Live data from Hacker News

Israel passes law denying naturalization to Palestinian spouses

reuters.com

711–720 of 735 posts

Re: Israel passes law denying naturalization to Palestinian spouses

#711

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quoted post unavailable.

I'm trying really hard to put aside the racist comments... This still doesn't explain how these women are obtaining Israeli citizenship if polygamy is illegal.

  > I'm trying really hard to put aside the racist comments...
I'm interested in what racist comments you would apply. These people live a different culture than Western culture - what they call marriage is foreign to what you call marriage. But I see that I'm communicating poorly, if you would like to tell me what you perceive as racism I would actually appreciate it very much. You can tell me here or in email if you prefer - my Gmail username is the same as my HN username.

Thank you.

Re: Israel passes law denying naturalization to Palestinian spouses

#712
post #338

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Now I understand your question. It is possible that because the first and second wife are not registered with the state, the men are "marrying" for the first (official) time. That could even be why this practice is usually done for the third- and forth- wife, and not the first or second. It is possible that these marriage are the "official" state-registered marriage. That's my guess, I don't really know.

I believe it’s relevant because why make a change to law if these polygamists aren’t exploiting the marriage law?

My guess would be because it is impossible to enforce any "law" governing how these people lead their everyday lives (who they marry) but it is possible to enforce laws regarding the movement of people across borders.

Re: Israel passes law denying naturalization to Palestinian spouses

#713

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Me again. I just googled for "beduin polygamy in israel", try it and you'll find all you need. It is ostensibly illegal but impossible to enforce. You should know that it's not restricted to only Beduin, I recently was at a West Bank gas station talking to a guy (in Arabic) who has recently married his second wife. There are Beduins in the West Bank, but this guy wasn't Beduin.

> ostensibly illegal but impossible to enforce Isn’t it quite simple to enforce when it comes to naturalisation?

I would imagine so, which is why that is the aspect that is now being addressed.

Re: Israel passes law denying naturalization to Palestinian spouses

#714

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quoted post unavailable.

> We are not talking about loving couples being forbidden to marry. According to the article, the law prevents first and only Palestinian spouses of Israeli citizens from becoming Israeli citizens, when love is the sole reason for wanting to marry. If Israel wanted to prevent citizens from having "third of fourth wives", an acceptable way would be to outlaw polygamy; if it wanted to prevent bogus marriages, an accept…

You are trying to apply Western ideas to the issue in order to understand it. That won't work.

  > According to the article, the law prevents first and only Palestinian spouses of Israeli citizens from becoming Israeli citizens,
That is incorrect. The law makes no mention of Palestinian, Jew, Arab, Muslim, etc.

  > when love is the sole reason for wanting to marry.
Your idea of what marriage is does not apply here. We are talking about people who have never met. In any case, marriage among the Bedouins is not about affection. Most marriages are between people who have never met. There is a good reason for that - the Saudis don't do this and they have inbreeding problems. The Beduins generally try to arrange spouses (yes, plural) from further away.

  > If Israel wanted to prevent citizens from having "third of fourth wives", an acceptable way would be to outlaw polygamy;
Polygamy is already illegal, but again you are trying to apply Western ideas. These people do not recognize the state, and the state leaves marital affairs up to the religious leaders. So they continue to marry multiple wives. Many many laws do not apply and are not enforce with regards to the Beduins and Arabs in general. Mostly this is a non-issue.

  > if it wanted to prevent bogus marriages, an acceptable way would be by not granting marriage certificates when the couple don't know each other.
There is no "marriage certificate", again you are applying Western ideas where they do no apply.

Re: Israel passes law denying naturalization to Palestinian spouses

#715

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quoted post unavailable.

Ah yes, the Arab hivemind sub plot to take over your country with little brown babies overtaking precious white ones. I, too, get concerned of the explosion of disgusting brown people that threatens my beautiful non Arabic speaking country. /s if not clear.

You have no idea how wrong you are. Firstly, there is no "brown", everybody here has a range of skin colours. Your American ideas about race do not apply to this situation.

Secondly, in fact this is an Arabic speaking country. I personally speak Arabic, I learn from my Arab friends and neighbours. So everything that I'm mentioning is from the actual experience of living here and understanding both Western culture and the Arab culture (for the most part).

Thirdly, these people are going to have a dozen babies per wife no matter where the wives come from. And with the modern healthcare that everybody receives, all those babies will grow to be adults - something that was not the case when their culture developed the need to have a dozen babies per wife.

I don't blame you for not understanding, the media reports on the situation with no lies but eliminating perspective. If we had the same race issues as the US, and if "marriage" meant the same here as US audiences expect, then your rage would be justified. The task of mentioning these differences would fall on the body "reporting" the situation if the reporting goal were to spread information. But the spread of information is not the goal of the reporting - as evidenced by what information they include and what information they eliminate.

Re: Israel passes law denying naturalization to Palestinian spouses

#716
post #645

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s not what cherry-picking means. The previous comment made a claim. I gave a what I considered a valid counter example undermining that claim. That’s an entirely reasonable response. Somewhat ironically, that Wikipedia article is cherry picking. It gives lots of examples that support its thesis and fails to mention or downplays counter examples, of which there are very many.

Of which you - contrary to the other commenter in the thread - failed to provide sources of. You cherry pick one example and talk about there being many, many more. Yet it is the other side shows sources that you with few words "argue" are not valid - also without providing arguments, sources, anything. You are not discussing in good faith.

[deleted]

Re: Israel passes law denying naturalization to Palestinian spouses

#717

Earlier quoted context omitted.

South Africa abstained to vote on UN resolution against Russian large attack on Ukraine. West didn't ignore apartheid, they quietly supported it, because USSR supported Mandela and anti-apartheid struggle. Kinda "enemy of my enemy is my friend". IMHO that was the stupidest position of the US, they should've "united" with USSR on anti-apartheid position.

When one factor "Capitalism vs. Communism" is the lens through which you view the world, then "are they on our side" becomes more important than "are they good people". That is why the west supported some terrible regimes, including Apartheid South Africa and Pinochet in Chile. Because they could claim to be "anti-communist".

Yes. And on the other hand, USSR supported a ton of very terrible regimes. Like cannibal Bokassa in Central African Republic.

Re: Israel passes law denying naturalization to Palestinian spouses

#718
post #656

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>They have also found refugee in Muslim community from Christian prosecution multiple times: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Jews_under_Musl ... Got some really lovely apologia for Islamic imperialism in that page: >Jews under Islamic rule were given the status of dhimmi, along with certain other pre-Islamic religious groups.[1] Though second-class citizens,

Leaving what you consider Islamic imperialism aside, I'm curious to hear your thoughts on how dhimmi status compared to how jews were treated in other parts of the world at that time.

Since dhimmi status extended into the 1800s, and even the 1900s in some areas, it compares pretty damn disfavorably to full emancipation and citizenship. Going back into earlier periods of history, I don't really care to tell you whether a Muslim boot or a Christian boot tastes better, since, being Jewish, I'd rather not have either one stamping on my face.

Re: Israel passes law denying naturalization to Palestinian spouses

#719

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The Middle East has been a melting pot for centuries No it hasn't. It's been an explicitly Islamist supremacist (sometimes under Arab dynasties, sometimes Persian or Turkish ones, but certainly never Jewish ones) imperial dominion for centuries, and was until 1924. Do you not know what dhimmi status was?

I’m not sure why you’re using Dhimmi as if it’s a trump card in this argument. It explicitly granted legal protections for non Muslims. Compared to its contemporaries under Christian rule in Europe, the Muslim world was quite progressive in that respect. You can observe the difference as it played out in Christian Spain after the reconquista.

Ok, so would you get in the time machine to go back and become a dhimmi? Why should we have liked on purely comparative grounds?

Re: Israel passes law denying naturalization to Palestinian spouses

#720

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then their shop isn't certified as kosher and can't make food for religious customers, but otherwise, it works fine. I've gone to convenience stores, cafes, restaurants, movie theaters, etc dozens of times on Shabbat, in Israel.

Were you able to take the trains? Buses?

Yes, of course. I lived in Haifa, which kept its bus rapid-transit system and several bus lines running all through Shabbat. This was especially helpful for the nighttime bus lines, so I could go to the beach on Friday afternoon, eat dinner and see a movie at Lev haMifratz with friends in the evening, and then get home at maybe 1-2am, all with public transit.
Post reply on HN