At what point is it morally unacceptable and how would you disentangle it?
It is morally unacceptable when the originating faith is ignored, erased, denied, rejected, and made apparently not to exist. THAT is what I am discussing. What UNESCO did. What the Palestinian textbooks did. What is happening all over the Muslim world.
I think you are basing this on too little information and a lot of emotional outrage coming out after UNESCO's decision.
What evidence do you have that Judaism is being "erased" all over the Muslim world?
You take two partial quotes, (approx 1 sentence each) and use that as evidence that a) this is somehow typical of Palestinian textbooks and b) unique in it's erasing of "the other". One of the criticism I've read about both Israeli and Palestinian textbooks is that they do exactly that to the other - marginalize, erase, minimalize.
(The Palestinian textbooks say that the "Mosque" of Abraham must not be JUDAIZED! How the hell does one "Judaize" a Jewish holy place? Its already a Jewish holy place!)
It's impossible to know what they mean because it's taken completely out of context and I can't find anything that shows what else is said.
How would I disentangle it? ALL of these sites must be recognized, always, in every conversation, in every document, in every treaty or agreement as places of Holiness and historical and ancestral significance to the Jewish people. They must be never be permitted to be appropriated by other cultures.
Wow. Tha' is a pretty extreme demand and it would open up quite a can of worms.
Would you likewise require Christians to do the same to pagan sites, saints and deities they appropriated?
Would you require the Jews to recognize " always, in every conversation, in every document, in every treaty or agreement as places of Holiness and historical and ancestral significance" those sites which are also of importance to Islam, for example Al Aqsa?
Monuments and places of historical, cultural, ancestral and religious significance are not "shared" holy sites. They are holy sites of the Jewish people, which also are revered by those of other faiths because of the historical and cultural and religious legacy which originated with and came through the Jewish people.
I disagree. They are shared holy sites in that they have become revered by other faiths. You can't just nullify several thousand years of history by demand. That is exactly the attitude that is causing so much conflict of the the Temple Mount - folks don't want to share or acknowledge the rights of others to it.
This does not in any way preclude the religious significance of these places to other faiths. Nor does it in any way limit or restrict the access of people of other faiths to these places. (Actually, according to the Jewish faith, just the opposite -- it is necessary that these places be shared).
It absolutely does. You are demanding that they first and foremost acknowledge, in every conversation, document etc. that it belongs to another religion and only secondarily to the other religions. You are also stating that to do otherwise is unethical.
Agree, it is necessary that they be shared.
And if the Palestinians insist on including the Cave of the Patriarchs and Rachel's Tomb and even the Temple Mount in their national homeland -- they hold a sacred trust on behalf of the Jewish people to preserve and honor the Jewish history of that place. And if they can not do that -- then they have no business being caretakers of the Jewish monuments and places.
Yes, they absolutely do and must, I agree. All of those sites are sacred trusts and must be shared by all those to whom it is sacred.
