From: makowsky@enuxha.eas.asu.edu (David Makowsky)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Re: Autopsy - Kahane and Rosenbaum
Summary: More crap.
Date: 5 Nov 92 18:10:16 GMT
Reply-To: makowsky@enuxha.eas.asu.edu (David Makowsky)
Organization: Arizona State University, Tempe AZ

In article <dfs.720896417@vash> dfs@doe.carleton.ca (David F. Skoll) writes:

# In <1992Nov3.213836.26587@ennews.eas.asu.edu>
# makowsky@enuxha.eas.asu.edu (David Makowsky) writes:
 
# >	I tell you what.  Just (for only one out of many examples) read
# >what the Jews must do with the inhabitants of the land.
 
# Yes, I know all about that - the tribes which must be destroyed, etc.
# However, perhaps you'v missed the news - Rabbinical rulings from the
# time of the Talmud declared that those commandments had been fulfilled,
# and that there was no more reason to continue hunting the seven tribes.
# I believe a similar ruling applies to the case of Amalek.
 
	Let us just say, for example, that you are correct about the
Rabbinical rulings (I am pretty sure you are incorrect with respect to
the tribes, and I am definitely sure you are incorrect with respect to
Amalek).  Let us again say that those laws only applied during the
time of Joshua's conquest.  Were those laws racist during the times
they were in effect?

	Now let us move forward to current times and assume those laws no
longer apply.  Does the fact that those laws no longer apply (only
consider it with respect to this aspect) make them any less or more
racist today (Igore right/wrong or anything else.  I am only
interested in discussing the "racist" issue.)?

# [In response to my comparison of Makowsky with Schmidling:]
# >	Everyone except for Mr. Skoll please skip 4 lines:
 
# >	Mr. Skoll. FUCK YOU!!!!!!

# Thanks.  Very reasoned argument.

	It was not intended to be an argument.  It was, however, very well
reasoned and deserved.

# >	I will make aliyah in the near future.
 
# That's great for the US, but not so good for Israel.

	"Thanks.  Very reasoned argument."

# >By the way, do you deny
# >that Judaism calls for all Jews to eventually be in Israel?

# The operative word is "eventually."

	I will ignore both your sillyness and the fact that you deleted
the context of my response.  Do you believe there is anything wrong
according to Judaism with facilitating the immediate movement of all
Jews to Israel?

# >As for
# >escaping a holy war in Israel, I bet the victims of the holocaust
# >would have taken that risk.  Would you?
 
# No, because Canada is not Nazi Germany.  I have never said that I
# intend to make Aliyah.  I may someday, but as far as I can see,
# Canada is my home.

	I will again ignore that you took out the context of what I was
responding to.  Not to make aliya is both your right and you priveledge.
However, for some, having to fight an external enemy is a much better
shot than fighting one that lives around you as a majority (and you
would know what I am talking about if you had not deleted the
context).

# ># In fact, I read a book of his called "Uncomfortable Questions for
# ># Comfortable Jews", which is in Carleton U's library.

# >	So, what did you think about the book, and what does it say about
# >his political views?

# I thought he was extremely reactionary and intolerant.

	Some examples please?  You should know that some people who
vehemently disagree with the Rabbi's political views give that
particular book especially high praise.

# >	Why don't you read "They Must Go".

# I'll look for it.

	Good.
--
"For all I care, you can send your money to the Hitler memorial fund, too, if
that pleases you."

From  arens@vaxa.isi.edu (Yigal Arens) in article <9323@venera.isi.edu>