Of course it isn't. You job is to defend anti-Christian bigotry. And you're doing an excellent job by the way. On the your second idiotic statement: So it's okay to denigrate a person if he makes money from it,....right?
Posted on 04/22/2006 11:43:32 PM PDT by freddymuldoon
The Bully Might Get Punched Back
© Rabbi Daniel Lapin
Two years have now elapsed since Mel Gibson released his movie “The Passion” and since various Jewish organizations launched their notorious attacks on religious conservatives. Since then, Mel has moved on to film a new movie, also in an unusual and unspoken foreign language. “Apocalypto” follows the adventures of a long-ago Mayan hero.
However the same Jewish organizations have not moved on. When their bizarre predictions of pogroms in Pittsburgh and massacres in Mississippi failed to materialize, they just continued with more of the same attacks. These organizations whose purpose is to undermine Biblical faith and promote secular liberalism in America have a dream.
Their dream is to overwhelm what they see as the big bad giant of American Christianity. There is only one thing wrong with this image. The giant has not been brought to his knees at all. He has just been awoken.
Here are three reasons why liberal Jewish attacks on the sleeping giant of American religious conservatism are ill-advised.
Reason one is that according to Judaism's ethical Torah-based guidance, ingratitude is immoral. Christianity’s cultural influence in America is precisely the reason that we Jews have lived so much better lives here than in any other country.
No other country has a higher proportion of Bible-owning households. Neither does any other industrialized country have a higher proportion of its population proclaiming a belief in God or attending worship services more regularly. Needless to say, support for most Jewish concerns have been steadfast and wholehearted on the part of nearly 100 million Christians.
Most serious Christians do however stop short of embracing another Jewish concern, namely secular liberalism. This is because many rightfully challenge the popular but false equation--Judaism equals liberalism. Furthermore, many religious conservatives attribute society's decline to liberalism, and I think they are largely correct.
It is entirely because religious conservatives oppose liberalism that they have fallen victim to Jewish organizational anger. Self-appointed Jewish leaders are being dishonest when they claim that their aversion to Christian conservatism is because of First Amendment concerns. I think all Americans are entitled to their opinions and if Jewish liberals wish to oppose religious conservatives such as myself or my Christian friends, good luck to them. It is when they attack Christians as Jews rather than as liberals that I take issue.
The second reason that I consider Jewish broadsides against Christian conservatives to be a bad idea is that their arguments have little integrity. For instance, one constantly hears that Christian conservatives pose a threat to religious freedom for Jews. Let us be honest: do they really mean they want religious freedom? Or is it freedom from religion that they seek?
To Jews, religious freedom is not merely a pretty phrase. For two thousand years we have fled, frightened and penniless, from one temporary haven to the next. For the most part, we have not done so for financial reasons but for reasons of religious freedom. Religious freedom really does mean something specific to us.
Religious freedom means not being killed for being Jewish. It means being allowed to pray three times a day. It means being able to secure meat that was slaughtered according to Jewish dietary rules called Kosher and it means being able to circumcise our infant sons eight days after their birth.
Blessedly, here in the United States, none of these religious freedoms seem to be in jeopardy. However, let us honestly examine whether they are closer to being threatened by modern liberalism or by contemporary conservatism. Where has an American Jew been killed for nothing other than being a Jew, and a visibly religious Jew at that? Was it in some Bible-belt town? No, Yankel Rosenbaum was murdered by Lemrick Nelson Jr. in the one city that more than any other, has traveled furthest down the road advocated by Jewish liberalism—New York.
Does anybody seriously believe that part of Dr. James Dobson's agenda is the banning of shechita, ritual slaughtering? Or is it more likely to come about at the hands of the radical fringe of the animal-rights movement so embraced by the Democratic Party? It should be remembered that when Sweden banned shechita, it did so under pressure from its animal rights extremists on the left, not because of Lutheran pastors.
In America today there are numerous attacks against circumcision, including the formation of national organizations such as "NOCIRC." Without exception these antagonists of circumcision identify themselves as liberals, not as Christian conservatives. Not altogether surprisingly, some of these anti-circumcision groups are even Jewish. The point is however that it is dishonest to accuse Christian conservatives of threatening our freedom to circumcise our boys.
The assault on prayer and upon tax relief for those who prefer to send their children to Jewish schools is already well under way. Needless to say, this is from liberals not conservatives. Why, therefore, are we attacking conservatives who are in favor of precisely those measures that would assist Jewish continuity? As I said, not only is it immoral, it is also a very bad idea.
Finally, my third reason for discouraging Jewish organizations from attacking religious conservatives is that these attacks increase anti-Jewish sentiment in those parts of America located between the Hudson River and Beverly Hills. Oh yes, I know that we Jews have learned to effectively silence our critics by bludgeoning them with the charge of anti-Semitism. The trouble is that sometimes in life we need friends not merely neighbors who seethe quietly. History reminds us that the latter are all to apt to smugly watch us being administered the medicine that they were unable to deliver themselves. Additionally, I feel that we will eventually over-use the charge of anti-Semitism; perhaps even to the point of rendering it quite impotent.
Most Christian political positions cannot be contested on the basis of traditional Jewish values. Which means that smart Jews should ask what Jewish interest is being served by our self-appointed spokesmen conducting these assaults on our Christian friends and neighbors?
Another question worth asking is whether the war that is being waged by less than two percent of America's population against some fifty percent of Americans is likely to improve or diminish the quality of life for American Jews? One day the bully might get punched back.
***
You mistake my amusement for "speaking out"? There's your problem. I'm amused that Christians (and not just here, I got an ear full last weekend from my family) are all upset over a work of fiction.
I guess some people just prefer to feel victimized.
Exactly what part of the story do you feel denigrates Christians or Christianity?
Did you make ANY comments when Mel Gibson's Passion of Christ was being lambasted?
Nope, that's not my job. I'd guess Mel was offended all the way to the bank on that one.
You SHOULD have asked, "What part of the story DIDN'T denigrate Christians or Christianity? It would be easier to answer.
font size="+7" NONE OF IT!!!!
It's utterly laughable that people like you who have never cracked open the Bible in your life should be taling about this subject at all. If you had read any of it, you wouldn't have asked such an ignorant question as that.
Go and read the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John and you will find the answer to that question yourself. I won't even have say a word.
Of course it isn't. You job is to defend anti-Christian bigotry. And you're doing an excellent job by the way. On the your second idiotic statement: So it's okay to denigrate a person if he makes money from it,....right?
That's because you're soooooo broad-minded and so much more "hep to the jive" than all of us Christian neanderthals.
Amused?
Like "Look at the amusing children playing"?
Amused like amused by low humor?
Amused like from a superior position?
Amused like Thurston Howell III at the hijinx of the lower classes attempting to think?
"Oh my, aren't they amusing. Ha haha Ha."
You are amused.
How interesting.
A good thing to remember under all curcumstanceses.
Funny, his autobiography says that he was raised Christian.
Dan Brown doesn't speak for Jews.
Anti Semitism is diminishing in the US, but is still real, regardless of Dan Brown.
The one thing I agree with you on is that anti Semitism is no excuse for anti Christianism, which is also real.
Sorry, that's incorrect. Thanks for playing.
There were Christian neanderthals? Check your timeline...
There are people here in Minnesota who happen to take the DaVinci Code seriously. To the point of carrying more weight than the Bible.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.