Israel passes law denying naturalization to Palestinian spouses

Post by dotancohen » Fri, Mar 11, 2022, 2:36 PM UTC

estaseuropano wrote: post #253

dotancohen wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know about internet sources or laws, but in general Arab affairs are left up to the Arabs. I just took a look through my telephone and at least four people in my address book have multiple wives. These are people that I know well enough to have in my address book. Two of them I'd call personal friends, one is an electrician, and another I buy my gas from. I could probably find more in there, and I certainly k…

This is still not answering the question whether these are legally recognized wives; whether they have residenve./nationality rights, right to work, etc

Post by NautilusWave » Fri, Mar 11, 2022, 2:37 PM UTC

tablespoon wrote: post #248

mmaunder wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is correct. I grew up under apartheid. This phrase is key: “ Proponents say the law helps ensure Israel's security and maintains its "Jewish character".” Consider if the US passed a law banning Mexican spouses from uniting with their US spouse to keep America’s “Christian character”.

> Consider if the US passed a law banning Mexican spouses from uniting with their US spouse to keep America’s “Christian character”. That's not a very good analogy, because Mexico is probably more Christian than the US.

Post by A4ET8a8uTh0 » Fri, Mar 11, 2022, 2:38 PM UTC

thatsmyfribble wrote: post #259

First of all, this isn't a ban on Israeli-Palestinian marriage, this is a restriction on the ability to gain citizenship through those marriages. I don't agree with that, but I do think it's important to clarify. Regarding comments I'm seeing here saying Israel is an apartheid state or that Israel is racist or that Israel the concept of a Jewish state is disgusting: Israel is the size of New Jersey. It is the only st…

Post by tedivm » Fri, Mar 11, 2022, 2:39 PM UTC

jpgvm wrote: post #255

tablespoon wrote: post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Consider if the US passed a law banning Mexican spouses from uniting with their US spouse to keep America’s “Christian character”. That's not a very good analogy, because Mexico is probably more Christian than the US.

In this context Christian almost always means white even if they try to pretend that isn't the case. At least Australia didn't mince words and called it the White Australia Policy, everyone else feels like they need to make it about religon or something else to make the racism more palatable.

Post by walkhour » Fri, Mar 11, 2022, 2:39 PM UTC

mmaunder wrote: post #161

quelsolaar wrote: post #2

This is an apartheid regime. Plain and simple.

That is correct. I grew up under apartheid. This phrase is key: “ Proponents say the law helps ensure Israel's security and maintains its "Jewish character".” Consider if the US passed a law banning Mexican spouses from uniting with their US spouse to keep America’s “Christian character”.