State, the whole reason the state was founded.

Controversy yes but the attempt to change the law on the part of a party which might be in government is new.

And what's next? Telling the millions who emigrated to Israel that they are not Jews and must leave?
 

rosends

Well-Known Member
It goes along with the ultra-Orthodox not thinking of Conservative and Reform folk as really practicing Judaism.
I don't see that as connected to the law of return. The concern is that the Reform and Conservative movements allow for the label of Jewish to be applied to people who are not, according to Orthodox understanding of normative jewish law, "Jewish."
 

Debater Slayer

Vipassana
Staff member
Premium Member
It reminds me of the Islamic fanatics who attack those who they consider to be not really Muslims. Of course the actions are different but the basic orientation is the same: who is OK and who is not.

The very idea of a state granting special treatment to some people based on ethnic or religious identity—be it Islamic, Jewish, or otherwise—strikes me as supremacist and dangerous. Israel is an apartheid state whose current structure needs to be fundamentally reformed if it is to become an egalitarian, humane state.
 

Harel13

Am Yisrael Chai
Staff member
Premium Member
Controversy yes but the attempt to change the law on the part of a party which might be in government is new.
That's also not new. I recommend reading up on the history of the law.
And what's next? Telling the millions who emigrated to Israel that they are not Jews and must leave?
I don't know what's next. But I'm quite certain that most of the people who emigrated to Israel based on the grandchild clause of the law are very well aware that they are not Jewish. So that won't be a shocker. As for what must be done in terms of their citizenship - I don't know. I don't claim to know everything. But doing nothing, which has mostly been the case until now, has not gotten Israel anywhere favorable. The first step is stopping the masses - tens of thousands - of non-Jews entering Israel every year.
 

Harel13

Am Yisrael Chai
Staff member
Premium Member
The very idea of a state granting special treatment to some people based on ethnic or religious identity—be it Islamic, Jewish, or otherwise—strikes me as supremacist and dangerous. Israel is an apartheid state whose current structure needs to be fundamentally reformed if it is to become an egalitarian, humane state.
Yes, yes. Once again, the claim of the supposed moral superiority of pluralism. You tout this on every Israel-related thread here. The fact is that the Jews have tried everything within their power to integrate into societies worldwide for many centuries. Any successes have been short. Do you realize that every year in NYC there's an Israel parade? Prior to that, when did Jews go on annual parades? Israel gave Jews a place in the world, a place they quite obviously did not have during the diaspora. Read some history.
 

Debater Slayer

Vipassana
Staff member
Premium Member
Yes, yes. Once again, the claim of the supposed moral superiority of pluralism. You tout this on every Israel-related thread here. The fact is that the Jews have tried everything within their power to integrate into societies worldwide for many centuries. Any successes have been short. Do you realize that every year in NYC there's an Israel parade? Prior to that, when did Jews go on annual parades? Israel gave Jews a place in the world, a place they quite obviously did not have during the diaspora. Read some history.

Almost every single religious and ethnic group has faced persecution at one point or another in multiple regions. This doesn't entitle anyone to illegally occupy others' land and then implement apartheid policies against them.

If your reasons for supporting Israel's current policies have to do with religion, though, then we'll almost surely disagree anyway. The bottom line is that I don't believe anyone's religious beliefs should dictate the life and fate of another. This applies to Zionists as much as it does Islamists, evangelicals, and Hindu nationalists.
 

Jayhawker Soule

-- untitled --
Premium Member
The very idea of a state granting special treatment to some people based on ethnic or religious identity—be it Islamic, Jewish, or otherwise—strikes me as supremacist and dangerous.
It certainly can be, and few things raise the specter of supremacist regime more than the evolving Netanyahu regime.

But there is another side to this right to return. It serves as a guarantee of refuge for a people -- less than 0.2% of the world's population -- who sincerely suspect that "never again" could easily prove to be an empty promise.

Israel is an apartheid state whose current structure needs to be fundamentally reformed if it is to become an egalitarian, humane state.
Yes.
 

Lyndon

"Peace is the answer" quote: GOD, 2014
Premium Member
Now? It's being embroiled in controversy for many decades.

The Right of Return as it stands now allows several million non-Jews (according to any denomination you ask) to apply for Aliyah. Goodbye Jewish State, the whole reason the state was founded.
Yes the new Master race, all it takes is a new fascist leader to put Palestinians in concentration camps, as if Gaza is not one already
 

Debater Slayer

Vipassana
Staff member
Premium Member
But there is another side to this right to return. It serves as a guarantee of refuge for a people -- less than 0.2% of the world's population -- who sincerely suspect that "never again" could easily prove to be an empty promise.

The rising tide of nationalist and nativist extremism in some countries certainly casts doubt on the promise of "never again," especially when said tide has been increasingly vocal in powerful countries such as the US, France, Italy, and the UK. The fact that the Italian PM directly borrows symbolism and slogans from Mussolini is as chilling as much as it is a reminder that history never gets too old to learn from.
 

sun rise

The world is on fire
Premium Member
I don't see that as connected to the law of return. The concern is that the Reform and Conservative movements allow for the label of Jewish to be applied to people who are not, according to Orthodox understanding of normative jewish law, "Jewish."

Israel was founded on the right of Jews to emigrate not practitioners of Judaism. The nazis did not care who was a practicing Jew and that was the basis of the post-holocaust rule that created a refuge for survivors. I believe that the legal classification for the right of return came from the Nazi classification of a Jew who was a "Mischling" of the second degree by having one Jewish grandparent.

Thus we see a secular state of Israel becoming a religious state with strict religious rules of who is allowed to emigrate and become a citizen.
 

Harel13

Am Yisrael Chai
Staff member
Premium Member
Almost every single religious and ethnic group has faced persecution at one point or another in multiple regions. This doesn't entitle anyone to illegally occupy others' land and then implement apartheid policies against them.
Indeed. That's why we're waiting for the illegal occupiers to get off our land.
If your reasons for supporting Israel's current policies have to do with religion, though, then we'll almost surely disagree anyway. The bottom line is that I don't believe anyone's religious beliefs should dictate the life and fate of another. This applies to Zionists as much as it does Islamists, evangelicals, and Hindu nationalists.
My religion is and will always be intertwined with my nationality. That nationality is the Jewish Nation. The name of our current political state is the State of Israel, merely the third such political state by our people in more or less this region of the world.
I cannot stress this enough to people: Read some history! Get to know something about this region before throwing around terms like apartheid. Do the same for other war-torn regions in the world, maybe you'll learn something about why some people are in conflict with others. Maybe you'll realize that not everything in life can be fixed with roses and daisies and boxes of chocolate (but if you want to send me chocolate, I only eat mehadrin kosher, so get me something like that).
 

sun rise

The world is on fire
Premium Member
illegally occupy others' land and then implement apartheid policies against them.

I disagree with the first point - the creation of Israel was was legal.

I utterly disagree with Israel's apartheid policies so agree with the second part of what I quoted.
 

Debater Slayer

Vipassana
Staff member
Premium Member
Indeed. That's why we're waiting for the illegal occupiers to get off our land.

If you're talking about Palestinians, you're essentially suggesting that people who have lived there for generations just up and go elsewhere—if they even have a place to go to. I have no idea how this makes sense to anyone who also argues that Jews need refuge and a state to belong in, unless one also believes that Palestinians are somehow less human or deserving of rights than Jews.

My religion is and will always be intertwined with my nationality. That nationality is the Jewish Nation. The name of our current political state is the State of Israel, merely the third such political state by our people in more or less this region of the world.
I cannot stress this enough to people: Read some history! Get to know something about this region before throwing around terms like apartheid. Do the same for other war-torn regions in the world, maybe you'll learn something about why some people are in conflict with others. Maybe you'll realize that not everything in life can be fixed with roses and daisies and boxes of chocolate (but if you want to send me chocolate, I only eat mehadrin kosher, so get me something like that).

The term "apartheid" is not just "thrown around" when it comes to Israel. There are various reasons that make it an accurate description thereof. For example:

Israel’s occupation of Palestinian Territory is ‘apartheid’: UN rights expert

Israel is an apartheid state, Amnesty International says

Amnesty says Israel is an apartheid state. Many Israeli politicians agree | Chris McGreal

Anyone is free to have whatever religious or political beliefs they want as long as those beliefs harm no one. However, the moment their religious or political identity infringes on the rights of others, it deserves unequivocal criticism and opposition. Ask yourself how you'd respond if Islamists or hard-line Christians controlled Israel and decided to give special treatment to Muslims or Christians at the expense of Jews. That's the same thing I see Israel doing to many non-Jewish citizens.
 

Debater Slayer

Vipassana
Staff member
Premium Member
I disagree with the first point - the creation of Israel was was legal.

I utterly disagree with Israel's apartheid policies so agree with the second part of what I quoted.

I was referring to Israel's current illegal occupation and settlements, not its creation, which is a different subject altogether.
 

jbg

Active Member
Controversy yes but the attempt to change the law on the part of a party which might be in government is new.

And what's next? Telling the millions who emigrated to Israel that they are not Jews and must leave?
Israel needs the support of non-Orthodox Diaspora Jews. Changing the law as Maoz wants would be Israel's cutting off its nose to spite its face.
 

paarsurrey

Veteran Member
Controversy yes but the attempt to change the law on the part of a party which might be in government is new.

And what's next? Telling the millions who emigrated to Israel that they are not Jews and must leave?

Is it so serious, please, right?

Regards
 

sun rise

The world is on fire
Premium Member
I was referring to Israel's current illegal occupation and settlements, not its creation, which is a different subject altogether.

In that case, I agree. Some of what the settlers say remind me of an Islamist I once debated. He asserted that the Islamic state would be equal to the largest expansion of Islam which of course included Spain. And he was willing to go to war to assert the Caliphate's rule over Spain and part of Eastern Europe.

And it reminds me of Russia's war with Ukraine and other expansionist aggression on the same basic idea - that Russia was entitled to take over land because it was once part of Russia.
 

Lyndon

"Peace is the answer" quote: GOD, 2014
Premium Member
In that case, I agree. Some of what the settlers say remind me of an Islamist I once debated. He asserted that the Islamic state would be equal to the largest expansion of Islam which of course included Spain. And he was willing to go to war to assert the Caliphate's rule over Spain and part of Eastern Europe.

And it reminds me of Russia's war with Ukraine and other expansionist aggression on the same basic idea - that Russia was entitled to take over land because it was once part of Russia.
Or that Jews would invade and take over Palestine because it used to be home to Jews 2000 years ago
 
Top