British Court of Appeals Bans Judaism

By many standards, the JFS applicant, identified in court papers as “M,” is Jewish. But not in the eyes of the school, which defines Judaism under the Orthodox definition set out by Jonathan Sacks, chief rabbi of the United Hebrew Congregations of the Commonwealth. Because M’s mother converted in a progressive, not an Orthodox, synagogue, the school said, she was not a Jew — nor was her son. It turned down his application.

In an explosive decision, the court concluded that basing school admissions on a classic test of Judaism — whether one’s mother is Jewish — was by definition discriminatory. Whether the rationale was “benign or malignant, theological or supremacist,” the court wrote, “makes it no less and no more unlawful.”

The case rested on whether the school’s test of Jewishness was based on religion, which would be legal, or on race or ethnicity, which would not. The court ruled that it was an ethnic test because it concerned the status of M’s mother rather than whether M considered himself Jewish and practiced Judaism.

“The requirement that if a pupil is to qualify for admission his mother must be Jewish, whether by descent or conversion, is a test of ethnicity which contravenes the Race Relations Act,” the court said. It added that while it was fair that Jewish schools should give preference to Jewish children, the admissions criteria must depend not on family ties, but “on faith, however defined.”

Now let’s pretend you have an IQ above 100 and are therefore not qualified to be a British judge.

The Court of Appeal decided that the Orthodox Jews’ Free School was engaging in racial discrimination because it required an conversion under Orthodox, rather than Reform auspices. In fact the Jews’ Free School was applying a religious test, rather than a racial one. Had they rejected a child because of a non-Jewish mother, that would have been a racial test. Instead they rejected the child because of a religious test. From a racial standpoint, the mother remains the same ethnicity and race that she did regardless of what conversion she undergoes. Her DNA does not change.

What this decision does though is nullify any conversion requirement, Orthodox or Reform or anything period. Which allows a British court to dictate the definition of Judaism by declaring its requirements for admission to be racist, something they have no right to do.

Now if Israel were to declare that the Catholic Church’s requirements for accepting Communion are discriminatory, there would be natural outrage. But now that the British Court of Appeals has decided what Judaism should be like, they can create their own version of Judaism.

Shin Bet Arrests Yaakov Teitel for Killing Jesus

The Israeli Authorities have done it again with the arrest of Yaakov Teitel, charged with committing every single unsolved crime in Israel over the last 2000 years… by no particular coincidence in time for the big Rabinaversary.

Yaakov Teitel has been charged with a long string of unrelated crimes committed with entirely different weapons over 10 years with no connection between them, except that after getting the crap beaten out of him for three days, Yaakov Teitel confessed to them. It’s not clear where exactly Yaakov Teitel managed to get explosives training, how he managed to make getaways from half a dozen crime scenes or even more incredibly smuggle an assault rifle past both US and Israeli customs… but the indictment does say that he’s actually the Jewish RAMBO.

Shin Bet spokesman Ilan Sheker has assured reporters that this is not at all a case of the Shabak grabbing some random mentally unstable right winger on their list and beating the crap out of him until he confesses to a bunch of crimes that it would have taken a Jewish James Bond to commit all together. And then planting a ton of weapons in his house. Not at all. The Shin Bet actually officially stopped doing that last year.

This is a totally legitimate case. Like the time that the Shin Bet totally did not send a guy to keep taunting Yigal Amir with chants of “When are you gonna do something about Rabin”, and then put a totally unrelated girl in jail for not warning them about it! Or creating a fake Jewish terrorist organization and then airing an undercover news report about it! No more! The Shin Bet now makes up only completely true stuff.

Anyway no celebration of that guy who got shot and we all felt sorry about it, cause we called him a Nazi… except it turned out that it was actually a Shabak agent who was holding up a Nazi poster… oops… would be complete without the ceremonial arrest of the right wing extremist for every crime over the last 2000 years… including killing Jesus.

I know those Shabak guys are great and all, but here’s my proposal. How about arresting some of those guys currently holding Gilad Shalit. Yeah I know, that’s too tough. It requires actually going into enemy territory and doing your job. Much easier to grab some patsy, scream at him and knock him around for a few days, and then dictate to him every unsolved crime he can confess to… so it totally looks like you’re not a bunch of incompetent thugs.

Anyway we can all sleep at night now, because Yaakov Teitel has finally been brought to justice for pipe bombing gay arab Jesus with an M-16.

Why Jews Don’t Vote Republican and Why Michael Medved is a Moron

Every now and then Jewish conservatives like to get together and wonder why Jews don’t vote Republican. Like most stupid questions, this is one of those things that can’t be answered because the idiots asking the question are operating on a wrong assumption.

Their assumption is that voting Republican would be better for Jews, than voting Democrat. The truth is that both parties are bad for the Jews. The Democrats may be worse by %16. But so what?

“Hey Gus, I can punch you in the face with my right fist or my left fist. My right fist will hurt you 16 percent less than my left fist. How about it?”

Yeah. Name anything the Democrats are bad at, affirmative action, high taxes, pressure on Israel… then tell me how the Republicans got rid of those things when they controlled the White House and Congress. Then stop and pause a bit so I can laugh in your face.

Sure every time I set foot in a polling booth in a national election I vote Republican, not because I seriously think things are going to change, but because I’ll take that +16% and because I’m an Orthodox Jew and may religion encourages rewarding good intentions, even if they don’t translate into anything tangible.

Most Jews in America are liberal or secular people who live in secular and liberal parts of the country. And Democrats speak their language very well. And guess who they vote for? The same people that the Methodists and Presbyterians they’re intermarried with vote for.

For most Jews the American Dream was about not being Jewish. And after reducing Judaism to a Broadway production, they know they’ve succeeded when they can self-righteously ignore any Jewish interests, and fight for the rights of Blacks, Mexicans and whoever instead. The Jewishness of their intermarried grandchildren who waved HOPE AND CHANGE banners is as relevant as Obama’s Swedishness… and let’s not pretend any different.

But back to why Michael Medved is a moron, because Commentary Magazine ran a forum on Why Dem Jews is Votingum Liberalese, and Medved the Great fell back on one of his rants about Jews voting liberal because they killed Jeebus. Or something equally stupid.

For most American Jews, the core of their Jewish identity isn’t solidarity with Israel; it’s rejection of Christianity.

Earth to Medved. Jews have one of the highest intermarriage rates of America… with Christians. If Jewish identity came down to rejecting Christianity, there would be no Jewish intermarriage except with Buddhists.

Jewish voters don’t embrace candidates based on their support for the state of Israel as much as they passionately oppose candidates based on their identification with Christianity—especially the fervent evangelicalism of the dreaded “Christian Right.”

If the issue is a Jewish rejection of Christianity, then why do Jews love Bill Clinton, who made a big point of his Christianity? Why did Jews vote for Jimmy Carter or Barack Obama? Clearly Christianity is not the issue. Conservative Christianity is the issue. So all Medved has done here is found a fancy way of saying that liberal Jews don’t like conservatives. Which we already knew.

Of course being the B.S. artist that he is, Medved tried to spin it into Jews not liking Christianity as a whole, rather than not liking Conservative Christianity specifically. Fail.

The contrasting components of the American Jewish population connect only through a point of common denial, not through any acts of affirmation.

Now give me a real life example of that.

Imagine a dialogue between Woody Allen and a youthful, idealistic emissary of the Hasidic Chabad movement

I said a real life example, not a ****ng Woody Allen movie, you ****ng moron. If you’re going to claim that the only thing Jews have in common is drinking Christian blood, you’d better be prepared to give real world examples, not imaginary dialogues being played out in your head.

The one area where they find common ground—and differ (together) from the majority of their fellow citizens—is their dismissal of New Testament theology, with its messianic claims for Jesus.

Also they both hate serial killers, like Mozart and chocolate. So what’s your point?

Woody Allen dismisses all religion. The Chabad Chassid dismisses all religion besides Judaism. To repeat Medved’s idiotic analogy, a Catholic and an Atheist would also share common ground in dismissing Judaism. Is that actually significant?

Anyone who doubts that rejection of Jesus has replaced acceptance of Torah (or commitment to Israel) as the eekur sach—the essential element—of American Jewish identity should pause to consider an uncomfortable question. What is the one political or religious position that makes a Jew utterly unwelcome in the organized community? We accept atheist Jews, Buddhist Jews, pro-Palestinian Jews, Communist Jews, homosexual Jews, and even sanction Hindu-Jewish meditation societies. “Jews for Jesus,” however, or “Messianic Jews” face resistance and exclusion everywhere.

Anyone who doubts that Michael Medved is too stupid to pudding with a spoon, has to decide that he’s completely dishonest instead.

There is no such thing as Messianic Jews, only Christian missionaries. A Catholic church and a Mormon church and a Hindu temple might all agree that they don’t want Evangelical missionaries coming to them. Does that mean that not wanting evangelical missionaries coming in is a point of unity between them? Does it define their identity. Nawp.

Seriously, Michael Medved is either a liar or a moron. You decide which.

In Left-leaning congregations, many rabbis welcome stridently anti-Israel speakers and even Palestinian apologists for Islamo-Nazi terror. But if they invited a “Messianic Jewish” missionary, they’d face indignant denunciation from their boards and, very probably, condemnation by their national denominational leadership.

And they’d face the same thing if they invited Rabbi Yehuda Levin or a member of AFSI, or anyone more religious or more conservative than them.

It is far more acceptable in the Jewish community today to denounce Israel (or the United States), to deny the existence of God, or to deride the validity of Torah than it is to affirm Jesus as Lord and Savior.

Thank you, Jerry Falwell.

Which Jewish community is that exactly? The Orthodox one? Nope. Many of those things wouldn’t fly in a lot of Conservative synagogues either. So I’m guessing Medved has reduced the Jewish community to the most radical congregations. Way to strawman your way for Jesus, Mikey.

Anyone who rejects the existence of God, by definition is going to reject any claims to Jesus being god either. So way to go proving that atheists don’t like religion. Whoohoo!

“Jews therefore view enthusiastic Christian believers—no matter how reliably they support Israel and American Jews—as enemies by definition. Rather than acknowledge the key role played by Christian Zionists (prominently including Harry Truman)…”

Hold on there, is Michael Medved seriously arguing that Jews should embrace conservative Christians… by citing the actions of a Democratic President? The successor of FDR? Not to mention a guy with a long record of saying nasty things about Jews in private?

Seriously, read a history book.

liberal partisans love to invoke 2,000 years of bloody Christian anti-Semitism. Today, however, the echoes of that poisonous hatred, complete with seething contempt for the allegedly disloyal and manipulative -“Israel lobby” in American politics, turn up far more frequently in the newsrooms of prestige newspapers or the faculty lounges of Ivy League universities than they do in Baptist churches in Georgia or Alabama.

Let’s be honest folks, they turn up in both places. Maybe the conservative side has gained a +16 percent margin over the liberal side, maybe.

The anti-Christian obsessions of American Jews lead not only to skewed perceptions of our true friends and enemies but also to anomalous definitions of “Jewish issues.” Much of the communal establishment insists, for instance, that their support of same-sex marriage and “abortion rights” expresses timeless Jewish values. Why and how?

Why assume that liberal Jews support abortion or gay marriage because they’re anti-Christian? If so how does Michael Medved explain the accepting position of some Protestant Christian churches on gay marriage and abortion? Are they anti-Christian too?

If Michael Medved wasn’t a lying moron, he might admit that liberal congregations are more likely to support gay marriage and abortion, regardless of whether they’re Jewish or not. Sadly he is.

The liberal belief that Jews should be pro-choice and pro–gay marriage has nothing to do with connecting to Jewish tradition and everything to do with disassociating from Christian conservatives.

Or maybe it has something to do with… liberalism. Which endorses gay marriage and abortion rights period. Michael Medved keeps trying to separate out Jews because it fits his agenda to claim that Jews are crazy obsessive anti-Christian whackjobs who will endorse gay marriage because they hate Jesus. The fact is that liberal Jews support liberal causes. Just as conservative Jews like Medved support conservative causes.

According to this argument, Catholic and evangelical attempts to “impose” their values on social issues represent a theocratic threat to American pluralism that has allowed Judaism to thrive.

Bwahaha. No wait. Since the Catholic Church supports Universal Health Care, shouldn’t Jews naturally respond by opposing Universal Health Care?

Oh wait it doesn’t work that way because Michael Medved is a lying moron.

The one segment of the contemporary community least concerned with this purported menace is the Orthodox—the less than 10 percent of the Jewish population that gives nearly as disproportionate support to Republicans as their Reform, Conservative, and secular Jewish neighbors give to Democrats. The reason for this contrasting response goes beyond the Orthodox tendency to agree with conservative Christians on most social issues and relates to their much greater comfort with religiosity in general. The Orthodox feel no instinctive horror at political alliances with others who make faith the center of their lives.

I have a headache now.

Michael Medved knows Orthodox Jews so well. Because Orthodox Jews are more comfortable with Christians than liberal Jews are…  in some imaginary universe.

As an Orthodox Jew myself, let me break the bad news to Michael Medved. Orthodox Jews are far less likely to make political alliances with anyone outside Orthodox Judaism. By contrast Reform Jews regularly make alliances with Christian liberals.

Interfaith is something that happens mostly among liberal Jews. Orthodox Jews are not big on interfaith. Or on government control over social issues. Orthodox Jews oppose abortion, but few communities really want the government dictating a Conservative Christian take on abortion laws that would contradict Jewish law that places the life of the mother first.

Orthodox Jews do not vote Republican because they are more comfortable with Conservative Christians, but because they agree more with Republican baseline moral, political and economic values. Most Orthodox Jews do not live anywhere near Conservative Christians, and if they had Baptist missionaries knocking on their doors every 5 minutes, they might have a whole other take on things.

Killing Kasztner – A Brand New Whitewash of a Nazi Collaborator

If you don’t know who Reszo Kasztner or Rudolf Kasztner or Rudolf Kastner was, the title of HaNefesh Ve’Hasatan about sums it up. Reszo Kasztner was one of the more prominent Jewish Nazi collaborators. Like many leading collaborators he started out trying to save Jewish lives, and like a lot of them ended up identifying more with the Nazis than with the Jews.

After the War Reszo Kasztner became a political football because he was appointed to a position in the Labor government in Israel. This led to attacks from Nationalist Zionists charging Kasztner with Nazi collaboration which instead of firing Kasztner, the Labor government tried to silence with a libel trail, that the government lost, when Kasztner began fondly remembering all his favorite Nazis while in the dock. A second government controlled trial exonerated him, but by then he had already been assassinated.

The Haredi Anti-Zionists meanwhile hypocritically tried to smear all of Israel as Nazi collaborators using Rudolf Kastner. This is the usual way that Haredi anti-Zionist smears ignore any distinctions between different Zionist groups. The only problem was that Kastner’s big payoff from the Nazis was the Kastner Train, which included the author of Vayoel Moshe. Yes, the irony is that the one Zionist Nazi collaborator actually rescued the Satmar Rebbe.

Meanwhile the left has been trying to exonerate Reszo Kasztner as a misunderstood guy. The big problem with that approach is that Reszo Kasztner didn’t just collaborate with the Nazis before the war, but after the war. Reszo Kasztner testified and worked on behalf of a bunch of top Nazis after the war, including Dieter Wisliceny who introduced the Yellow Star and Ghettos for Jews.

But the Pro Kasztner documentaries keep on coming. The latest Killing Kasztner is from an unimpeachable source, Gaylen Ross, a former model who appeared in Dawn of the Dead, and a bunch of episodes of Walker, Texas Ranger. Yeah seriously, you can’t make this stuff up. Killing Kasztner and uses the usual lame modern documentary formats. There’s already a trailer with lots of heroic music, chanting monks in the background, WWII footage and interviews with his daughter and the guy who supposedly shot him.

Even the trailer contains plenty of lies. Kasztner’s daughter claims that her father saved more Jews than anyone else. That honor would probably go to Frank Foley, certainly not Kasztner who saved important people, many of whom had paid off his Nazi buddies. But in the bigger picture, Kasztner helped kill a lot more Jews than he saved. Kasztner and some of his associates lied to Hungarian Jews telling them there was no danger and nothing to worry about, that everything was gonna be fight. Just sit back and relax. We got this one. A 1000 or so people, most of them rich and influential got an express train out of Nazi territory, the rest got Auschwitz.

I know the Jewish left has a way of not being able to let go of trying to rewrite history, but they might want to let Kasztner go. Especially when your latest argument comes from a guest star on two episodes of Walker Texas Ranger.

Hello My Name is Patrick Martin, I Work for the Globe and Mail, and I’m Unqualified to Work in Journalism

Who’s Patrick Martin, you might ask? He’s a Globe and Mail reporter who’s written this week’s favorite Charedi bashing article, and earned his journalism degree from Clown College.

His article, A Hostile Takeover of Zionism is already burning up all the zOMG HAREDIM ARE TAKING OVER THE PLANET bloggers.

Problem, the article is actually pretty unintentionally hilarious. It would be like me trying to write a burning hit piece about how the battles inside the American Anglican Church, without being too clear on who Anglicans or what the difference is between them and Catholics. Well done Paddy, well done.

It’s really hard to read paragraphs like this, without breaking into laughter…

While the NRP has disappeared, the ideas and the name have grown. The powerful Shas Party, of Sephardi and Haredi disciples, is the best example.

Seriously, can anyone who knows Israeli politics read this without blowing milk out their nose? To put this into terms that Paddy can understand, the equivalent of this paragraph would be…

“The Presbyterian Church have since disappeared, but the Catholic Church has risen to take its ideas and its place.”

Listing how many ways Patrick Martin screwed up a simple paragraph almost defies the imagination. The NRP did not disappear, it renamed itself. The NRP does not care about El Al flying on Shabbat or segregated buses, it’s on the liberal side even of the Dati Leumi spectrum. Shas has nothing to do with the NRP, it’s a Sephardi Religio-Nationalist party, and shares very few concerns with the NRP. Its birth had more to do with the Haredim, who viewed the NRP as the enemy.

Patrick Martin’s A Hostile Takeover of Zionism is full of mind bogglingly insane paragraphs like that. Any journalist who wrote a similar article about any other group that his colleagues were actually familiar with, would be out on his ass, sweeping out the stables next to Jayson Blair.

These days, many of the Haredim – the word means “those who tremble” in awe of God” – have joined with right-wing religious Zionists to become a powerful political force.

Martin’s whackoid premise is that Haredim and Religious Zionists have joined forces. He has no real proof for any of this, especially since he can’t tell apart any subgroups of Haredim or Religious Zionist. The only tie to Haredim that he does cite involves a former Sefardi Chief Rabbi. But as far as Patrick Martin knows, Haredim are the whackoids in black, and Religious Zionists are the settlement whackoids. So it’s common sense for the Globe and Mail’s Jayson Blair to stitch them together with lots of statistics, some of which are actually not made up, but without any actual demonstration of how this supposed takeover by the two groups is running.

A decade ago, there were almost no Haredim in the West Bank settlements. Today, the two largest settlements are entirely ultra-Orthodox, and the Haredim are about a third of the almost 300,000 settlers.

Seriously, dude. If you want to define down settlements enough, you can also call all the Haredim in Jerusalem, settlers.

Will Israel adhere to its founding secular values or will it become a theocratic Jewish state?

What founding secular values? You mean like bans on Shabbat transportation and flights? Bans on stores selling meat? Israel’s principles today are more secular than they used to be. Try buying pork in Israel in 1961.

In the Haredim, the religious Zionists have acquired potent allies. Their followers obey orders without question.

Like robots! Except where does this alliance actually exist? Not in Disengagement, which the Haredim backed. Not in conversion, which the Religious Zionists are opposed to. But why should Patrick Martin actually have to provide actual examples of his conspiracy theories.

To obtain these goals they have influenced the platforms and growth of political parties, appointments to the rabbinical courts and government policy. As a result, religious schools get a disproportionate share of the education budget, El Al planes don’t fly on the Sabbath and publicly run buses are segregated on a growing number of runs.

Which happened just last week when Shas and the NRP and all the Haredim got together! zOMG! Except like totally not. Sabbath transportation bans are not new, and the El Al controversy was a Charedi issue. Bus segregation is opposed by Religious Zionists. And the appointments have been part of a quiet civil war between two sides.

I’ll skip a bunch of paragraphs in which Patrick Martin recites a whole bunch of stuff about Haredi violence, that once again does not serve to support his thesis. Finally he wraps up the insanity by citing a claiming that Israelis are leaving the country because it’s becoming more like Iran. Because Haifa and Tel Aviv, totally like Bnei Brak now. All the discos have shtreimels in them! And pork comes with a hasgacha.

Naturally the usual idiots like Failed Messiah are all over this, in between reporting on how the Gedolim are really David Icke’s lizard people.

There’s plenty to criticize about Haredim, without making up a whole lot of crap to do it. The key to writing articles about religion in Israel seems to be to have no clue what you’re talking about. People like Patrick Martin find it easy to spread conspiracy theories that are laughable, because none of his superiors will question anything negative written about Israel or religious Jews. It’s the Noah Feldman principle.

Frum and Frei

Ex-frum bloggers often seem to divide the world into “The Frum World”, a narrow and narrowminded tribal mini-world, and the GREAT BIG WORLD OUT THERE WHERE YOU CAN DO JUST ABOUT ANYTHING. Why stay frum when you can this, and this and that too!

But of course the frum world is really a lot like the rest of the world, which isn’t one big magical realm full of possibilities with no more rules of expectations, but a collection of subcultures and mini-tribes, each with its own set of rules and expectations. Humans are naturally tribal. We clump, we build treehouses and then we post rules on the treehouse, elect a treehouse committee and say who is and isn’t allowed in our treehouse. Unless you’re going to be a hermit, there’s no opting out, without also opting in. Leaving one tribe and its rulers, means joining another and following its rules.

Every single social subgroup has its own power structure and social rules which you’re expected to obey. It has standards of dress and beliefs that you can and can’t have. With some social subgroups, particularly the ones ex-frum people love, those can be subtle, which just means you can’t buy a sefer to tell you how to fit in. Not having official rules, but ones you have to pick up from the cooler people, is of course what makes those subgroups “cool”.

No matter how open or loose or free you think a subgroup is, all of them have their taboos. Try being a right wing bohemian artist, wearing clothes at a nudist colony or suggesting that religion might not be all bad at phyrangula. Each tribe has things they’ll toss you out on your ass for. Thou Shalt Nots. And of course the key Thou Shalt Not in every subgroup is Thou Shalt Not Challenge the Men in Charge or the Queen Bees, and Thou Shalt Not Change the Way We Do Things. Sound familiar?

Respect for the people on top and the local minchag is built into every single group. It’s one of those things that make humans what they are. Being non-conformist just means finding a new more creative standard to conform to. “You should think for yourselves.” “Yes, we should think for ourselves!”

Take the ex-frum girl blogger who has happily left Frumstania behind. She no longer spends lots of money shopping for Kosher food and checking Hasgachas. Now she spends lots of money shopping at Whole Foods and checking for Fair Trade Hasgachas. She no longer dresses to meet a standard in some sefer and the social expectations of those in her high school. She dresses to meet a standard in a whole bunch of magazines and the social expectations of the people in her office. She doesn’t have to worry about supporting a husband who learns in Kollel. Instead she gets to support her boyfriend who’s a struggling artist.

Welcome to your old life, with a cooler label on it. Sure you can be more things, so long as you’re willing to give other things up. There’s no free lunch and no open book. The world can seem like a big place, but it quickly breaks down into smaller social groups that still require conformity as the price of membership. Yes you can be an artist, a ballerina or a crazy homeless person, if you’re willing to learn and abide by the social survival skills of your new tribe. If you can’t, then you’re off the derech or a problem person who has no future “with us”.

Dissatisfied people see those expectations as the bars on a cage. Adjusted people don’t see them at all and wonder what all the fuss is about. But there’s no yellow brick road away from social expectations, conformity and seemingly arbitrary rules. There’s no opting out of one system, without opting into another. There’s no frum and frei. Only different flavors of frum.

…And you think our Gedolim our bad

You can hardly hit up the Jblogsphere without running into 10,000 complaints about the “Gedolim”. The Gedolim, for anyone not in the know, are Rabbis who are considered very great and authoritative by some people, but not by others, whose level of authority changes depending on who you talk to.

But for a reality check, feast your eyes on Iran, where the Shiite Gedolim are in a civil war, killing and raping each other’s followers, over control of Iran’s oil. The Catholic Church’s Gadol Pope is an ex-Nazi who on retirement would have a solid contract from Hollywood to play every villain in every movie ever.

And then we can take a step back further, to the conflict of two great Christian Gedolim, Sir Thomas More and Martin Luther.

Martin Luther is the founding father of Protestantism and Nazism. Sir Thomas More was canonized by the Pope as the Patron Saint of Politicians and Statesmen. Which seems about right, since Thomas More was a vicious homicidal sociopath who wanted to kill everyone who disagreed with him.

Martin Luther was a crazy German monk who was a German nationalist and against the tyranny of the Church, because he wanted more local German tyranny. Also he really hated the Jews, I mean really really hated the Jews.

Here’s a sample

They rulers must act like a good physician who, when gangrene has set in proceeds without mercy to cut, saw, and burn flesh, veins, bone, and marrow. Such a procedure must also be followed in this instance. Burn down their synagogues, forbid all that I enumerated earlier, force them to work, and deal harshly with them… If this does not help we must drive them out like mad dogs.

In other words Martin Luther had a lot in common with Shmarya Rosenberg of Failed Messiah.

But that wasn’t enough for Marty, who was sure that even if you burned down all the synagogues and banned Judaism, Jews would still be praying… in his own imagination!

But what will happen even if we do burn down the Jews’ synagogues and forbid them publicly to praise God, to pray, to teach, to utter God’s name? They will still keep doing it in secret. If we know that they are doing this in secret, it is the same as if they were doing it publicly. For our knowledge of their secret doings and our toleration of them implies that they are not secret after all and thus our conscience is encumbered with it before God.

But if Martin Luther was nothing else, he was a magnificent wordsmith

Did I not tell you earlier that a Jew is such a noble, precious jewel that God and all the angels dance when he farts?

This is why Germans don’t have any concept of comedy that doesn’t involve killing people.

But on the other hand there was Sir Thomas More, who coined the term Utopia and is treated as a Catholic hero and martyr, because after killing a whole bunch of people… eventually King Henry VIII killed him.

You might know Sir Thomas More from his fictional incarnations, particularly as the great and ethical humanist of A Man for All Seasons. And this image has about as much relation to reality as Christopher Walken trying to play Princess Diane in a broadway musical.

There are a ton of Catholic schools named after Sir Thomas More, and he’s considered a brilliant orator and man of letters. So here is a sample of Sir Thomas More replying to Martin Luther

Come, do not rage so violently, good father; but if you have raved wildly enough, listen now, you pimp. You recall that you falsely complained above that the king has shown no passage in your whole book, even as an example, in which he said that you contradict yourself. You told this lie shortly before, although the king has demonstrated to you many examples of your inconsistency ….

But meanwhile, for as long as your reverend paternity will be determined to tell these shameless lies, others will be permitted, on behalf of his English majesty, to throw back into your paternity’s shitty mouth, truly the shit-pool of all shit, all the muck and shit which your damnable rottenness has vomited up, and to empty out all the sewers and privies onto your crown divested of the dignity of the priestly crown, against which no less than against the kingly crown you have determined to play the buffoon.

Something tells me that Sir Thomas More would have had an easy transition to blogging or the Huffington Post. Because it’s pretty obvious that the Patron Saint of all Politicians and Statesmen liked to spend a lot of time playing with his own shit.

Of course calling Martin Luther a pimp, which based on his outfits he probably wasn’t, and claiming that his mouth was a giant toilet and he was a raving madman, which were two problems that More himself seemed to suffer from, wasn’t the ultimate. Because Sir Thomas More had his own dungeon for torturing heretics.

Sir Thomas More had already brought back the burning of heretics after becoming Bishop of London. Being a heretic often involved selling bibles translated into English, which was considered a major crime by the Catholic Church. One of the bible sellers that Sir Thomas More caught was taken to his house, “pinioned `hand, foot, and head in the stocks’, for six days without release… whipped and also twisted his brows with small ropes, so that the blood started out of his eyes.”

In More’s defense, this was actually mild by the torture standards of the day. The Spanish would have considered More a liberal for not breaking him on the wheel.

Eventually More, like pretty much every power mad cleric, in England, ran afoul of Henry the Eight, who had his head chopped off. This was a kindlier means of execution than burning at the stake, which Sir Thomas More had dispensed to Tyndale, the first translator of the bible. Since then More has been canonized by two churches and in fiction too. The British biographer Jasper Ridley though described Sir Thomas More as “a particularly nasty sadomasochistic pervert”… which you know is not exactly shocking when you consider the guy had people tortured in his own house.

More’s refusal to sign the Act of Supremacy made him into a Catholic hero, never mind all the butchery and psychotic behavior. Just as Martin Luther is a Protestant hero, despite being a psychotic madman who wanted to kill pretty much everyone.

Just as Robert Novak is a big ass conservative hero, even though he supported Hamas. And Ann Coulter is a big ass conservative hero, even though she hates Jews. And Bill Moyer is a liberal hero, even though he claimed Jews are genetically coded for violence. And Jimmy Carter is a liberal hero… even though… you get the drift. Can’t question the “greats”. It’s the same everywhere.

Peace. Out.

ARE YOU THE VICTIM OF A NARCISSIST?

Have you built an entire identity around being a victim? Are you compulsively unable to stop from rehashing every petty detail in your life and blaming it on someone else? Have you had an affair with a married man who stayed married even though he told you he was going to leave his wife and you like totally believed him because why would a guy who cheats on his wife lie to you anyway?

YOU MAY BE THE VICTIM OF A NARCISSIST

“Narcissist” comes from the Greek (Narcissus, or Spirit of the Self-Help Books Section). Narcissists are typically people with more self-esteem than you. Narcissists victimize their victims for life by having an affair with them and then moving on. This cripples their victims for life and leaves them unfit to do anything but write about the dangers of narcissism and long for the return of the Phil Donahue Show.

John Gray discovered the term “Narcissist” in 1684 while he was looking for more things that men and women do differently. Since then many Nobel Prize winning physicists have devoted years of their life to studying the issue and found nothing, because they were men, and men suck!

The NHS has recently declared a “Narcissism Epidemic” and warned everyone who’s stupid and whiny to stay indoors, and avoid sneezing near cat covered furniture.

There are easy ways to identify a Narcissist. A Narcissist in the early stages of a relationship is really into you. Then he seems less interested. This may be a sign that the relationship isn’t working out, OR IS THAT JUST WHAT THE NARCISSIST WANTS YOU TO THINK WHILE HE KEEPS PLAYING GAMES WITH YOUR MIND?

If you’re reading this, you already know the answer to that.

Also a Narcissist’s moods change. One day he can be angry, and another day he can be happy. Narcissists also often have noses, eyes and long evil mustaches which they twirl while muttering darkly about their plans to steal all the earth’s diamond reserves IN ORDER TO POWER THEIR NARCISSISM.

Narcissists can be anybody. A schoolteacher. A bus driver. A donut hole puncher. But they’re most likely to be someone you were in a bad relationship with, but was totally not your fault, CAUSE HE WAS A NARCISSIST. And he controlled your mind! And your thoughts! And your dreams! And your pastries!

The only way to break free of a Narcissist’s influence is to talk about him non-stop. Only by spending the next few decades going on about Narcissists, can you finally liberate yourself to have a healthy normal relationship with the pillow next to you in the old age home.

Some therapists will advise you to get on with your life instead. Avoid them because THEY ARE CLEARLY NARCISSISTS. Instead pick a therapist whose conversations with you will help her write a book about how women can identify Narcissists that Oprah might select for her book club. And then you’ll be on TV with her. And then you can write your own book. And won’t that be so much better than not having a crazy obsession that prevents you from living a normal life?

Blimey Cor, Reform Rabbi Jonathan Romain Declares War on Jewish Education

Rosh Hashana is usually the time when Jews gather to repent and to plan for ways to do good next year. But the way Satanist Churches have upside down crosses and black masses that are said backward, Reform take everything Judaism does and run it through backward. While Rabbis at Jewish synagogues were probably thinking of how to get more children involved in Jewish education, Rabbi Jonathan Romain of the Maidenhead Synagogue did his own Black Mass and came on a Rosh Hashana (or is that Ahanhsah Hsor) commitment to waging a relentless war on Jewish education.

On Monday the Jewish New Year begins. Unlike the secular new year — largely a boisterous time characterised by revelry and champagne — Rosh Hashannah is a very serious and sober occasion. Jews spend the day in synagogue, even the lapsed ones who do not normally attend services. We reflect on our conduct during the past 12 months and make resolutions to repeat the good things we did, remedy the hurts we caused and set goals for the coming year. Here lies my problem. My resolution this year may make sense to some, but will be seen as heresy to others, especially fellow rabbis (and many vicars and imams). I resolve to speak out against faith schools,

Isn’t that wonderful. It’s about time a Rabbi had the courage to condemn Jewish education and call for tearing down the Yeshivas. Johnny Romain (Lettuce?) may go down as the greatest Jewish thinker since that guy who sacrificed a pig on the altar in the temple 2000 years ago or so.

The problem with faith schools is not their purpose but their consequences. They may be designed to inculcate religious values, but they result in religious ghettos, which can destabilise the social health of the country at large. Even those faith schools that genuinely try to reach out to the wider community and teach good citizenship still segregate Jewish, Muslim or Catholic children from each other and bring them up in what amounts to an educational apartheid system.

Rabbit Jonathan Romain has got a point. No denying that. But his “modest proposal” doesn’t go nearly far enough.

Why draw the line at faith school apartheid, when house of worship apartheid goes on. Why should we segregate Jews, Muslims and Catholics in Synagogue Apartheid. We all know having different religions is socially destabilizing, it creates ghettos, perpetuates divisions and makes Jeebus cry. I know, he told me so personally while I was studying a picture of his mother hugging Michael Jackson on a tree stump!

Eliminating Faith Schools doesn’t go nearly far enough. We have to work harder to eliminate religious differences than simply denying our children a Jewish education. No, we have to tear down Synagogue Apartheid too. Down with the Yeshiva, Down with the Synagogue, Down with Judaism. Let’s all be one religion. Skin color will still be a problem, but we can all dye our faces purple.

Also no more single sex bathrooms. Bathroom Apartheid must end. Because there’s no such thing as legitimate separations, are there. Anything separate is apartheid. Down with Apartheid!

Of course we’re going to have to get rid of Rabbis too. We’ll need a new title that encompasses a universal religious leader, with Rabbi Jonathan Romain as our model. How about Spiritual Wanker of No Faith?

I want my children to sit next to a Sikh in class, play football in the break with a Methodist, do homework with a Hindu and walk to the bus stop with a Muslim before returning to their Jewish home.

I’ve kept my mouth shut before, but now Rabbi Jonathan Romain is just shamelessly plagiarizing Dr. Doolittle

If I could talk to the Methodist, and maybe a Sikh or two
and curse at him in fluent Hindu
Share a dirty joke with a Buddhist, Kick a football at a Muslim
Before returning to our intermarried, atheist, completely secular, don’t ask us about our religion… Jewish home!

Hey kids, for 50 points, can anyone tell me why Reform Judaism is dying out? Can’t be the lack of a Jewish education. Oh wait.

I’m not sure if watching the Reform post-Judaism movement commit suicide in such a public way is sad or funny. Sadly it’s probably a little of both. For a while now the movement has talked about embracing Jewish education. Oops apparently that’s Apartheid.

However good some faith schools are individually, collectively they are a recipe for social disaster. Leaders of all faiths should put aside religious self-interest and make national cohesion a higher priority. At the same time, MPs who can see political advantage in supporting local sectarian demands should have the courage to ignore calls for religious preferences and work towards the greater good of communal integration.

Assimilation today! Assimilation tomorrow! Assimilation forever! I recommend that Johnny Lettuce begin his “Tear down the Schools” crusade with the Muslims. Then after they fish all 14 pieces of him out of the river, we can bury him in 14 different religious cemeteries to accommodate his commitment to ecumenism uber alles.

And in case you’re wondering, Rabbi Jonathan Romain’s Saturnalia resolution next year will to speak out against Faith Synagogues.

Nice Guys and Girls Finish Last

There’s a common refrain you’ll hear from a lot of guys across a variety of backgrounds who are trying to date, but not getting anywhere. “Nice guys finish last.” The nice guys being them of course, who can’t get anywhere because women want good looking jerks with money, or some variation on the theme.

Of course their own lists for the girl they’re looking for rarely begin and end with the word “nice”. Weight, dress sizes, looks, father’s money (if they’re frum), all that stuff factors into it. And nice ends up being pushed way to the side.

Girls have their own version of that in complaining about all the things men are looking for, instead of looking for a nice sincere loving person. Of course like the guys, in real life, their lists tend to be head by things other than “nice”.

Hypocrisy isn’t limited to a single gender, and there’s no reason it should be. Male or female, we’re all human beings, and operate on the same basic parameters. One of those parameters is that we don’t really mean what we say, and that what we think we want, isn’t necessarily what we want.

So what’s wrong with nice anyway? Nice isn’t a word that makes anyone’s pulse race. Nice means “Mostly Harmless” in the Douglas Adams way. It means safe and non-threatening. In theory it means they’re a good person. In theory.

But nice is subjective. One person’s nice, is another person’s jerk. Most people are nice to some people, without being nice to others. The frustrated bachur\bachurette who’s totally nice to his\her aunt, grandmother and best friends… might be a passive aggressive monster when interacting with the opposite sex. And plenty of the “Why doesn’t anyone want nice” crowd have plenty of frustration built up toward the opposite sex, with emerges as passive aggressive behavior on dates that they’re often not even aware of.

And nice doesn’t mean the ability to interact meaningfully with other people. I know plenty of nice people who would be completely dysfunctional in a marriage because they’re incredibly socially awkward and neurotic. So while nice is nice, nice is also relative.

Nice doesn’t drive anyone wild. Maybe it’s because attraction is based on animal impulses which select mates based on primary and secondary sexual characteristics that indicate their ability to be a good provider, or birth many children. Characteristics that can be seen on any underwear ad.

Then there’s the personality side of that, which is projecting confidence. Nice rarely projects much confidence. Male and female jerks do. Which is one reason why letting your biology pick a date is a good idea only if you’re looking to end up 1. Out of money 2. With a disease 3. In a shelter 4. In divorce court.

But contrary to what the nice guys and girls complaining think, “niceness” is not the opposite of that. Goodness is. The difference is that goodness also projects strength. Niceness does not. It takes strength of character to do the right thing and fight for the right things. It doesn’t take much strength to be nice, often it’s the safest option for people with low confidence and poor self-esteem. Which is why despite the puppy dog eyes and the sad sad internet posts, they’re not the ones getting picked.

So yes, nice guys and girls do finish last. Because passivity and whining is its own sour reward. Good things don’t come to those who sit around and blog about how they can’t get a date. They come to those bad and good people who go out and get them.

To stop finishing last, start lining up first. Project some confidence, honestly examine your own values and change your life.