Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Israel passes law denying naturalization to Palestinian spouses

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

411–420 of 735 posts

Re: Israel passes law denying naturalization to Palestinian spouses

#411

Post by colechristensen »

toyg wrote: post #329
colechristensen wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To the contrary, humans have never been nicer to each other or lived more pleasant lives at any point before the present.

And that's precisely because we stopped pulling this sort of crap in more and more places. 300 years ago, the number of religions and ethnicities currently existing in US or Western Europe would have meant a constant state of civil war.

>300 years ago, the number of religions and ethnicities currently existing in US or Western Europe would have meant a constant state of civil war.

300 years ago the Ottoman Empire was in full swing and quite religiously and ethnically diverse (probably more so than modern Europe or America). Not to say everyone had equal rights or was nice to each other, but historically a cornerstone for the success of many (not all) empires has been a significant degree of diversity and tolerance of both religions and ethnicity. It also wasn't new, Rome was also quite diverse and tolerant. (not always, not to everyone, but still quite so)

Re: Israel passes law denying naturalization to Palestinian spouses

#412

Post by thatsmyfribble »

zd123 wrote: post #392
joshenberg wrote: post #377

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The existential crisis of Judaism is indeed a core issue, although I am of the opinion that it does not justify the tactics and laws present. That does make it an Apartheid state. However, OP used no semantic sleights and the suggestion he did is concerning to discourse. He was describing its origins, and you its current conditions. If you reject the idea the Jewish people would like / need a homeland then just say t…

OP begins by saying: “ 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” Then later on says: “Israel was not built by its founders to be a melting pot, it was built as a home for displaced Jewish people. It was not built to be a place of equality, and unfortunately, by its nature it cannot be one and continue to…

The phrasing of the disgusting line is unclear, I apologize. I'm not calling people claiming that disgusting, I'm commenting on people who are calling the concept of a Jewish state disgusting, as in, I'm commenting on people who are saying "the concept of a Jewish state is disgusting."

I would still love to meet Penn and Teller though.

Re: Israel passes law denying naturalization to Palestinian spouses

#413

Post by bradlys »

vkou wrote: post #390
spywaregorilla wrote: post #384

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unfortunately, geopolitics all but guarantee this will never happen so long as Israel is a strong western ally

Does it have to be? Does it operate a gas pipeline that heats Germany, or something? Is it an irreplaceable source of titanium? A major wheat exporter? Is the West planning to use it as a launchpad for a war of aggression in the region?

> Is the West planning to use it as a launchpad for a war of aggression in the region?

Pretty sure this was the reason. It’s a tactical piece that they want to keep control over. Everyone else in the region hates them (and rightfully so).

Re: Israel passes law denying naturalization to Palestinian spouses

#414

Post by MomoXenosaga »

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…

Yes I do find the concept of a Jewish state disgusting. It leads to a theocracy.

"The issue is that if citizenship is freely given, Jews become the minority in Israel and it is no longer a Jewish state"

This can be easily resolved if Israel would define what it's borders are. But Israel does not in fact want to be a normal country it is run by religious extremists.

Re: Israel passes law denying naturalization to Palestinian spouses

#415

Post by sterlind »

joshenberg wrote: post #364
apricot wrote: post #138

From the article: « Proponents say the law helps ensure Israel's security and maintains its "Jewish character". » Which is eerily similar to the arguments in favor of the 1935 "Law for the Protection of German Blood and German Honour" (Nurenberg laws) in Germany, which forbade marriage between Germans and Jews.

The demographic difference between the two is staggering. If all Palestinians received right of return to Israel, Jews would immediately become a political minority. The Germans had no equivalent statistical reasoning other than racism. Think about the context before you compare people to Nazis

sounds like an argument for the two-state solution, then?

Israel can't have its cake and eat it too.

Re: Israel passes law denying naturalization to Palestinian spouses

#416

Post by thehappypm »

docdeek wrote: post #84

This article doesn’t really provide much in the way of explanation for why this law is being enacted. Here [0] is a better article that quotes supporters and objectors to the law. It includes the (IMHO not very convincing) figures that "Between 1993 and 2003, around 130,000 Palestinians were given Israeli citizenship or residency through family unification, including children, according to court filings. The Shin Bet…

.037% terrorism sounds high to me

Re: Israel passes law denying naturalization to Palestinian spouses

#417

Post by bradlys »

pthread_t wrote: post #39

So, 21% of Israel's population has restrictions on who they could marry all so that they can maintain a majority of the favored demographic. This is apartheid.

> This is apartheid.

It’s been this way for a while. This is just one more thing on top of another.

Re: Israel passes law denying naturalization to Palestinian spouses

#418

Post by simiones »

toyg wrote: post #329
colechristensen wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To the contrary, humans have never been nicer to each other or lived more pleasant lives at any point before the present.

And that's precisely because we stopped pulling this sort of crap in more and more places. 300 years ago, the number of religions and ethnicities currently existing in US or Western Europe would have meant a constant state of civil war.

That's not true. Look at India - it has many times more ethnicities, and many Indian kingdoms used to have good relations even between Hindus and Muslims before modern times. Also, empires like the Ottoman empire had Turks, Arabs, Greeks, Persians, Jews and many other nationalities; and Muslims, Christians, Zoroastrians and other religions living in relative harmony - certainly not in a constant state of civil war.

Ancient empires were even more diverse, with civil wars often arising more along economic lines than ethnic or religious ones.

Re: Israel passes law denying naturalization to Palestinian spouses

#419

Post by simiones »

fuckcensorship wrote: post #385
jgmmo wrote: post #371

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quoted post unavailable.

Believing Israel is an oppressive country is not antisemitism.

I think (hope) that the comment above was remarking that Israel itself is deeply antisemitic (Arabs are a semitic people).

Re: Israel passes law denying naturalization to Palestinian spouses

#420

Post by twofornone »

pthread_t wrote: post #39

So, 21% of Israel's population has restrictions on who they could marry all so that they can maintain a majority of the favored demographic. This is apartheid.

Israel is surrounded by Arab Muslims who outnumber Jews 100:1 and are overtly hostile to Judaism, as prescribed by their religion. I ask honestly, is it really so wrong for a nation to implement laws to preserve its culture, particularly when it's people constitute a tiny fraction of the global population?

Or is support of cultural preservation only virtuous when the alternative is labeled "gentrification"?

Post reply on HN