21–30 of 735 posts
“JAFFA, March 10 (Reuters) - Israel’s parliament on Thursday passed a law denying naturalization to Palestinians from the occupied West Bank or Gaza married to Israeli citizens, forcing thousands of Palestinian families to either emigrate or live apart.” Abhorrent but not about preventing marriages, at least not directly
>Proponents say the law helps ensure Israel's security and maintains its "Jewish character". What the fuck?
Where's the outcry.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This article fails to explain the reasons for which proponents believe that marriage with Palestinians would threaten security or Jewish character of the country, failing the supposed neutrality of the article or compromising the supposed quality of journalists in charge of investigating this.
Then please enlighten us, what's the rationale?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This article fails to explain the reasons for which proponents believe that marriage with Palestinians would threaten security or Jewish character of the country, failing the supposed neutrality of the article or compromising the supposed quality of journalists in charge of investigating this.
Plenty of people in other countries feel the same way about their native population, I don't see why Israel gets a pass.
This is an apartheid regime. Plain and simple.
South Africa took a lot of flak for their apartheid. Wonder why the same doesn't happen with this apartheid in the XXI century. That's a shame.
Western countries apply their moral principles differently to their allies.
I don't know the first thing about constitutional law in Israel but western basic sensibilities would be that this violates the principle of equality under the law.
This law, by the way, is unconstitutional* for more reasons than just the race-based discrimination. It defines different criteria for "permitted spouse" by gender, and has exceptions for specific religions (e.g. Druze).
*Israel doesn't really have a constitution, but there are certain "core laws" that the Supreme Court decided in the '90s that it can use as a basis to strike down other laws passed by the Parliament.
If you’re trying to pacify a group wouldn’t you encourage integration, instead of banning it?