Carter’s Evil Lie

George Washington couldn’t tell a lie, but Jimma can’t seem to stop. The big news today is that former President Jimmy Carter said the boycott against Israel is “too much.” However, he couldn’t stop himself from finding something else to say about Israel–something nasty and false and harmful. Jimmy insinuated that Israel’s one request regarding the peace negotiations with the PA: recognition of Israel as the Jewish State, would mean that Arabs living in Israel would have to convert to Judaism.

Israel can claim ‘We are a Jewish state.’ I don’t think the Arab countries will contradict that Jewish statement. But to force the Arab people to say that all the Arab people that they have in Israel have to be Jews, I think that’s going too far.

Jimmy-Carter

Um, no, Jimma. That’s not true. It’s just stuff you made up out of thin air. Jews don’t seek converts. That would be ISLAM that does that. Oh, and Christianity, too. They SEEK converts. And in the case of say, the Inquisition, and the Crusades, they actually IMPOSE conversion on the unwilling. Same thing in Islam. You don’t want to be Muslim? Fine. You die.

The Jews, on the other hand, don’t just take anyone. We are a select club. You have to be um, CHOSEN.

 

About Varda Epstein

A third-generation-born Pittsburgher on her mother’s mother’s side, Varda moved to Israel 34 years ago and is a crazy political animal who spams people with right wing political articles on Facebook in between writing about education as the communications writer at Kars for Kids, raising her 12 children, and noshing constantly on fried food

One incoming link

Knallchargen | abseits vom mainstream - heplev
25 May 2014 at 4:05pm
[…] Jimmy Carter, der alte Hetzer – er findet zwar, dass Israel zu ...

Facebook Comments

  • cba

    Or you can chose to convert.

    • Varda Meyers Epstein

      And get turned away. Because that is the Jewish tradition regarding prospective converts.

      • dcomplex

        Yeah but then you gotta keep annoying the rabbi until he agreea

        • Varda Meyers Epstein

          And the reason for that is that Judaism discourages converts.

          • walt kovacs

            didnt always. but now, most of us have higher standards

            unless one is reform, conservative, or rabbi weiss

          • dcomplex

            I thought that is the tradition _enforcing_ the reason, which is actually that we do not want people joining up and then not fulfilling the mitzvot, which means assuming responsibilities and then not carrying them out, which in turn could lead to forfeiture of one’s share in Olam Haba… no?

            • Varda Meyers Epstein

              No. We don’t get to posit reasons for rules and laws. We don’t encourage conversion. We discourage those attempting to convert. Why is not something I really care about. It just is.

              • dcomplex

                I’m not “positing” anything. I am pretty sure that is the rationale that Rabbis give. I mean, there is no explicit prohibition on conversion, and I don’t think it’s “just” a minhag, so that means that it was argued out somewhere. The reasoning I gave is iirc from something a rabbi told me or gave in a sermon.

                • Varda Meyers Epstein

                  We want to test their resolve and make sure there is some actual resolve. Sure. We want to make sure they are sincere about wanting to take on the mitzvot. But in general, we don’t worry about reasons and so forth. Like keeping kosher. We don’t worry about why we don’t eat pork, we just don’t do it.

                  • dcomplex

                    No no. We keep kosher because it is in the torah, and precise rules are argued out in the Rabbinic literature. IIRC, there is/was a small community with a minhag that it is okay to eat poultry and dairy together, but there is no orthodox Rabbi who would declare pork or horse to be kasher.

                    It’s not just completely ad-hoc. The Talmud is full of this kind of stuff.

                    • Varda Meyers Epstein

                      Still, kashrut, for instance, is a chok: a law with no reason given. The chukim are given to us to test whether we would blindly obey the laws when we don’t know the reasons for them. So to me, the reasons are in general a nice thing to know but not strictly necessary.

                    • dcomplex

                      Yes but that is my point. We do not have rules that are ad-hoc. Either they are justified by the Torah or by reasoning. The traditions on conversion are based on reasoning. Ahad even gave the citation in a post above.

                    • dcomplex

                      Yes but that is my point. We do not have rules that are ad-hoc. Either they are justified by the Torah or by reasoning. The traditions on conversion are based on reasoning. Ahad even gave the citation in a post above.

                    • Varda Meyers Epstein

                      But only insofar as the reason may be a test of faith, as is the case with a chok. I don’t need to know the reason or question the reason in order to follow the rules. So to me, questioning the reason we turn away converts in this context is besides the point. The point is that we turn them away. We don’t do what Islam and Christianity do. That makes it a ridiculous claim on Carter’s part. He’s trying to tar us with the brush that tars Christianity and Islam and it’s so false it’s laughable. And evil.

                    • dcomplex

                      Sure, but this is a dangerous way of thinking. It would mean you would follow your Rabbi’s word without question. Binding Rabbinic law derives from consensus among a tradition of Rabbis of great scholarship, and in order for such a consensus to be achieved, there must be reasoning justifying the finding. Moreover, I often make use of this reasoning when speaking with nonjews. For instance, I find the reasoning behind the discouraging of conversion useful for showing how Jews can be chosen but not “supremacist” or chauvinistic. I explain that we are chosen for a _responsibility_ rather than some kind of superiority. There are not really any benefits to being Jewish except the fulfillment of duty-well-done.

                    • Varda Meyers Epstein

                      I disagree. In fact vehemently. I think Jews are chosen because they are special. I see no reason to justify that idea with non-Jews. I think there is a tremendous benefit to being a Jew.

              • dabney_c

                That’s not the Jewish way. We always ask ‘why’ and seek reasons, even if sometimes we can’t know the definitive answer.

                • Varda Meyers Epstein

                  Wrong. The Jewish way is Naaseh V’Nishma: we will do and then we will listen (to the reasons).

                  • dabney_c

                    Not wrong. While Jews are obligated to follow the law even if the reasons are not clear, it is the Jewish way to make sense of the ‘why’ and to find the reasons. The whole culture is built on interpreting the Torah and the Law.

          • ahad_ha_amoratsim

            Varda, that is the reason that Judaism discourages converts. You are correct that we don’t look for reasons behind Torah mitzvos, but I am pretty sure that discouraging converts (as opposed to circumcising male converts, and immersion and acceptance of mitzvos for all converts) was instituted by the Sages, and they told us their reason.
            I don’t have the reference handy (probably in the 1st or 2nd perek of Kiddushin), but as I racall, it is part of a discussion about whether we can free an eved canaani (gentile slave) against his will. Freeing him, of course, makes him a full fledged Jew. The Sages note the general rule allowing us to confer a benefit on someone without his consent, but not to impose a disadvantage without his consent. The Sages then discuss whether becoming is an advantage or (because of the responsibility to perform additional mitzvos) a disadvantage. If I recall, the Sages conclude that freeing the eved canaani gives him more benefit than disadvantages, but even so, the case is different for a free non-Jew: the eved canaani is already subject to all the mitzvos except affirmative time-triggered obligations, whereas the ordinary non-Jew is subject only to the 7 Noahide laws. And the ordinary non-Jew can marry, divorce, go where they please, acquire property, and so forth, which the eved canaani cannot.
            None of which changes the fact that we discourage converts, or makes Jew-hating President Carter’s remarks any less despicable.

  • cba

    Or you can chose to convert.

    • http://www.kars4kids.org/blog Varda Meyers Epstein

      And get turned away. Because that is the Jewish tradition regarding prospective converts.

      • dcomplex

        Yeah but then you gotta keep annoying the rabbi until he agreea

        • http://www.kars4kids.org/blog Varda Meyers Epstein

          And the reason for that is that Judaism discourages converts.

          • walt kovacs

            didnt always. but now, most of us have higher standards

            unless one is reform, conservative, or rabbi weiss

          • dcomplex

            I thought that is the tradition _enforcing_ the reason, which is actually that we do not want people joining up and then not fulfilling the mitzvot, which means assuming responsibilities and then not carrying them out, which in turn could lead to forfeiture of one’s share in Olam Haba… no?

            • http://www.kars4kids.org/blog Varda Meyers Epstein

              No. We don’t get to posit reasons for rules and laws. We don’t encourage conversion. We discourage those attempting to convert. Why is not something I really care about. It just is.

              • dcomplex

                I’m not “positing” anything. I am pretty sure that is the rationale that Rabbis give. I mean, there is no explicit prohibition on conversion, and I don’t think it’s “just” a minhag, so that means that it was argued out somewhere. The reasoning I gave is iirc from something a rabbi told me or gave in a sermon.

                • http://www.kars4kids.org/blog Varda Meyers Epstein

                  We want to test their resolve and make sure there is some actual resolve. Sure. We want to make sure they are sincere about wanting to take on the mitzvot. But in general, we don’t worry about reasons and so forth. Like keeping kosher. We don’t worry about why we don’t eat pork, we just don’t do it.

                  • dcomplex

                    No no. We keep kosher because it is in the torah, and precise rules are argued out in the Rabbinic literature. IIRC, there is/was a small community with a minhag that it is okay to eat poultry and dairy together, but there is no orthodox Rabbi who would declare pork or horse to be kasher.

                    It’s not just completely ad-hoc. The Talmud is full of this kind of stuff.

                    • http://www.kars4kids.org/blog Varda Meyers Epstein

                      Still, kashrut, for instance, is a chok: a law with no reason given. The chukim are given to us to test whether we would blindly obey the laws when we don’t know the reasons for them. So to me, the reasons are in general a nice thing to know but not strictly necessary.

                    • dcomplex

                      Yes but that is my point. We do not have rules that are ad-hoc. Either they are justified by the Torah or by reasoning. The traditions on conversion are based on reasoning. Ahad even gave the citation in a post above.

                    • http://www.kars4kids.org/blog Varda Meyers Epstein

                      But only insofar as the reason may be a test of faith, as is the case with a chok. I don’t need to know the reason or question the reason in order to follow the rules. So to me, questioning the reason we turn away converts in this context is besides the point. The point is that we turn them away. We don’t do what Islam and Christianity do. That makes it a ridiculous claim on Carter’s part. He’s trying to tar us with the brush that tars Christianity and Islam and it’s so false it’s laughable. And evil.

                    • dcomplex

                      Sure, but this is a dangerous way of thinking. It would mean you would follow your Rabbi’s word without question. Binding Rabbinic law derives from consensus among a tradition of Rabbis of great scholarship, and in order for such a consensus to be achieved, there must be reasoning justifying the finding. Moreover, I often make use of this reasoning when speaking with nonjews. For instance, I find the reasoning behind the discouraging of conversion useful for showing how Jews can be chosen but not “supremacist” or chauvinistic. I explain that we are chosen for a _responsibility_ rather than some kind of superiority. There are not really any benefits to being Jewish except the fulfillment of duty-well-done.

                    • http://www.kars4kids.org/blog Varda Meyers Epstein

                      I disagree. In fact vehemently. I think Jews are chosen because they are special. I see no reason to justify that idea with non-Jews. I think there is a tremendous benefit to being a Jew.

              • dabney

                That’s not the Jewish way. We always ask ‘why’ and seek reasons, even if sometimes we can’t know the definitive answer.

                • http://www.kars4kids.org/blog Varda Meyers Epstein

                  Wrong. The Jewish way is Naaseh V’Nishma: we will do and then we will listen (to the reasons).

                  • dabney

                    Not wrong. While Jews are obligated to follow the law even if the reasons are not clear, it is the Jewish way to make sense of the ‘why’ and to find the reasons. The whole culture is built on interpreting the Torah and the Law.

          • ahad_ha_amoratsim

            Varda, that is the reason that Judaism discourages converts. You are correct that we don’t look for reasons behind Torah mitzvos, but I am pretty sure that discouraging converts (as opposed to circumcising male converts, and immersion and acceptance of mitzvos for all converts) was instituted by the Sages, and they told us their reason.
            I don’t have the reference handy (probably in the 1st or 2nd perek of Kiddushin), but as I racall, it is part of a discussion about whether we can free an eved canaani (gentile slave) against his will. Freeing him, of course, makes him a full fledged Jew. The Sages note the general rule allowing us to confer a benefit on someone without his consent, but not to impose a disadvantage without his consent. The Sages then discuss whether becoming is an advantage or (because of the responsibility to perform additional mitzvos) a disadvantage. If I recall, the Sages conclude that freeing the eved canaani gives him more benefit than disadvantages, but even so, the case is different for a free non-Jew: the eved canaani is already subject to all the mitzvos except affirmative time-triggered obligations, whereas the ordinary non-Jew is subject only to the 7 Noahide laws. And the ordinary non-Jew can marry, divorce, go where they please, acquire property, and so forth, which the eved canaani cannot.
            None of which changes the fact that we discourage converts, or makes Jew-hating President Carter’s remarks any less despicable.

  • Hard Little Machine

    Jimmy announced yesterday for Politico that the key problem regarding women in America is that Christianity hates them. I really have to wonder if he’s not just a stealth Muslim propagandist at this point.

    • Norman_In_New_York

      Follow the money.

  • Hard Little Machine

    Jimmy announced yesterday for Politico that the key problem regarding women in America is that Christianity hates them. I really have to wonder if he’s not just a stealth Muslim propagandist at this point.

    • Norman_In_New_York

      Follow the money.

  • walt kovacs

    jimmy said that “settlement” products should be labeled as such….so who cares if he supports a full boycott

    the man is, has been and will be a jew hating bastard

    a classic evangelical

    one of the last, who is actually honest about his beliefs that we are all going to hell for not accepting jesus

    and no jimmy, the nsa arent monitoring your emails….unless they just need a laff

  • walt kovacs

    jimmy said that “settlement” products should be labeled as such….so who cares if he supports a full boycott

    the man is, has been and will be a jew hating bastard

    a classic evangelical

    one of the last, who is actually honest about his beliefs that we are all going to hell for not accepting jesus

    and no jimmy, the nsa arent monitoring your emails….unless they just need a laff

  • SoloV

    I for one, am happy the crusades occurred. Not happy that Jews suffered within them but if the crusades didn’t happen I believe we would all be Islamic robots.

    • Jim from Iowa

      Not to mention “Monty Python and the Holy Grail.” Impossible without the crusades.

  • SoloV

    I for one, am happy the crusades occurred. Not happy that Jews suffered within them but if the crusades didn’t happen I believe we would all be Islamic robots.

    • Jim from Iowa

      Not to mention “Monty Python and the Holy Grail.” Impossible without the crusades.

  • Pingback: Knallchargen | abseits vom mainstream - heplev()

Israellycool is testing Sovevos. Click for more info.