Ted Cruz says, "I'm a Christian first, American Second ..." Imagine if a Jew or Muslim said that

[Beach Runner]

I think this political statement clearly is withing the charter of this group.
I thought I posted it earlier.

Years ago Kissinger and Golder Meir met, and Golda said Henry, you're Jewish, you should be good to Israel. Kissinger said "Madam, I am an American first, Secretary of State second, and a Jew third." Golda said, "In Hebrew we read from right to left."

Here's an example of Christian Privilege in this country and why I consider
Cruz the most dangerous of any candidates. The rest is all quoted,

"I'm a Christian first, American second, conservative third and Republican fourth...I'll tell ya, there are a whole lot of people in this country that feel exactly the same way."

From the Daily Kos:

The politics of this aside, I want to highlight here something we might call Christian Privilege. Could you imagine, for example, a Jewish candidate for president saying that he or she was a Jew first and an American second? Now imagine the sheer outrage if a Muslim American of any prominence whatsoever declared that he or she was Muslim first and American second. People's heads would explode.
On a related note, imagine a presidential candidate saying he or she was black, white, or Latino (or any other ethnic group) first, and American second. President Obama--and, having done extensive research on his conception of ethnic and national identity, I believe he sincerely feels this way--made crystal clear before 2008 that his identification as an American took precedence over his blackness. Without doubt, he could not have been elected president without having done so.
I want, no, I demand, a president whose first loyalty is to the Constitution, and to the people--all the people--he or she was elected to serve. Only a Christian has the privilege--and only ones like Ted Cruz, who present themselves as holier than thou, would have the gall--to claim otherwise.

[Shelly]

I have made that distinction many times here on this newgroup when I
said I am not an American Jew. I am a Jewish American.

--
Shelly

[topazgalaxy]

On Sunday, January 24, 2016 at 7:21:55 AM UTC-5, Beach Runner wrote:
> I think this political statement clearly is withing the charter of this group.
> I thought I posted it earlier.
>
> Years ago Kissinger and Golder Meir met, and Golda said Henry, you're Jewish, you should be good to Israel. Kissinger said "Madam, I am an American first, Secretary of State second, and a Jew third." Golda said, "In Hebrew we read from right to left."
>
> Here's an example of Christian Privilege in this country and why I consider
> Cruz the most dangerous of any candidates. The rest is all quoted,
>
> "I'm a Christian first, American second, conservative third and Republican fourth...I'll tell ya, there are a whole lot of people in this country that feel exactly the same way."
>
> From the Daily Kos:
>
> The politics of this aside, I want to highlight here something we might call Christian Privilege. Could you imagine, for example, a Jewish candidate for president saying that he or she was a Jew first and an American second? Now imagine the sheer outrage if a Muslim American of any prominence whatsoever declared that he or she was Muslim first and American second. People's heads would explode.

The problem is sharia law. It is not compatible with our way of life or our constitution.
I would have no trouble if a candidate said they are Jewish first and an American second because Judeo-Christian values are compatible with our way of life.
Islamic values-- strict Islamic values-- as in sharia are not compatible with our way of life.
That is only one reason why Hillary's right arm may be viewed as a real problem by some...?Huma Abedin

http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2016/01/huma-abedin-hillary-clinton-adviser

Poor Huma, married to a guy named Weiner who showed his Weiner on the internet even while a Congressman.

Look at her parents connections-- from the article--

"Abedin was born in Kalamazoo, Michigan. Her mother, Saleha Mahmood Abedin, is Pakistani; her late father, Syed Zainul Abedin, was Indian. Both were intellectuals. When Abedin was two years old, the family moved to Jidda, Saudi Arabia, where, with the backing of Abdullah Omar Nasseef, then the president of King Abdulaziz University, her father founded the Institute of Muslim Minority Affairs, a think tank, and became the first editor of its Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs, which stated its mission as "shedding light" on minority Muslim communities around the world in the hope of "securing the legitimate rights of these communities."

After Syed died, in 1993, his wife succeeded him as director of the institute and editor of the Journal, positions she still holds. She has also been active in the International Islamic Council for Da'wa and Relief, which is now headed by Nasseef and was banned in Israel on account of its ties to the Union of Good, a pro-Hamas fund-raising network, run by Yusuf al-Qaradawi.END


Check out who Yusuf Al-Qaradawi is, a fiery Muslim preacher who draws crowds by the thousands and has publically praised Hitler.
Al-Qaradawi has made a speech which I saw on the internet where he said that even when he is old and sick and in a wheelchair he wants to grab a machine gun, and shoot the Jews and the crowd loved it.

Gee how come Hillary doesn't publicize this stuff? Wonder why.

> On a related note, imagine a presidential candidate saying he or she was black, white, or Latino (or any other ethnic group) first, and American second. President Obama--and, having done extensive research on his conception of ethnic and national identity, I believe he sincerely feels this way--made crystal clear before 2008 that his identification as an American took precedence over his blackness. Without doubt, he could not have been elected president without having done so.
> I want, no, I demand, a president whose first loyalty is to the Constitution, and to the people--all the people--he or she was elected to serve. Only a Christian has the privilege--and only ones like Ted Cruz, who present themselves as holier than thou, would have the gall--to claim otherwise.

Don;t ya just love Golda's statement? One of the best.

[DoD]

"Shelly" <shel...@thevillages.net> wrote in message
news:n82ieg$81v$1...@dont-email.me...

I would think that Cruz has ever right to say that, and voters have every
right to vote or not vote for him, and this
is just another attempt by the origianal poster to rail against a chapstick
politician against the charter.... I hope this is not
what the next year is going to be like.

[malcolm...@btinternet.com]

On Sunday, January 24, 2016 at 12:21:55 PM UTC, Beach Runner wrote:
> I think this political statement clearly is withing the charter of this group.
> I thought I posted it earlier.
>
> Years ago Kissinger and Golder Meir met, and Golda said Henry, you're Jewish, you should be good to Israel. Kissinger said "Madam, I am an American first, Secretary of State second, and a Jew third." Golda said, "In Hebrew we read from right to left."
>
> Here's an example of Christian Privilege in this country and why I consider
> Cruz the most dangerous of any candidates. The rest is all quoted,
>
> "I'm a Christian first, American second, conservative third and Republican fourth...I'll tell ya, there are a whole lot of people in this country that feel exactly the same way."
>

Very cute observation.

Virtually every American Christian, if the question was put to them "Is it more
important to be a good Christian or a good American?" would say, "it's more
important to be a good Christian". Then they'll often say something about
Nazi Germany. It's always obvious with hindsight that governments can behave
badly and that the moral man has a duty to oppose. But it's a ritualistic claim,
made so easily because a Nazi-type situation seems far away.

[Yisroel Markov]

It's not easy to me. I'm definitely a Jew first, even though I love
this country and deliberately chose to come live here. Even so, IMHO a
Jew's identity can't be too tightly bound with any non-Jewish country,
no matter how benevolent. Many of my ex-countrymen observe what's
happening in the USA with alarm, as it reminds them of the birth
country they have quit. I don't think the USA is close to sliding into
socialism, but it's not impossible. Likewise, the system's safeguards
against persecution of minorities are strong, but not absolute,
either. Things can change, sometimes abruptly, and in unanticipated
direction.

I'd rather not have to move again, but I can't ignore the possibility.
--
Yisroel "Godwrestler Warriorson" Markov - Boston, MA Member
www.reason.com -- for a sober analysis of the world DNRC
--------------------------------------------------------------------
"Judge, and be prepared to be judged" -- Ayn Rand

[Beach Runner]

Remember that there was no country in the world where Jews were more accepted than in Germany prior to Hitler.

Jews in Germany assimilated, called themselves Germans. In fact, in
World War 1 Jews had the highest rate of enlistments in the military
than any other minority.

German Jews considered themselves far superior to their Polish and other
more traditional Jewish populations. This even applied to German Jews in the US, so I understand during the immigration days.

One of Hitler's early problems was that so many Jews excelled in the German Military and were well respected officers. He quietly went after them so as not to create attention when he went after German heroes.

Don't think it couldn't happen here. All it would take is an economic
or social disaster, and people will be blaming the Jews.

[mm]

On Mon, 25 Jan 2016 19:38:12 +0000 (UTC), Beach Runner
<lowh...@gmail.com> wrote:

>
>Don't think it couldn't happen here. All it would take is an economic
>or social disaster, and people will be blaming the Jews.

I don't know how you can say "will be". "Might be" is plenty strong
enough.

We already had an economic disaster, and few if any blamed Jews.
(Maybe that's your out. You didn't say how many people.) And that
was with a Jewish Federal Reserve Chairman, whose misunderstanding of
how things worked was iiuc definitely part of the problem. (Of
course the next two chairmen have been Jews too, so maybe the current
Pres goes by what economic views they have and not by whether they are
Jews or not.)

[Shelly]

Yes, both ahve that right but it is NOT against the charter. Any attempt
to "Chistianize" this country DIRECTLY affects Jews. It is very much ON
charter.

--
Shelly

[DoD]

"Shelly" <shel...@thevillages.net> wrote in message

news:n867gd$j7j$2...@dont-email.me...

Him saying that is Christianizing this country? If he would have said, *We*
are Christians first
and Americans, second, there might be some merit in that......Otherwise this
is just another excuse
to discuss the OPs politics.....

[malcolm...@btinternet.com]

Very few Jews feel able to say, in public, "I am a Jew first, an
American second". It's topical and interesting to point that out,
and there's certainly some truth in it.

One possible conclusion is that Cruz is wrong to say that he is a
Christian first. However that isn't the one most people would draw.

[Shelly]

You are citing a distinction without a difference. My statement stands.

--
Shelly

[SolomonW]

I agree with you, if you agree that Shelly can say she is a Jewish
American, why cannot Cruz say he is a Christian American

[Shelly]

I'll chalk this one up to confusion and simply not knowing. I am very
much MALE, have been married to my wife for 52 years, am heterosexual,
and Shelly is what my friends call me. On my birth certificate it say
Sheldon.

No apology necessary.

--
Shelly

[DoD]

"Shelly" <shel...@thevillages.net> wrote in message

news:n87ptg$ek3$2...@dont-email.me...

There is a whopping big difference.... My statement stands...

[DoD]

"SolomonW" <Solo...@citi.com> wrote in message
news:nm7pyqs08e9i.cpdu4kd52l9g$.dlg@40tude.net...

*****HE****** is a Jewish American..... And there is zero reason Cruz can't
say what he did.

[DoD]

<malcolm...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:0ae7b4a7-d9c6-4252...@googlegroups.com...

> On Monday, January 25, 2016 at 10:37:05 PM UTC, DoD wrote:
>> "Shelly" <shel...@thevillages.net> wrote in message
>> news:n867gd$j7j$2...@dont-email.me...
>> > On 1/24/2016 4:34 PM, DoD wrote:
>>
>> > Yes, both ahve that right but it is NOT against the charter. Any
>> > attempt
>> > to "Chistianize" this country DIRECTLY affects Jews. It is very much ON
>> > charter.
>>
>> Him saying that is Christianizing this country? If he would have said,
>> *We* are Christians first and Americans, second, there might be some
>> merit in that......Otherwise this
>> is just another excuse
>> to discuss the OPs politics.....
>>
> Very few Jews feel able to say, in public, "I am a Jew first, an
> American second". It's topical and interesting to point that out,
> and there's certainly some truth in it.

How in the world do you know that? Did you take a poll of Jewish Americans?

> One possible conclusion is that Cruz is wrong to say that he is a
> Christian first. However that isn't the one most people would draw.

Cruz has a right to call himself a turnip if he wishes.... It is up to other
people
to decide if he is the right candidate for president.

[cindys]

On Tuesday, January 26, 2016 at 10:54:04 AM UTC-5, DoD wrote:
> <malcolm...@btinternet.com> wrote in message

snip

> > Very few Jews feel able to say, in public, "I am a Jew first, an
> > American second". It's topical and interesting to point that out,
> > and there's certainly some truth in it.
>
> How in the world do you know that? Did you take a poll of Jewish Americans?

------------
I self-describe as an American Jew.
Best regards,
---Cindy S.

[mm]

Me, too. I'd give 40 to 1** odds it will never in my lifetime get so
bad here that I as a Jew would have to leave, but in theory it could.
If Ted Cruz had his way, it could. And rather than give up living
like a Jew, I would leave the USA. The opposite situation could not
exist. Being a Jew does not interfere with Americanism, even if
trouble makers could change the way America runs.

**Much higher if I weren't afraid I'd have to pay off.

Napoleon wouldn't like this attitude. His words, roughly, "To the
Jews as Jewish Frenchmen, everything. As French Jews, nothing."

[DoD]

"cindys" <cst...@rochester.rr.com> wrote in message
news:4d5f020d-4ba6-4bfe...@googlegroups.com...

You know.... I never really thought about this question before in my
life.... If someone asked me
I think I would be baffled by it.... I guess I would say, I am me.... I
don't think I would really care
what particular order I would put my descriptors in... (ethnicity,
religion, birth country)
They are all important to me and the composition
of me.... and I don't think any one of them detracts from the others, so it
is not really important
to me of how I would describe myself... I guess I would do it differently
each time depending on
what came to mind first.

But I still find it interesting that Malcolm *knows* that American Jews are
*afraid* to say they are
Jews first...

[Shelly]

On 1/26/2016 10:56 AM, DoD wrote:
>
>
> "Shelly" <shel...@thevillages.net> wrote in message
> news:n87ptg$ek3$2...@dont-email.me...
>> On 1/25/2016 5:43 PM, DoD wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> "Shelly" <shel...@thevillages.net> wrote in message
>>> news:n867gd$j7j$2...@dont-email.me...
>>>> On 1/24/2016 4:34 PM, DoD wrote:
>>>
>>>> Yes, both ahve that right but it is NOT against the charter. Any
>>>> attempt to "Chistianize" this country DIRECTLY affects Jews. It is
>>>> very much ON charter.
>>>
>>> Him saying that is Christianizing this country? If he would have said,
>>> *We* are Christians first
>>> and Americans, second, there might be some merit in that......Otherwise
>>> this is just another excuse
>>> to discuss the OPs politics.....
>>
>> You are citing a distinction without a difference. My statement stands.
>
> There is a whopping big difference.... My statement stands...

If you say so.

--
Shelly

[Shelly]

Absolutely correct, he does. Just as he has the right to say he is a
Marshmallow Conservative :-). And, if I were originally for him just
hearing him say that would turn me against him because I want my
political representatives to be Americans first and foremost. BTW, that
also applies to Jews.

--
Shelly

[Shelly]

Yes, I don't know where he gets that idea. As for me, I don't really
care all that much how ordinary people describe themselves. However, for
elected representatives it makes a big difference to me. After all, they
will have power to affect my life.

--
Shelly

[malcolm...@btinternet.com]

On Tuesday, January 26, 2016 at 4:49:24 PM UTC, DoD wrote:
>
> But I still find it interesting that Malcolm *knows* that American Jews are
> *afraid* to say they are Jews first...
>

I didn't say that the reason was that they were afraid. And the observation was
not made by me, I simply agreed with it - and whilst I have only visited the
US twice and not to any Jewish areas (Texas and Alaska are the states I have
visited), I do know quite a lot of Jews with American connections, and it struck
me as correct.

[DoD]

<malcolm...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:7b37049a-08c0-4adc...@googlegroups.com...

You said "not feel able to" .... What does that mean if it doesn't mean
afraid to?

[DoD]

"Shelly" <shel...@thevillages.net> wrote in message

news:n888p2$m5a$1...@dont-email.me...

But that is a good bet for him.... It might cost him a few Jewish Shels, but
gain
him 10 Evan Jellicals... Actually it might not too much.... Trump ( whom I
would bet is
about as religious as a water buffalo) but he is getting all kinds of
religious endorsements..
I think Falwell Jr just came out today for him, and he all but got endorsed
by Jeffres ( who
has one of those HUGE Mega Churches) down in Texas... I actually heard
Jeffres talking
about it, and he was asked why doesn't *more religious* people take Cruz's
side and Jeffres
to his credit said we are not looking for someone to hold prayer groups in
the White
House.... we are looking for someone to fix the country... I guess the
religious community
is banking on Trump to be an economic genius. One thing is for sure, this
food fight between
the Republicans have been very entertaining.....

[mm]

On Tue, 26 Jan 2016 17:51:44 +0000 (UTC),
malcolm...@btinternet.com wrote:

>On Tuesday, January 26, 2016 at 4:49:24 PM UTC, DoD wrote:
>>
>> But I still find it interesting that Malcolm *knows* that American Jews are
>> *afraid* to say they are Jews first...
>>
>I didn't say that the reason was that they were afraid. And the observation was
>not made by me, I simply agreed with it -

You didn't "simply" agree with it. You volunteered: "Very few Jews

feel able to say, in public, "I am a Jew first, an American second".
It's topical and interesting to point that out, and there's certainly
some truth in it."

[mm]

On Tue, 26 Jan 2016 16:55:50 +0000 (UTC), "DoD"
<danski...@gmail.com> wrote:

>...

>But I still find it interesting that Malcolm *knows* that American Jews are
>*afraid* to say they are
>Jews first...

LOL. Well put.

Now that the number of people posting, and reading I"m sure, has
decreased, I haven't felt it necessary to read Malcolm's posts, to
correct them, for fear others will take them seriously.

David here confirms IMO that few if any will take him seriously.

And as I said in the other post, I"m an American Jew. I would hate to
have to leave America, and I don't foresee it being necessary, but I'm
a Jew first and always. Even if were to have made aliyah and become
an Israeli, I would still keep my American citizenship and speak with
pride that I'm an American too. An American 2.

[mm]

On Mon, 25 Jan 2016 00:17:48 +0000 (UTC),

malcolm...@btinternet.com wrote:

>On Sunday, January 24, 2016 at 12:21:55 PM UTC, Beach Runner wrote:
>> I think this political statement clearly is withing the charter of this group.
>> I thought I posted it earlier.
>>
>> Years ago Kissinger and Golder Meir met, and Golda said Henry, you're Jewish, you should be good to Israel. Kissinger said "Madam, I am an American first, Secretary of State second, and a Jew third." Golda said, "In Hebrew we read from right to left."
>>
>> Here's an example of Christian Privilege in this country and why I consider
>> Cruz the most dangerous of any candidates. The rest is all quoted,
>>
>> "I'm a Christian first, American second, conservative third and Republican fourth...I'll tell ya, there are a whole lot of people in this country that feel exactly the same way."
>>
>Very cute observation.
>
>Virtually every American Christian, if the question was put to them "Is it more
>important to be a good Christian or a good American?" would say, "it's more
>important to be a good Christian".

Really? How many AmerXians have you asked that question to?

>Then they'll often say something about
>Nazi Germany.

And how many of the 4 people you asked added this? You're just
blowing smoke.

[mm]

On Tue, 26 Jan 2016 14:20:16 +0000 (UTC), SolomonW <Solo...@citi.com>
wrote:

Without taking a position on this, let me point out the difference.

When a Xian says he's a Xian first it means to him that he's a moral
person and if he were ordered, during wartime say, to kill civilians
(he thinks) he wouldn't do it. Of course US law is that one must not
obey an illegal order, even in the army, so if it's as simply put as I
have it, he's in good shape.

When a Jew says he's a Jew first, it means that too, but it also means
that the nation his first loyalty is towards is Am Yisroel. Not the
secular state of Israel, and not because it's secular. Even if
Israel were a halachic state, until he actually lived there or was in
the process of moving there, the Jew would mean Am Yisroel.

When a Xian says what I have above, Jews know what he means.

But when a Jew says what I have above, non-Jews think he means he's
not loyal to the US at all. Heck, plenty of them think that anyhow,
and this just gives them "evidence" they can use to convince the
others.

[topazgalaxy]

On Tuesday, January 26, 2016 at 10:54:04 AM UTC-5, DoD wrote:

Heck, Trump used the word "schlonged", a nice Yiddish term....
I agree with you BTW
And we are early in the elections..

[DoD]

"topazgalaxy" <topaz...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:caeb77ac-00dd-43f2...@googlegroups.com...

I will let you in on a little secret..... Although I am for Kasich in this
election...I would actually
vote for Trump (because I am so SICK TO DEATH of both parties I WANT TO
PUKE) but I won't
because of 2 or three little things that are more precious than the
presidency and that is the
possible Supreme court nominees..

You see I don't think either party deserves to win... and Trump is a wild
card who just happens
to be running under a republican ticket, but really I don't think anyone
knows how Trump would
behave (probably not even himself at this point) if he wins....

If it weren't for the supreme court nominations, I would actually give Trump
a chance.... but I just
can't do it, if he turns out to be a dyed in the wool peanut butter....
(used for Shel's benefit). Otherwise
give someone else a chance... certainly we survived the last president...
and I don't think a Trump presidency
could be much worse, but those supreme court nominations not to be taken
lightly.....

[Shelly]

On 1/26/2016 4:51 PM, DoD wrote:
>
> I will let you in on a little secret..... Although I am for Kasich in
> this election...I would actually
> vote for Trump (because I am so SICK TO DEATH of both parties I WANT TO
> PUKE) but I won't
> because of 2 or three little things that are more precious than the
> presidency and that is the
> possible Supreme court nominees..
>
> You see I don't think either party deserves to win... and Trump is a
> wild card who just happens
> to be running under a republican ticket, but really I don't think anyone
> knows how Trump would
> behave (probably not even himself at this point) if he wins....
>
> If it weren't for the supreme court nominations, I would actually give
> Trump a chance.... but I just
> can't do it, if he turns out to be a dyed in the wool peanut butter....
> (used for Shel's benefit). Otherwise
> give someone else a chance... certainly we survived the last
> president... and I don't think a Trump presidency
> could be much worse, but those supreme court nominations not to be taken
> lightly.....

Which, if Kasich is not the nominee, is another excellent reason to vote
Democrat. God forbid if Cruz is the president (no pun intended). I fear
who he would nominate for the Supreme Court.

--
Shelly

[SolomonW]

Mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

Oh Australian Xian rarely uses this usage, so I misinterpreted it.

Interestingly I have heard Hindus use it in this context.

[mm]

On Tue, 26 Jan 2016 22:57:01 +0000 (UTC), SolomonW <Solo...@citi.com>

You lost me. Use what in what context?. What is "this usage"?

[topazgalaxy]

Well, your little secret is a secret no more :) since it was posted on a public chat group.
You are correct, the Supreme Court picks are something to keep in mind.
Those justices are not getting any younger.

[SolomonW]

That a person is a moral person

[Shelly]

EXCELLENT POINT!!!!


--
Shelly

[Beach Runner]

I think there is a huge difference, as Kissenger pointed out to being
an American first, and a Jew second, IF one is to take a position with
the government.

If someone was an American Jew, and placed their responsibility to Jewish
interests above American interests, which in all honesty I would do,
they should not be elected for government. I would, in all honesty
support Israel with an emotional attachment.

If someone says they consider themselves a Christian first, then they
are placing Christian laws and values above American equality.
If they are an American that is a Christian, and can separate the two,
great.

The US Government is supposed to be free of religious influence.
Cruz will take his values above what would be American values,
he says that in slightly different words. He wants his style
of religous prayer in the school. That's just one example
of his beliefs extending over into American values.

The freedom to pray or not pray is a fundamental liberty in
America. To have pray in public school puts pressure on
all students to conform, or perhaps they will be forced to.

I remember being required to say the Pledge in school, just
as Japanese Interns in WW II being kept in internment camps
were, required to say with liberty and justice for all.

We hardly have liberty and justice for all. No do I consider
it right to have added "Under God" to the pledge, as we have
freedom from religion as well.

Thomas Jefferson, with his failings as a slave owner certainly
recognized that we needed separation of Church and State,
and created Religious Freedom Day on Jan 16ath.

But as originally stated, if a Jew or Muslim made the same
remark, they would have been condemned for not being loyal to
America first. Forget the fact our great discrimination
against atheists, which now comprise over 16% of the population
and is growing, especially among young people.

Admitting to being an atheist is a political kiss of death.
I'm sure many people in the Senate and Congress are secret atheists,
as I'm sure Jefferson was.

[Shelly]

On 1/27/2016 3:08 PM, Beach Runner wrote:

> I think there is a huge difference, as Kissenger pointed out to being
> an American first, and a Jew second, IF one is to take a position with
> the government.

Right.

> If someone was an American Jew, and placed their responsibility to Jewish
> interests above American interests, which in all honesty I would do,

I would not.

> they should not be elected for government. I would, in all honesty

Agreed.

> support Israel with an emotional attachment.

As would I.

<snip>

> We hardly have liberty and justice for all. No do I consider
> it right to have added "Under God" to the pledge, as we have
> freedom from religion as well.

To this day I remain silent went it gets to "under God" and resume
speaking when it is passed that.

<snip>

> Admitting to being an atheist is a political kiss of death.
> I'm sure many people in the Senate and Congress are secret atheists,
> as I'm sure Jefferson was.

He was a Deist.

--
Shelly

[Harry Weiss]

Shelly <shel...@thevillages.net> wrote:



> I have made that distinction many times here on this newgroup when I
> said I am not an American Jew. I am a Jewish American.

> --
> Shelly

I am the opposite, I am a Jew first an American second, If G-d forbid
someone like Crtuz gets in and tries to legislate xianity I will not
comply. Throuout the millenium our ancestors have given up their lives
rather than take on pratices of other religions,




--
Harry J. Weiss
hjw...@panix.com

[Shelly]

Neither will I comply. However, I am still an American first. If civil
disobedience is required, then so be it.

--
Shelly

[cindys]

On Wednesday, January 27, 2016 at 8:58:03 PM UTC-5, hjw...@panix.com wrote:
snip
>
> If G-d forbid
> someone like Cruz gets in and tries to legislate xianity I will not
> comply.

---------------
By what legal process can an American president legislate a religion? Unless Cruz managed to pull off a military coup, how could he enact a law that openly violated the Constitution and the Bill of Rights? And what form would this legislation take? A law that says every American citizen must accept Jesus or go to jail? Come on Harry!
Best regards,
---Cindy S.

[cindys]

On Tuesday, January 26, 2016 at 2:37:40 PM UTC-5, googy wrote:
snip

(Please note that I have snipped and rearranged the order of the paragraphs of your post because I only wanted to comment on certain parts. I have not paraphrased you, and I do not believe that I have changed the meaning of your words.)

>
> When a Xian says he's a Xian first it means to him that he's a moral
> person

Agreed.

snip

>

>

>When a Jew says he's a Jew first, it means that too, but it also means
>that the nation his first loyalty is towards is Am Yisroel. Not the
>secular state of Israel, and not because it's secular. Even if
>Israel were a halachic state, until he actually lived there or was in
>the process of moving there, the Jew would mean Am Yisroel.

>When a Xian says what I have above, Jews know what he means.


>But when a Jew says what I have above, non-Jews think he means he's
>not loyal to the US at all. Heck, plenty of them think that anyhow,
>and this just gives them "evidence" they can use to convince the
>others.

With this I disagree. I don't think non-Jews think he means he's not loyal to the US at all, but I do think non-Jews think the person means the interests of the State of Israel would take priority over the interests of the United States. I don't think most non-Jews understand about Am Yisroel. To them, Judaism is just a religion. And Israel is the Jewish State.
Best regards,
---Cindy S.

[Beach Runner]

Exactly.

Few realize that was really what Chanukah was about. It wasn't about a
oil burning or a military victory, the real meaning is that even with an
appealing Greek civilization, the Jews chose to remain Jews.

Many Jews died rather than convert.
'
Of course, I'm sure faced with death and torture we lost many Jewish people.

The only place vast number of Jews put their nation about their Judaism,
and in fact converted in vast numbers was Germany, and we see how that turned
out.

[cindys]

On Thursday, January 28, 2016 at 10:33:30 AM UTC-5, Beach Runner wrote:
> On Wednesday, January 27, 2016 at 5:58:03 PM UTC-8, hjw...@panix.com wrote:
> > Shelly <shel...@thevillages.net> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > > I have made that distinction many times here on this newgroup when I
> > > said I am not an American Jew. I am a Jewish American.
> >
> > > --
> > > Shelly
> >
> > I am the opposite, I am a Jew first an American second, If G-d forbid
> > someone like Crtuz gets in and tries to legislate xianity I will not
> > comply. Throuout the millenium our ancestors have given up their lives
> > rather than take on pratices of other religions,
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Harry J. Weiss
> > hjw...@panix.com
> Exactly.
>
> Few realize that was really what Chanukah was about. It wasn't about a
> oil burning or a military victory, the real meaning is that even with an
> appealing Greek civilization, the Jews chose to remain Jews.

----
Not at all. It was a civil war of fundamentalist Jews against assimilated Jews. And yes, it definitely was about a military victory for the fundamentalist Jews.
Best regards,
---Cindy S.

[cindys]

On Thursday, January 28, 2016 at 10:33:30 AM UTC-5, Beach Runner wrote:

snip

>
> The only place vast number of Jews put their nation about their Judaism,
> and in fact converted in vast numbers was Germany, and we see how that turned
> out.

------
Are you saying that pre-WWII, vast numbers of German Jews had converted to Christianity? If so, I would certainly like to see some proof for that assertion! I know that many German Jews were assimilated but *converted in vast numbers*???? I don't believe it. Provide the proof or retract the statement.
Best regards,
---Cindy S.

[Beach Runner]

Perhaps the word vast is to vague. Many would be better.

https://www.h-net.org/reviews/showrev.php?id=23086

I quote

For the most part, conversion has hardly been a popular topic among Jewish historians. In the late nineteenth century, pioneering Jewish historian Heinrich Graetz sought to draw clear battle lines, singling out Varnhagen and the numerous other Jews of Berlin's elite who converted in the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries as part of a baptismal epidemic that deserved to be remembered with shame. While Graetz's heirs today have rejected his moralizing tone, for the most part Jewish historians have yet to subject the diverse experiences of German Jews who, for whatever reason, embraced Christianity to serious study.[3] As Hertz notes in the introduction to her pioneering study, this is a major lacuna. When the Nazis came to power, Germany had a Jewish community of just over five hundred thousand, yet as Nazi officials soon discovered, the numbers of Christians with some level of Jewish ancestry almost equaled the number of Jews. Rather than following in the footsteps of recent historians of German Jewry and revisiting questions of assimilation and acculturation within the Jewish community, Hertz's How Jews Became Germans moves into new terrain, forcing us to face the subtleties of the life stories of the ancestors of these non-Jewish Germans of Jewish descent.


Back to me:

Why did the Nazi's have to research so many people to find that in the past they had "Jewish" blood? It was because conversion was all too common
in Germany.


I hope that helps.

[Yisroel Markov]

On Thu, 28 Jan 2016 15:39:59 +0000 (UTC), Beach Runner
<lowh...@gmail.com> said:

>On Wednesday, January 27, 2016 at 5:58:03 PM UTC-8, hjw...@panix.com wrote:
>> Shelly <shel...@thevillages.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> > I have made that distinction many times here on this newgroup when I
>> > said I am not an American Jew. I am a Jewish American.
>>
>> > --
>> > Shelly
>>
>> I am the opposite, I am a Jew first an American second, If G-d forbid
>> someone like Crtuz gets in and tries to legislate xianity I will not
>> comply. Throuout the millenium our ancestors have given up their lives
>> rather than take on pratices of other religions,
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Harry J. Weiss
>> hjw...@panix.com
>Exactly.
>
>Few realize that was really what Chanukah was about. It wasn't about a
>oil burning or a military victory, the real meaning is that even with an
>appealing Greek civilization, the Jews chose to remain Jews.
>
>Many Jews died rather than convert.

It wasn't a "convert or else" deal back then. Yes, many Jews died...
killed by other Jews who wanted to keep Judaism supreme in Israel.

>Of course, I'm sure faced with death and torture we lost many Jewish people.
>
>The only place vast number of Jews put their nation about their Judaism,
>and in fact converted in vast numbers was Germany, and we see how that turned
>out.

The only place? What about France, or Russia, for that matter?

"Is there another people on this earth whose sons are so physically
and spiritually degraded as to hate everything their people does,
while anything done to it by other people, all the torture and
degradation, all the hate, the robberies and murders, any violence,
fills their hearts with joy? For example, in Russia in 1881 at the
height of pogroms, there were sons and daughters of Israel who printed
leaflets calling for more pogroms, hoping that Jewish blood would help
revive the Russian peasant."

Berl Katzenelson wrote the above in 1936.
http://www.jewishagency.org/ru/leaders/content/22791
--
Yisroel "Godwrestler Warriorson" Markov - Boston, MA Member
www.reason.com -- for a sober analysis of the world DNRC
--------------------------------------------------------------------
"Judge, and be prepared to be judged" -- Ayn Rand

[Harry Weiss]

[Harry Weiss]

What I wrote did not make it, Until the 1960s US Public schoos begain the
day with a Bible reading and the lords prayer, The Supreme Court rule
that it violated the separation of chhurch and state, A few new members
on the court could change that back to the way it was,

There is more that could be legislated in with compliant SC,

[mm]

Absolutely.

BTW, have you all ever noticed that they had prayer at schools, but
lots of other public places they didn't have any.

People have plenty of spare time when they're waiting at the
Department of Motor Vehicles. Why didn't they have prayer there?

And people in many states would spend 2 weeks a the jury pool with
only a small part of that time on a jury. Why didn't the government
lead prayer there?

And what about the bus and the subway. Some people read but others
just stare out the window. Why no prayer there?

It's because they think they can influence children, but adults
wouldn't stand for it.

And whose children? I'm sure those who want prayer in school will
tell you that their children pray at home, and go to church and
Sundaya school. It's *other* people's children they want to pray.

[Shelly]

Exactly. We didn't have that where I went to school, but every assembly
began with a prayer. Even in sixth grade it burned me and I thought it
be a violation of church and state -- and I was not yet 12 at the time.
Thank you, thank you, thank you Madeline Murray O'Hare.

--
Shelly

[malcolm...@btinternet.com]

On Friday, January 29, 2016 at 8:42:26 AM UTC, googy wrote:
>
> BTW, have you all ever noticed that they had prayer at schools, but
> lots of other public places they didn't have any.
>

> And what about the bus and the subway. Some people read but others
> just stare out the window. Why no prayer there?
>
> It's because they think they can influence children, but adults
> wouldn't stand for it.
>

Children aren't adults.
We had a rule at school that you may ask for a small but not a large.
There was also a threat that anyone using the salt cellar as a dalek
would be made to ingest the entire contents.

It's appropriate that adults teach children how to worship as part
of their induction into a society that worships, just as it is to teach
table manners.

[Beach Runner]

Of course you are correct, way too many Jews have converted all over the
world to assimilate.

The reason I pointed to Germany is that it is the place where Jews were felt
most accepted as part of society, as demonstrating their national pride by
having the highest percentage of minorities to enlist for WW I. That created
a problem for Hitler (poor guy), so many of his officers and heroes were Jews,
so he quietly removed them.

But the number of Jewish converts that converted for economic or social reasons
is extensive.

Here's a very partial list of Famous converts, of course there are many more times that of converts that were not famous. The source, while in
Wikepedia came from the Jewish encyclopedia. Reading down I found some
surprises that made me sad, like Bob Dylan, never knew he converted.
Moses Mendelson is of course very famous to us musicians, as he represented that to get a job within the court as a musical leader, he had to convert.
I was also sad, as a musician to see Mahlar on the list, as playing his music was always special. I believe he was rescued in Operation Paperclip.
Robert Moses was a surprise, I guess the way he destroyed the NY planning
regarding transportation and destroyed the Bronx with the cross Bronx expressway, its' good to see him go. Never knew Disraeli was born Jewish.
Moishe Rosen -- Founder of Jews for Jesus[42]- Yech!


The Jewish Encyclopedia gives some statistics on conversion of Jews to Protestantism, to Roman Catholicism, and to Orthodox Christianity (which it calls erroneously Greek Catholicism; Greek or Byzantine Catholics are under the See of Rome, not in the Orthodox Church).[1] Some 2,000 European Jews converted to Christianity every year during the 19th century, but in the 1890s the number was running closer to 3,000 per year, -- 1,000 in Austria Hungary (Galizian Poland), 1,000 in Russia (Poland, Belarus, Ukraine, and Lithuania), 500 in Germany (Posen), and the remainder in the English world.

Paul the Apostle - early Christian leader and author of many New Testament epistles.[2]
Abd-al-Masih (martyr) - a convert martyred for his faith [3]
Michael Solomon Alexander - first Anglican Bishop of Jerusalem[4]
Petrus Alphonsi - physician in ordinary to King Alfonso VI of Castile[5]
Juan Alfonso de Baena - medieval Castilian troubadour[6]
Lovisa Augusti- opera singer and actress.[7]
Eduard Bendemann - German painter[8]
Sir Julius Benedict - English composer[8]
Leo de Benedicto Christiano - medieval financier[9]
Theodor Benfey - German philologist[8]
David Berkowitz - American serial killer [10]
Michael Bernays - German professor of literature[8]
Gottfried Bernhardy - German philologist and literary historian[8]
Ludwig Börne - German political writer and satirist[8]
John Braham - English tenor opera star[8]
Moritz Wilhelm August Breidenbach - German jurist[8]
Julius Friedrich Cohnheim - German pathologist[8]
Isaac da Costa - Dutch language poet[8]
Abraham Capadose - Dutch physician and writer; friend of Isaac da Costa[8]
Carl Paul Caspari - Norwegian theologian[8]
Jehuda Cresques - Catalan cartographer[11]
Ferdinand David - German virtuoso violinist and composer[8]
Ludwig Dessoir - German actor[8]
Benjamin Disraeli - British Prime Minister and leader of the Conservative Party in the 19th century[12]
Alfred Döblin - German expressionist novelist[13]
Bob Dylan - popular musician who converted to Christianity in 1979.[14] He later began studying with Chabad, a branch of Hasidic Judaism,[15] though his current religious affiliation is uncertain. See also information on Dylan's Conversion to Christianity, Born-again period and Religious beliefs.
Alfred Edersheim - Biblical scholar[8]
Rachel Felix - French-Swiss theatre actress[8]
Pero Ferrús - Castilian poet[16]
Bobby Fischer - chess grandmaster
Achille Fould - French financier and politician[8]
Jacob Frank - 18th century Jewish reformer[17]
The Reverend Canon Dr Giles Fraser - Christian minister and former Canon Chancellor of St Paul's Cathedral
Heinrich von Friedberg - German jurist and statesman[18]
Ludwig Friedländer - German philologist[8]
Eduard Gans - German philosopher and jurist, exponent of the conservative Right Hegelians[19]
Hermann Mayer Salomon Goldschmidt - German astronomer and painter[8]
Fritz Haber - German chemist and Nobel laureate in Chemistry [20]
Karl Landsteiner - Austrian biologist and physician, In 1930 he received the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine. converted from Judaism to Roman Catholicism in 1890[21]
Gerty Cori - Czech-American biochemist who became the third woman--and first American woman--to win a Nobel Prize in science, and the first woman to be awarded the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine.[22][23]
Max Born - German physicist and mathematician, he won the 1954 Nobel Prize in Physics.[24]
Boris Pasternak - Russian poet, novelist, and literary translator. He was awarded the Nobel Prize for Literature in 1958. He Converts to Eastern Orthodoxy from Judaism[25]
Heinrich Heine - German writer[8]
Friedrich Gustav Jakob Henle - German physician, pathologist and anatomist[8]
Jorge Isaacs - Colombian writer, politician and soldier[26]
Carl Gustav Jacob Jacobi - German mathematician
Heinrich Jacoby - German educator[8]
Georg Jellinek - German legal philosopher[27]
Paul S. L. Johnson - American scholar and pastor[28]
David Kalisch - German playwright and humorist[8]
Felix Philipp Kanitz - Austro-Hungarian naturalist, geographer, ethnographer, archaeologist and author of travel notes[29]
Andrew Klavan - filmmaker and novelist [30]
Leopold Kronecker - German mathematician and logician[8]
Hermann Lebert - German physician[8]
Karl Lehrs - German classical scholar[31]
Osip Mikhailovich Lerner - 19th century Russian intellectual and lawyer[32]
Fanny Lewald - German author[8]
Tsaritsa Theodora of Bulgaria - Wife of tsar Ivan Alexander, tsaritsa in the late Second Bulgarian Empire
Jean-Marie Lustiger- Cardinal, former Archbishop of Paris [33]
Heinrich Gustav Magnus - German chemist and physicist[8]
Ludwig Immanuel Magnus - German mathematician[8]
Gustav Mahler - Composer (1860-1911)[34]
Alexander Men - Russian priest, Orthodox theologian and author (assassinated 1990) [35]
Hugh Montefiore - Anglican Bishop of Birmingham from 1977 to 1987
Robert Moses - politician and "master builder" of 20th century New York City
Felix Mendelssohn - composer (1809-1847)[8]
Karl Friedrich Neumann - German orientalist[8]
Robert Novak - Raised in secular Jewish culture,[36] he converted to Catholicism in May 1998 after his prolific career as a journalist, columnist, and political commentator.[37]
Harry Frederick Oppenheimer - South African businessman[38]
Francis Palgrave - English historian[8]
Corey Pavin - PGA golfer[39]
Johannes Pfefferkorn - German theologian and writer[8]
Friedrich Adolf Philippi - German Lutheran theologian[8]
Howard Phillips - Prominent American conservative leader and former presidential candidate
Lorenzo Da Ponte - Italian librettist[8]
Harry Reems - Adult film actor.[40]
David Ricardo - English political economist[8]
Gillian Rose - British philosopher and sociologist[41]
Moishe Rosen -- Founder of Jews for Jesus[42]
Anton Rubinstein -- Russian pianist, composer, and conductor[8]
Joseph Schereschewsky -- Episcopal Bishop of Shanghai, founder of Saint John's University, Shanghai, bible translator[43]
Eduard von Simson -- German jurist and politician[8]
Dan Spitz - lead guitarist of the heavy metal band Anthrax[44]
Friedrich Julius Stahl -- Prussian jurist and conservative thinker[8]
Edith Stein - Nun, martyr, saint.[45]
Siegbert Tarrasch -- Challenger for the World Chess Championship [46]
Mordechai Vanunu -- considered a whistle-blower on Israel's nuclear programme who was subsequently kidnapped, tried and imprisoned by Israel.[47]
Rahel Varnhagen (born Rahel Levin) - writer and saloniste[48]
Simone Weil -- French philosopher and activist [49]
Otto Weininger -- Austrian philosopher[50]
Joseph Wolff -- German missionary[8]
Sir Moses Ximenes -- 18th century English merchant[8]
David Levy Yulee - United States Senator from Florida[51]
Efrem Zimbalist, Jr. - American actor[52][53][54]
Israel Zolli - former Chief Rabbi of Rome[55]
Shia LaBeouf - Hollywood actor who decided to leave Judaism and become a Christian while playing a Christian character in the movie Fury (2014).[56][57] He had previously contributed to a book entitled I am Jewish in 2004.[58]

To give a better answer to Cindy's demand that I document that many Germans converted to Judaism


In the 19th century, many Jewish Germans converted to Christianity; most of them becoming Protestants rather than Roman Catholics.[10] Two-thirds of the German population were Protestant until 1938, when the Anschluß annexation of Austria to Germany added 6 million Roman Catholics. The addition of 3.25 million Catholic Czechoslovaks of German ethnicity (Sudeten Germans) increased the percentage of Roman Catholics in Greater Germany to 41% (approximately 32.5 million vs. 45.5 million Protestants or 57%) in a 1939 population estimated at 79 million. One percent of the population was Jewish.

German converts from Judaism typically adopted whichever Christian denomination was most dominant in their community. Therefore, about 80% of the Gentile Germans persecuted as Jews according to the Nuremberg Laws were affiliated with one of the 28 regionally-delineated Protestant church bodies.[11] In 1933 approximately 77% of German Gentiles with Jewish ancestry were Protestant, the percentage dropped to 66% in the 1939 census, after the annexations of 1938 (due in particular to the acquisition of Vienna and Prague, with their relatively large and well-established Catholic populations of Jewish descent).[12] Converts to Christianity and their descendants had often married Christians with no recent Jewish ancestry.

As a result, - by the time the Nazis came to power - many Protestants and Roman Catholics in Germany had some traceable Jewish ancestry (usually traced back by the Nazi authorities for two generations), so that the majority of 1st- or 2nd-degree Mischlinge were Protestant, yet many were Catholics. A considerable number of German Gentiles with Jewish ancestry were irreligionists.

Lutherans with Jewish ancestry were largely in northwestern and Northern Germany, Evangelical Protestants of Jewish descent in Middle Germany (Berlin and its southwestern environs) and the country's east. Catholics with Jewish ancestry lived mostly in Western and Southern Germany, Austria, and what is now the Czech Republic.

Of course there were many children born of mixed parents, they called them
Jewish Mislings, who of course Hitler went after.

The point being, things were wonderful for Jews in Germany, just as they are
today in America. I propose that with the increased rise in world wide
anti semitism, people blaming Israel on the world's problems, tremendous anti semitic efforts by white supremacists groups, if conditions got bad it could happen here.

Even with Muslimphobia, the greatest percentage of hate crimes by religions remains against the Jews for a total of 18% of of hate crimes overall.

[cindys]

-----
Sometimes I can't help but wonder if you post this kind of rubbish just to incite a reaction. Are you *trying* to start a flame war?????

The USA (since this is the society under discussion) is a society where some people worship and others don't. And the ones who do worship have different ways to worship. So, it is is completely inappropriate for a taxpayer-funded school to force children to recite prayers that contradict their parents' type of worship (or lack thereof).

If I am a Jewish parent, I don't want my children reciting Christian prayers (or any kind of prayers provided by a public school), and if I am an atheist parent, I surely don't want my children reciting any prayers at all. And a tax-payer-funded school doesn't have the right to impose somebody else's belief system on my children. Sorry.

Freedom of worship or to not worship. That is the right of every American. It's guaranteed by the US Constitution and the Bill of Rights, and your nonsense statements from across the pond about "inducting children into a society that worships" don't trump the rights of Americans to be free from this type of religious coercion.
Best regards,
---Cindy S.

[Shelly]

On 1/29/2016 9:16 AM, malcolm...@btinternet.com wrote:
> On Friday, January 29, 2016 at 8:42:26 AM UTC, googy wrote:
>>
>> BTW, have you all ever noticed that they had prayer at schools, but
>> lots of other public places they didn't have any.
>>
>> And what about the bus and the subway. Some people read but others
>> just stare out the window. Why no prayer there?
>>
>> It's because they think they can influence children, but adults
>> wouldn't stand for it.
>>
> Children aren't adults.
> We had a rule at school that you may ask for a small but not a large.
> There was also a threat that anyone using the salt cellar as a dalek
> would be made to ingest the entire contents.

What is a small and what is a large and what is a dalek?

>
> It's appropriate that adults teach children how to worship as part
> of their induction into a society that worships, just as it is to teach
> table manners.

--
Shelly

[Shelly]

I agree with one minor correction. That right in the US is not in the
Constitution. It is in the Bill of Rights which comprise the first ten
amendments to the Constitution.

--
Shelly

[DoD]

"Shelly" <shel...@thevillages.net> wrote in message

news:n8g2k7$sps$1...@dont-email.me...

> On 1/29/2016 9:16 AM, malcolm...@btinternet.com wrote:
>> On Friday, January 29, 2016 at 8:42:26 AM UTC, googy wrote:
>>>
>>> BTW, have you all ever noticed that they had prayer at schools, but
>>> lots of other public places they didn't have any.
>>>
>>> And what about the bus and the subway. Some people read but others
>>> just stare out the window. Why no prayer there?
>>>
>>> It's because they think they can influence children, but adults
>>> wouldn't stand for it.
>>>
>> Children aren't adults.
>> We had a rule at school that you may ask for a small but not a large.
>> There was also a threat that anyone using the salt cellar as a dalek
>> would be made to ingest the entire contents.
>
> What is a small and what is a large and what is a dalek?

I have no idea on what a large and a small is.... I looked up dalek and
apparently it is

The Daleks /'d??l?ks/ are a fictional extraterrestrial race of mutants
principally portrayed in the
British science fiction television programme Doctor Who.

I have no idea what any of this means....

[Fred Goldstein]

On 1/29/2016 8:24 AM, Shelly wrote:
> On 1/28/2016 8:49 PM, Harry Weiss wrote:

...

>> What I wrote did not make it, Until the 1960s US Public schoos begain the
>> day with a Bible reading and the lords prayer, The Supreme Court rule
>> that it violated the separation of chhurch and state, A few new members
>> on the court could change that back to the way it was,
>>
>> There is more that could be legislated in with compliant SC,
>
> Exactly. We didn't have that where I went to school, but every assembly
> began with a prayer. Even in sixth grade it burned me and I thought it
> be a violation of church and state -- and I was not yet 12 at the time.
> Thank you, thank you, thank you Madeline Murray O'Hare.

I'm sure other Americans "of a certain age" remember those days... I
think I was in third grade when it ended. Until then, every school day
began with a reading of a psalm (often the 23rd, but sometimes the
student could just pick one at random) and the Lord's Prayer. From the
Protestant's King James Bible, at a school that was pretty evenly split
between Jews and Catholics, with a few Protestants for good measure.

Hence I am familiar with Our Father named Harold and Reverend Will B. Dunn.

[Herman Rubin]

On 2016-01-29, mm <mm2...@bigfoot.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 29 Jan 2016 01:49:06 +0000 (UTC), Harry Weiss
><hjw...@panix.com> wrote:

>>Harry Weiss <hjw...@panix.com> wrote:
>>> cindys <cst...@rochester.rr.com> wrote:
>>> > On Wednesday, January 27, 2016 at 8:58:03 PM UTC-5, hjw...@panix.com wrote:
>>> > snip

>>> > > If G-d forbid
>>> > > someone like Cruz gets in and tries to legislate xianity I will not
>>> > > comply.

>>> > By what legal process can an American president legislate a
religion? Unless Cruz managed to pull off a military coup, how could
he enact a law that openly violated the Constitution and the Bill of
Rights? And what form would this legislation take? A law that says
every American citizen must accept Jesus or go to jail? Come on Harry!

>>> > ---Cindy S.

>>What I wrote did not make it, Until the 1960s US Public schoos begain the
>>day with a Bible reading and the lords prayer, The Supreme Court rule
>>that it violated the separation of chhurch and state, A few new members
>>on the court could change that back to the way it was,

>>There is more that could be legislated in with compliant SC,

> Absolutely.

> BTW, have you all ever noticed that they had prayer at schools, but
> lots of other public places they didn't have any.

> People have plenty of spare time when they're waiting at the
> Department of Motor Vehicles. Why didn't they have prayer there?

> And people in many states would spend 2 weeks a the jury pool with
> only a small part of that time on a jury. Why didn't the government
> lead prayer there?

> And what about the bus and the subway. Some people read but others
> just stare out the window. Why no prayer there?

In all of these, you can have all the silent prayer you want.

Private prayer is nowhere prohibited. Someone wrote after the
SC decision that as long as there were testsm, there would be
prayer in the schools. Freedom of religion means that there
may not be coercion in prayer.

> It's because they think they can influence children, but adults
> wouldn't stand for it.

There still are such attempts to influence adults, most of which
are disregarded.

> And whose children? I'm sure those who want prayer in school will
> tell you that their children pray at home, and go to church and
> Sundaya school. It's *other* people's children they want to pray.

Most "religious" people think that everybody should be made to observe
THEIR religion in public.

--
This address is for information only. I do not claim that these views
are those of the Statistics Department or of Purdue University.
Herman Rubin, Department of Statistics, Purdue University
hru...@stat.purdue.edu Phone: (765)494-6054 FAX: (765)494-0558

[Shelly]

ROTFLMAO. (It only took a second or two to translate "Harold". Will B.
Dunn took a little longer.) Thanks.

--
Shelly

[Shelly]

Exactly.

I don't think than some posters here who are US citizens can even
comprehend just how jealously we Americans guard our constitutionally
written freedoms. All they seem to understand is that "Gee, we [non-US]
have those freedoms and no one is bothering us. What is the matter with
you, anyway?". They just seem incapable of understanding that it was
just for freedoms like those that this country was started -- and
continued. It is also why immigrants come here and assimilate to be
proud Americans, rather than setting up enclaves and demanding the
ability to have legal jurisdiction (Sharia, for example) there
regardless of what the government wants. As much as they have their
history of king or queen, we have our protection of our liberties.

Ah well, I have said my piece.

--
Shelly

[Harry Weiss]

Most of the time I went to Yeshiva, But just before I was in 6th grade
we moved to Floriday and my parent did not have time to find a place for
me to stay near the Hebrew Academy so I went to public school, But
there the Bible was not the 23d psalm but almost always something from the
NT,

[Beach Runner]

On Friday, January 29, 2016 at 6:46:41 AM UTC-8, cindys wrote:
> On Friday, January 29, 2016 at 9:09:45 AM UTC-5, malcolm...@btinternet.com w> > It's appropriate that adults teach children how to worship as part

> > of their induction into a society that worships, just as it is to teach
> > table manners.
>

NOOOOOO! Prayer is not an introduction to society that worships.
An athiest has just as much rights as any other religion.

What prayers? How about American Prayers?
The Oglala Lakota were Americans and worshipped Wankan Tanka.

I'm sure you must mean American Prayers like that, right?
Not some European foreign prayers.

Of course, the Lakota don't have formal prayers per se, they
have a religion based on the pipe, the sweat hut, the sun dance and other
ceremonies you probably know nothing about, and yet you claim to be an
American.

Of course, for years Christians forced their version of prayer and G-d down
the Oglala Lakota (Sioux) tribe, and it destroyed the self worth and identity. It was one of the greatest criminal acts against Native Americans.

I for one know that this is a nation that has freedom of and from religion
and I don't want none of your prayers in public schools.

Jan 16 was Religious Freedom day.

[malcolm...@btinternet.com]

On Sunday, January 31, 2016 at 3:52:09 AM UTC, Beach Runner wrote:
> > It's appropriate that adults teach children how to worship as part
> > > of their induction into a society that worships, just as it is to
> > > teach table manners.
> >
>
> NOOOOOO! Prayer is not an introduction to society that worships.
> An athiest has just as much rights as any other religion.
>
> What prayers? How about American Prayers?
> The Oglala Lakota were Americans and worshipped Wankan Tanka.
>
> I'm sure you must mean American Prayers like that, right?
> Not some European foreign prayers.
>

Should school teach table manners?
I mean if I decide that I'll eat all my meals in front of the TV
and only eat pizzas and burgers with my fingers, there's no law
against that, right?
And the Indians didn't have knives and forks did they, so what's
the school doing providing them?

>
> Of course, the Lakota don't have formal prayers per se, they
> have a religion based on the pipe, the sweat hut, the sun dance and other
> ceremonies you probably know nothing about, and yet you claim to be an
> American.
>

Huh? I claim to be an American?
I've visited the US twice, but only for short holidays, and of course
I've met many Americans (and dated two American girls, sadly didn't
work out on either occasion). But that doesn't make me an American.

>
> Of course, for years Christians forced their version of prayer
> and G-d down the Oglala Lakota (Sioux) tribe, and it destroyed the
> self worth and identity. It was one of the greatest criminal acts
> against Native Americans.
>

Totem poles were erected over the bodies of sacrificed slaves.
Native American religion wasn't the cuddly, environmentally
friendly, proto-feminist religion that some people make it out
to be.

[cindys]

On Sunday, January 31, 2016 at 10:20:41 AM UTC-5, malcolm...@btinternet.com wrote:
> On Sunday, January 31, 2016 at 3:52:09 AM UTC, Beach Runner wrote:
> > > It's appropriate that adults teach children how to worship as part
> > > > of their induction into a society that worships, just as it is to
> > > > teach table manners.
> > >
> >
> > NOOOOOO! Prayer is not an introduction to society that worships.
> > An athiest has just as much rights as any other religion.
> >
> > What prayers? How about American Prayers?
> > The Oglala Lakota were Americans and worshipped Wankan Tanka.
> >
> > I'm sure you must mean American Prayers like that, right?
> > Not some European foreign prayers.
> >
> Should school teach table manners?

American schools do not teach table manners, and I think most Americans would find this idea very strange. So, no.

But teaching table manners is not the same as teaching prayers. Reciting prayers is something one learns and does at home or at church or synagogue. Not at a taxpayer-funded school. I agree with the poster who said what the prayer-promoters really want is to force *other people's children* to recite prayers. I can tell you that the parents who live in my school district would find the idea downright odious. And if it were up to me, I wouldn't even allow after-school religious clubs to meet on school grounds. I think there should be complete separation of church and state.
Best regards,
---Cindy S.

[Shelly]

+1,000,000

--
Shelly

[Beach Runner]

By saying what should be taught in schools in Amrican you appeared
to be one.

What the heck does toten pols have to do with anything?

The point is you said we should teach prayer in American schools, just
like table manners (which we don't) and I demonstrated the complete
idiocy of it by picking a truly American religion.

Of course, what your propose is completely against the first amendment's,

separation of church and state.

Why stick in an insult of Native American religions? A racist statement.

Cindy is right, all prayer at all times should be out of the public schools.

[cindys]

On Monday, February 1, 2016 at 9:14:55 AM UTC-5, Beach Runner wrote:
snip
>

> By saying what should be taught in schools in American you appeared
> to be one.

Malcolm has been posting on SCJM for years. All the regular posters know he is British. But the problem is that he spends so much time pontificating about life in the USA and sharing with us how Americans think and behave and how we *should* think and behave that it's very easy to be confused about his nationality.
Best regards,
---Cindy S.

[malcolm...@btinternet.com]

There are no daleks in America. So an American child is in no danger
of using the pepper pot as a dalek and consequently doesn't need
to be taught table manners.
Thanks for clearing that up.

[Beach Runner]

I take it he's not Jewish?

[Shelly]

What the hell is a dalek and now, also, what the hell is a pepper pot?
As for teaching table manners, that is the proper province of the home
and parents, not the schools.

--
Shelly

[Shelly]

On 2/1/2016 8:47 PM, Beach Runner wrote:
> I take it he's not Jewish?

Correct.

--
Shelly

[Giorgies E Kepipesiom]

On Monday, February 1, 2016 at 10:13:08 PM UTC-5, shel...@thevillages.net wrote:
>
> What the hell is a dalek and now, also, what the hell is a pepper pot?
> As for teaching table manners, that is the proper province of the home
> and parents, not the schools.

Dalek: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dalek
Pepper Pot: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guyanese_pepperpot

I have no idea what either of these things has to do with the subject under discussion.

GEK
happy to help

[Shelly]

Neither do I. BTW, my son is a fan of "Dr. Who". I watched a few
episodes with him and I consider it a two-bit, poorly conceived and
designed, low budget, ridiculous science fiction production -- and I
like good science fiction.

--
Shelly

[mm]

On Thu, 28 Jan 2016 19:57:39 +0000 (UTC), Beach Runner
<lowh...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Thursday, January 28, 2016 at 10:20:49 AM UTC-8, cindys wrote:

>> On Thursday, January 28, 2016 at 10:33:30 AM UTC-5, Beach Runner wrote:
>> snip
>> >

>> > The only place vast number of Jews put their nation about their Judaism,
>> > and in fact converted in vast numbers was Germany, and we see how that turned
>> > out.

Even if one accepts what you have at the bottom, and I suppose I do, I
still don't think your phrasing above is supported by it. I don't
think these people put their nation (germany?) above their Judaism.
They put their own secular opportunities and potential tangible
(financial, social, safety) well-being above it.

I don't think anyone, even german patriots, which almost all of them
were, thought, "I want Germany to be a better country so I'll convert
to Xianity, because that will make it better.".

As in the story of the 3 men who were playing golf together at a
restricted country club in the USA. All had been raised as Jews and
converted.

After the game, they were changing clothes in the locker room. No one
else was there and Joe asked Max, "So why did you convert?" and Max
said "I wanted more contacts so I could expand my business. Why did
you convert, Joe?" "I met this beautiful girl and her parents
wouldn't let her marry me unless I converted. Jack, why did you
convert?" "Well, I read the religious books and studied their
theology, until my eyes were opened and I realized that it was the
right thing to do."

And the other two laughed and said, "Who do you think you're talking
to, a couple goyim?"


(I think originally there were 4 men but I forget the 3rd's reason.)

>> ------
>> Are you saying that pre-WWII, vast numbers of German Jews had converted to Christianity? If so, I would certainly like to see some proof for that assertion! I know that many German Jews were assimilated but *converted in vast numbers*???? I don't believe it. Provide the proof or retract the statement.
>> Best regards,
>> ---Cindy S.
>Perhaps the word vast is to vague. Many would be better.
>
>https://www.h-net.org/reviews/showrev.php?id=23086
>
>I quote
>
>For the most part, conversion has hardly been a popular topic among Jewish historians. In the late nineteenth century, pioneering Jewish historian Heinrich Graetz sought to draw clear battle lines, singling out Varnhagen and the numerous other Jews of Berlin's elite who converted in the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries as part of a baptismal epidemic that deserved to be remembered with shame. While Graetz's heirs today have rejected his moralizing tone, for the most part Jewish historians have yet to subject the diverse experiences of German Jews who, for whatever reason, embraced Christianity to serious study.[3] As Hertz notes in the introduction to her pioneering study, this is a major lacuna. When the Nazis came to power, Germany had a Jewish community of just over five hundred thousand, yet as Nazi officials soon discovered, the numbers of Christians with some level of Jewish ancestry almost equaled the number of Jews. Rather than following in the footsteps of
>recent historians of German Jewry and revisiting questions of assimilation and acculturation within the Jewish community, Hertz's How Jews Became Germans moves into new terrain, forcing us to face the subtleties of the life stories of the ancestors of these non-Jewish Germans of Jewish descent.
>
>
>Back to me:
>
>Why did the Nazi's have to research so many people to find that in the past they had "Jewish" blood? It was because conversion was all too common
>in Germany.
>
>
>I hope that helps.
>

[mm]

On Mon, 1 Feb 2016 01:33:06 +0000 (UTC), cindys
<cst...@rochester.rr.com> wrote:

>On Sunday, January 31, 2016 at 10:20:41 AM UTC-5, malcolm...@btinternet.com wrote:
>> On Sunday, January 31, 2016 at 3:52:09 AM UTC, Beach Runner wrote:
>> > > It's appropriate that adults teach children how to worship as part
>> > > > of their induction into a society that worships, just as it is to
>> > > > teach table manners.
>> > >
>> >
>> > NOOOOOO! Prayer is not an introduction to society that worships.
>> > An athiest has just as much rights as any other religion.
>> >
>> > What prayers? How about American Prayers?
>> > The Oglala Lakota were Americans and worshipped Wankan Tanka.
>> >
>> > I'm sure you must mean American Prayers like that, right?
>> > Not some European foreign prayers.
>> >
>> Should school teach table manners?

Only Malcolm woudl think there is some connection between teaching
table manners in school and teaching religion. One big reason the
original English immigrants to America left England was so they and
their children wouldn't be told how to pray by others. Did they
leave that part out of Malcolm's history class?

>American schools do not teach table manners, and I think most Americans would find this idea very strange. So, no.

But I don't have any problem with teaching table manners in cases
where it's worth the time spent.

That was typical of what was taught in finishing schools. While few
finishing schools describe themselves that way, and probably all of
them spend much more time on scholarship, I'm sure some time is spent
on manners. If not in formal classes then in afternoon teas and
Sunday lunches. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finishing_school

But beyond this, I've heard of teachers in poor communties teaching
specifically table manners, etc. because the teacher thought it would
do the kids more good than knowing about one more Civil War battle,
for example.

In NYC in public school they used to teach how to fold the NYTimes in
order to easily read it on while standing on the subway. (Some
papers, like currently the Daily News and the Post, are in tabloid
format, mostly to make themselves easy to read on the train.)

Many public schools teach driving. (Baltimore City stopped for
several years but is starting again.)

They should teach kids what they need to know, at least when everyone
agrees what that is.

>But teaching table manners is not the same as teaching prayers.

Absolutely! If the school were to teach a kid to hold the fork with
his left hand instead of his right, I don't think any parent will be
suing or even complaining to the school board, like I would if they
were trying to teach alien prayers.

[mm]

On Fri, 29 Jan 2016 14:53:11 +0000 (UTC), cindys
<cst...@rochester.rr.com> wrote:

>On Friday, January 29, 2016 at 9:09:45 AM UTC-5, malcolm...@btinternet.com wrote:
>> On Friday, January 29, 2016 at 8:42:26 AM UTC, googy wrote:
>> >
>> > BTW, have you all ever noticed that they had prayer at schools, but
>> > lots of other public places they didn't have any.
>> >
>> > And what about the bus and the subway. Some people read but others
>> > just stare out the window. Why no prayer there?
>> >
>> > It's because they think they can influence children, but adults
>> > wouldn't stand for it.
>> >
>> Children aren't adults.
>> We had a rule at school that you may ask for a small but not a large.
>> There was also a threat that anyone using the salt cellar as a dalek
>> would be made to ingest the entire contents.
>>
>> It's appropriate that adults teach children how to worship as part
>> of their induction into a society that worships, just as it is to teach
>> table manners.
>
>-----
>Sometimes I can't help but wonder if you post this kind of rubbish just to incite a reaction. Are you *trying* to start a flame war?????

That's a possibility I hadn't considered, but it makes sense. It's a
subset of "I want to be the center of attention", which is, I think,
his overriding goal.

And Beach Runner, it's not just how to be an American that this Brit
thinks he knows so much about. He also thinks he knows about how to
be a Jew, think like a Jew, and what Jews know, even though this
non-Jew has done some reading on his own but never had a Jewish
teacher afawct. And he seems not to learn here.

And it's not just those two topics but nature and everything else he's
an expert on. He claimed to know that dogs can't hate, even though
he's not a dog afaik.

[Beach Runner]

I absolutely agree with the earlier post that Jews in Germany did not convert to make Germany a better country or in any way because they believed
in Christianity, they did it only to improve their financial and social situations. It's sad.

Undoubtedly over the ages many Jews accepted the discrimination and disadvantages of being Jewish, accepting the fact that Judaism enriched their lives far more than being part of another culture, opportunities or wealth. Look at all the years Jews lived in Muslim nations as Dhemmi, when
all they had to do was convert and be accepted as first class citizens.

But there has also been a stream of people that did convert, more often
when they faced death. How many pretended to convert, such as in Spain?
Secret Jews.

But to address Cindy's assertion that people came to America for religious freedom, it was more a mixed bag. Many came, such as the Puritans to practice only their particular version of Christianity and outlawed all other religions. Religious freedom was not universal.

In general, Native American religions were outlawed, especially the Ghost
religion, even while proclaiming religious freedom for all. I lived and worked for the Oglala Sioux Tribe for several years, and their culture was
decimated by destroying their self worth, teaching them their religion, culture, and language were worthless, much of which done by various churches and the BIA. Only by having self worth can one succeed.

When I wrote grants, and I wrote a lot of funded grants I used what I called the "Jewish Model". I brought in the elders to teach young children their traditional culture, values, religion, language and such. With self pride comes success. Alcoholism is a symptom, not the cause. Years later I tried to get new teaching certifications in California, and they required
Clad, teaching children where English is the second language. 30 years later they are teaching "The Jewish Model", to teach pride in their home culture, continue teaching their native language, so I was right on.

Still there were others that wanted separation of Church and State, perhaps
one of the greatest things America has contributed to the world. Jefferson
and Franklin were leaders in such views. We must protect that right with all our might, even if we are not politically correct, such as when I refused to play a Christmas concert with a community orchestra.

This is a freedom that the Christian Evangelists and many other Christians want to take away. Cruz being just one horrible example that wants Christian prayers in the schools.

So many of the right wing Christians that support Israel don't care about the Jews, they want their scriptures fulfilled which would lead to a disaster for Jews and only their types of Christians would survive or go to heaven. They are not real friends of Israel and certainly not the Jews.

As far as teaching table manners. In many schools they no longer even give children utensils as they fear they are dangerous, so they learn to eat
in American style, fast food is made to be eaten with one's hands.

Our educational system has serious problems. It's very class oriented,
poor children, especially in urban environments get unequal education,
sometimes terrible. No Child Left Behind has been a disaster, politicians
directing education with short term rote learning. The results are in,
after 10 years of NCLB SAT scores are the worst ever. They stiped music and the arts from schools for NCLB, and music study has been proven to improve academic performance, abstract thinking, and even intelligence.

And I love Sander's goal to provide free college education for everyone.
It would be a great equalizer. With the exponential and absurd rise in college tuition, it's no longer reasonable or possible to work through college. When I took graduate courses at Columbia University, the tuition was about $120 a credit for graduate school in 1978. Today, at the University of Davis, a public university, a 3 credit course costs over $5,200. That's absurd and greed.

Of course it needs to be implemented intelligently. Many students will need extensive remedial education. Students must attend classes, do their work,
maintain reasonable gpas to stay in the program. And vocational training should also be offered, our society needs plumbers and workers. Just remember, that while Jews value education, after 150 years of slavery, African Americans were not allowed to be educated by law, so education is hardly a natural value to escape poverty.

At least 10 countries now provide free college education and for us to compete with their skilled workforces of the future. It would be the best investment America could make.

As for England, the Great Britain, at least when I taught there in the late 1970s, the only required subject, believe it or not, was Episcopal Religion.
I wonder if that's changed. In practice, they had superior elementary schools in poor urban areas with individualized education on shoe string budgets. I saw little religious teachings.....

Until Christmas time.... Then they had a horrible play portraying Jews in
a most anti semitic manner. I got in trouble, I didn't keep my mouth shut in the face of teaching that Jews were responsible for Christ's death. My father was proud of me.

The head mistress teacher, similar to a principal, after lambasting me for
saying something, justified it by having me read something from that fairy
tale book they call the New Testament, like that justified it.

[cindys]

On Tuesday, February 2, 2016 at 12:42:29 PM UTC-5, Beach Runner wrote:
snip
>

> But to address Cindy's assertion that people came to America for religious freedom, it was more a mixed bag.

snip
----
Excuse me....I never made such an assertion. Europeans came to America for a variety of reasons, many of which were not related to religion at all.
Best regards,
---Cindy S.

[cindys]

On Monday, February 1, 2016 at 10:13:08 PM UTC-5, shel...@thevillages.net wrote:

snip

>
> What the hell is a dalek and now, also, what the hell is a pepper pot?
> As for teaching table manners, that is the proper province of the home
> and parents, not the schools.

----
From the Dr. Who TV show, a dalek is a member of a mutant race which is depicted in a metal shell resembling a salt shaker. I would presume a "salt cellar" is a what Americans call a salt shaker and a "pepper pot" is what Americans call a pepper shaker.
Best regards,
---Cindy S.

[cindys]

-----
You're very welcome.
Best regards,
---Cindy S.

[Herman Rubin]

I thought that trying to change handedness had gone out decades ago.

[mm]

iiRC, and this is only from my poor memory, there were about 150,000
Jews in Spain, and about 1/3 left**, 1/3 were killed, and 1/3
pretended to convert.

**Without the benefit of a travel agent, hotel reservations,
traveler's checks.... I used to have a much longer list.

>But to address Cindy's assertion that people came to America for religious freedom,

Did Cindy say this? I know I did, so I'll comment.

>it was more a mixed bag. Many came, such as the Puritans to practice only their particular version of Christianity and outlawed all other religions. Religious freedom was not universal.

I don't think that changes anything, or makes it a mixed bag. They
came for religious freedom, and so other English would not be telling
them how to pray.

That some, most, or all of them didn't believe in religous freedom for
other religions doesn't change that in the slightest. If I say I moved
to Chicago for a job, it means a job for me, not a bunch of other
people. Saying someone came for religious freedom means only that
he came for religious freedom for himself. One should never assume,
probably shoudln't even imagine, that the good things people want for
themselves they also want for everyone else. (That's what makes
people do want it for others, and who make efforts in that direction,
so exceptional.)

I've learned this about others in an area unrelated to religion, also.

>
>In general, Native American religions were outlawed, especially the Ghost
>religion, even while proclaiming religious freedom for all. I lived and worked for the Oglala Sioux Tribe for several years, and their culture was
>decimated by destroying their self worth, teaching them their religion, culture, and language were worthless, much of which done by various churches and the BIA. Only by having self worth can one succeed.
>
>When I wrote grants,

By that you mean you wrote grant requests?

>and I wrote a lot of funded grants I used what I called the "Jewish Model". I brought in the elders to teach young children their traditional culture, values, religion, language and such. With self pride comes success. Alcoholism is a symptom, not the cause. Years later I tried to get new teaching certifications in California, and they required
>Clad, teaching children where English is the second language. 30 years later they are teaching "The Jewish Model", to teach pride in their home culture, continue teaching their native language, so I was right on.
>
>Still there were others that wanted separation of Church and State, perhaps
>one of the greatest things America has contributed to the world. Jefferson
>and Franklin were leaders in such views. We must protect that right with all our might, even if we are not politically correct, such as when I refused to play a Christmas concert with a community orchestra.

IIRC, no one here said anything about political correctness. And I
didn't disagree with YOUR not playing**. Only that you thought the
concert shouldn't be held in a public auditorium.

**I had a female friend from my hiking club, but we'd done a couple
other things together without the club. She lived in the Jewish
n'hood but sang with a choir in another n'hood. And for the Xmas
concert, I was pretty sure that included religious songs proclaiming
Jesus as god, as their songs do. I couldn't manage to ask her about
it because I knew I couldn't pretend to see it as justified.

I did ask her about putting a mezuzah on her new house's doorway(s),
and afaik that never got done. Yet she went out of her way to meet
Jewish boys, and afaik didn't socialize at all with non-Jewish boys.

>This is a freedom that the Christian Evangelists and many other Christians want to take away. Cruz being just one horrible example that wants Christian prayers in the schools.

If we can get him to bump off Trump, I think it will be easier to bump
him off later. Trump's right about one thing. No one in the Senate
likes him. One reason: He called Mictch McConnell a liar, while
standing on the Senate floor!

>So many of the right wing Christians that support Israel don't care about the Jews, they want their scriptures fulfilled which would lead to a disaster for Jews and only their types of Christians would survive or go to heaven. They are not real friends of Israel and certainly not the Jews.

I agree.

>As far as teaching table manners. In many schools they no longer even give children utensils as they fear they are dangerous, so they learn to eat
>in American style, fast food is made to be eaten with one's hands.

LOL. I don't think there are schools like that.

>Our educational system has serious problems. It's very class oriented,
>poor children, especially in urban environments get unequal education,
>sometimes terrible. No Child Left Behind has been a disaster, politicians
>directing education with short term rote learning. The results are in,
>after 10 years of NCLB SAT scores are the worst ever. They stiped music and the arts from schools for NCLB, and music study has been proven to improve academic performance, abstract thinking, and even intelligence.
>
>And I love Sander's goal to provide free college education for everyone.

High school has been free since what, 1900? 1870? 1840? It seems
to me people need a college degree now as much as they needed a high
school diploma 100 years ago, and it ought to be free just like high
school has been.

It was definitely free when my mother went to high school, graduating
in 1926, and when my father did (I have his framed diploma hanging on
the wall behind me), graduating in 1912. That was over 100 years ago.
I think we should have made some educational progress in 100 years.

>It would be a great equalizer. With the exponential and absurd rise in college tuition, it's no longer reasonable or possible to work through college. When I took graduate courses at Columbia University, the tuition was about $120 a credit for graduate school in 1978. Today, at the University of Davis, a public university, a 3 credit course costs over $5,200. That's absurd and greed.

I'm pretty sure the U. of Chicago charged $1410 a quarter for tuition
(one charge for all courses) in 1964. Three quarters per school year.
They gave a lot of scholarships too and say that no one has to not
attend because of money. I think room and board was about $1000 a
year.

>Of course it needs to be implemented intelligently. Many students will need extensive remedial education. Students must attend classes, do their work,
>maintain reasonable gpas to stay in the program. And vocational training should also be offered, our society needs plumbers and workers. Just remember, that while Jews value education, after 150 years of slavery, African Americans were not allowed to be educated by law, so education is hardly a natural value to escape poverty.
>
>At least 10 countries now provide free college education and for us to compete with their skilled workforces of the future. It would be the best investment America could make.
>
>As for England, the Great Britain, at least when I taught there in the late 1970s, the only required subject, believe it or not, was Episcopal Religion.
>I wonder if that's changed. In practice, they had superior elementary schools in poor urban areas with individualized education on shoe string budgets. I saw little religious teachings.....
>
>Until Christmas time.... Then they had a horrible play portraying Jews in
>a most anti semitic manner. I got in trouble, I didn't keep my mouth shut in the face of teaching that Jews were responsible for Christ's death. My father was proud of me.

I am too!

>The head mistress teacher, similar to a principal, after lambasting me for
>saying something, justified it by having me read something from that fairy
>tale book they call the New Testament, like that justified it.

Hmmmph.

[henry.dot.goodman.at.virgin.net]

On Tuesday, February 2, 2016 at 3:02:58 PM UTC, googy wrote:
> Absolutely! If the school were to teach a kid to hold the fork with
> his left hand instead of his right, I don't think any parent will be
> suing or even complaining to the school board, like I would if they
> were trying to teach alien prayers.
>

Forks are always held in the left hand where I live. The right hand is for the knife.
Henry Goodman

[mm]

On Tue, 2 Feb 2016 19:47:42 +0000 (UTC), Herman Rubin
<hru...@skew.stat.purdue.edu> wrote:

>
>> Absolutely! If the school were to teach a kid to hold the fork with
>> his left hand instead of his right, I don't think any parent will be
>> suing or even complaining to the school board, like I would if they
>> were trying to teach alien prayers.
>
>I thought that trying to change handedness had gone out decades ago.
>

I didn't say anyone actually taught this, but I was referring not to
handedness but to the American practice of changing the hand which
holds the fork betwen cutting the food and eating the food. AIUI, the
British don't change hands.

Ahh. Looking ahead, I see that Henry confirms this.

[Harry Weiss]

mm <mm2...@bigfoot.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 1 Feb 2016 01:33:06 +0000 (UTC), cindys
> <cst...@rochester.rr.com> wrote:

> >On Sunday, January 31, 2016 at 10:20:41 AM UTC-5, malcolm...@btinternet.com wrote:
> >> On Sunday, January 31, 2016 at 3:52:09 AM UTC, Beach Runner wrote:
> >> > An athiest has just as much rights as any other religion.
> >> >
> >> > What prayers? How about American Prayers?
> >> > The Oglala Lakota were Americans and worshipped Wankan Tanka.
> >> >
> >> > I'm sure you must mean American Prayers like that, right?
> >> > Not some European foreign prayers.

Currently most Indian prayers are very generic (often referring to
grandfather) and very speific to purpose that they arew gathered, Prare
often includes a song and smudging,

> Many public schools teach driving. (Baltimore City stopped for
> several years but is starting again.)

I learned in Public school in summer school, when I was home from
Yeshivah, It was offerred in Yeshiva as well but very expensive,

[Beach Runner]

Responding to an earlier post, yes I was a Grantwriter for the Loneman School and the White Clay District in the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation, the
poorest county in the US. I was originally recruited as a teacher. Loneman was the first Native American school to sue the BIA to have their own school board rather than be managed by the BIA in DC. It represented the right of all people to control their own schools.

The locals were very racist against the Lakota people so they recruited teachers from New York City, looking for aggressive, intelligent change agents. So I went from teaching academics at an Orthodox Yeshiva to a
the most traditional Native American school in the country. But, as stated, I implemented Jewish values. For various reasons I was promoted and spent most of my time writing grant projects for the school and community, all based on using Jewish values.

It was fairly easy to get grants funded as most funding sources were never fully used, and few people could write good projects using correct English.
What people don't realize, it's not about asking for money, it's about creating a good project, that can be measured and administered, and targeted only to an appropriate funding sources. Funders communicate and
they consider it "whoring" to write grant applications to lots of organizations that don't fund that particular type of project.

When Reagan was elected, most of the funding for Native American programs
dried up, as he cut all kinds of programs for poor people. I don't want to
get into politics beyond this simple fact.

As far as using utensils in England they don't switch hands, they don't in
Europe. They laugh at how Americans eat, but think when we change hands
it's the only break in our eating. Table manners are an affectation from
class based society.

And yes, many schools don't give students utensils anymore. The food industry tries to create foods that people eat with their hands. Of course, for good health buy real foods and prepare it yourself rather than
processed foods. When people here write about how long their relatives lived, they eat real food, not the garbage produced by the processed food industry. Foods since the 1970s have 30% more empty calories. Source,
the Omnivore's Dilemma by Michael Polan as well as many others.

I disagree that people didn't come for religious freedom. They came to practice their religion. Other's did want religious freedom, an example
was William Penn or Ben Franklin.

Peter Stuyvesant wanted to outlaw Judaism in Manhattan but that decision was overturned the the Dutch East Indian Company.

George Washington certainly appreciated Jewish people who helped him fund
the revolution.

[Harry Weiss]

Beach Runner <lowh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tuesday, February 2, 2016 at 1:59:12 PM UTC-8, googy wrote:
> > On Tue, 2 Feb 2016 19:47:42 +0000 (UTC), Herman Rubin
> > <hru...@skew.stat.purdue.edu> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >> Absolutely! If the school were to teach a kid to hold the fork with
> > >> his left hand instead of his right, I don't think any parent will be
> > >> suing or even complaining to the school board, like I would if they
> > >> were trying to teach alien prayers.
> > >
> > >I thought that trying to change handedness had gone out decades ago.
> > >
> > I didn't say anyone actually taught this, but I was referring not to
> > handedness but to the American practice of changing the hand which
> > holds the fork betwen cutting the food and eating the food. AIUI, the
> > British don't change hands.
> >
> > Ahh. Looking ahead, I see that Henry confirms this.

> Responding to an earlier post, yes I was a Grantwriter for the Loneman School and the White Clay District in the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation, the
> poorest county in the US. I was originally recruited as a teacher. Loneman was the first Native American school to sue the BIA to have their own school board rather than be managed by the BIA in DC. It represented the right of all people to control their own schools.

Was this before 1977 (passing of 93-638)

> The locals were very racist against the Lakota people so they recruited teachers from New York City, looking for aggressive, intelligent change agents. So I went from teaching academics at an Orthodox Yeshiva to a
> the most traditional Native American school in the country. But, as stated, I implemented Jewish values. For various reasons I was promoted and spent most of my time writing grant projects for the school and community, all based on using Jewish values.

> It was fairly easy to get grants funded as most funding sources were never fully used, and few people could write good projects using correct English.
> What people don't realize, it's not about asking for money, it's about creating a good project, that can be measured and administered, and targeted only to an appropriate funding sources. Funders communicate and
> they consider it "whoring" to write grant applications to lots of organizations that don't fund that particular type of project.

> When Reagan was elected, most of the funding for Native American programs
> dried up, as he cut all kinds of programs for poor people. I don't want to
> get into politics beyond this simple fact.

> As far as using utensils in England they don't switch hands, they don't in
> Europe. They laugh at how Americans eat, but think when we change hands
> it's the only break in our eating. Table manners are an affectation from
> class based society.

> And yes, many schools don't give students utensils anymore. The food industry tries to create foods that people eat with their hands. Of course, for good health buy real foods and prepare it yourself rather than
> processed foods. When people here write about how long their relatives lived, they eat real food, not the garbage produced by the processed food industry. Foods since the 1970s have 30% more empty calories. Source,
> the Omnivore's Dilemma by Michael Polan as well as many others.

> I disagree that people didn't come for religious freedom. They came to practice their religion. Other's did want religious freedom, an example
> was William Penn or Ben Franklin.

> Peter Stuyvesant wanted to outlaw Judaism in Manhattan but that decision was overturned the the Dutch East Indian Company.

> George Washington certainly appreciated Jewish people who helped him fund
> the revolution.

[mm]

On Wed, 3 Feb 2016 05:36:55 +0000 (UTC), Beach Runner
<lowh...@gmail.com> wrote:


I hope to comment on other parts of your post later, but this one just
cries out for a reply.

>Peter Stuyvesant wanted to outlaw Judaism in Manhattan but that decision was overturned the the Dutch East Indian Company.

When I worked at 42 Broadway, I often ate lunch on the grass in
Bowling Green Park, a fenced in park just north of the Customs House.
And at the south end of the park was a statue of Peter Stuyvesant,
with a bronze plaque that said roughly, "Under Peter Stuyvesant, Jews
got political rights in New Amsterdam". Without mentioning that he
was against it!!!! Like you say, the Jews had to write back to
Amersterdam, to friends and family, some of whom were stockholders in
the company, to get his idea reversed. I didn't know that when I
first saw the statue. BTW, the Dutch *West* India Company.

I moved from NY in 1983. Around 1990 I was visiting a friend working
in lower Manhattan and I made a point to stop by the park to see if
the plaque was still there but the whole statue was gone. Of course
NYC makes a point of rotating some of its stuff -- there's a
warehouse, I think, between Riverside Drive and the West Side Highway
around 150th or 160th St. where they store copies of much of the good
stuff, and probably store the good stuff sometimes while displaying
copies -- so maybe it's back. I hope by this time the plaque, though
literally true, has been changed.

[mm]

On Wed, 3 Feb 2016 07:11:22 +0000 (UTC), mm <mm2...@bigfoot.com>
wrote:

http://digitalhistory.hsp.org/pafrm/doc/jewish-petition-dutch-west-india-company-january-1655

[mm]

On Wed, 3 Feb 2016 07:22:02 +0000 (UTC), mm <mm2...@bigfoot.com>
wrote:

>
>>

>>When I worked at 42 Broadway, I often ate lunch on the grass in
>>Bowling Green Park, a fenced in park just north of the Customs House.
>>And at the south end of the park was a statue of Peter Stuyvesant,
>>with a bronze plaque that said roughly, "Under Peter Stuyvesant, Jews
>>got political rights in New Amsterdam". Without mentioning that he
>>was against it!!!! Like you say, the Jews had to write back to
>>Amersterdam, to friends and family, some of whom were stockholders in
>>the company, to get his idea reversed. I didn't know that when I
>>first saw the statue. BTW, the Dutch *West* India Company.
>>
>>I moved from NY in 1983. Around 1990 I was visiting a friend working
>>in lower Manhattan and I made a point to stop by the park to see if
>>the plaque was still there but the whole statue was gone. Of course
>>NYC makes a point of rotating some of its stuff -- there's a
>>warehouse, I think, between Riverside Drive and the West Side Highway
>>around 150th or 160th St. where they store copies of much of the good
>>stuff, and probably store the good stuff sometimes while displaying
>>copies -- so maybe it's back. I hope by this time the plaque, though
>>literally true, has been changed.
>
>http://digitalhistory.hsp.org/pafrm/doc/jewish-petition-dutch-west-india-company-january-1655

Jewish Petition to Dutch West India Company
Author(s): Dutch West India Company January 1655

1655, January Petition of the Jewish Nation

To the Honorable Lords, Directors of the Chartered West India Company,
Chamber of the City of Amsterdam.

Granted that they may reside and traffic, provided they shall not
become a charge upon the deaconry or the Company.2 The merchants of
the Portuguese Nation residing in this City3 respectfully remonstrate
to your Honors that it has come to their knowledge that your Honors
raise obstacles to the giving of permits or passports to the
Portuguese Jews to travel and to go to reside in New Netherland,4
which if persisted in will result to the great disadvantage of the
Jewish nation. It also can be of no advantage to the general Company
but rather damaging.
There are many of the nation who have lost their possessions at
Pernambuco5 and have arrived from there in great poverty, and part of
them have been dispersed here and there. So that your petitioners had
to expend large sums of money for their necessaries of life, and
through lack of opportunity all cannot remain here to live. And as
they cannot go to Spain or Portugal because of the Inquisition,6 a
great part of the aforesaid people must in time be obliged to depart
for other territories of their High Mightinesses the States-General
and their Companies,7 in order there, through their labor and efforts,
to be able to exist under the protection of the administrators of your
Honorable Directors, observing and obeying your Honors' orders and
commands.
It is well known to your Honors that the Jewish nation in Brazil have
at all times been faithful and have striven to guard and maintain that
place, risking for that purpose their possessions and their blood.
Yonder land8 is extensive and spacious. The more of loyal people that
go to live there, the better it is in regard to the population of the
country as in regard to the payment of various excises and taxes which
may be imposed there, and in regard to the increase of trade, and also
to the importation of all the necessaries that may be sent there.
Your Honors should also consider that the Honorable Lords, the
Burgomasters9 of the City and the Honorable High Illustrious Mighty
Lords, the States-General,

Page 2
have in political matters always protected and considered the Jewish
nation as upon the same footing as all the inhabitants and burghers.10
Also it is conditioned in the treaty of perpetual peace with the King
of Spain11 that the Jewish nation shall also enjoy the same liberty as
all other inhabitants of these lands.
Your Honors should also please consider that many of the Jewish nation
are principal shareholders in the Company. They having always striven
their best for the Company, and many of their nation have lost immense
and great capital in its shares and obligations.
The Company has by a general resolution consented that those who wish
to populate the Colony shall enjoy certain districts of land gratis.
Why should now certain subjects of this State not be allowed to travel
thither and live there? The French consent that the Portuguese Jews
may traffic and live in Martinique, Christopher and others of their
territories, whither also some have gone from here, as your Honors
know. The English also consent at the present time that the Portuguese
and Jewish nation may go from London and settle at Barbados, whither
also some have gone.
As foreign nations consent that the Jewish nation may go to live and
trade in their territories, how can your Honors forbid the same and
refuse transportation to this Portuguese nation who reside here and
have been settled here well on to about sixty years, many also being
born here and confirmed burghers, and this to a land that needs people
for its increase?
Therefore the petitioners request, for the reasons given above (as
also others which they omit to avoid prolixity), that your Honors be
pleased not to exclude but to grant the Jewish nation passage to and
residence in that country; otherwise this would result in a great
prejudice to their reputation. Also that by an Apostille and Act the
Jewish nation be permitted, together with other inhabitants, to
travel, live and traffic there, and with them enjoy liberty on
condition of contributing like others, &c. Which doing, &c.

Source Information:
Title
Jewish Petition to Dutch West India Company
Authors
Unknown
Dutch West India Company
Collection Information
The Historical Society of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA
Am.226
Translated by Oppenheim, Samuel

[Beach Runner]

You are dead on on 93-638. That is the legislature the Loneman School Corporation used to sue the BIA to take control of the local school.

Of course, they had a brilliant proponent in Edwin Fills the Pipe, who had served in the military and was brilliant. He was going to be the next tribal president, but died at age 39, I'm sure through murder.

During the 70s the left wing Indians and right wing Indians were
Aim versus Goons were killing each other right and left.
Thus, where I lived was the homicide leader by percentage in the country.'
AIM really screwed up the reservation, there was a trading post on the reservation at Wounded Knee where people bought indian crafts and then resold them. They provided a service, someone to buy their goods.
Aim leaders claimed they didn't pay them enough.

So why didn't they start their own business? Why didn't they start anything
to help the people? The people that owned the trading post were good people and trying to make a living while helping the local tribes.

They splintered the community leading to violence and death, and they were outsiders, not members of the local tribe.

[malcolm...@btinternet.com]

On Wednesday, February 3, 2016 at 1:26:13 AM UTC, hjw...@panix.com wrote:
> mm <mm2...@bigfoot.com> wrote:
> > On Mon, 1 Feb 2016 01:33:06 +0000 (UTC), cindys
> > <cst...@rochester.rr.com> wrote:
>
> > >On Sunday, January 31, 2016 at 10:20:41 AM UTC-5, malcolm...@btinternet.com wrote:
> > >> On Sunday, January 31, 2016 at 3:52:09 AM UTC, Beach Runner wrote:
> > >> > An athiest has just as much rights as any other religion.
> > >> >
> > >> > What prayers? How about American Prayers?
> > >> > The Oglala Lakota were Americans and worshipped Wankan Tanka.
> > >> >
> > >> > I'm sure you must mean American Prayers like that, right?
> > >> > Not some European foreign prayers.
> Currently most Indian prayers are very generic (often referring to
> grandfather) and very speific to purpose that they arew gathered, Prare
> often includes a song and smudging,
>

When you say "prayer must be prohibited / mandated in public schools", of course
you are implicitly writing a European or Old World concept into law.
American Indians probably have a word in their language which loosely
translates as "prayer". In English, the word "prayer" actually mean "petition"
("pray silence Ladies and Gentlemen for the Lord Mayor's address"),
though it's now lost that meaning. The Indian word will have similar nuances,
it might not actually mean the same thing at all as the English word prayer.

(Note the Hebrew word is a hithpael, does it really match the English concept?)

[Shelly]

We all know the current meaning of "prayer". BTW, I don't believe that
"prayer", the noun, was used in the context you used. Rather, "pray",
the verb, was, and still is to a limited extent. So, what is your point?
It is totally clear that what is meant here is prohibiting prayer to a
supernatural being and that is part of the liturgy of any established
religion. No one would object to "We pray for everyone's continued good
health and happiness.", not even me. In that context it is commonly
understood to mean "good wishes".

Our Bill of Rights prohibits the state from establishing a religion.
Having prayers that are part of the LITURGY, or containing references to
religious people, of any established religion take place in GOVERNMENT
funded places is prohibited.

Do we have to make it any clearer to you? I hope not.

--
Shelly

[Beach Runner]

I have to address Malcom's comments on Native American religions. I'm sure
he has absolutely no experience with them. Using the Lakota, while in the
Sweat hut, the pass the pipe, and when the pipe reaches each person, they
offer their own prayer to Wankan Tanka, composed on the spot.

The Native American Church, which is a blend of Native American religions under the name Church is mostly full of symbolism, the use of psychodelic
mushrooms to seek visions, but the most important part of the religion
remains water.

The point is there was tremendous diversity in Native American religions.

He made a reference to toteem poles, which applies to very few tribes.

The Aztecs had a completely different religion, and believed in human sacrifices.

You can't say how Native American's worshipped or different, their religious
practices were as different as their languages. Many, such as the Lakota
did indeed "petition G-d" as you put.

What you can say is that 95% of the Native Population were killed by
Europeans, mostly by disease. There were great cities and civilizations
in the Americas, in many ways many civilians far more civilized, cultured,
and scientific than the Europeans. The Mayans calander was more advanced,
they had great cities with sewers and water supplies, food storage, knowledge of medicine, science, astronomy, big cities with excellent living conditions. They were only defeated with germs.

Don't believe 50 Spainish solders defeated vast numbers of South American Native people, most were dead by the time they reached them.

The Apaches recognized the dangers and avoided all contact with European and survived until they were hunted down like dogs. In 1924 a band of Appaches
came across the Mexican boarder and raided a US town. They were not stupid.
Only the endless waves of solders defeated them.

I only claim to have any real knowledge about the Lakota religion, and some of the Native American Church because I experienced and studied them. It involved study, questioning, observation, and even participation. Have

Don't let a complete lack of knowledge on the subject stop you from offering
your views. You brought up that Americans should pray, so I could only assume you meant an American religion.

[Yisroel Markov]

On Fri, 29 Jan 2016 01:49:06 +0000 (UTC), Harry Weiss
<hjw...@panix.com> said:

>Harry Weiss <hjw...@panix.com> wrote:
>> cindys <cst...@rochester.rr.com> wrote:
>> > On Wednesday, January 27, 2016 at 8:58:03 PM UTC-5, hjw...@panix.com wrote:
>> > snip
>> > >
>> > > If G-d forbid
>> > > someone like Cruz gets in and tries to legislate xianity I will not
>> > > comply.
>
>> > ---------------
>> > By what legal process can an American president legislate a religion? Unless Cruz managed to pull off a military coup, how could he enact a law that openly violated the Constitution and the Bill of Rights? And what form would this legislation take? A law that says every American citizen must accept Jesus or go to jail? Come on Harry!
>> > Best regards,
>> > ---Cindy S.
>
>> --
>
>What I wrote did not make it, Until the 1960s US Public schoos begain the
>day with a Bible reading and the lords prayer, The Supreme Court rule
>that it violated the separation of chhurch and state, A few new members
>on the court could change that back to the way it was,
>
>There is more that could be legislated in with compliant SC,

Indeed. But the key word is "legislated," and I'll add another one:
"on the federal level." Do you honestly see America going that way?
That SC decision was a part of a continuing trend.

And, perhaps more importantly, was the USA in the state of "legislated
Christianity" prior to that SC decision?
--
Yisroel "Godwrestler Warriorson" Markov - Boston, MA Member
www.reason.com -- for a sober analysis of the world DNRC
--------------------------------------------------------------------
"Judge, and be prepared to be judged" -- Ayn Rand

[Yisroel Markov]

On Fri, 29 Jan 2016 16:17:25 +0000 (UTC), Shelly
<shel...@thevillages.net> said:

>On 1/29/2016 9:53 AM, cindys wrote:
>> On Friday, January 29, 2016 at 9:09:45 AM UTC-5, malcolm...@btinternet.com wrote:
>>> On Friday, January 29, 2016 at 8:42:26 AM UTC, googy wrote:
>>>>
>>>> BTW, have you all ever noticed that they had prayer at schools, but
>>>> lots of other public places they didn't have any.
>>>>
>>>> And what about the bus and the subway. Some people read but others
>>>> just stare out the window. Why no prayer there?
>>>>
>>>> It's because they think they can influence children, but adults
>>>> wouldn't stand for it.
>>>>
>>> Children aren't adults.
>>> We had a rule at school that you may ask for a small but not a large.
>>> There was also a threat that anyone using the salt cellar as a dalek
>>> would be made to ingest the entire contents.
>>>
>>> It's appropriate that adults teach children how to worship as part
>>> of their induction into a society that worships, just as it is to teach
>>> table manners.
>>
>> -----
>> Sometimes I can't help but wonder if you post this kind of rubbish just to incite a reaction. Are you *trying* to start a flame war?????

All he's doing is presenting a European's viewpoint. In a non-diverse
population, children attending a given school are likely to be all
from the same cultural or religious group, and such instruction would
be only logical. This is why American public schools had religious
instruction and/or prayer until their populations diversified.

>> The USA (since this is the society under discussion) is a society where some people worship and others don't. And the ones who do worship have different ways to worship. So, it is is completely inappropriate for a taxpayer-funded school to force children to recite prayers that contradict their parents' type of worship (or lack thereof).
>>
>> If I am a Jewish parent, I don't want my children reciting Christian prayers (or any kind of prayers provided by a public school), and if I am an atheist parent, I surely don't want my children reciting any prayers at all. And a tax-payer-funded school doesn't have the right to impose somebody else's belief system on my children. Sorry.
>>
>> Freedom of worship or to not worship. That is the right of every American. It's guaranteed by the US Constitution and the Bill of Rights, and your nonsense statements from across the pond about "inducting children into a society that worships" don't trump the rights of Americans to be free from this type of religious coercion.

AISI, he's not trumping anything. Or suggesting that it should.

>I agree with one minor correction. That right in the US is not in the
>Constitution. It is in the Bill of Rights which comprise the first ten
>amendments to the Constitution.

Huh? It's in the Constitution, as amended.

[Yisroel Markov]

On Tue, 2 Feb 2016 17:49:04 +0000 (UTC), Beach Runner
<lowh...@gmail.com> said:

[snip]

>But there has also been a stream of people that did convert, more often
>when they faced death. How many pretended to convert, such as in Spain?
>Secret Jews.

About 70-80% converted, and it started before the expulsion of 1492.
How many of them only pretended is hard to say, but definitely not all
- the Jews were quite demoralized after 1391. Several converts rose
high in the Catholic hierarchy; the archbishop of Toledo is the
best-known example. I daresay he was sincere.

For some details, see
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/Inquisition.html

[snip]

>This is a freedom that the Christian Evangelists and many other Christians want to take away. Cruz being just one horrible example that wants Christian prayers in the schools.

There's been several mentions of that already. But I looked at
RightWingWatch.org and Americans United, and I could find no reference
to Cruz expressing such a desire. Have you?

[snip]

>And I love Sander's goal to provide free college education for everyone.
>It would be a great equalizer.

[facepalm] Fixing a failed policy by having more of it. Yeah, great
idea. </sarcasm>