From: 
Subject: Zionist Jews Are Not Jews?

 

  

Zionist Jews Are Not Jews.

 

 <http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=70c_1215422003> http://www.liveleak .com/view? 
i=70c_1215422003
   

 A good hearted human would not hide the truth, only a coward would hide the 
truth.

Lara Nunes (2009)

 

Subject: [Who Is a Jew? Court Ruling in Britain Raises Question By SARAH LYALL 
Courtesy:The New York Times
  


 

  _____  

November 8, 2009


Who Is a Jew? Court Ruling in Britain Raises Question 


By SARAH LYALL 
<http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/l/sarah_lyall/index.html?inline=nyt-per>
 

LONDON — The questions before the judges in Courtroom No. 1 of Britain 
<http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/international/countriesandterritories/unitedkingdom/index.html?inline=nyt-geo>
 ’s Supreme Court were as ancient and as complex as Judaism itself. 

Who is a Jew? And who gets to decide? 

On the surface, the court was considering a straightforward challenge to the 
admissions policy of a Jewish high school in London . But the case, in which 
arguments concluded Oct. 30, has potential repercussions for thousands of other 
parochial schools across Britain . And in addressing issues at the heart of 
Jewish identity, it has exposed bitter divisions in Britain ’s community of 
300,000 or so Jews, pitting members of various Jewish denominations against one 
another. 

“This is potentially the biggest case in the British Jewish community’s modern 
history,” said Stephen Pollard, editor of the Jewish Chronicle newspaper here. 
“It speaks directly to the right of the state to intervene in how a religion 
operates.” 

The case began when a 12-year-old boy, an observant Jew whose father is Jewish 
and whose mother is a Jewish convert, applied to the school, JFS. Founded in 
1732 as the Jews’ Free School , it is a centerpiece of North London ’s Jewish 
community. It has around 1,900 students, but it gets far more applicants than 
it accepts. 

Britain has nearly 7,000 publicly financed religious schools, representing 
Judaism as well as the Church of England, Catholicism and Islam, among others. 
Under a 2006 law, the schools can in busy years give preference to applicants 
within their own faiths, using criteria laid down by a designated religious 
authority. 

By many standards, the JFS applicant, identified in court papers as “M,” is 
Jewish. But not in the eyes of the school, which defines Judaism under the 
Orthodox definition set out by Jonathan Sacks, chief rabbi of the United Hebrew 
Congregations of the Commonwealth. Because M’s mother converted in a 
progressive, not an Orthodox, synagogue, the school said, she was not a Jew — 
nor was her son. It turned down his application. 

That would have been the end of it. But M’s family sued, saying that the school 
had discriminated against him. They lost 
<http://www.bailii.org/cgi-bin/markup.cgi?doc=/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2008/1535.html&query=Jewish+and+school&method=boolean>
 , but the ruling was overturned 
<http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2009/626.html>  by the Court of Appeal 
this summer. 

In an explosive decision, the court concluded that basing school admissions on 
a classic test of Judaism — whether one’s mother is Jewish — was by definition 
discriminatory. Whether the rationale was “benign or malignant, theological or 
supremacist,” the court wrote, “makes it no less and no more unlawful.” 

The case rested on whether the school’s test of Jewishness was based on 
religion, which would be legal, or on race or ethnicity, which would not. The 
court ruled that it was an ethnic test because it concerned the status of M’s 
mother rather than whether M considered himself Jewish and practiced Judaism. 

“The requirement that if a pupil is to qualify for admission his mother must be 
Jewish, whether by descent or conversion, is a test of ethnicity which 
contravenes the Race Relations Act,” the court said. It added that while it was 
fair that Jewish schools should give preference to Jewish children, the 
admissions criteria must depend not on family ties, but “on faith, however 
defined.”

The same reasoning would apply to a Christian school that “refused to admit a 
child on the ground that, albeit practicing Christians, the child’s family were 
of Jewish origin,” the court said. 

The school appealed to the Supreme Court, which is likely to rule sometime 
before the end of the year. 

The case’s importance was driven home by the sheer number of lawyers in the 
courtroom last week, representing not just M’s family and the school, but also 
the British government, the Equalities and Human Rights Commission, the United 
Synagogue, the British Humanist Association and the Board of Deputies of 
British Jews.

Meanwhile, the Court of Appeal ruling threw the school into a panicked scramble 
to put together a new admissions policy. It introduced a “religious practice 
test,” in which prospective students amass points for things like going to 
synagogue and doing charitable work. 

That has led to all sorts of awkward practical issues, said Jon Benjamin, chief 
executive of the Board of Deputies of British Jews, because Orthodox Judaism 
forbids writing or using a computer on the Sabbath. That means that children 
who go to synagogue can’t “sign in,” but have to use methods like dropping 
prewritten postcards into boxes.

It is unclear what effect the ruling, if it is upheld, will have on other 
religious schools. Some Catholic schools, accustomed to using baptism as a 
baseline admissions criterion, are worried that they will have to adopt similar 
practice tests. 

The case has stirred up long-simmering resentments among the leaders of 
different Jewish denominations, who, for starters, disagree vehemently on the 
definition of Jewishness. They also disagree on the issue of whether an 
Orthodox leader is entitled to speak for the entire community. 

“Whatever happens in this case, there must be some resolution sorted out 
between different denominations,” Mr. Benjamin said in an interview. “That the 
community has failed to grasp this has had the very unfortunate result of 
having a judgment foisted on it by a civil court.”

Orthodox Jews, of course, sympathize with the school, saying that observance is 
no test of Jewishness, and that all that matters is whether one’s mother is 
Jewish. So little does observance matter, in fact, that “having a ham sandwich 
on the afternoon of Yom Kippur doesn’t make you less Jewish,” Rabbi Yitzchak 
Schochet, chairman of the Rabbinical Council of the United Synagogue, said 
recently. 

Lauren Lesin-Davis, chairman of the board of governors at King David, a Jewish 
school in Liverpool , told the BBC 
<http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/business/companies/british_broadcasting_corporation/index.html?inline=nyt-org>
  that the ruling violated more than 5,000 years of Jewish tradition. 

“You cannot come in and start telling people how their whole lives should 
change, that the whole essence of their life and their religion is completely 
wrong,” she said. 

But others are in complete sympathy with M. 

“How dare they question our beliefs and our Jewishness?” David Lightman, an 
observant Jewish father whose daughter was also denied a place at the school 
because it did not recognize her mother’s conversion, told reporters recently. 
“I find it offensive and very upsetting.” 

Rabbi Danny Rich, chief executive of Liberal Judaism here, said the lower 
court’s ruling, if upheld, would help make Judaism more inclusive. 

“JFS is a state-funded school where my grandfather taught, and it’s selecting 
applicants on the basis of religious politics,” he said in an interview. “The 
Orthodox definition of Jewish excludes 40 percent of the Jewish community in 
this country.” 


Reference/Source: http://www. nytimes.com/ 2009/11/08/ world/europe/ 08britain. 
html?_r=1&sq=Who%20is% 20a%20jew&st=cse&scp=1&pagewanted=print



 .

Image removed by sender. 

 

 

*** exposing the hidden truth for further educational research only *** CAVEAT 
LECTOR *** In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is 
distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in 
receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. NOTE: 
Some links may require cut and paste into your Internet Browser. Please check 
for daily real news posts and support the truth! (sorry but don't have time to 
email all posts) at  <http://tinyurl.com/33c9yr> http://tinyurl.com/33c9yr    
or   <http://groups.google.com/group/total_truth_sciences/topics?gvc=2> 
http://groups.google.com/group/total_truth_sciences/topics?gvc=2  ; You can 
also subscribe to the multiple daily emails by sending  an email to  
<mailto:[email protected]> 
[email protected] ; free book download:   
<http://www.lulu.com/content/165077> http://www.lulu.com/content/165077  *** 
Revealing the hidden Truth For Educational & Further Research Purposes only. 
***  NOTICE: Due to Presidential Executive Orders, the National Security Agency 
(NSA) may have read emails without warning, warrant, or notice. They may do 
this without any judicial or legislative oversight. You have no recourse, nor 
protection.......... IF anyone other than the addressee of this e-mail is 
reading it, you are in violation of the 1st & 4th Amendments to the 
Constitution of the United States. Patriot Act 5 & H.R. 1955 Disclaimer Notice: 
This post & all my past & future posts represent parody & satire & are all 
intended for entertainment and amusement only. To be removed from the weekly 
list, please reply with the subject line "REMOVE"


 


 

__,_._,___


--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"total_truth_sciences" group.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/total_truth_sciences
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

<<inline: image001.jpg>>

Reply via email to