"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion..." EO instead, then.

[fncceo]

Hoho, how about aid one religion more than another?

faith based inititives....

Rising antisemitism in direct defiance of the laws of the land.

By you're metric, Islamophobia would as well

OH WAIT....'semite' means Jews AND Arabs...

The term antisemitism was coined 150-years ago by Germans specifically to refer to hatred of Jews.

If that weren't the case, this picture could never have been taken.

Got a websters ?

>>>

Definition of Semitic. (Entry 1 of 2) 1 : of, relating to, or constituting a subfamily of the Afro-Asiatic language family that includes Hebrew, Aramaic, Arabic, and Amharic. 2 : of, relating to, or characteristic of the Semites

Doesn't lay claim to religion or race, does it fnnceo?

But hey, reditors abound it an owrellian dystopia

Maybe whoever TF Trump has for a press sec missed it, or just sided with the definition in vogue

Either way, they're flaming 1st Amd defying,consititutionally ignorant nazi Aholes

~S~

From Webster's

anti-Semitism
noun
an·ti-Sem·i·tism | \ ˌan-tē-ˈse-mə-ˌti-zəm, ˌan-ˌtī-

variants: or less commonly antisemitism
Definition of anti-Semitism
: hostility toward or discrimination against Jews as a religious, ethnic, or racial group
First Known Use of anti-Semitism
1851, in the meaning defined above

 

[sparky]

ah, dueling dictionaries then fnnceo?

Semite
[ sem-ahyt or, esp. British, see-mahyt ]
noun
a member of any of various ancient and modern peoples originating in southwestern Asia, including the Akkadians, Canaanites, Phoenicians, Hebrews, and Arabs.
a Jew.
a member of any of the peoples descended from Shem, the eldest son of Noah.

&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&

Loaded words: Evolving interpretations of 'anti-semitic' and 'anti-semitism' in dictionary definitions and in public discourse - Willem Meijs and Susan Blackwell

&&&&&&&&&&&

Semite
PEOPLE

WRITTEN BY:

• The Editors of Encyclopaedia Britannica

See Article History
Semite, member of a people speaking any of a group of related languages presumably derived from a common language, Semitic (see Semitic languages). The term came to include Arabs, Akkadians, Canaanites, Hebrews, some Ethiopians, and Aramaean tribes. Mesopotamia, the western coast of the Mediterranean, the Arabian Peninsula, and the Horn of Africa have all been proposed as possible sites for the prehistoric origins of Semitic-speaking peoples, but no location has been definitively established.


~S~

 

[fncceo]

Here's where a knowledge of History allows one to detect an amusing irony that the less knowledgeable among us remain oblivious.

In the 1850's, the practice in Europe (particularly Germany and France) of referring to Jews as 'Semites' was considered to be an insult.

The implication being that , no matter how assimilated Jews became in Europe, they could never be properly European because their 'blood' was Semitic. They believed Jews should remain isolated from European society if not be removed from it entirely.

Now, the same people who hate Jews claim that Jews can't belong to the historical land of Israel because they have become too European and not as Semitic as others who lay claim to the region. They believe Jews should be removed from the land of Israel for not being Semitic enough.

 

[imawhosure]

POLITICS
Trump Signs Order Against Anti-Semitism At Colleges, Worrying Free Speech Advocates
December 11, 20194:42 PM ET

LAUREL WAMSLEY

Trump Signs Order Against Anti-Semitism At Colleges, Worrying Free Speech Advocates
*******************************************************************************************

"Establishment of religion"

In Everson v. Board of Education (1947):

"The "establishment of religion" clause of the First Amendment means at least this: Neither a state nor the federal government can set up a church. Neither can pass laws which aid one religion, aid all religions, or prefer one religion over another. " - wikipedia
******************************************************************************************

Does not making a group a "protected group", based on their specific religion, violate this idea? Shall we also protect Sikhs? Wiccans? Muslims?

Then obviously, all climate changers who worship on the alter of MMGW are out of office! Geeze, that puts up 50 seats in the House. I like the way you think, even if it is bassackards-)

 

[g5000]

POLITICS
Trump Signs Order Against Anti-Semitism At Colleges, Worrying Free Speech Advocates
December 11, 20194:42 PM ET

LAUREL WAMSLEY

Trump Signs Order Against Anti-Semitism At Colleges, Worrying Free Speech Advocates
*******************************************************************************************

"Establishment of religion"

In Everson v. Board of Education (1947):

"The "establishment of religion" clause of the First Amendment means at least this: Neither a state nor the federal government can set up a church. Neither can pass laws which aid one religion, aid all religions, or prefer one religion over another. " - wikipedia
******************************************************************************************

Does not making a group a "protected group", based on their specific religion, violate this idea? Shall we also protect Sikhs? Wiccans? Muslims?

Sorry, dude. There have already been two topics merged about this: Trump Plays Identity Politics, Joins The Side of Multiculturalists In Culture War

 

[cnm]

The term antisemitism was coined 150-years ago by Germans specifically to refer to hatred of Jews.

Now it means criticism of Israel's policies and actions.

 

[sparky]

Here's where a knowledge of History allows one to detect an amusing irony that the less knowledgeable among us remain oblivious.

In the 1850's, the practice in Europe (particularly Germany and France) of referring to Jews as 'Semites' was considered to be an insult.

The implication being that , no matter how assimilated Jews became in Europe, they could never be properly European because their 'blood' was Semitic. They believed Jews should remain isolated from European society if not be removed from it entirely.

Now, the same people who hate Jews claim that Jews can't belong to the historical land of Israel because they have become too European and not as Semitic as others who lay claim to the region. They believe Jews should be removed from the land of Israel for not being Semitic enough.

When i was a wee lad, i'd take the red ants from one ant hill, and place them in the black ant hill or visa versa fnnceo

mayhem would ensue , despite them all same sized & colorblind

point?

even the forkin' insect world is prejudiced

& human nature hails from nature

One is better to acknowledge this, than legislate denial shields preventing such epiphanies

~S~

 

[fncceo]

The term antisemitism was coined 150-years ago by Germans specifically to refer to hatred of Jews.

Now it means criticism of Israel's policies and actions.

If criticism of Israel and its policies were consider anti-Semitism, then every Israeli citizen would be a rabid anti-Semite.

Israeli politics is much more aggressive, divisive, and confrontational than American politics and every Israeli is an ardent critic of his government.

That being said, singling out Israel for criticism while ignoring her neighbors or ascribing sinister motives to Israeli politics based on the ethnicity of the majority of its citizens, especially coming from people who have no connection with the region can very well come from an anti-Semitic place.

It's not random that there are over 30 armed conflict happening around the world and the conflict between Israel and Palestine, despite being the lowest in intensity and casualties, generates ten times as much conversation as all the others combined.

There is something about the conflict that draws in certain people who vociferously rage on about the actions of the Jewish State ... and I doubt it's the region's weather.

 

[fncceo]

Here's where a knowledge of History allows one to detect an amusing irony that the less knowledgeable among us remain oblivious.

In the 1850's, the practice in Europe (particularly Germany and France) of referring to Jews as 'Semites' was considered to be an insult.

The implication being that , no matter how assimilated Jews became in Europe, they could never be properly European because their 'blood' was Semitic. They believed Jews should remain isolated from European society if not be removed from it entirely.

Now, the same people who hate Jews claim that Jews can't belong to the historical land of Israel because they have become too European and not as Semitic as others who lay claim to the region. They believe Jews should be removed from the land of Israel for not being Semitic enough.

When i was a wee lad, i'd take the red ants from one ant hill, and place them in the black ant hill or visa versa fnnceo

mayhem would ensue , despite them all same sized & colorblind

point?

even the forkin' insect world is prejudiced

& human nature hails from nature

One is better to acknowledge this, than legislate denial shields preventing such epiphanies

~S~

So, just to be clear ... anti-Semitism (as classically defined) is all right and proper because Jews are, after all things, different from the rest of the ants?

Interesting admission on your part.

 

[sparky]

Interesting admission on your part.

Painting you a metaphor admits nothing,especially if you don't 'get it' fnnceo

But if you want it point blank, you may

I could give a rodents rear end about race & religion in a secular society

those that make special rules because of their race or religion disrespect our constitution

that includes Bush's faith based initiatives , Trumps anti-semite baloney, or any other public figure pandering to race or religion

THAT i'm d*med prejudiced about

because i'm an American FIRST, not last behind all these pathetic posers

~S~

 

[fncceo]

Interesting admission on your part.

Painting you a metaphor admits nothing,especially if you don't 'get it' fnnceo

But if you want it point blank, you may

I could give a rodents rear end about race & religion in a secular society

those that make special rules because of their race or religion disrespect our constitution

that includes Bush's faith based initiatives , Trumps anti-semite baloney, or any other public figure pandering to race or religion

THAT i'm d*med prejudiced about

because i'm an American FIRST, not last behind all these pathetic posers

~S~

I don't expect to change your mind on the subject. Antisemitism has always been an intractable position among its adherents.

My comments are intended for those with fewer preconceived ideas about the Jews.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

And yet progressives felt it necessary to set a precedent and push to have Hate Crime Laws implemented in the United States that made certain groups of people protected classes

Sorry, those groups and their traits are not mentioned in the constitution. Would you like to address the topic?

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

It's very clear that this order doesn't establish or promote any religion.

But that is only a partial response. You have other points to address, specifically:

"Neither can pass laws which aid one religion, aid all religions, or prefer one religion over another."

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

The executive order in this case addresses a single issue, the appalling rise of open antisemitism on federally funded college campuses. Rising antisemitism in direct defiance of the laws of the land.

False. There is no law the EO banned behavior defies. That is why the executive order happened. You're saying some silly things. Think this through a bit more.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

I am not a Jew but if I was, anyone displaying anti-semitism, depending on the severity, would be searching for either a dentist, a doctor or an undertaker.

Actually, your described behavior is clearly illegal. We already have laws against that. Would you like to address the topic?

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

POLITICS
Trump Signs Order Against Anti-Semitism At Colleges, Worrying Free Speech Advocates
December 11, 20194:42 PM ET

LAUREL WAMSLEY

Trump Signs Order Against Anti-Semitism At Colleges, Worrying Free Speech Advocates
*******************************************************************************************

"Establishment of religion"

In Everson v. Board of Education (1947):

"The "establishment of religion" clause of the First Amendment means at least this: Neither a state nor the federal government can set up a church. Neither can pass laws which aid one religion, aid all religions, or prefer one religion over another. " - wikipedia
******************************************************************************************

Does not making a group a "protected group", based on their specific religion, violate this idea? Shall we also protect Sikhs? Wiccans? Muslims?

Then obviously, all climate changers who worship on the alter of MMGW are out of office! Geeze, that puts up 50 seats in the House. I like the way you think, even if it is bassackards-)

Your climate science denial goes in the conspiracy theory section. Would you like to address the topic?

 

[fncceo]

It's very clear that this order doesn't establish or promote any religion.

But that is only a partial response. You have other points to address, specifically:

"Neither can pass laws which aid one religion, aid all religions, or prefer one religion over another."

Where is the preference in this order? If I speak out against blacks being lynched, does that imply I'm supporting the lynching of whites? Or, is it addressing a specific issue that is affecting the black community and not the others.

This is a specific order addressing a specific problem, the open anti-Semitism being suffered by Jewish students in many cases with the approval of the universities they attend.

Universities, I might point out, are doing so in direct violation of federal laws with which they must comply to receive federal funds.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Sorry, dude. There have already been two topics merged about this:

Neither your thread title or OP address the establishment clause, specifically. I am looking for thoughts on this, specifically.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Where is the preference in this order?

Youre joking, right?

You can perform this behavior regarding Islam or Christianity, but not regarding Judaism.

This is simple and clear from the information presented in post #1

 

[fncceo]

From the US Dept of Education, Office for Civil Rights website:

"The civil rights laws enforced by the U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights (OCR) protect all students, regardless of religious identity, from discrimination on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, disability, and age. None of the laws that OCR enforces expressly address religious discrimination. However, the law OCR enforces that prohibits schools, colleges, and universities from discriminating based on race, color, or national origin (Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964), protects students of any religion from discrimination, including harassment, based on a student’s actual or perceived:"

According to Title VI of the Civil rights act, universities that allow religious discrimination are in violation of the act and not eligible for Federal Funding.

This EO merely puts the law into immediate effect.