Monday, June 04, 2012

Why should Zionists, Islamists... exempt from rigours of democracy simply by invoking "religious freedom" or specter of "intolerance"?

Introduction by Chris Moore:

The following article by religious scholar Ted Pike outlining the increasingly open bigotry of Jewish Zionist rabbis, both Diaspora and Israeli, raises an interesting philosophical and legal issue: When a religion preaches hatred for non-adherents as a mainstream component of its teachings, at what point does that "religion" lose the right to hide behind religious freedom in the U.S. and cross over into being an ideology that should be subjected to the same standards of criticism as all other ideologies?

This Diaspora Zionist rabbi is clearly preaching an ideology of Gentile hatred, yet if one were to condemn him as a Jewish supremacist racist, he would likely say it's his religious right, and accuse his critics of "anti-Semitism."

This is the template for contriving ideologies of hatred and racism, claiming they're a "religion," and then accusing those who criticise them of being bigots -- all as a means to usher in self-serving, institutional supremacism for the particular race, ethnicity or cult hiding behind their conception of God (whether they define "God" spiritually, or as their self-same tribe/ethnicity, or as their ideology).

It seems to me it's time to categorize all religions as ideologies, and force them all to be subject to the marketplace of ideas, and no longer allow them or the government or some other institution to stifle their critics by accusing them of "hatred" or "bigotry" or "intolerance," or by according them some protective or "vulnerable minority" status, or as is the case in the U.S. with Zionism, actually subsidising and underwriting their ideology under the auspices of "Homeland Security."

Every "religion" should be subject to the same standards as all other democratic institutions instead of being allowed to rig the game to its own advantage by outlawing or stifling criticism, which is the equivalent of a government fixing elections, or some political party that happens to be running government outlawing other political parties vying for power.

Let the marketplace of ideas decide who is "right" and who is "wrong" within any given context, which is far more consistent with democratic ideals, instead of rigging the game by exempting Zionists, Islamists,...whoever...from the rigours of open scrutiny, critique and debate.

If one wants to argue that protecting "diversity" and "multiculturalism" is essential to maintaining the balance of the social ecosystem, that's fine. But what's more likely to protect that balance: Neolib/neocon/Zionist totalitarianism? Islamic totalitarianism? Or the preservation of Western civilization and its democratic ideals of free speech, constitutionalism, open discourse,and the marketplace of ideas?



A spiritual head of the Lithuanian branch of Ultra-Orthodox Jewry in Israel, Rabbi Aharon Shteinman, recently said:

There are eight billion people in the world and what are they? Murderers, thieves, brainless people. But who is the essence of the world? Has God created the world for these murderers? For these evil-doers? Non-Jews have no connection to torah. The nations have nothing, no confidence (=faith) and no good principles.

This is not the fringe position of one fanatic. This statement has been echoed by prominent Israeli rabbis who say Gentiles are subhuman, worthy of death. Public expression of such racist vitriol began several years ago with publication and wide distribution of The King’s Torah, a commentary on the Talmud advocating murder of Arabs, even children. Israel’s ban on “incitement of religious hatred” should have been enforced against its authors, Rabbis Yitzhak Shapira and Yoseph Elitzur, as well as other influential rabbis supporting and distributing it. It hasn’t. Just six days ago Israeli attorney general Yehuda Weinstein closed the case against them, dropping all criminal charges...

Of course, the investigation was always half-hearted or even feigned, as is any prosecution of Ultra-Orthodox for anti-Arab violence. Yet this decision sends an especially encouraging message to the Ultra-Orthodox settler movement: Israel, an alleged democracy, ostensibly protective of the rights of non-Jewish minorities, will clearly not enforce its laws against Jews. More than ever, the settlers and those who persecute Arabs and Messianic Jewish Christians will be able to preach and practice the vengeful, even homicidal message of hate and bigotry epitomized by the Talmud and Zohar.

Israel Permits Anti-Gentile/Christian Bigotry

Israel again reveals itself a sham democracy, consistently protective of Israeli wrongdoers at the expense of the rights of Gentiles. Christian rights in Israel are actually so minimal that, although Jews may now legally advocate killing Arab children, there exists no effective legal remedy if Jews want to spit on Christians!...

The many well-known cases of persecution of Christians in Israel do not dampen zeal for Israel among inveterate evangelical Zionist media leaders such as WorldNetDaily owner Joseph Farah. He still censors virtually all unflattering information about Israel to his millions of readers. (See "Zionist Evangelicals are World-Class Censors")

His dogma remains, though Jewish statehood in 1948 was made possible only by the Deir Yassin and many other massacres of Arabs. (See "Israel: Founded on Terror ") Similarly, Zionists drove 800,000 homeless refuges including many Christian Arabs into concentration camps. He says “if you believe the Bible as I do, the return of Israel as a nation after 2,000 years is a greater miracle than all that occurred during the Exodus.” The misleading title of his article “Modern Israel: Greatest Miracle Ever?” suggests Israel’s statehood trumps even the incarnation and atonement of Christ!...MORE...LINK

No comments: