Who Is a Jew? Court Ruling in Britain Raises Question
Earl Evleth
angels at two entries of the Pearly gates in heaven, on entry
has at the top a sign "for those with the right religion",
the other gates says "for those with the wrong religion";
Everybody if going through the gate "for those with the right religion"`
One angel says to the other "they don't understand the joke"
****
"Because M�s mother converted in a progressive, not an Orthodox, synagogue,
the school said, she was not a Jew � nor was her son. It turned down his
application."
Who Is a Jew? Court Ruling in Britain Raises Question
By SARAH LYALL
LONDON � The questions before the judges in Courtroom No. 1 of Britain�s
Supreme Court were as ancient and as complex as Judaism itself.
Who is a Jew? And who gets to decide?
On the surface, the court was considering a straightforward challenge to the
admissions policy of a Jewish high school in London. But the case, in which
arguments concluded Oct. 30, has potential repercussions for thousands of
other parochial schools across Britain. And in addressing issues at the
heart of Jewish identity, it has exposed bitter divisions in Britain�s
community of 300,000 or so Jews, pitting members of various Jewish
denominations against one another.
�This is potentially the biggest case in the British Jewish community�s
modern history,� said Stephen Pollard, editor of the Jewish Chronicle
newspaper here. �It speaks directly to the right of the state to intervene
in how a religion operates.�
The case began when a 12-year-old boy, an observant Jew whose father is
Jewish and whose mother is a Jewish convert, applied to the school, JFS.
Founded in 1732 as the Jews� Free School, it is a centerpiece of North
London�s Jewish community. It has around 1,900 students, but it gets far
more applicants than it accepts.
Britain has nearly 7,000 publicly financed religious schools, representing
Judaism as well as the Church of England, Catholicism and Islam, among
others. Under a 2006 law, the schools can in busy years give preference to
applicants within their own faiths, using criteria laid down by a designated
religious authority.
By many standards, the JFS applicant, identified in court papers as �M,� is
Jewish. But not in the eyes of the school, which defines Judaism under the
Orthodox definition set out by Jonathan Sacks, chief rabbi of the United
Hebrew Congregations of the Commonwealth. Because M�s mother converted in a
progressive, not an Orthodox, synagogue, the school said, she was not a Jew
� nor was her son. It turned down his application.
That would have been the end of it. But M�s family sued, saying that the
school had discriminated against him. They lost, but the ruling was
overturned by the Court of Appeal this summer.
In an explosive decision, the court concluded that basing school admissions
on a classic test of Judaism � whether one�s mother is Jewish � was by
definition discriminatory. Whether the rationale was �benign or malignant,
theological or supremacist,� the court wrote, �makes it no less and no more
unlawful.�
The case rested on whether the school�s test of Jewishness was based on
religion, which would be legal, or on race or ethnicity, which would not.
The court ruled that it was an ethnic test because it concerned the status
of M�s mother rather than whether M considered himself Jewish and practiced
Judaism.
�The requirement that if a pupil is to qualify for admission his mother must
be Jewish, whether by descent or conversion, is a test of ethnicity which
contravenes the Race Relations Act,� the court said. It added that while it
was fair that Jewish schools should give preference to Jewish children, the
admissions criteria must depend not on family ties, but �on faith, however
defined.�
The same reasoning would apply to a Christian school that �refused to admit
a child on the ground that, albeit practicing Christians, the child�s family
were of Jewish origin,� the court said.
The school appealed to the Supreme Court, which is likely to rule sometime
before the end of the year.
The case�s importance was driven home by the sheer number of lawyers in the
courtroom last week, representing not just M�s family and the school, but
also the British government, the Equalities and Human Rights Commission, the
United Synagogue, the British Humanist Association and the Board of Deputies
of British Jews.
Meanwhile, the Court of Appeal ruling threw the school into a panicked
scramble to put together a new admissions policy. It introduced a �religious
practice test,� in which prospective students amass points for things like
going to synagogue and doing charitable work.
That has led to all sorts of awkward practical issues, said Jon Benjamin,
chief executive of the Board of Deputies of British Jews, because Orthodox
Judaism forbids writing or using a computer on the Sabbath. That means that
children who go to synagogue can�t �sign in,� but have to use methods like
dropping prewritten postcards into boxes.
It is unclear what effect the ruling, if it is upheld, will have on other
religious schools. Some Catholic schools, accustomed to using baptism as a
baseline admissions criterion, are worried that they will have to adopt
similar practice tests.
The case has stirred up long-simmering resentments among the leaders of
different Jewish denominations, who, for starters, disagree vehemently on
the definition of Jewishness. They also disagree on the issue of whether an
Orthodox leader is entitled to speak for the entire community.
�Whatever happens in this case, there must be some resolution sorted out
between different denominations,� Mr. Benjamin said in an interview. �That
the community has failed to grasp this has had the very unfortunate result
of having a judgment foisted on it by a civil court.�
Orthodox Jews, of course, sympathize with the school, saying that
observance is no test of Jewishness, and that all that matters is whether
one�s mother is Jewish. So little does observance matter, in fact, that
�having a ham sandwich on the afternoon of Yom Kippur doesn�t make you less
Jewish,� Rabbi Yitzchak Schochet, chairman of the Rabbinical Council of the
United Synagogue, said recently.
Lauren Lesin-Davis, chairman of the board of governors at King David, a
Jewish school in Liverpool, told the BBC that the ruling violated more than
5,000 years of Jewish tradition.
�You cannot come in and start telling people how their whole lives should
change, that the whole essence of their life and their religion is
completely wrong,� she said.
But others are in complete sympathy with M.
�How dare they question our beliefs and our Jewishness?� David Lightman, an
observant Jewish father whose daughter was also denied a place at the school
because it did not recognize her mother�s conversion, told reporters
recently. �I find it offensive and very upsetting.�
Rabbi Danny Rich, chief executive of Liberal Judaism here, said the lower
court�s ruling, if upheld, would help make Judaism more inclusive.
�JFS is a state-funded school where my grandfather taught, and it�s
selecting applicants on the basis of religious politics,� he said in an
interview. �The Orthodox definition of Jewish excludes 40 percent of the
Jewish community in this country.�
Jigsaw1695
How typical of the Europeans to try and define what a persons religion
should be. It is a religious matter for the religion in question to
decide, not some wig-wearing old boy from the proper school.
Who knows what the decision would be with all the bigotry and hatred
of jews that is prevelent throughout Europe.
Jigsaw
yitzhak in eretz isreal (sic)
> Who knows what the decision would be with all the bigotry and hatred
> of jews that is prevelent throughout Europe.
Y.
--
Yitzhak Isaac Goldstein
AADP's 'left-wing Israeli intellectual'
'The same folks that are bombing innocent people in Iraq were the ones
who attacked us in America on September the 11th'
(George W. Bush, 12 July 2007)
<http://elderofziyon.blogspot.com/>
Earl Evleth
0cec3f67-f015-4606...@v36g2000yqv.googlegroups.com,
"Jigsaw1695" <Jigsa...@aol.com> wrote:
> How typical of the Europeans to try and define what a persons religion
> should be. It is a religious matter for the religion in question to
> decide, not some wig-wearing old boy from the proper school.
In a formal sense most of us don't consider the British Europeans.
>
> Who knows what the decision would be with all the bigotry and hatred
> of jews that is prevelent throughout Europe.
I don't know about the UK, but private schools in France
receive financial support from the state, and the state
does set some rules that must be followed in order to get
public funds.
Those rules have to do with what the schools have to teach.
For instance they have to teach biology and within that
course content certainly the theory of evolution is
presented in a favorable light. Moslem schools have trouble
meeting the course standards since some don't what to teach
some things. Next, religious instruction is after hours.
Religious dress is not restricted in private schools
but in public schools, the wearing of the cross, the
star of David etc are controlled.
I too would be reluctant to try and control many religious
practices but the subject is nuanced.
Jigsaw1695
How soon will it be before France requires Jews to wear the star of
David on their breast. Oh never mond, that could never happen in
Europe, could it.
Jigsaw
“all that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men (and women)
to do or say nothing."
Earl Evleth
982c3314-86bb-47d8...@t2g2000yqn.googlegroups.com,
"Jigsaw1695" <Jigsa...@aol.com> wrote:
> How soon will it be before France requires Jews to wear the star of
> David on their breast. Oh never mond, that could never happen in
> Europe, could it.
Not Western Europe. I don't find Eastern Europeans trustworthy
I have experience with anti-Semitic colleagues from Eastern
Europe.
yitzhak in eretz isreal (sic)
> How soon will it be before France requires Jews to wear the star of David
> on their breast. Oh never mond, that could never happen in Europe, could
> it.
Happy99
"Jigsaw1695" <Jigsa...@aol.com> a écrit dans le message de
news:0cec3f67-f015-4606...@v36g2000yqv.googlegroups.com...
Planet Visitor II
wrote:
Apparently mocking irony is not within your intellectual grasp. See
--
http://media-2.web.britannica.com/eb-media/49/67849-004-0A532A89.jpg
Planet Visitor II
yitzhak in eretz isreal (sic)
Not that I wish to interfere with your planned (and much anticipated)
suicide, Super-Retard, but I need to point out that Earl is wrong yet
again. Religious instruction in Jewish schools is not 'after hours'.
Kodesh as it's called in Jewish schools, was from 08:00 until 08:55 in the
school where I taught. That was for 'Seconde'; 'Première' and 'Terminale'
had those classes from 10:00 until 10:55 and from 13:00 until 13:55. In
addition, there were three breaks for the mandated three daily prayers of
sha'harit, mine'ha and arvite. Also, the school canteen was 'parvé', i.e.
no dairy products were served, or even permitted to be introduced. There
is a synagogue on the first basement level, along the corridor from the
canteen.
So Jewish life, religion and doctrine is not 'after hours' in French Jewish
schools.
I really would like it if Earl limited his posturing to subjects on which
he has at least a smidgen of knowledge.
Earl Evleth
"yitzhak in eretz isreal (sic)" <yit...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> So Jewish life, religion and doctrine is not 'after hours' in French Jewish
> schools.
After hours in the sense that it is added on to the state approved
curriculum.
Those schools don't just teach the Torrah. That is extra instruction
if done. Brain washing must go one, agreeed.