Victory for Israel's right as loyalty oath set to become law

[Tripmann]

http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/victory-for-israel-s-right-as-loyalty-oath-set-to-become-law-1.317565

A controversial national loyalty oath took a step closer to becoming law on Wednesday as Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu lost a battle to soften the wording of the proposed citizen's declaration.

Ministers approved a draft of the proposed oath, which would require anyone taking Israeli citizenship to swear allegiance to Israel as a "Jewish and democratic state".

The government now looks almost certain to pass the ammendment Israel's citizenship law in a vote on Sunday. The debate will then pass to the Knesset's legislative committee and final to a full parliamentary vote.

The attempt to enforce recognition of Israel as uniquely Jewish has been deeply controversial, particularly among Israel's Arab citizens, who make up a fifth of the country's population.

Still trying to find out what this 'jewish state' thing actually means.

[Tempest]

1. What exactly is democratic about a loyalty oath?

Isn't that something more akin to what was required by Nazi Germany, and other despotic ruled countries?

[Tripmann]

2. Hit nail on head. Its the jewish and democratic state phrase that bothers me

Does it mean a democratic state as long as you're jewish? Does it mean favouritism based on religion. If it does then you're talking about pledging allegiance to apartheid.

[ProgressiveMajority]

48. Yup. How about we require Zionists in the US to swear an oath

How about we require Zionists, AIPAC and so forth in the US to swear an oath of loyalty to America? Let's see how that would go down with the people who voted for this.

[kayecy]

3. I wonder how many US Jews would be prepared..........

I wonder how many US Jews would be prepared to swear allegiance to a "Christian and democratic state"?

[FiveGoodMen]

8. About the same number as atheists and agnostics who are supposed to pledge allegiance

to the flag of "one nation under gawd"

[Donald Ian Rankin]

40. Rather higher, I suspect.

Swearing allegiance to a nebulous concept of "God" that doesn't actually mean anything is less bad than having to swear allegiance to a specific interpretation of God with declared rules for how you live your life, many of them bad ones.

[oberliner]

44. There are no such components involved here

Nothing to do with having an allegiance to a specific interpretation of God or any rules about how to live ones life.

[ProgressiveMajority]

45. YES IT DOES, the oath says "Jewish" state

This effort on the part of the Israeli right is yet more evidence that the country is in the moral wrong. Judaism is a specific religion with all the accompanying tenants and so forth.

This is no different than the Christian Militia types who want to enshrine the US as a "Christian" nation.
Edit: Well, it is different, these people actually got the law passed in Israel

[oberliner]

49. Citizens of Israel are not required to practice Judaism

or any of its tenants .

Also, the law hasn't passed yet in Israel.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

51. If it does they'll be required to swear allegiance to it, though.

And no, it hasn't passed yet; the question is "would it be a good thing if it did"? When pressed you've confirmed that you think it wouldn't, but you're clearly having fun defending it even so.

[oberliner]

52. If ifs and buts were candy and nuts we'd all have a merry christmas

Israel does not require citizens to practice Judaism.

I have made it clear that I do not support this proposed legislation; that does not mean that I will not still correct information posted here that is inaccurate.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

54. "The government now looks almost certain to pass the ammendment Israel's citizenship law"

From the OP: The government now looks almost certain to pass the ammendment Israel's citizenship law in a vote on Sunday.

This isn't some nebulous hypothetical, as you're trying to make it out to be.

And you're not correcting inaccuracies, you're - at best - spreading a disenting opinion.

[oberliner]

56. The law has nothing to do with anyone's religion

That is my point - not that the law won't pass, probably it will, just that the law does not require people to practice Judaism.

The nebulous hypothetical came from your post where you suggested that this may indeed happen someday.

Therein lies the inaccuracy.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

53. Simply not true

The oath demands that one swear allegiance to continuing the state of affairs whereby Israel's laws are heavily derived from Judaism - not just in the sense of "draw on Jewish moral tradition", but in the sense of "gives official legal standing to religious courts and law" and "actively discriminates against those who don't agree to convert to Judaism".

So yes, this oath is very much demanding that all Israelis swear allegiance to Judaism (even if they don't practice it) and obey its rules, and denying them the right to challenge those rules through the democratic process.

[no_hypocrisy]

4. A country can't both be "Jewish" and "democratic" as one limits the other's efficacy.

As a corollary, if this country were a "Christian Nation", the law would be based on biblical law, not the secular constitution.

[Tripmann]

That comment reminds me of an old joke.....

Kid: Mammy mammy, when I grow up I want to be a man

Mother: You better pick one son, cause you can't do both

[Tripmann]

11. Dupe

[whosinpower]

16. Yeah - I am not sure Israel has a formal written constitution

Here is an interesting article on the subject.

http://www.jcpa.org/dje/articles/const-intro-93.htm

snip - Israel has been unable to adopt a constitution full blown, not because it does not share the new society understanding of constitution as fundamental law, but because of a conflict over what constitutes fundamental law within Israeli society.


The article is an academic one, but seems quite good at explaining the situation.

[Peter1x9]

5. Pretty Ironic

Israel keeps drifting closer and closer to fascism.

[Tempest]

7. It's a natural progression

The more a people feel they are victims, the more likely they become victimizers.

The German people in the 1930s saw themselves as the victims of post WWI agreements and it gave rise to the Nazi party.

[issy98]

18. Appears you have little

knowledge of fascism if you believe that simplistic notion.

[shaayecanaan]

22. "A true anti-fascist must

oppose the Serbs when they oppress the Croats
oppose the Croats when they oppress the Muslims (Bosnians)
and oppose the Muslims when they oppress the Gypsies"

-Tito

[azurnoir]

6. something that is unclear

would people that are currently Israeli citizens be required to take this oath or only those who are "becoming" Israeli citizens?

[Tempest]

9. New citizens, but you know it will be expanded

It will be expanded to include government workers, the military and any place else the extreme right in Israel wants to have covered.

[azurnoir]

26. only new citizens that are nonJewish see #25

I think that it is non Jewish citizens that this law is aimed at and in time will be required for all non-Jewish citizens of Israel

[CJvR]

10. At least the Jihadists have seen the paradox.

IIRC some jihadist fanatics declared democracy un-Islamic a while ago, concluding quite correctly that democracy repalced rule of god with rule of man.

[dixiegrrrrl]

12. How hypocritical.

The US is "one nation under gawd" as pointed out above, ( and apparently no longer offers liberty and justice for all).

Israel wants to be identified as a Jewish state ( thereby formally disfranchising all Muslims and other religious
and/or non-religious citizens)
and yet both US and Israel condemn Muslim countries from feeling the same way about their religion.

So, no agnostics allowed in any of those places.?

How many here remember and can repeat the Oath of Allegiance we took as school kids, facing the flag, one hand on our hearts?

[RaleighNCDUer]

13. Which number is 'loyalty oaths' in the signs of fascism? nt

[whosinpower]

14. Netanyahu did not lose the battle

He agreed to the new wording - which was almost exactly like the old wording.....

If he did not agree to the new wording, it never would of come up for a vote.

This "oath" makes a farce out of democracy, and serves a clear notice to Arab citizens, atheist citizens and christian citizens that, as far as government is concerned, their contributions to the society, culture, intellect, hard work and sweat in the state of Israel means nothing.....nothing at all.

[whosinpower]

15. I have a question

These new immigrants who wish to become citizens.....
according to Jpost - immigrants who fall under the right of return law will not be required to take the oath....

So - this "oath" is really targetting Israeli Arabs who wish to bring over palistinian spouses - at least that is what Jpost insinuated.

Here is my question then....so Mr Israeli Arab falls in love with Miss Palistinian and marries her. He wants to bring her back to his home in Tel Aviv. He wants to start a new life. What becomes of their children? If Miss Palistinian TAKES the oath, because she dearly loves her man, and she wishes to be with him.....what becomes of their children? Are they automatically Israeli?

[azurnoir]

19. Not sure about that the better question is will Miss Palestinian be allowed to

live with her husband in Israel

Illegals must pledge allegiance to Jewish state to stay

Amendment presumes Palestinians won’t apply for fear of retribution.

Cabinet officials clarified on Monday that an amendment to the temporary provision of the Citizenship and Entry into Israel Law whereby illegal residents who are married to Israelis and asking for citizenship must declare allegiance to Israel as a “Jewish democratic state” has not yet been passed. The amendment is still under consideration, officials said.

The measure is designed to make it more difficult for Palestinians married to Israeli Arabs to gain citizenship on the basis of family unification.

Security officials told the cabinet that since the construction of the West Bank security barrier, terrorist organizations had been looking to enlist the children of couples made up of Israeli Arabs and Palestinians to gather intelligence, prepare the groundwork for terrorist attacks, and even carry out the attacks themselves. The officials said that terrorist groups were trying to recruit people from this population because their Israeli ID cards gave them freedom of movement between Israel and the PA.

<snip>

The assumption behind the new “pledge of allegiance” is that it would deter Palestinians from asking for citizenship, because they would not want to be branded as collaborators.

http://www.jpost.com/Israel/Article.aspx?id=181847

[whosinpower]

29. That too is a good question

And when a person takes into consideration, that this comes from the same guy who thinks redrawing the borders to better reflect demographics......even IF they take the oath, and are exemplary, the state will not necessarily protect their interests.

[Jim Sagle]

17. Good.

[Crunchy Frog]

20. Racism. It's a Good thing.

[Jim Sagle]

21. Self-defense isn't racism.

[shaayecanaan]

23. But you are (nt)

[Jim Sagle]

27. Say it in Engllish, please.

[azurnoir]

24. Explain how making nonJews take anloyalty oath to a Jewish state

is self defense, especially the ones that are already citizens or will you claim that will never ever happen?

[Ken Burch]

28. A loyalty oath isn't part of self-defense

It's McCarthyism.

It was wrong in this country in 1949.

It's wrong in Israel now.

[issy98]

46. Unfortunately for you

Israel couldn't give a flying f**k what you think. Lot's of countries have citizenship oaths for new citizens. Stop taking a double standard.

[Ken Burch]

47. I'm not taking a double standard

I'd make the same objection if the U.S. started making people swear oaths to it as "a Christian state".

I've ALWAYS been against loyalty oaths.

[LeftishBrit]

62. If it were about ALL new citizens, that would be one thing

But it seems specific to Arabs. That is unfair and bigoted. Why should not the RW settlers - and for that matter Lieberman himself, who immigrated as an adult - have to swear such an oath? Many such people IMO show questionable loyalty to Israel as a *democratic* state.

There are certainly plenty of other countries that discriminate against particular groups; that doesn't make it a good thing for any of those countries.

[Name removed]

61. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[azurnoir]

25. Labor expects new settlement freeze as payoff for loyalty oath

Junior coalition partner furious after PM hands victory to right-wingers with backing for citizenship requirement of pledging loyalty to 'Jewish democratic state.'

Labor party ministers angered by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's snap decision to back a controversial citizenship loyalty oath said late Wednesday that they expected a new freeze in settlement building as a payoff.

Netanyahu neglected to inform his Labor coalition partners that he had approved a right-wing minister's draft of a new oath that would require any non-Jew taking Israeli citizenship to swear allegiance to Israel as a "Jewish and democratic state."

emphasis mine

http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/labor-expects-new-settlement-freeze-as-payoff-for-loyalty-oath-1.317576

[oberliner]

30. So the establishment of a Palestinian state will not end the conflict?

The next phase, it seems, will be addressing the very idea of Israel's existence as a self-defined Jewish state.

[Tripmann]

31. And how do you 'define' the term "jewish state"?

[oberliner]

32. From the Declaration of Establishment of the State of Israel

THE STATE OF ISRAEL will be open for Jewish immigration and for the Ingathering of the Exiles; it will foster the development of the country for the benefit of all its inhabitants; it will be based on freedom, justice and peace as envisaged by the prophets of Israel; it will ensure complete equality of social and political rights to all its inhabitants irrespective of religion, race or sex; it will guarantee freedom of religion, conscience, language, education and culture; it will safeguard the Holy Places of all religions; and it will be faithful to the principles of the Charter of the United Nations.

http://www.mfa.gov.il/mfa/peace%20process/guide%20to%20the%20peace%20process/declaration%20of%20establishment%20of%20state%20of%20israel

[Crunchy Frog]

34. Then why not make ALL immigrants take the same oath?

[oberliner]

36. Well I think the whole idea of an oath is preposterous

I definitely oppose this move by the Israeli right-wingers and those who support them.

[whosinpower]

35. Therein lies the paradox

Lieberman knows the paradox and asks the citizens of Israel that it is time to make a choice.

Because - if it is true that Israel ensures complete equality of social and political rights to ALL its inhabitants irrespective of their religion, race or sex, then to demand a loyalty oath based on acknowledging that Israel is a jewish state is paradoxical.

Personally, I have no real issue with immigrants taking an oath of loyalty to the state they are immigrating to. By the same token, via citizenship, the state should clarify and guarentee the rights it acknowledges in the declaration of Independance to each and every successful applicant. And I will even go further, and say that this oath should NOT be segregated to non-jews - but to every single man, woman and child who wishes to gain citizenship. The foundation of equality demands no less.

There are over one million citizens of Israel who are not jewish. That their spouses(who may not be Israeli citizens) must endure a different set of rules and regulations than the right of return applicants have, already makes a mockery out the principles set out in the declaration. In a working democracy, the rights of the minorities have substance.

[oberliner]

37. Agreed

No oath for anyone or the same oath for everyone.

I totally oppose this move.

[Tripmann]

50. And you genuinely think this is what somebody taking the loyalty oath will be swearing to??

[Donald Ian Rankin]

55. Hilarious.

> THE STATE OF ISRAEL will be open for Jewish immigration and for the Ingathering of the Exiles;

Done that (although referring to us as "exiles" is racist and offensive - I'm in no way an exile from Israel, no matter how many zionists or antisemites tell me I am).


>it will safeguard the Holy Places of all religions;

Arguably done that, if by "safeguard" you mean "conquer and occupy, but not actually knock down".


>it will foster the development of the country for the benefit of all its inhabitants;
>it will be based on freedom, justice and peace as envisaged by the prophets of Israel;
>it will ensure complete equality of social and political rights to all its inhabitants irrespective of religion, race or sex; >it will guarantee freedom of religion, conscience, language, education and culture;
>and it will be faithful to the principles of the Charter of the United Nations.

Spat in the face of all these.

[oberliner]

57. Have you read the US founding documents?

Some pretty "hilarious" reading there as well.

Living up to the values one sets out for oneself is always a challenge.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

58. Only the edited highlights.

What I find most striking about the bits I've read is that they sound pretty close to the blueprint for a modern liberal democracy - especially if you look at the generalities and the platitudes rather than the small print - but they were written by a bunch of genocidal, racist, mysogynistic slavedrivers *who went on doing those things after writing those documents*.

I don't have a clear conclusion to draw from this, but it puzzles me.

I think it's very striking that several of the abuses set up in law by the founding fathers were overturned not by rewriting their constitution, but by just doing what it said.

[Violet_Crumble]

33. So you support the loyalty oath of the RW Nutty govt?

This article is about that, not about any possible Palestinian state coming into being. Do you support the 'loyalty oath'?

[oberliner]

38. No way

It is ridiculous and typical of Lieberman and his ilk to push something like this now.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

39. Let's hope so.

Both to "a Palestinian state ending the conflict" and "the next step being addressing Israel's self-definition as a Jewish state".

Israel's explicitly racist laws are not sufficient reason to attack it, but I very much hope they get changed. If it wants to remain a cosmetically Jewish state, that's fine; if it wants to continue it's current racist policies on e.g. immigration, land purchase, allocation of state funding etc then it needs to continue to be subjected to non-violent pressure even after a Palestinian state is founded.

"Being less wicked than we used to be" is no substitute for "not being wicked".

[oberliner]

41. I certainly don't hope so

If the two-state solution does not lead to peace between Israelis and Palestinians, then I certainly don't see that as something hopeful.

I certainly hope that Hamas and Islamic Jihad and others do not still feel the need to commit acts of "resistance" against Israel even after the occupation is over and a Palestinian state is established because they are displeased by Israel's definition of itself as a Jewish state.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

42. You might want to reread my post. You appear to think you're disagreeing with me.

Also, I said I hoped multiple things, and it's not clear which you don't hope.

[oberliner]

43. Done

Non-violent pressure - thanks.

Sorry for the quick trigger!

[txaslftist]

60. Heck no.

It would be just an interim step offered as a sop to the UN and others while Israel continues to work on their ethnic cleansing.

[LeftishBrit]

63. Huh?

An interim step to what? And what do you want to happen?

[txaslftist]

59. Maybe they could make a little badge...

for people who don't take the loyalty oath to wear on their clothing.

So these disloyal folks can be easily identified.