Saturday, October 9, 2010
Major Jewish Groups Pledge to Help End Anti-Gay Bullying
http://www.jewishjournal.com/nation/article/major_jewish_groups_pledge_to_end_glbt_bullying_20101008/
Tuesday, October 5, 2010
Let's Send a Message to New Jersey's Anti-Gay Jewish Journal
Avi Smolen and Justin Rosen submitted notice of their nuptials to New Jersey's Jewish Journal, which lists local simchas. This angered a couple of Orthodox rabbis, and--incredibly--the Jewish Journal backtracked like cowards. They apologized to anyone "hurt" by the mentioning of a same-sex wedding and vowed to never repeat this grave error.
The Journal claims to have made this apology after igniting a firestorm among Orthodox Jews; this is strange because, well. . . just take a look at the comments responding to the apology. So many Jews came out to support gay/straight equality and to bash the Jewish Journal for its bigotry that it makes one wonder just which group the JJ will end up giving the final apology to.
It reminds me of the early part of the last decade, when radio personality Laura Schlessinger converted to Orthodox Judaism upon marrying a Jew and immediately caught flack from Jewish people for her anti-gay views. She recieved so much hate mail and so much criticism from organzied Jewish life--including the Federation and an alliance of pro-gay rabbis--that she eventually abandoned Judaism, claiming that apparently Jews care more about gay people than about what the Torah says. (I would certainly hope so, Laura.) Jews successfully drove her out of the religion, and about a month ago she got fired for repeatedly using the "N" word with a black caller.
It's amazing what Jewish people can get accomplished as a community when they are really passionate about something, and gay civil rights seem to rival support for Israel as the issue most Jews can agree on.
This is not a small matter. The New Jersey Jewish Journal (not to be confused with any other Jewish Journal, all of whom are unconnected)is a non-denominational publication read by Reform, Conservative, and Orthodox Jews, as well as ethnic Jews with no religion. Orthodox is the SMALLEST branch of Judaism, and it's also the only anti-gay branch. The New Jersey Jewish Journal does not follow Orthodoxy in any other area; they print ads for non-kosher restaurants, clothing stores that mix wool and linen, bar/bat mitzvahs for kids with non-Jewish mothers, and they print marriage notices for Jews with Christian, Muslim, and Hindu spouses. ALL of that is against Orthodox rules, so discrimination against a male couple is not only bigoted,--it's hypocritical. Please let the New Jersey Jewish Journal know how disgusting you find their support for bigots and religious extremists. Even if you're not Jewish, please add your voice. Repairing the world is for everyone.
The Journal claims to have made this apology after igniting a firestorm among Orthodox Jews; this is strange because, well. . . just take a look at the comments responding to the apology. So many Jews came out to support gay/straight equality and to bash the Jewish Journal for its bigotry that it makes one wonder just which group the JJ will end up giving the final apology to.
It reminds me of the early part of the last decade, when radio personality Laura Schlessinger converted to Orthodox Judaism upon marrying a Jew and immediately caught flack from Jewish people for her anti-gay views. She recieved so much hate mail and so much criticism from organzied Jewish life--including the Federation and an alliance of pro-gay rabbis--that she eventually abandoned Judaism, claiming that apparently Jews care more about gay people than about what the Torah says. (I would certainly hope so, Laura.) Jews successfully drove her out of the religion, and about a month ago she got fired for repeatedly using the "N" word with a black caller.
It's amazing what Jewish people can get accomplished as a community when they are really passionate about something, and gay civil rights seem to rival support for Israel as the issue most Jews can agree on.
This is not a small matter. The New Jersey Jewish Journal (not to be confused with any other Jewish Journal, all of whom are unconnected)is a non-denominational publication read by Reform, Conservative, and Orthodox Jews, as well as ethnic Jews with no religion. Orthodox is the SMALLEST branch of Judaism, and it's also the only anti-gay branch. The New Jersey Jewish Journal does not follow Orthodoxy in any other area; they print ads for non-kosher restaurants, clothing stores that mix wool and linen, bar/bat mitzvahs for kids with non-Jewish mothers, and they print marriage notices for Jews with Christian, Muslim, and Hindu spouses. ALL of that is against Orthodox rules, so discrimination against a male couple is not only bigoted,--it's hypocritical. Please let the New Jersey Jewish Journal know how disgusting you find their support for bigots and religious extremists. Even if you're not Jewish, please add your voice. Repairing the world is for everyone.
Thursday, September 2, 2010
Natalie Portman on Israel
Israel is ...
Where I was born. Where I ate my first Popsicle and used a proper toilet for the first time. Where some of my 18-year-old friends spend their nights in bunkers sleeping with their helmets on. Where security guards are the only jobs in surplus. Where deserts bloom and pioneer stories are sentimentalized. Where a thorny, sweet cactus is the symbol of the ideal Israeli. Where immigrating to Israel is called “ascending” and emigrating from Israel is called “descending.” Where my grandparents were not born, but where they were saved.
Where the year passes with the season of olives, of almonds, of dates. Where the transgressive pig or shrimp dish speaks defiantly from a Jerusalem menu. Where, despite substantial exception, secularism is the rule. Where wine is religiously sweet. Where “Arabic homes” is a positive real estate term with no sense of irony. Where there is endless material for dark humor. Where there are countless words for “to bother,” but no single one yet for “to pleasure.” Where laughter is the currency; jokes the religion. Where political parties multiply more quickly than do people. Where to become religious is described as “returning to an answer” and becoming secular “returning to a question.”
Where six citizens have won Nobel prizes in 50 years. Where the first one earned an Olympic gold in 2004 for sailing (an Israeli also won the bronze for judo). Where there is snow two hours north and hamsin (desert wind) two hours south. Where Moses never was allowed to walk, but whose streets we litter. Where the language in which Abraham spoke to Isaac before he was to sacrifice him has been resuscitated to include the words for “sweatshirt” and “schadenfreude” and “chemical warfare” and “press conference.” Where the muezzin chants, and the church bells sound and the shofars cry freely at the Wall. Where the shopkeepers bargain. Where the politicians bargain. Where there will one day be peace but never quiet.
Where I was born; where my insides refuse to abandon.
Where I was born. Where I ate my first Popsicle and used a proper toilet for the first time. Where some of my 18-year-old friends spend their nights in bunkers sleeping with their helmets on. Where security guards are the only jobs in surplus. Where deserts bloom and pioneer stories are sentimentalized. Where a thorny, sweet cactus is the symbol of the ideal Israeli. Where immigrating to Israel is called “ascending” and emigrating from Israel is called “descending.” Where my grandparents were not born, but where they were saved.
Where the year passes with the season of olives, of almonds, of dates. Where the transgressive pig or shrimp dish speaks defiantly from a Jerusalem menu. Where, despite substantial exception, secularism is the rule. Where wine is religiously sweet. Where “Arabic homes” is a positive real estate term with no sense of irony. Where there is endless material for dark humor. Where there are countless words for “to bother,” but no single one yet for “to pleasure.” Where laughter is the currency; jokes the religion. Where political parties multiply more quickly than do people. Where to become religious is described as “returning to an answer” and becoming secular “returning to a question.”
Where six citizens have won Nobel prizes in 50 years. Where the first one earned an Olympic gold in 2004 for sailing (an Israeli also won the bronze for judo). Where there is snow two hours north and hamsin (desert wind) two hours south. Where Moses never was allowed to walk, but whose streets we litter. Where the language in which Abraham spoke to Isaac before he was to sacrifice him has been resuscitated to include the words for “sweatshirt” and “schadenfreude” and “chemical warfare” and “press conference.” Where the muezzin chants, and the church bells sound and the shofars cry freely at the Wall. Where the shopkeepers bargain. Where the politicians bargain. Where there will one day be peace but never quiet.
Where I was born; where my insides refuse to abandon.
Tuesday, August 31, 2010
Amnesty International Alert Regarding Troy Davis: Alert Your Local Media
http://www.amnestyusa.org/death-penalty/troy-davis-finality-over-fairness/page.do?id=1011343
Thursday, August 12, 2010
Muslim Groups Oppose SBC's Plans to Build Mega-Church Near Site of Massacre
"Enraged," says Ali Hili when asked to describe his feelings in one word. "How can they do this to us? How much more dignity can they strip away from us?"
Hili is referring to the Southern Baptist Convention's plan to build a mega-church complex near the remains of a two-mile stretch of Iraqi land that once contained Iraqi-owned businesses, restaurants, and a day school. In the summer of 2005 when the war in Iraq was raging, this cosmopolitan, mostly secular area--which Iraqis had once proudly touted as the beginning of “a new Middle East”--was completely destroyed by a vigilante group of right-wing Christian U.S. soldiers who claimed to be “reclaiming the Middle East for God.”
These five men—in direct violation of their orders—took matters into their own hands and slaughtered non-combat civilians, including women and children. They entered restaurants and businesses and shot diners and workers in the face. They opened fire on civilians in the streets. Tragically, a bomber pilot calling himself “the 13th disciple” bombed most of the buildings before flying the plane into the Badr Day School, killing himself and hundreds of children and adults.
This savage act of vigilantism was condemned by the United Nations and several human rights groups, and was harshly criticized by President Bush, who said, “While I understand the anger these men felt, I do not endorse what they did. They are distorting the Christian message, which is a message of peace. Christianity is a religion of peace, in fact.”
“It was a massacre,” Hili says. “The streets filled with blood. Parents were searching through the rubble for their sons and daughters for days after [the violence.] That is why [the SBC’s plan for the mega-church] is so surreal.”
The SBC ignited a media firestorm last week when the conservative Christian organization made public its long-gestating plans for a sprawling, ten-million dollar complex near the grounds where the massacre took place—an area many Iraqis now see as a place of sacred sadness. The complex will include what will be the largest church ever built in Iraq, a Christian bookstore, and a McDonald’s, as well as a swimming pool, a gym, and a spa for church-goers to enjoy after sermons and all week long.
Many Iraqis consider the SBC’s plans to be overwhelmingly insulting and inflammatory since it was militant Christians who slaughtered their loved ones.
“It’s outrageous,” says Sadi Hussain. “They are taking sacred ground where thousands of Iraqis were slaughtered by Christian fanatics, and they are building themselves a worship and relaxation center for other Christians! How is this ethical? How is this Christian?”
But Richard Land of the SBC sees it differently. “It’s a way to promote understanding,” Land said in an interview with the New York Times. “Understanding and tolerance. Because, you know. . . we are building the church complex, a lot of Iraqis are upset about it, and they should, you know. . . just tolerate it. That’s what tolerance is all about. Seeing something you think is awful and just looking the other way.”
Land also says there is something more sinister afoot than a mere disagreement. He says critics of the church complex are actually bigots. “It’s pure, unadulterated Christianophobia,” Land told the Wall Street Journal. “The Iraqis who are saying ‘oh please don’t build a church where Christians murdered my sister’ are raving bigots who are driven by the same hatred that fueled Hitler. They are foaming-at-the-mouth lunatics, and I mean, they might as well turn their burquas into Klan hoods. There has been a dramatic increase in Christianophobia over the last few years, with South Park making fun of Jesus and churches being picketed after Proposition 8 passed."
When asked in a phone interview if the complex will only cater to Christians, Land assures us that is not the case. “This will be a place for all Iraqis. Christianity is a universal faith. It is not simply for one ethnicity; we welcome Arabs, Jews, everyone. The message that the Son of God died for our sins is for every ear to hear, and that includes ethnic people who were raised in the wrong faith. Anyone who wants to attend our church, work out with us, swim with us, eat non-hallal and non-kosher McDonald’s food with us is certainly welcome.”
“It’s obscene,” says Haider Faiek of the Council on American-Islamic Relations. “My grandson was living in Iraq at the time; he was killed by one of the vigilantes when he was taking an algebra test at school. He just happened to be there when that maniac crashed his plane into [the building.]” Faiek tries to fight back tears, but soon they are streaming down his face. “I miss him so much,” he says, “ and I cannot believe these savages are putting a victory flag over his grave.”
When showed a video of an Iraqi woman begging the SBC to not build the church complex over the place where her twin daughters were murdered, Sarah Taylor of Christianity Today says, “I see her lips moving, but all I hear is ‘I am Hitler and I hate everyone who is not exactly like me.’”
Is Taylor not the least bit touched by the Iraqi woman’s plea? “Not one bit,” Taylor says. “She’s obviously a bigot. I’m not sure she can even be helped at this point. Everyone wants to beat up Mel Gibson for his comments, but they should look at this lady. It’s like she’s reciting Mein Kampf and crying about how beautiful it is.”
Not everyone is upset about the complex. Summer Peterson is a 17-year old girl from San Diego, California, whose family is planning to vacation at the complex next spring. “I can’t wait,” she says, smiling. She shrugs off the controversy. “Anyone who criticizes Christians is a racist. Saying we shouldn’t build this church here is exactly like saying black people should be slaves or Jews should be put in ovens again. The vigilantes are extremists; they were distorting true Christianity. I understand where they’re maybe coming from, but I don’t think it’s right to kill people. But also, what do Iraqis expect to happen when they have governments we don’t like and hold a position on Israel we don’t agree with? That just makes Christian terrorists angry and then they get worked up into too much religious, like, I don’t know. . . fervor?”
Is Peterson worried about the dangers of vacationing in Iraq? “Not at all,” she says quickly. “Think about it. The complex is the safest place there. It’s the one place in Iraq that Christian terrorists and Americans would never bomb.”
Copyright 2010, Eli Jeremiah
Hili is referring to the Southern Baptist Convention's plan to build a mega-church complex near the remains of a two-mile stretch of Iraqi land that once contained Iraqi-owned businesses, restaurants, and a day school. In the summer of 2005 when the war in Iraq was raging, this cosmopolitan, mostly secular area--which Iraqis had once proudly touted as the beginning of “a new Middle East”--was completely destroyed by a vigilante group of right-wing Christian U.S. soldiers who claimed to be “reclaiming the Middle East for God.”
These five men—in direct violation of their orders—took matters into their own hands and slaughtered non-combat civilians, including women and children. They entered restaurants and businesses and shot diners and workers in the face. They opened fire on civilians in the streets. Tragically, a bomber pilot calling himself “the 13th disciple” bombed most of the buildings before flying the plane into the Badr Day School, killing himself and hundreds of children and adults.
This savage act of vigilantism was condemned by the United Nations and several human rights groups, and was harshly criticized by President Bush, who said, “While I understand the anger these men felt, I do not endorse what they did. They are distorting the Christian message, which is a message of peace. Christianity is a religion of peace, in fact.”
“It was a massacre,” Hili says. “The streets filled with blood. Parents were searching through the rubble for their sons and daughters for days after [the violence.] That is why [the SBC’s plan for the mega-church] is so surreal.”
The SBC ignited a media firestorm last week when the conservative Christian organization made public its long-gestating plans for a sprawling, ten-million dollar complex near the grounds where the massacre took place—an area many Iraqis now see as a place of sacred sadness. The complex will include what will be the largest church ever built in Iraq, a Christian bookstore, and a McDonald’s, as well as a swimming pool, a gym, and a spa for church-goers to enjoy after sermons and all week long.
Many Iraqis consider the SBC’s plans to be overwhelmingly insulting and inflammatory since it was militant Christians who slaughtered their loved ones.
“It’s outrageous,” says Sadi Hussain. “They are taking sacred ground where thousands of Iraqis were slaughtered by Christian fanatics, and they are building themselves a worship and relaxation center for other Christians! How is this ethical? How is this Christian?”
But Richard Land of the SBC sees it differently. “It’s a way to promote understanding,” Land said in an interview with the New York Times. “Understanding and tolerance. Because, you know. . . we are building the church complex, a lot of Iraqis are upset about it, and they should, you know. . . just tolerate it. That’s what tolerance is all about. Seeing something you think is awful and just looking the other way.”
Land also says there is something more sinister afoot than a mere disagreement. He says critics of the church complex are actually bigots. “It’s pure, unadulterated Christianophobia,” Land told the Wall Street Journal. “The Iraqis who are saying ‘oh please don’t build a church where Christians murdered my sister’ are raving bigots who are driven by the same hatred that fueled Hitler. They are foaming-at-the-mouth lunatics, and I mean, they might as well turn their burquas into Klan hoods. There has been a dramatic increase in Christianophobia over the last few years, with South Park making fun of Jesus and churches being picketed after Proposition 8 passed."
When asked in a phone interview if the complex will only cater to Christians, Land assures us that is not the case. “This will be a place for all Iraqis. Christianity is a universal faith. It is not simply for one ethnicity; we welcome Arabs, Jews, everyone. The message that the Son of God died for our sins is for every ear to hear, and that includes ethnic people who were raised in the wrong faith. Anyone who wants to attend our church, work out with us, swim with us, eat non-hallal and non-kosher McDonald’s food with us is certainly welcome.”
“It’s obscene,” says Haider Faiek of the Council on American-Islamic Relations. “My grandson was living in Iraq at the time; he was killed by one of the vigilantes when he was taking an algebra test at school. He just happened to be there when that maniac crashed his plane into [the building.]” Faiek tries to fight back tears, but soon they are streaming down his face. “I miss him so much,” he says, “ and I cannot believe these savages are putting a victory flag over his grave.”
When showed a video of an Iraqi woman begging the SBC to not build the church complex over the place where her twin daughters were murdered, Sarah Taylor of Christianity Today says, “I see her lips moving, but all I hear is ‘I am Hitler and I hate everyone who is not exactly like me.’”
Is Taylor not the least bit touched by the Iraqi woman’s plea? “Not one bit,” Taylor says. “She’s obviously a bigot. I’m not sure she can even be helped at this point. Everyone wants to beat up Mel Gibson for his comments, but they should look at this lady. It’s like she’s reciting Mein Kampf and crying about how beautiful it is.”
Not everyone is upset about the complex. Summer Peterson is a 17-year old girl from San Diego, California, whose family is planning to vacation at the complex next spring. “I can’t wait,” she says, smiling. She shrugs off the controversy. “Anyone who criticizes Christians is a racist. Saying we shouldn’t build this church here is exactly like saying black people should be slaves or Jews should be put in ovens again. The vigilantes are extremists; they were distorting true Christianity. I understand where they’re maybe coming from, but I don’t think it’s right to kill people. But also, what do Iraqis expect to happen when they have governments we don’t like and hold a position on Israel we don’t agree with? That just makes Christian terrorists angry and then they get worked up into too much religious, like, I don’t know. . . fervor?”
Is Peterson worried about the dangers of vacationing in Iraq? “Not at all,” she says quickly. “Think about it. The complex is the safest place there. It’s the one place in Iraq that Christian terrorists and Americans would never bomb.”
Copyright 2010, Eli Jeremiah
Saturday, July 24, 2010
James Cameron Blasts Boycotting Israel
This summer, a gay pride event in Spain disinvited a gay Israeli singer because she is Israeli. It was the Pride organizers' way of protesting Israel's deadly floatilla raid. Needless to say, this is sheer bigotry. It's exactly because of incidents like this that we in the U.S. have anti-discrimination laws based on nationality. Internationally, does that thinking only pertain to those from Arab and Muslim countries? Are we not told ad nauseum how wrong it is to discriminate against Muslims because of the actions of their leaders?
Anti-Israelis and anti-Semites who purport to support Palestinians are resorting to typically unethical means to support their ends. They are intimidating artists, singers, and filmmakers into cancelling tours, shows, and appearances in Israel, as well as pressuring other countries to discriminate against Israeli artists on the basis of their nationality.
Elvis Costello originally declined to cancel his Israeli shows this summer, remarking that it is wrong to punish citizens for government policies you might disagree with, but after harsh intimidation by the Palestinian Solidarity Movement, he changed his tune. The same thing happened with the Pixies. Others, such as Carlos Santana, were all too happy to discriminate and apparently did so without much pressure.
As if strong-arming celebrties were not enough, now the Jew-haters are outright lying. They got a petition to boycott Israeli artists going by forging the signatures of James Cameron and Jane Fonda.
Well, the Terminator/Avatar director is not easily intimidated. He could have taken Fonda's easy way out by simply having his publicist say the signature was a forgery (Fonda has a sordid history of bashing Israelis and then aplogizing for it,) but he did more than that. He blasted the petition's organizers for their deceit and made it clear how he feels about boycotting people because of their nationality. The Jew-haters have once again screwed themselves over by messing with the wrong guy.
http://www.jpost.com/ArtsAndCulture/Entertainment/Article.aspx?id=168521
If they thought Cameron would automatically side with Hamas against Israelis because they see the aliens in Avatar as representing Palestinians, they were sadly mistaken. (And they have a short memory, seeing as how the bad guys in Cameron's True Lies were extremist Muslims.) The natives in Avatar are a peaceful, tolerant group of natives with a culture that honors women as equals, and they are 100% faultless when the U.S. government attacks them and destroys their land. By contrast, the Palestinians freely elected Hamas, an anti-Semitic, anti-gay, terrorist group that trains men, women, and children to engage in suicide bombing and organizes hatred and violence not only against Israelis but also Jews in the U.S. and Europe.
Aside from their own incredibly stupid mistake of electing Hamas, they are also badly mistreated by a reactionary Israeli government, but the Avatar comparisons being bandied about are so demonstrably false they make Palestinians look bad in the harsh light of reality. In the real world, Israel is a currently reactionary government oppressing another right-wing, imperialistic group that is absurdly called leftist. (White supremacists also oppose globalization and corporations, but we do not call them left-wing.) Those who are fair and unbiased see it this way and find fault on both sides. Everyone else--whether they only support Israrelis or only support Arabs--are bigots, plain and simple.
Anti-Israelis will read this and undoubtedly whine that Israeli-supporters try to stifle debate by calling critics anti-Semitic, even though they cry "bigotry" at every turn to stifle debate about Islamic extremism; for instance, it is Israeli-bashers who are smearing as racist anyone who thinks building a mosque near the grounds where Islamic terrorists slaughtered thousands of Americans is inflammatory. In truth, much criticism of Israel is valid; it is only when critics apply anti-Jewish double standards (where are the calls for boycotting China, Syria, and Iran? Or even the U.S.?) and racist abuse ("Zionists killed Michael Jackson") that most of us call them anti-Semitic. When did reasonable debate about Israel devolve into Berekely girls with facial hair screaming that Zionism is equal to Nazism?
Cameron joins a great group of artists in saying no to boycotting Israel, including Natalie Portman, Sacha Baron Cohen, and many others, both Jewish and non-Jewish.
And as for that gay-pride event in Spain disinviting that singer for being Israeli? As much I detest Iran's government, I would never, ever discriminate against an Iranian because of her nationality. That's the difference between me and others who claim to support "tolerance."
Anti-Israelis and anti-Semites who purport to support Palestinians are resorting to typically unethical means to support their ends. They are intimidating artists, singers, and filmmakers into cancelling tours, shows, and appearances in Israel, as well as pressuring other countries to discriminate against Israeli artists on the basis of their nationality.
Elvis Costello originally declined to cancel his Israeli shows this summer, remarking that it is wrong to punish citizens for government policies you might disagree with, but after harsh intimidation by the Palestinian Solidarity Movement, he changed his tune. The same thing happened with the Pixies. Others, such as Carlos Santana, were all too happy to discriminate and apparently did so without much pressure.
As if strong-arming celebrties were not enough, now the Jew-haters are outright lying. They got a petition to boycott Israeli artists going by forging the signatures of James Cameron and Jane Fonda.
Well, the Terminator/Avatar director is not easily intimidated. He could have taken Fonda's easy way out by simply having his publicist say the signature was a forgery (Fonda has a sordid history of bashing Israelis and then aplogizing for it,) but he did more than that. He blasted the petition's organizers for their deceit and made it clear how he feels about boycotting people because of their nationality. The Jew-haters have once again screwed themselves over by messing with the wrong guy.
http://www.jpost.com/ArtsAndCulture/Entertainment/Article.aspx?id=168521
If they thought Cameron would automatically side with Hamas against Israelis because they see the aliens in Avatar as representing Palestinians, they were sadly mistaken. (And they have a short memory, seeing as how the bad guys in Cameron's True Lies were extremist Muslims.) The natives in Avatar are a peaceful, tolerant group of natives with a culture that honors women as equals, and they are 100% faultless when the U.S. government attacks them and destroys their land. By contrast, the Palestinians freely elected Hamas, an anti-Semitic, anti-gay, terrorist group that trains men, women, and children to engage in suicide bombing and organizes hatred and violence not only against Israelis but also Jews in the U.S. and Europe.
Aside from their own incredibly stupid mistake of electing Hamas, they are also badly mistreated by a reactionary Israeli government, but the Avatar comparisons being bandied about are so demonstrably false they make Palestinians look bad in the harsh light of reality. In the real world, Israel is a currently reactionary government oppressing another right-wing, imperialistic group that is absurdly called leftist. (White supremacists also oppose globalization and corporations, but we do not call them left-wing.) Those who are fair and unbiased see it this way and find fault on both sides. Everyone else--whether they only support Israrelis or only support Arabs--are bigots, plain and simple.
Anti-Israelis will read this and undoubtedly whine that Israeli-supporters try to stifle debate by calling critics anti-Semitic, even though they cry "bigotry" at every turn to stifle debate about Islamic extremism; for instance, it is Israeli-bashers who are smearing as racist anyone who thinks building a mosque near the grounds where Islamic terrorists slaughtered thousands of Americans is inflammatory. In truth, much criticism of Israel is valid; it is only when critics apply anti-Jewish double standards (where are the calls for boycotting China, Syria, and Iran? Or even the U.S.?) and racist abuse ("Zionists killed Michael Jackson") that most of us call them anti-Semitic. When did reasonable debate about Israel devolve into Berekely girls with facial hair screaming that Zionism is equal to Nazism?
Cameron joins a great group of artists in saying no to boycotting Israel, including Natalie Portman, Sacha Baron Cohen, and many others, both Jewish and non-Jewish.
And as for that gay-pride event in Spain disinviting that singer for being Israeli? As much I detest Iran's government, I would never, ever discriminate against an Iranian because of her nationality. That's the difference between me and others who claim to support "tolerance."
Friday, March 26, 2010
Magnolia and The Prince of Egypt: Nice Cinematic Companions to the Passover Hagaddah
Paul Thomas Anderson is one of our greatest living filmmakers, and Magnolia (New Line Cinema, 1999) is among his finest contributions. Set in California's San Fernando Valley, his tragic, funny, ultimately inspiring epic explores a group of sad-sacks whose lives cross and connect in surprising ways. Tom Cruise plays an ego-maniacal motivational instructor who teaches other men to treat women like shit by manipulating them and using them only for sex. Jason Robards portrays his father, who is dying of cancer. Julianne Moore's character is a drug-addict who married the father for his money and is cheating on him with scores of men. Phillip Seymore Hoffman is the nurse who is going the extra mile to make sure the father's last days are meaningful.
A year before Magnolia graced cinema screens, DreamWorks SKG (then a scrappy upstart) competed against Walt Disney's cartoon empire with what was then the most ambitious non-Disney animated film ever made: The Prince of Egypt (DreamWorks 1998.) A beautiful, moving re-telling of the Passover story, this film caused an enthusiastic Michael Lerner to announce in his Tikkun that year that if DreamWorks never made another film, Prince of Egypt would be enough to justify the mini-studio's existence.
It's daringly dark and harsh, sacrificing the possibility of Happy Meal tie-ins for preserving the story's power. But while it keeps intact much of the Torah account's violence, it makes the liberation of the chosen people universal. In the story-telling hands of executive producers Jeffrey Katzenberg, David Geffen, and Steven Spielberg, God frees the Hebrews not simply because He does not want the Hebrews to be enslaved, but because He does not want ANY people to be enslaved. It's truly a modern Midrash.
Many conservative Evangelicals were perplexed that DreamWorks ended the film's story with the Israelites reaching the promised land, instead of continuing the climax with God's dictation of the Ten Commandments, which would have made the film a remake of the Charlton Heston classic. But they don't realize that Jews celebrate receiving the law at Simchat Torah. Passover is not about law or commandments. It is about deliverance from slavery. Freedom.
In mere days, we will sit at our families' seders and ask why tonight is different from all other nights. It's different because it's the one night we make sure we remember our humble roots. We may be comfortable now, but our ancestors were shit on. Even secular Jews who consider the Passover story to be complete fiction can agree our ancestors were treated worse than animals.
Jews were treated so badly because people are flawed, bigoted, and easily swayed into evil acts. And Jews are among those bad people; no group in the human race is immune. We all fuck up. In the Passover story, people were fucking up. They were enslaving other humans. God got the oppressors' attention with plagues: among those plagues, it rained frogs.
In Magnolia, people are fucking up. They're mistreating each other. Some higher force gets these oppressors' attention by raining frogs down upon them. Just like in the Torah, frogs fall from the heavens onto the earth, causing destruction among the oppressors and sinners. Because of this supernatural event--with its implication that some moral force is working in the universe--, almost everyone in the film changes his or her life. A deeply insecure man who was trying to steal to impress a hot gay bartender turns himself in. The Christian police officer forgives him. The emotionally wounded, sexually abused woman the police officer is falling for finds the courage to confront her monstrous father.
If Judaism is--as I believe it to be--an evolving theology and culture, then both Magnolia and The Prince of Egypt serve as modern Midrash. While the latter retells Exodus with renewed emphasis on the story's humanity, the former takes a Passover motif and uses it as a grand, spiritually transcendent epiphany for the troubled souls we spent nearly three hours with. It's cleansing and healing, morally sound and liberating.
And unlike the Charlton Heston version, the characters in Prince of Egypt actually look Jewish (before intermarriage) and Egyptian, with dark skin color and Middle Eastern features. And the scene in which God rolls back the Red Sea to drown the army is depicted as a somber event, bringing to mind the midrash about God asking the Hebrews why they are celebrating when He has just had to kill His precious children. Not to mention the film ends with scriptures from the Torah, New Testament, and Qu'ran.
Enjoy the films, and Happy Pesach!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZBgV0DK_FP4&feature=player_embedded
A year before Magnolia graced cinema screens, DreamWorks SKG (then a scrappy upstart) competed against Walt Disney's cartoon empire with what was then the most ambitious non-Disney animated film ever made: The Prince of Egypt (DreamWorks 1998.) A beautiful, moving re-telling of the Passover story, this film caused an enthusiastic Michael Lerner to announce in his Tikkun that year that if DreamWorks never made another film, Prince of Egypt would be enough to justify the mini-studio's existence.
It's daringly dark and harsh, sacrificing the possibility of Happy Meal tie-ins for preserving the story's power. But while it keeps intact much of the Torah account's violence, it makes the liberation of the chosen people universal. In the story-telling hands of executive producers Jeffrey Katzenberg, David Geffen, and Steven Spielberg, God frees the Hebrews not simply because He does not want the Hebrews to be enslaved, but because He does not want ANY people to be enslaved. It's truly a modern Midrash.
Many conservative Evangelicals were perplexed that DreamWorks ended the film's story with the Israelites reaching the promised land, instead of continuing the climax with God's dictation of the Ten Commandments, which would have made the film a remake of the Charlton Heston classic. But they don't realize that Jews celebrate receiving the law at Simchat Torah. Passover is not about law or commandments. It is about deliverance from slavery. Freedom.
In mere days, we will sit at our families' seders and ask why tonight is different from all other nights. It's different because it's the one night we make sure we remember our humble roots. We may be comfortable now, but our ancestors were shit on. Even secular Jews who consider the Passover story to be complete fiction can agree our ancestors were treated worse than animals.
Jews were treated so badly because people are flawed, bigoted, and easily swayed into evil acts. And Jews are among those bad people; no group in the human race is immune. We all fuck up. In the Passover story, people were fucking up. They were enslaving other humans. God got the oppressors' attention with plagues: among those plagues, it rained frogs.
In Magnolia, people are fucking up. They're mistreating each other. Some higher force gets these oppressors' attention by raining frogs down upon them. Just like in the Torah, frogs fall from the heavens onto the earth, causing destruction among the oppressors and sinners. Because of this supernatural event--with its implication that some moral force is working in the universe--, almost everyone in the film changes his or her life. A deeply insecure man who was trying to steal to impress a hot gay bartender turns himself in. The Christian police officer forgives him. The emotionally wounded, sexually abused woman the police officer is falling for finds the courage to confront her monstrous father.
If Judaism is--as I believe it to be--an evolving theology and culture, then both Magnolia and The Prince of Egypt serve as modern Midrash. While the latter retells Exodus with renewed emphasis on the story's humanity, the former takes a Passover motif and uses it as a grand, spiritually transcendent epiphany for the troubled souls we spent nearly three hours with. It's cleansing and healing, morally sound and liberating.
And unlike the Charlton Heston version, the characters in Prince of Egypt actually look Jewish (before intermarriage) and Egyptian, with dark skin color and Middle Eastern features. And the scene in which God rolls back the Red Sea to drown the army is depicted as a somber event, bringing to mind the midrash about God asking the Hebrews why they are celebrating when He has just had to kill His precious children. Not to mention the film ends with scriptures from the Torah, New Testament, and Qu'ran.
Enjoy the films, and Happy Pesach!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZBgV0DK_FP4&feature=player_embedded
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)