The bill proposed in North Carolina that would assert that states are not bound by the separation of church and state is very alarming to those of us who understand the utmost importance of this constitutional value, including American Jews. If this bill is seriously considered or becomes law, it will have consequences for all Americans and those who believe that government should not be making laws that show preference to some religions over others. We call for this bill to be completely rejected in North Carolina and withdrawn from consideration.
The Interfaith Moral Action on Climate will hold tomorrow (Tuesday) a multi-religious Pray-in for the Climate at the White House. The Pray-in will gather at the New York Avenue Presbyterian Church, three short blocks from the White House. Speakers there will include
Jacqueline Patterson, IMAC steering committee and climate point person for the NAACP;
Imam Johari Malik, the "Green Imam" of Washington;
Diane Randall, exec of the Friends Committee on National Legislation;
Rabbi David Saperstein, director of the Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism; and
Rev. Bob Edgar, former Congressman, former general secretary of the National Council of Churches, and now CEO of Common Cause.
Editorial Note:Florida is one of the most Jewish states thanks in part to the many Jewish retirement communities there. 3.4% of Floridians are Jewish according to the 2011 survey. Historically, Jews are very politically engaged and turnout to vote at higher rates than gentiles. For example, in 2008, Jews represented 4% of the vote in the general election.
Nate Silver wrote in The New York Times' 538 blog last night that there is little evidence supporting claims that Jewish voters in FL are switching their support to the Republican Party.
There has been some speculation that Democrats could struggle to hold the Jewish vote in 2012....
But there is no sign tonight of Jewish voters switching their registration over to the Republican side in Florida. According to early exit polls, just 1% of voters in tonight's Republican primary identified as Jewish. That's down from 3% in the Florida Republican primary in 2008, which also might mean that Jewish Republican voters in the state are not terribly enthusiastic about this group of candidates.
For all the campaign attention paid this past week to Israeli politics and-towards the end-Mitt Romney's handling of kosher meal budgeting in Massachusetts, few if any Jews appeared to vote in the Florida GOP primary.
According to Fox News exit poll, just 1% of the state's primary voters identified as Jewish. 31% said they were Catholic and 59% said they were protestant or 'other Christian.' 4% said 'something else.'
A week ago I wrote that the most interesting question about the Florida Jewish vote is that
'If the percentage of Republican Jews is higher this year than in 2008; if more than 4% to 5% of the Republican Florida voters are Jewish.'
The answer to this question is now clear: a resounding no. According to exit polls only 1% of Republican voters were Jewish - that's not more but rather less Jewish voters than the number of 2008.
... I don't know how Tuesday's results could be interpreted in ways favorable to Jewish Republicans. Clearly, the Jews of Florida aren't moved by the candidates, they aren't moved by the party, and they aren't moved by Obama's policies - not enough to switch party registration and vote for their candidate of choice.
Editorial Note:Florida is one of the most Jewish states thanks in part to the many Jewish retirement communities there. 3.4% of Floridians are Jewish according to the 2011 survey. Historically, Jews are very politically engaged and turnout to vote at higher rates than gentiles. For example, in 2008, Jews represented 4% of the vote in the general election.
Nate Silver wrote in The New York Times' 538 blog last night that there is little evidence supporting claims that Jewish voters in FL are switching their support to the Republican Party.
There has been some speculation that Democrats could struggle to hold the Jewish vote in 2012....
But there is no sign tonight of Jewish voters switching their registration over to the Republican side in Florida. According to early exit polls, just 1% of voters in tonight's Republican primary identified as Jewish. That's down from 3% in the Florida Republican primary in 2008, which also might mean that Jewish Republican voters in the state are not terribly enthusiastic about this group of candidates.
For all the campaign attention paid this past week to Israeli politics and-towards the end-Mitt Romney's handling of kosher meal budgeting in Massachusetts, few if any Jews appeared to vote in the Florida GOP primary.
According to Fox News exit poll, just 1% of the state's primary voters identified as Jewish. 31% said they were Catholic and 59% said they were protestant or 'other Christian.' 4% said 'something else.'
A week ago I wrote that the most interesting question about the Florida Jewish vote is that
'If the percentage of Republican Jews is higher this year than in 2008; if more than 4% to 5% of the Republican Florida voters are Jewish.'
The answer to this question is now clear: a resounding no. According to exit polls only 1% of Republican voters were Jewish - that's not more but rather less Jewish voters than the number of 2008.
... I don't know how Tuesday's results could be interpreted in ways favorable to Jewish Republicans. Clearly, the Jews of Florida aren't moved by the candidates, they aren't moved by the party, and they aren't moved by Obama's policies - not enough to switch party registration and vote for their candidate of choice.
All we get is the poetry of a Jewish fruit peddler and a heap of vanishing figs. — Baruch Spinoza
You will be greater than all of us, but not as a Jew. — Rabbi Mortera
Reminiscent of intellectual dramas like Copenhagen, New Jerusalem: The Interrogation of Baruch de Spinoza at Talmud Torah Congregation: Amsterdam, July 27, 1656 is an ambitious new drama by David Ives, known for his evenings of one act comedies called All in the Timing and Time Flies. Playing through November 6th at the Lantern Theater Company, this heady play directed by Lantern's Artistic Director Charles McMahon is based on true events in the life of the philosopher Baruch de Spinoza. This recent off-Broadway hit challenges traditional political and religious thinking with passion and wit.
The production's action takes place in the Amsterdam synagogue where the 23 year old stands trial for his revolutionary thoughts about God, nature and human life. Sam Henderson's Spinoza, donning a black leather bomber jacket, (costumes beautifully designed by Maggie Baker with lighting by Shon Causer) is arrogant but humble, witty and rakish. The favorite son of the rabbi's heir apparent, (played by David Bardeen) Spinoza refuses to remain silent about his revolutionary thoughts, and is accused by political leader and Calvinist Abraham van Valkenburgh ( played by Seth Reichgott) of heresy. The audience becomes part of this trial as we witness Spinoza refuse to silence his radical beliefs, denying the divine origin of the Torah which sits in the Ark of the Covenant, that provides the effective and sparsely designed backdrop for the action (designed by Nick Embree).
Artists whose works have been exhibited include Rita Ackert, Steve Belkowitz, Linda Dubin Garfield, Liliana Life, Carla Goodstein, Peter Reich, and Mordechai Rosenstein, Mickie Rosen, Hinda Schuman, Susan Leonard, Kathryn Pannepacker, Else Wachs, Paulette Bensignor, Susan Forbes, Rachel Issac, B.Leah Palmer, and Barbara Rosenzweig.
Christine O'Donnell says the United States Constituion means a lot to her. She claimed to have studied "Constitutional Government at Claremont Graduate University"
Then, in last week's debate, Christine made a big deal about her beliefs not meaning anything, if she goes to Washington, it will be to support the Constitution.
Yesterday's debate at the Widener Law School shows the Constitution to be a document she obviously has not read with any amount of comprehension.
"Where in the Constitution is the separation of church and state?" O'Donnell asked him.
When Coons responded that the First Amendment bars Congress from making laws respecting the establishment of religion, O'Donnell asked: "You're telling me that's in the First Amendment?"
Her comments, in a debate aired on radio station WDEL, generated a buzz in the audience.
"You actually audibly heard the crowd gasp," said Widener University political scientist Wesley Leckrone, adding that he thought it raised questions about O'Donnell's grasp of the Constitution.
Note in the video how O'Donnell keeps on gleefully repeating her ignorant misunderstanding of the Constitution. She is convinced she is right and has Coons in a "gotcha" moment. She understands that someone in the room is an idiot, but unfortunately does not realize that she is it.
After that debate my team and I we were literally high fiving each other thinking that we had exposed he doesn't know the First Amendment, and then when we read the reports that said the opposite we were all like "what?"
I've been thinking a lot about hatred and bigotry, in light of the comments on this post. It seems that we all have some latent, if not blatant, inherent bigotry. Last night, Scott posted a link to Ron Paul's comments about why Park51 should be allowed near Ground Zero. Scott picked one quote, I pick this one:
Defending the controversial use of property should be no more difficult than defending the 1st Amendment principle of defending controversial speech. But many conservatives and liberals do not want to diminish the hatred for Islam--the driving emotion that keeps us in the wars in the Middle East and Central Asia.
I have been thinking about my lifelong, absolute, defense of First Amendment rights. In case you have forgotten, there are five:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
And yet, I am somehow disquieted. It's because of the Preamble to the Constitution, which says:
We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America. (emphasis mine)
What do we say about religions, and religious "idealism" that deny liberty to those amoungst us? How do we balance the right to practice one's religion when members try to force some parts of that religion down other people's throats?
The Anti-Defamation League has a record of sticking up for religious freedom, but they are speaking out against the "Ground Zero Mosque". Various Jewish groups are praising or condemning the ADL for this stand. In joining forces with the right-wing ,is the ADL taking a stand against terrorism or selling out their long held principles?
The Philadelphia Jewish Voice is an online non-profit volunteer based community newspaper serving the Philadelphia Jewish Community since 2005. We are dedicated to addressing the important social, political and cultural issues facing our community in a spirit of honesty, integrity and diversity.
Your tax-deductible donations will help give Voice to the Greater Philadelphia Jewish Community.
To pay by credit card or paypal, click here:
or send a check to:
Eric Smolen, Treasurer,
The
Philadelphia Jewish Voice,
327 Pembroke Road,
Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004
The Philadelphia Jewish Voice is organized pursuant to
Pennsylvania's non-profit corporation law. We have tax-exempt status under IRS
Code Section 501(c)(3). Contributions are tax-deductible to the fullest extent of
the law.
For more information about the Philadelphia Jewish Voice visit
GuideStar.
— by Aaron Keyak
— David Streeter
