Skip to main content


99% of the time "Judeo-Christian" is antisemitic. And yes, I will absolutely elaborate on this if asked.

Credit: @Rabbit Cohen

Edit because this blew up far more than I expected and multiple people have asked for me to elaborate, here's a copy of my elaboration with follow up questions encouraged:

It's a messy topic and it's late here (I'm a bit sleepy), so feel free to ask follow up questions.

The short version of it is that Judeo-Christian is almost always used in one of two harmful ways:

1) To try and give more credibility and weight to something that is purely Christian by claiming that it's part of Judaism as well when it's not (like the above example, because Judaism explicitly permits abortions)
2) To try and talk about broader groupings of related faiths while ignoring the many other Abrahamic faiths (the proper term, though that one more often hurts the lesser known groups, don't use it unless you also know it applies to groups like the Baháʼí, which I'll admit even I know next to nothing about, but it's valid here because all I'm doing is naming their religious family)

Because many (cough most cough) teach a bastardized form of Judaism through the lens of Christianity, and because that's the only exposure many get to our faith... they get skewed harmful and hurtful ideas about us.

Some highlight examples:
* We don't have an established afterlife (we don't say there isn't one, we just have zero information on it if there is)
* We don't seek "eternal reward", the reward for our faith is being a better person than we were the day before
* We have forgiveness baked into our faith, and no it doesn't require animal sacrifice (it requires you to actually ask the person you wronged...)
* We thoroughly encourage arguing any topic with anyone (right time and place of course), and that includes picking a fight with God if you think they're wrong about something (you have a 99.9% chance of being wrong... but we commend the effort and every once in a while someone wins the argument)
* We have a rule, Pikuach Nefesh, roughly meaning that life is the highest commandment. Your well being takes precedence over your faith, if it would hurt you or others to be observant than you are exempt from that requirement. It's unacceptable to hurt others for your faith, and for yourself it's frowned upon
* We actively discourage conversion, it's allowed but it's not a trivial process. We don't want people to become Jews, we just want people to be better.

in reply to just adrienne

@just adrienne @Rabbit Cohen And followed now!

This was from Facebook memories way back, and I like to when it fits, share those things over to the fediverse.

Adding an edit to explicitly credit because they deserve it.

in reply to Shiri Bailem

@Rabbit Cohen @just adrienne Hey Rabbit, thanks again for the wonderful source post... sorry if this has resulted in spam upon you waking up, hope I'm representing well as I tackle these endless comments lol
in reply to Shiri Bailem

@adrienne No problem! Thank you for going more into depth on the issue, it's important.
in reply to Scott Matter

@Scott Matter things like:

Judeo-Christian Potluck - A potluck hosted by both Jews and Christians

Judeo-Christian Househould - A family in which one parent is Jewish and the other is Christian

in reply to wendinaokland

@wboucek @Scott Matter nondenominational usually refers to "generic Christian", and mixed faith is... well, mixed if it's just those two specific faiths (it implies there are more than 2 faiths present in the case of the potluck, and in the case of a home it's just less specific)
in reply to Shiri Bailem

@scottmatter It’s so hard to get it right, and the faint antisemitism is hiding under every freaking rock. I’ll have my bagel with a schmear and some, uh, kosher ham?
in reply to wendinaokland

@wboucek @Scott Matter well, neither of those cases would be something I'd call antisemitic, just less precise. They're absolutely valid to use, and are absolutely used more often.
in reply to Shiri Bailem

@scottmatter Just the false inclusiveness of judeo-Christian, and I guess my own misunderstanding of nondenominational. It’s fine.
in reply to wendinaokland

@wboucek @Scott Matter yeah, false inclusivity is a huge pain in my ass...

It's why now is the time of year for me to greet people with Happy Holidays and Season's Greetings!

in reply to Scott Matter

@scottmatter Maybe when they're too clueless to realize they're doing an Embrace, Extend (and Extinguish) on an entirely different religion?
in reply to Charlie Stross

@Charlie Stross @Scott Matter antisemitism from ignorance is still antisemitism, it's accidental bigotry vs willful bigotry.

But also the EEE is a perfect reference point for what it's all about!

Unknown parent

Shiri Bailem

@A13cui :perl: :opensuse: Thanks for asking!

It's a messy topic and it's late here (I'm a bit sleepy), so feel free to ask follow up questions.

The short version of it is that Judeo-Christian is almost always used in one of two harmful ways:

1) To try and give more credibility and weight to something that is purely Christian by claiming that it's part of Judaism as well when it's not (like the above example, because Judaism explicitly permits abortions)
2) To try and talk about broader groupings of related faiths while ignoring the many other Abrahamic faiths (the proper term, though that one more often hurts the lesser known groups, don't use it unless you also know it applies to groups like the Baháʼí, which I'll admit even I know next to nothing about, but it's valid here because all I'm doing is naming their religious family)

Because many (cough most cough) teach a bastardized form of Judaism through the lens of Christianity, and because that's the only exposure many get to our faith... they get skewed harmful and hurtful ideas about us.

Some highlight examples:
* We don't have an established afterlife (we don't say there isn't one, we just have zero information on it if there is)
* We don't seek "eternal reward", the reward for our faith is being a better person than we were the day before
* We have forgiveness baked into our faith, and no it doesn't require animal sacrifice (it requires you to actually ask the person you wronged...)
* We thoroughly encourage arguing any topic with anyone (right time and place of course), and that includes picking a fight with God if you think they're wrong about something (you have a 99.9% chance of being wrong... but we commend the effort and every once in a while someone wins the argument)
* We have a rule, Pikuach Nefesh, roughly meaning that life is the highest commandment. Your well being takes precedence over your faith, if it would hurt you or others to be observant than you are exempt from that requirement. It's unacceptable to hurt others for your faith, and for yourself it's frowned upon
* We actively discourage conversion, it's allowed but it's not a trivial process. We don't want people to become Jews, we just want people to be better.

in reply to Shiri Bailem

"Judeo-Christian" always feels about as helpful as a distinction as, like... "Eurasian", except for the specific cases where it's a wink-and-nudge thing from the types I'd like to keep entirely out of wink-and-nudge range from me.
in reply to Shiri Bailem

@a13cui my understanding is that it was a replacement for "Christian values" after 1945. The older term having come to mean plain fascism. And that the new term was promoted by people trying to whitewash their long standing Jew-hatred.
in reply to Shiri Bailem

when is abortion permitted? Pikuach Nefesh sounds like it wouldn't be ok to kill an unborn baby (not trying to start an argument, but a genuine question)
This entry was edited (11 months ago)
in reply to foo

@foo @a13cui Actual life > life that might exist one day but doesn't yet
@foo
in reply to foo

@foo
(A) when it's a person is a philosophical/religious argument, Judaism says at birth
(B) Pikuach Nefesh is specifically what permits it, abortion is permitted when it would cause harm to carry to term. It explicitly includes mental and economic health in that (if it would cause mental distress, if it would interfere with your ability to care for yourself or your family)
@A13cui :perl: :opensuse:
@foo
Unknown parent

@𐪅𐪀𐪈 𐪑𐪁𐪉
Not remotely a counter argument. For one equating Israel with Judaism is an anti-semitic (blood and soil, or just thinking a regional government is authoritative of a worldwide culture) or Zionist take (despised by non-zionists like myself as they are colonizers who think Israel can do no wrong).

Also, it's in the blog section talking about America. It's also precisely the wrong usage (it's calling America Judeo-Christian... it's just christian if anything). On top of that, internalized bigotry is a thing in minority groups.

Unknown parent

A. Lynn
@scottmatter
Sidenote: I understand why the combination would be complete trash in the topic of abortion. Anyone trying that might deserve a kick to the shin.
Unknown parent

fraggle
@WahbAllat the guy who wrote this article is like 1% as clever as he thinks he is. Just the same old boring right wing bigotry we've all heard a million times before
Unknown parent

Shiri Bailem

@M_U @A13cui :perl: :opensuse: Judaism is both a religion and a cultural/"ethnic" group, "Judeo-Christian" is almost always used to refer to the religion of which my statements are representative of the vast vast majority of Judaism.

Also one of the distinct differences is that Atheism and the faith of Judaism are not incompatible. There are many atheist-jews because God actually isn't the center point of Judaism, the main point is the time tested rules (see the argue with everything/everyone) about becoming a better person.

We will always be used by minority groups referring to themselves, mostly because "the vast vast vast majority of us" is clumsy to say and people get the point that exceptions exist. Also, because it doesn't change the fact of the statement being made.

It's also why I mad the example points I did because they're central points that are agreed upon by all major sects as opposed to the many many points which are argued over (once again see the argue with everything/everyone... arguments are a past-time in Jewish culture)

The Doctor reshared this.

Unknown parent

Shiri Bailem

Content warning: religious history

Unknown parent

Shiri Bailem

@0x506978656C526F626F74🦾🤖 in probably 50% of the cases absolutely!

They often use it as a stand-in for Abrahamic (which is often problematic, but has far far more legitimate uses) and I mention in my elaboration comment, though I go more narrow a mention the most obscure Abrahamic faith I know of (Baháʼí) to highlight both facts just because their obscurity I feel makes the point better (though I feel a little guilty for using them as a token, it is also in the effort of getting them and other groups recognition).

@🤖
Unknown parent

Shiri Bailem

@ScepticalScot1 Correct on Judaism, it's an explicit thing.

To be clear, our faith doesn't blanket allow it either... but it's a tiny distinction with how broad our allowance is:

We don't consider it a person until it's birth, until then it's just a potential person (Jewish law only treats it as a person in cases of forced abortion or similar, ie. if you murder a pregnant person who wanted their child, then it's a double-homicide).

Judaism specifically says that abortion is permitted when the well-being of the person carrying it is threatened. But that sounds far more restrictive than it is because we have a broad view of well-being laid out, which includes mental health (being forced to carry a pregnancy you do not want and birth a child against your will is traumatic, therefore abortion is permitted because your mental health would be threatened by denying an abortion... which basically means abortion is permitted in the vast vast vast majority of cases)

(An example of times when it might not be permitted would be things like if they were in the middle of a psychotic episode)

Unknown parent

Shiri Bailem

@Nicolai von Neudeck 🤒🤕 Oooooof, true but oooof.

I will forewarn against the usage there because many anti-theists (atheists with a grudge against all faiths) have picked up Judeo-Christian as well and would interpret that as accusing Judaism of also committing similar atrocities (though the government of Israel continually makes that a challenging topic...)

Unknown parent

Shiri Bailem

"Major Sects" - the large divisions of Judaism representing the vast vast majority of us
"Agreed upon" - Explicitly in our agreed mutual holy texts, considered major defining elements of our faith, or in the case of the afterlife not mentioned anywhere in our texts

Keep in mind that we have more religious texts than are included in the Christian "Old Testament", most significantly the Talmud which is accepted by all Jewish sects I know of and is where many of these elements are established.

How about this follow up: do you have more familiarity with Jewish cultures than a Jew? Do you know what I'm leaving off of the lists that differs between Jewish groups?

@M_U @A13cui :perl: :opensuse:

Unknown parent

DressToKILT
@WahbAllat It would be a shame if someone were to explain a kibbutz to this guy and shatter his ridiculous world view.
in reply to Shiri Bailem

can you elaborate? It is my instinct that this is true, but I can’t verbalize why.
in reply to Tammy Garrison

@Tammy Garrison Here's a link to my previous elaboration: https://foggyminds.com/display/c6ef095f-1864-c4b5-e122-cfb887278714

Feel free to ask follow up questions!


@A13cui :perl: :opensuse: Thanks for asking!

It's a messy topic and it's late here (I'm a bit sleepy), so feel free to ask follow up questions.

The short version of it is that Judeo-Christian is almost always used in one of two harmful ways:

1) To try and give more credibility and weight to something that is purely Christian by claiming that it's part of Judaism as well when it's not (like the above example, because Judaism explicitly permits abortions)
2) To try and talk about broader groupings of related faiths while ignoring the many other Abrahamic faiths (the proper term, though that one more often hurts the lesser known groups, don't use it unless you also know it applies to groups like the Baháʼí, which I'll admit even I know next to nothing about, but it's valid here because all I'm doing is naming their religious family)

Because many (cough most cough) teach a bastardized form of Judaism through the lens of Christianity, and because that's the only exposure many get to our faith... they get skewed harmful and hurtful ideas about us.

Some highlight examples:
* We don't have an established afterlife (we don't say there isn't one, we just have zero information on it if there is)
* We don't seek "eternal reward", the reward for our faith is being a better person than we were the day before
* We have forgiveness baked into our faith, and no it doesn't require animal sacrifice (it requires you to actually ask the person you wronged...)
* We thoroughly encourage arguing any topic with anyone (right time and place of course), and that includes picking a fight with God if you think they're wrong about something (you have a 99.9% chance of being wrong... but we commend the effort and every once in a while someone wins the argument)
* We have a rule, Pikuach Nefesh, roughly meaning that life is the highest commandment. Your well being takes precedence over your faith, if it would hurt you or others to be observant than you are exempt from that requirement. It's unacceptable to hurt others for your faith, and for yourself it's frowned upon
* We actively discourage conversion, it's allowed but it's not a trivial process. We don't want people to become Jews, we just want people to be better.


Unknown parent

Shiri Bailem

@Nicolai von Neudeck 🤒🤕 I have no ability to delete your post without you being on my server, though I'm not seeing it anymore either. I'd check with your admins to see if they maybe flagged it and didn't understand?

And the exact kinds of people I mentioned in my comment are the people who'd not understand because they're indoctrinated by christo-fascism and rejecting it without rejecting what they've learned from it.

in reply to Shiri Bailem

@a13cui Definitely a positive impression there, honestly I never knew half of that.
in reply to Shiri Bailem

@a13cui “It's unacceptable to hurt others for your faith” Does that include Palestinians?
in reply to Shiri Bailem

@HollyGoDarkly Solid agree, *and also* such claims are generally not even “Christian”, but a particular subset’s views. Plenty of Christians — including lots of large organized denominations — are pro-choice, for example.
in reply to Anthony Sorace

@Anthony Sorace @Erika Ensign that falls under "No True Scotsman", they are Christian regardless of being a subset much the same as I won't claim that Zionists aren't jews despite holding objectionable views.

It's a logical fallacy used very often to avoid looking at issues in one's own social groups.

in reply to Shiri Bailem

@HollyGoDarkly Oh, I agree, and I’m sorry if it came across that way. I just meant that they claim to represent Christianity in general, which is BS. You’re entirely right that we don’t get to disclaim them so easily.
in reply to Shiri Bailem

@a13cui Hi friend... let me just hit this follow button here and see if people will read this simply because I commented on it because this info needs to get out... 👋
in reply to Shiri Bailem

@a13cui This is fantastic — I have one note that is a bit of a question. I suspect the bit of Jewish law that discourages conversion into Judaism isn’t about screening for the best candidates but is about screening for narcs. Jews were oppressed in many different societies, including ones that forbid conversion to Judaism with severe penalties for all involved. Turning away a potential convert 3 times would be a ritualized way to weed out undercover fakes.
in reply to Zach Fine

@a13cui I’m not sure if that “three times” is actually law. But testing the applicant’s commitment is the norm. It’s a long way from the experience of the first convert, Ruth, just basically said “your God is my God, where you go I go” and that was what it took when it wasn’t a conversion process happening under the rule of regimes hostile to Jews.
in reply to Zach Fine

@a13cui I’m saying this note is a question because I bet I’ve got some misconceptions in there and don’t mean to pretend to be an authority on the subject. The question would be whether this line of thought about the changes in process and reasons for it are plausible.
in reply to Shiri Bailem

@a13cui in my experience, people saying “Abrahamic religions” are using that as a direct substitution for “Judeo-Christian” and using the same christofascist cudgel to also include Islam in their shit.
in reply to Shiri Bailem

@a13cui It often feels like the Jewish faith has things figured out better than most belief systems.

Especially the "don't try to force others to follow your religion" part. That's a big awesome one.

in reply to e. hashman 🇵🇸

@e. hashman :flag_bisexual: Again I said major sects and didn't say there are no exceptions.

I'm not going to entertain this line of arguments any further because I can't see a version of this being in good faith at this point.

in reply to Pedestriansfirst

@Pedestriansfirst @A13cui :perl: :opensuse: most jews in my experience condemn the actions of the israeli government. Those that don't are usually zionists and they are contemptable for it.
Unknown parent

ראַף 🟣
@morecowbell
It's not really a tribute if it mostly gets used to mean Christian. It often implies the speaker doesn't understand or value the important differences between Jewish and Christian values. Also low-key islamaphobic
in reply to Zach Fine

@Zach Fine @A13cui :perl: :opensuse: it's purpose is to prevent dilution of the faith.

The rejection is just the first step, there's also studying and being approved by a Bet Din (rabbinic court).

We want to insure people don't join the community and the immediately start screwing with our traditions and practices.

in reply to Zach Fine

@Zach Fine @A13cui :perl: :opensuse: as far as the grounds for rejecting 3 times, it's one of the cases where the tradition stretches drastically farther than the origin of it. I wish I had citations, but my rabbi did once find the super obscure origin of it and for the life of me I can't remember where.
in reply to Zorin =^o.o^=

@Zorin =^o.o^= @A13cui :perl: :opensuse: That's one of those Christian centric things right there, most faiths don't care much about forcing people to join, just the largest (direct causation there)
in reply to fluffy 💜

@fluffy 💜 @A13cui :perl: :opensuse: It has slightly more legitimate usage, but only slightly.

Mostly just because it is the actual family name.

But yeah, it's too often used for faux-inclusivity.

Unknown parent

Pedestriansfirst
@a13cui @i664k Apologies but I don’t understand what you are trying to say with your quotes. Can you explain in simple terms?
in reply to Shiri Bailem

yes code for we cosplay as Xians but like the old testament angry bits and ignore all the libtard woke new testament.
in reply to Robrab

@Robrab That's really a combination of anti-semitism and "No True Scotsman"

Most of the "old testament angry bits" are Christian interpretations or mistranslations.

Prime example is the verse they translate as "A man should not lie with another man as he would a woman" (anti-homosexuality) which is far more accurately translated as "A man should not lie with a boy as he would a woman" (anti-pedophilia). One of those two makes a hell of a lot more sense for stoning...

in reply to Shiri Bailem

yes i know abortion has no place in Judaism and is an antisemetic trope, wasn't referring to that at all, there is a lot of overlap in the moral base of Christianity and Judaism, it's not 99% disjointed at all.
This entry was edited (11 months ago)
in reply to american

most people assume "Abrahamic Religions" and "JudeoChristian" are interchangable terms and thus often spout shit they don't realize are just not true, gotta give everyone a fair interpretation given such common misconceptions.
in reply to american

@retard oh, I guess you were making the response as directed to the hypothetical person referenced, not to me?
in reply to Shiri Bailem

I'm not the original questioner, I dropped them from the thread. I don't think anything I wrote here contradicts your main argument. Just sharing some diversity you may not have been aware of—I think the Karaites pose really interesting theological questions for rabbinic Judaism.
in reply to Shiri Bailem

Content warning: religion

in reply to CaptMorgan

Content warning: religion

in reply to Pedestriansfirst

@Pedestriansfirst @A13cui :perl: :opensuse: They're a blatant antisemite using limited visibility on their posts to hide their posts from moderators. I've reported them to their server admins and instituted a contact block on my server (to be clear, only of their individual account and server wide block is not because of personal disagreement but because blatant bigotry that I don't want my users to be exposed to)
Unknown parent

Shiri Bailem
@A.L. Blacklyn @Scott Matter They're a blatant antisemite using limited visibility on their posts to hide their posts from moderators. I've reported them to their server admins and instituted a contact block on my server (to be clear, only of their individual account and server wide block is not because of personal disagreement but because blatant bigotry that I don't want my users to be exposed to)
in reply to Shiri Bailem

@a13cui yeah the last time I saw someone using the term “abrahamic religions” in an “inclusive” manner it was regarding something that was literally about honoring Christ, so
in reply to CaptMorgan

Content warning: religion

in reply to fluffy 💜

@fluffy 💜 @A13cui :perl: :opensuse: most of the time I see "abrahamic religions" I barely make note of it because it's academic usage (ie. looking at the Wikipedia page for Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Bahá'í, etc and seeing "Classification: Abrahamic"), but my experience is definitely not universal, I just suspect the perception of it is possibly warped by proper usage not drawing attention like improper usage does.
in reply to Zorin =^o.o^=

@Zorin =^o.o^= @A13cui :perl: :opensuse: Also noting that a lot of the "have things figured out" comes from the outlook of arguing as a pastime. Since nothing is above debate, everything gets challenged constantly.

These days, it's not as visible because the vast majority of topics have been challenged to the point that there's little to argue... but there are absolutely topics being fought over (like for instance circumcision which is a very very touchy ongoing argument, mostly due to it's adjacency to the history of antisemitism)

in reply to Shiri Bailem

Great edit, thank you for elucidating. I can’t believe that’s the only word my mind will spit out. I’m a bit medicated:/. Anyway, thanks!
This entry was edited (11 months ago)
in reply to Shiri Bailem

Like forfend popped out just now?

Why? Couldn’t tell ya, but it’s why I’m a much better writer than talker lol.

My best one of late was intransigent intelligence. Think the asd helps with popping the right sounds n meaning out at the right time.

in reply to DemocritusDiscoBall

@DemocritusDiscoBall ooh, such delightful words. I enjoy linguistics, so many fun quirks.

And isn't Intransigent Intelligence just all of us? It sounds to me like "Intelligence suffering from the backfire effect"

in reply to Shiri Bailem

You would hope, but many people don’t continue to do research when they get disapproval, hate for it. In that case it was in reference to D Elisabeth Glassco who posts here as @Deglassco, about Black history, specifically all teh bs book banning etc GOP is pulling out to cover up the history of slavery.

People like her have the fortitude and intelligence to fight through the bs, read the hard hateful truth, and share with us. We need more brave, smart people to fight the good fight.

in reply to Shiri Bailem

Intransigent unwilling to change one’s point of views, even under pressure
Intelligence, smart enough to see the truth.

So you need them both in how I mean the phrase. Because when you start talking about how life really is, you often get a LOT of hate from small minded authoritarians.

in reply to DemocritusDiscoBall

@DemocritusDiscoBall Yeah, it's basically the backfire effect and whether or not the person takes effort to combat it. It has nothing to do with smarts and everything to do with pure psychology.

The backfire effect is rooted in the fact that when we take a stance on an issue it incorporates into our identity, the stronger the stance the more it incorporates.

When faced with evidence that the position may be wrong, we experience cognitive dissonance and our brain reacts to that information as a threat. Our natural default response is to double down on whatever it is, both increasing the strength of your connection to it and even less critical of the details you're relying on to support your argument.

It's basically the reason you "can't win arguments on the internet", because if someone is to the point of arguing about it, then they're invested enough that they'll be highly susceptible to the backfire effect. (Instead it's better to make your arguments for the sake of unconvinced bystanders)

It takes effort and mindfulness to push back against the backfire effect, and a conscious effort to allow yourself to be wrong.

in reply to Shiri Bailem

So I forget where I heard this (probably "We need to build" by Eboo Patel?), but IIRC the term Judeo-Christian was invented mid-20th century by a coalition of Jews, Catholics, and Protestants as a way to fight against anti-Semitic and anti-catholic sentiment in the US. These days we definitely need a broader term to encompass an even larger cohort, and it's a shame Judeo-Christian has been misappropriated for evil 😞
in reply to Jared Forsyth

@Jared Forsyth wouldn't surprise me, a lot of terms get formed in a positive place and corrupted over time.

The broader term is Abrahamic Faith. It has more valid use cases, but does suffer from the same problem of people using it to talk just about Christianity.

As beloved author Charles Stross (The Laundry Files) commented above, it's the Embrace Extend Eradicate practice, applied to religion.

in reply to Zach Fine

@zachnfine @a13cui Which sums up pretty succinctly why Christianity is the way it is: It could really have done with some of that, instead of being so open and welcoming to all, that it is now very obviously the product of 2000 years of infiltration, appropriation, and bastardization, by every example of exactly the worst kind of self-serving people with power and privilege, Jesus warned about.

Thanks to that difference, try as they might to appropriate and bastardize Judaism - like they have so many other cultures - Christians have time and again, failed.

Where Christians go out of their way to eradicate basic critical thinking in those they indoctrinate, Judaism encourages it, and that provides a basic defense against the kind of corruption, that Christianity has utterly succumbed to.

'Those who have eyes shall see', and Jews see Christianity's leaders very clearly, for the wolves in sheep's clothing they always have been.

in reply to Naomi

@Naomi @Zach Fine @A13cui :perl: :opensuse: So there's definitely some distinct history to what happened with Christianity.

It starts with the Apostles and namely with Luke arguing that Christians did not have to first be Jews. It's obvious why that argument won out (lower standards and dropping circumcision).

And then it was kicked into high-gear with Emperor Constantine who converted the whole Roman Empire to Christianity.

As an important bit of context, the Roman empire/faith was essentially the borg of religions. As it conquered cultures it declared that their faiths were all subsets of their own, assimilating them into their faith.

The issue between the Jews of Israel and Rome was rooted in the fact that Rome wanted to call our God just another manifestation of Zeus and we wholeheartedly rejected that (the story of Hannukah starts with the Romans trying to put up a statue of Zeus in front of the Temple).

So, when the emperor declared that Rome was now Christian, they immediately assimilated their own faith into Christianity. This is why the popular Christian afterlife mirrors the afterlife of the roman faith (seriously compare Heaven/Hell depictions with the Elysian Fields and Pits of Tartarus; and then contrast to the fact that Judaism has no established afterlife).

in reply to Glyph

@glyph @foo @a13cui

This is worth reading in full, but one point to take away is that in Judaism abortion is not merely permitted (in certain circumstances). It is obligatory/required (in certain, more limited, circumstances). If continuing a pregnancy threatens a woman's life, abortion is obligatory.

This is complicated by another halachic principle, which is the obligation to abide by the (secular) laws of the place where one lives.

There can be direct conflict here.

in reply to Shiri Bailem

@a13cui This is great. I went to a catholic high school, and I remember contesting anything religious was a huge no-no. The word was the word, and arguing about it wasn't allowed.

Allowing even long-standing ideas to be challenged is one of the most important requirements for a society to progress.

in reply to Shiri Bailem

i really wish leftists would stop using this term
in reply to Pedestriansfirst

@Pedestriansfirst @A13cui :perl: :opensuse: they are in fact Jews and you won't find me pulling a "No True Scotsman" on that.

I will however always note that they're Zionists and that non-Zionists don't approve of Zionists.

For a Christian example, it's the difference between saying WBC isn't Christian vs saying WBC is condemned by most other Christians.

Making the Palestine argument applies specifically to the Zionist take that Israel (the political entity) and Judaism are inseparable, and it implies from that that all Jews support the actions of Israel as opposed to the majority (at least as I've seen) condemning it.

in reply to Zorin =^o.o^=

@Zorin =^o.o^= @A13cui :perl: :opensuse: Agreed, I'm a fan of Mark Twain's (yes, the Mark Twain) commentary on the topic:

He has made a marvellous fight in this world, in all the ages; and has done it with his hands tied behind him. He could be vain of himself, and be excused for it. The Egyptian, the Babylonian, and the Persian rose, filled the planet with sound and splendor, then faded to dream-stuff and passed away; the Greek and the Roman followed, and made a vast noise, and they are gone; other peoples have sprung up and held their torch high for a time, but it burned out, and they sit in twilight now, or have vanished. The Jew saw them all, beat them all, and is now what he always was, exhibiting no decadence, no infirmities of age, no weakening of his parts, no slowing of his energies, no dulling of his alert and aggressive mind. All things are mortal but the Jew; all other forces pass, but he remains. What is the secret of his immortality?

We persist and have great impact because knowledge and understanding are cherished, and all things old and new are challenged constantly. We don't claim perfection, being Jewish is all about the act of continually striving to do and be better.

reshared this

Unknown parent

Shiri Bailem
@Nicolai von Neudeck 🤒🤕 also of note, I'm American, the Holocaust is pretty much only ever talked about here as a story of the "Allies victory over evil" and little is really talked about with detail about the Jewish experience of it or what really was going on across various stages of it.
in reply to Shiri Bailem

@zachnfine @a13cui And this is why I'd much rather listen to Jews than Christians. You keep the parts of history that Christians have gone out of their way to bury, so your explanations actually make sense of the glaring disparities between what Jesus (a Jew) said, and what Christians, from the apostles onwards (Paul in particular), /say/ he said.

I mean, I can't even google anything related to the Bible, without getting endless pages of 'Good Christian Bible study' takes, twisting every word he said into its opposite.

Questioning that is why I got kicked out of Sunday school when I was still an infant, and it wasn't much longer before I realized Christianity was a very Roman creation, even with the poor, Christian education I was given.

in reply to Shiri Bailem

Yeah the term judeo christian doesn't really make sense 99.9% of the time. Like most things Judaism and Christianity share in common are also shared by Islam so "major Abrahamic religions" would be more appropriate way of describing whatever that may be.
in reply to Eugene

And that's when they do share things in common. Like for example abortion is only a hot button issue in Christianity its consider a completely acceptable thing for women (or anyone else with a uterus) to do in Judaism and Islam has some limitations but is also largely fine with it from what I've read.
This entry was edited (11 months ago)
in reply to Eugene

@Eugene Yeah, I can't speak to Islam but in Judaism it's "disallowed" with exceptions so broad that it basically just means you need to be in your right mind, and the only time limit being birth.
in reply to Eugene

@Eugene "Major Abrahamic Religions" thank you for a great example usage of Abrahamic!
in reply to Shiri Bailem

@a13cui So if I’m not blocked and understand you correctly the people killing Palestinian children (about 80 in the last couple of years) are Jews but bad Jews that most Jewish people don’t approve of. Good.
in reply to Pedestriansfirst

@Pedestriansfirst @A13cui :perl: :opensuse: 80? that honestly is a lot lower than what I would have expected at this point

I won't say "bad Jews" because that's far too close to "No True Scotsman", they are Zionists and Zionism is Jewish Colonialism, which is a very bad take imo.

And no, you're not blocked. It wasn't a great take to start with, but it was understandable given the propensity for Christians to take the "No True Scotsman" fallacy against arguments such as that.

I believe in giving someone a chance first when there's any grey area on potential hate, plus it was a good excuse to outline the differences on a very common and hot topic that gentiles often know little about. And I think you learned something about Jewish society from it.

For more background, part of the problem with Zionists is that they're supported by White Supremacists and Nazis.

It sounds weird on the surface that Nazis would support Zionists, but it comes from a common White Supremacist principle of "Blood and Soil" in which they believe that different "races" have dominion over different lands (ie. white people over europe, Jews over Israel, Asians over Asia, etc). It's why you'll occasionally see someone spouting antisemitic bullshit, but then pivot to supporting Israel.

(Also "fun" trivia: this is why so many white people claim some vague distant "Cherokee Princess" in their background, it came from an effort to expand their blood and soil claim to the Americas)

in reply to Shiri Bailem

@a13cui For your information I am not a Christian but I am a true Scot! Thanks for an interesting discussion and I have genuinely learned a bit more about Jewishness and Zionism. If your prayers might work please pray for peace in this troubled world.
Unknown parent

Shiri Bailem

@Nicolai von Neudeck 🤒🤕 I saw in your about you're from Germany and yeah, it's bad everywhere (the honeymoon post-holocaust period is ending and anti-semitism is returning to the "norm"), just from what I understand there's still drastically more taught about the Holocaust and Naziism in Germany than in the US.

Here, we get little more than "Nazis hate Jews", "Nazis bad", and "Bad things happened at Auschwitz". If anything else is covered, it's merely glossed over.

Of course, we're also the country that throws hissy fits at the idea of taking down monuments to people who actively fought to keep slavery (not that it's over with in the US, we just made it state slavery)

in reply to Pedestriansfirst

@Pedestriansfirst @A13cui :perl: :opensuse: praying for peace is a constant for us, but we also believe in Tikkun Olam, it's our responsibility to continually work toward it as well.

I figured you were not Christian, when mentioning Palestine you were calm about it and responded reasonably... Christians tend to only really go that route if they're going to be frothing antisemites, so it'd be really surprising to me if you were. (Not impossible, just unlikely)

Part of the trouble is that in the west Christianity overshadows all other religions to the point that many atheists only known and understand Christianity when they're rejecting religion as a whole. And that's something I'm deeply conscious of.

... I also love getting into arguments with anti-theists because they get so incredibly confused at (a) rational arguments and (b) the fact that I'll context switch right along them when they're not even paying attention to their context. (I jokingly call these people theo-phobes after the idea of homophobes being self-hating homosexuals and I believe many of them have an indoctrinated belief in god and are repulsed by the thought that the things they were taught would be true)

Unknown parent

Shiri Bailem
@Nicolai von Neudeck 🤒🤕 btw, 7 hours later I decide to finally hit translate on Täter-Opfer-Umkehr and learn that it's the german for DARVO (Deny, Attack, Reverse Victim and Offender)
Unknown parent

Shiri Bailem
@Nicolai von Neudeck 🤒🤕 I had a feeling you might appreciating learning that! Based on your usage I suspect it's a direct translation between the two.
in reply to Shiri Bailem

@a13cui Well sadly your prayers don’t seem very effective. But keep at it and good luck.
in reply to Shiri Bailem

This is excellently written. I have long had the same ideas, but you have expressed them more cogently than I ever have.
in reply to Shiri Bailem

I just want to say, thank you for this and especially thank you for your _astonishing_ patience in dealing with the replies. There is clearly a goodly amount of bad faith or even just whataboutism floating around and you have handled it with grace, kindness and aplomb.
Unknown parent

Shiri Bailem

@Nicolai von Neudeck 🤒🤕 oof, for some reason I thought Germany was notable in taking them all down... but I really shouldn't be surprised.

I think it's both (a) and (b), after the war anti-semitism became shameful so it moved out of the public view... but also being out of the public limited it's spread.

But every year the holocaust gets more distant and the reaction to it becomes more and more muted as people try to claim that it's done and gone and not worth talking about anymore and with that Naziism becomes more and more a cartoon instead of a real threat... so of course it starts spreading again.

in reply to Pedestriansfirst

@Pedestriansfirst @A13cui :perl: :opensuse: peace is supposed to come with the Messiah, until then we just work toward that goal because even if we can never achieve it it's always a blessing to work toward.

Wayne is distracted reshared this.

Unknown parent

Shiri Bailem

@Emily K 🪬 @Jared Forsyth Agreed, I cite it as better only because it's actually used in broader valid cases (as an accurate classification of the faiths), but whenever they talk about individual beliefs... it turns to total crap real fast.

Majority of the time they're talking about Christianity, every once in a while they hit a valid chord between the big three... but it's a miracle if it's actually accurate to all Abrahamic Faiths.

in reply to Shaterri (he/him)

@Shaterri (he/him) Honestly I think this has been mostly good faith arguments given how people have responded to my replies. There's one where I drew the line feeling it was making it's way to bad faith pedantry... and the one worse than that you'll note their posts have disappeared or will soon because their server banned them (credit to Venera.social for responding quickly and decisively)

But I can see what people think of as bad faith. There's a lot of common anti-theist counter arguments that I'm familiar with, but I don't think any of them have gone beyond one post and in most cases took my reply graciously and learned something.

For instance calling out Palestine that one time, which while tiresome is understandable since Christians typically pull a "No True Scotsman" fallacy in response to things like that, which clearly marks them as not worth talking to. As tiresome as it is, it's a good barometer question for Jews imo.

in reply to Zach Fine

@zachnfine @a13cui I’d always thought of the mixed multitude leaving Egypt as containing converts. And Rahab… 🤔
in reply to CaptMorgan

Content warning: religion

in reply to assertchris

@assertchris @Zach Fine @A13cui :perl: :opensuse: it's established well after that, that's prior to the Torah even being written and I believe it was established somewhere in the commentaries (like a millennia later) I think, but as I said no idea where.

It's not as hard to maintain your culture prior to being conquered by Rome and prior to Diaspora, but after it becomes vitally important to preserve your practices if you don't want them to dissolve into assimilation.

in reply to assertchris

Content warning: religion

in reply to Shiri Bailem

Hi from Germany, a country with a 'very long judao-christian tradition', as a leading politician said some years ago.
Not only did he use the term to promote anti-islamism by claiming they are NOT part of our tradition and shouldn't be, but he also seems to have 'forgotten' the nasty details of that 'judao-christian tradition'...
He definitely belongs in that 99%-bracket.
Unknown parent

Shiri Bailem

@More Cowbell @raf I had to sit on this one for a while, but... you know that arguing with Jews over what is antisemitic is itself antisemitic?

And do you really think bigots are saying "Oh yeah, I'm absolutely a proud bigot!"? And that if they actually believe their bigotry that somehow frees them of being a bigot?

in reply to Shiri Bailem

Thank you so much to everyone who's shared this and asked questions!

From the comment section it seems to me a lot of people have learned some things about Judaism and how it differs from Christianity. We even exposed one raging antisemite troll who's been banned from their server (shoutout venera.social for having over a thousand users and taking care of it in around an hour).

There certainly was a lot of mild antisemitism throughout the comments, but as far as I can tell in most cases it was ignorance that has been relieved by this!

(Remember kids, pulling a "what about israel?" is rude to do out of nowhere, but if someone supports the occupation they're bad for being a Zionist and that still doesn't permit you to denigrate their faith because it's the same faith as those who reject the occupation)

reshared this

in reply to Shiri Bailem

What do you mean by that? Or the word “Zionism.” I’m asking in earnest. Please describe what that means for you because I don’t know that we understand these words to mean the same thing.
in reply to heather gold

@heather gold Zionism, in it's current form is Jewish colonialism of the area of Israel/Palestine. It wasn't so bad initially when it was just a push for a Jewish state, but became awful between that state enacting colonialist policies against Palestine. Topped off by the fact that modern Zionists believe that the Israeli government represents the Jewish faith and not just the people of Israel. (ie. Zionists generally believe criticism of Israel to be antisemitic)

The occupation of Palestine is the fact that Israel has forced them out of more and more land, and keeps encroaching on their territory. There's a constant expansion effort by Israel that constantly disregards the impact on Palestine, and is more than happy to push Palestinians out of their homes then declare them the "bad guys" for fighting to keep their land and homes. (They often paint it as antisemitic attacks rather than attacking a nation that keeps trying to steal your home)

in reply to Shiri Bailem

Ich verstehe es nicht.
können wir Dinge wie eine Abtreibung auch ohne Religionsbezug betrachten?
Es ist ein Eingriff, welcher von Ärzten vorgenommern wird mit Zustimmung des Patienten.
Meiner Meinung nach hat Religion in dieser Entscheidung nichts zu suchen, egal welcher man angehört.
in reply to Raroun

@Raroun @Rabbit Cohen

I do not get it.
can we look at things like abortion without reference to religion?
It is an intervention performed by doctors with the patient's consent.
In my opinion, religion has no place in this decision, no matter which one you belong to.

Agreed, but unfortunately it's often centered around Christianity and fascism, and both for and against throw around Judeo-Christian when talking about how it's being forced by religious groups.

in reply to Shiri Bailem

@Shiri Bailem
If people were more human and less religious, the problem would probably not exist.
I'm not religious and I don't have much to contribute to this discussion, except my opinion, unfortunately :)
in reply to Raroun

@Raroun Critiques of religion and it's impact on people not of their faith (and sometimes of their faith) are valid!

A lot of the time I see the problem being that people's only experience is imperialistic religions (Christianity) and little experience with the variety of experiences and lessons.

Like for instance, in Judaism we couldn't care less if you worshiped our god, let alone any other god. Our primary focus is on the wellbeing of ourselves and our communities (which includes the non-jews). (We don't even care that much if other Jews worship our god, atheistic religious jews are an actual accepted thing!)

Where many Christians take the stance of "let Jesus into your heart and you will become a good person!", Judaism takes the stance of "You must do the right thing whether you like it or not, and if you keep doing it maybe you'll become a better person for it" (do the right thing being things like being charitable and kind as well as not tolerating bigotry even if it's not directed at you).

And most importantly in Judaism: if it can't stand up to scrutiny than it shouldn't be respected (ie. nothing is off limits to argue, and if it falters under argument then it has no right to be respected)

Feel free to ask me questions if you like about my experiences, I just ask that you content warning for others any questions that are potentially sensitive. I won't try to convert you (we have a tradition of rejecting potential converts), we just emphasize sharing knowledge and understanding as one of our primary goals.

in reply to Shiri Bailem

I sincerely didn't know how drastically different Judaism was until years out from leaving fundamentalist Christianity, I was in a 4 year relationship with a Jewish woman.

There is so much outright bullshit about Judaism taught in those circles.

I still only know enough to know that there is a vast ocean of information I need to learn.

in reply to JamieGC 🏴 🏳️‍🌈 🖖

@JamieGC I mean, I think any honest rabbi will say the same thing? lol

It's a constant learning experience, especially for someone not raised in it.

And Christianity loves to paint such a horrific picture of Judaism and pretend it's an authority on the matter... and then people believe them.

in reply to Shiri Bailem

🙂​

I love how much Judaism is about learning, from what I have heard, and find it fascinating that debating more minor details is practically a friendly sport.

My life would have been so much better had I grew up in that kind of environment instead.

in reply to Shiri Bailem

thanks for this! That phrase has bothered me for a long time and this is helpful to keep in mind so I can push back on it with something more concrete than my bad vibes/general suspicion
Unknown parent

Shiri Bailem
@Ulrich_the_Elder 🇨🇦 🇺🇦 😷 Please please provide a citation, I was not aware that unicorn appeared anywhere in either the Jewish or Christian Bibles!
in reply to undead enby of the apocalypse

@undead enby of the apocalypse My pleasure, thank you for reading and taking it earnestly!

Feel free to ask me any questions you may have about this or Judaism in general! (I just ask you content warning for others any potentially sensitive topics)

in reply to Don Hawkins - W7DAH

@Don Hawkins - W7DAH fun fact, atheist observant Jews are a thing because Judaism is not dependent on belief in God.

Feel free to fire your arguments away, I enjoy debating antitheists. I'll even give you a courtesy and forewarning you: I will match the context of your arguments (ie. if your argument is from the assumption of my god existing, my response will follow that assumption; but if your argument is from the assumption that my god doesn't exist, I will respond likewise... a lot of people get confused because they don't pay attention to context switches)

in reply to Shiri Bailem

good to know about the Atheism among Jewish-peeps, thanks! As for debating the rest, you’d be wasting your time & mine. There is no God, period, done & done. But hey, u b u.
in reply to Don Hawkins - W7DAH

@Don Hawkins - W7DAH then why spend your time coming to the post of a minority culture posting hostile memes if you're not going to discuss? Sounds like all you're doing then is shitting on people trying to feel superior but backing down immediately when challenged?
in reply to Shiri Bailem

@Don Hawkins - W7DAH Also, for arguing in favor of reason there seems to be an absence of it here? And a lot of assumption.

Your response is nonsense if your response to "atheist jews" is "there is no god"? So what?

Are you just trolling persecuted minorities because you think none of us will ever debate you? You think a handful of memes shitting on a post about antisemitism will make you appear enlightened?

in reply to Shiri Bailem

“also”, I couldn’t care less what others might think. This appears in my profile:

“Better to write for yourself & have no public, than to write for the public & have no self." --Cyril Connolly

in reply to Shiri Bailem

you seem triggered by one, short response; maybe social media isn’t for you. 😎
in reply to Shiri Bailem

it’s called opinion & free speech, nothing to feel threatened by; conversely why do you go to such great lengths to proselytize in a social media space? Why would you characterize someone’s decision not to waste time debating as “backing down” as though some contest had been declared & everyone ‘required’ to participate? Your logic seems skewed. Nice try, & thanks for playing Skippy, but I have better things to do. Don’t you have some doors to go knock on?
in reply to Don Hawkins - W7DAH

@Don Hawkins - W7DAH

it’s called opinion & free speech


When did I call for government censorship of you?

why do you go to such great lengths to proselytize in a social media space?


Judaism does not proselytize, and the fact that you make that claim shows an ignorance of both the conversation and our faith. Our tradition is to reject converts by default, and when accepted we have an extensive vetting process. Accusing me of proselytization just exposes your ignorance of religion in general and makes you look like a tool who's only here to shit on people to make yourself feel better.

“also”, I couldn’t care less what others might think. This appears in my profile:

“Better to write for yourself & have no public, than to write for the public & have no self." --Cyril Connolly


Well, if you're posting it publicly then you're on some level writing for the public, and even if you're writing for yourself you're getting something out of it and I'm just trying to get to the bottom of what you get out of shitting on an oppressed minority talking about their oppression? My best guess is a sense of smug superiority in which you claim enlightenment, but what's so enlightened about attacking an oppressed minority asking to not be oppressed? Or misrepresenting an oppressed minority on a post asking people to stop misrepresenting us?

you seem triggered by one, short response; maybe social media isn’t for you. 😎


Ah yes, the "I'm being an asshole, but obviously better than you because I can throw around psych terms completely out of context to claim your inferiority and dismiss your responses". Triggered is referring to PTSD, do you think it's amusing to mock people with PTSD? Quite an enlightened take. I'm engaging a bigot because it's fun and presents a complete picture of their bigotry to others (especially to moderators). If I refuse to engage I get nothing, but by engaging I stand to protect vulnerable people from you and the likes of you.

in reply to Shiri Bailem

very good to know. And that saves me time. I only have your response to reread.
in reply to Shiri Bailem

@Odradek @BathysphereHat
I feel there's a special evil in talking about germanies "judeo-christian" history (often done!), as uf that history wasnt mostly pogroms, exclusion, antisemitism, the shoa.
Unknown parent

Shiri Bailem

@More Cowbell @raf To quote Avenue Q: "Everyone is a little bit racist sometimes"

The defining question is whether it's rooted in ignorance or willful, which is part of this whole conversation with you.

You can be antisemitic without being willful about it, the question of character is how you respond when called on it. Telling us you know better than us about what is or isn't bigotry that we deal with is itself a form of bigotry.

The judgement of you as a person comes now, in how you respond to this?

If you learn and grow, addressing what we called out, then all the praise for you because that's hard to do. If you back away, well at least you were polite. If you become hostile, then we just write you off as a bigot.

And of course, further polite inquiries in good faith are valid too and fall under learning and growing.

Unknown parent

Shiri Bailem

@More Cowbell @raf There isn't a shared culture between Judaism and Christianity, they are very very distinctly different cultures and one has spent a very long time trying to kill the other.

Christianity is a member of the Abrahamic family of faiths and probably has more cultural similarity to Islam than it does Judaism, despite being an offshoot of Judaism. (And Abrahamic can be equally problematic if you're not well familiar with the cultural differences between Christianity and say Rastafarianism, but at least it's an accurate name for the relationship)

Much of the usage of "Judeo-Christian" comes from the belief that there's far more similarity than there is.

It's much like talking about the "Western Culture in which healthcare is a privilege, not a right" despite the fact that that's an american cultural element that's not shared by the vast majority of western nations.

Unknown parent

Shiri Bailem
@More Cowbell @raf and this is where it's firmly established that you're just a bigot who wants to justify bigotry by pretending to be an ally.
in reply to Shiri Bailem

@Ulrich_the_Elder 🇨🇦 🇺🇦 😷 Realized that my tone may not have come across in context, I genuinely want to know because that's a fascinating bit of trivia to have!

I otherwise agree, especially since in the Jewish Bible (parts not included in the Christian Bible) it is talked about, and explicitly permitted.

Unknown parent

Shiri Bailem

@M_U @e. hashman :flag_bisexual: I appreciate the apology.

Sects do have a cultural element because they are groupings based on shared beliefs and values.

Ethnic distinctions are a mess in general, especially when talking about ethno-religious groups like Judaism as someone can be of the ethnicity and not the faith, or of the faith group and not the ethnicity. In those cases though we'd typically differentiate by their specific groupings.

Most I know are Ashkenazi Jews, being the most represented group of Judaism in the west (for comparison, you also find Sephardic Jews as prominent in the west, but with drastically less representation).

Because of intersectionality, one can be a member of many many cultures at the same time and the definitions are going to depend on which topics and elements are being referenced. When talking about religious beliefs, a sect/denomination is more meaningful than a region. And there are some elements that are derived from those beliefs that make it applicable as well.

I won't pretend that a New York Jew is the same as a Florida Jew, as a Texas Jew, let alone a Polish Jew, Indian Jew, or Japanese Jew. Just that we're going to share a lot of the same cultural elements where they're rooted specifically in our faith, especially when in the same sects.

Also, fyi, "IQ" is mostly rooted in classism and racism. here's an entertaining video from the show Adam Ruins Everything talking about it: https://youtu.be/W3oUqKUx2o0

Unknown parent

Shiri Bailem

@M_U "smart" and "intelligent" are all vague, undefined terms that are pretty much always problematic.

We have a multitude of different cognitive abilities, and they're basically trying to say someone who's "smart" is cognitively superior... when they're often just well versed on a topic.

It also causes a lot of trauma for people like myself who go through life oscillating between being called "smart" or "stupid" depending on which cognitive abilities are factored into a task. (For instance, I have Executive Dysfunction, but also have pattern thinking and great pattern recognition)

in reply to Shiri Bailem

@M_U to elaborate further, saying a particular group has "higher intelligence" in any fashion is still racist and falls under the "Model Minority" bigotry (used to pigeonhole people in those groups and leveraging one group against another).

Jews aren't "smarter", we just have a culture that encourages education, and very importantly critical thinking (our pastime of arguing everything, and nothing being above challenge means that we are encouraged to actually analyze topics rather than just memorize)

in reply to Shiri Bailem

Thank you for this explanation. It's very helpful.
Unknown parent

Shiri Bailem

@M_U ... okay, that's just straight up eugenics bullshit and will not be tolerated.

It's proven blatantly untrue, and is deeply disrespectful of our cultures. On top of that it's a purely racist talking point.

We have long established that we do not have significant mental or physical differences between "races", especially given that no one is "pure blooded", and especially going back thousands of years.

Unknown parent

Shiri Bailem

@M_U tendency towards sickle-cell anemia, tendency for cancer, tendency for blue eyes, tendency for baldness... sure.

No tendency for traits that don't exist (ie. "IQ"), no genetic tendency for education, or open-mindedness.

I've already reported you for racism and eugenics talk.

Maybe step back and look at your arguments vs the counter: that a culture that encourages challenging and arguing everything might be more conducive to understanding and challenging ideas in the world than a culture that emphasizes rote memorization and penalizes asking questions?

Do you assume that magically all groups of Judaism preserved genes for "superior intelligence" (despite being a non-sense idea rooted entirely in racism to begin with) despite varying every other genetic trait throughout? Or are you making assumptions about the genetic makeup of Jews worldwide, just assuming that all Jews are descended from Ashkenazi? Perhaps divine intervention? (I may be religious, but I'll take "easily provable" over "God did it")

Unknown parent

Shiri Bailem

@M_U I didn't report you for being antisocial, I reported you for racism. "Positive" stereotypes still cause harm and are still racist.

And I have no tolerance for for talk of eugenics, you are now blocked server wide regardless of whether your admins take action.

in reply to Shiri Bailem

💯 I dont get how Christians can claim these bans are "Judeo-Christian", Nearly all of the terrible logic Christians use for being against abortion are mostly based on Christian Scripture(mainly in the New Testament and its vagueness) and one psalm which im not sure is even related
in reply to miawgogo :KirbyVerified:

@miawgogo :KirbyVerified: it's because they believe Judaism is just Christianity minus Jesus.

Like, they think our beliefs are that you behave perfectly or go to hell because they see "judged by our acts" under their belief of "any sin = hell". (FYI, we do believe in being judged by our acts, but judged means judgement, it's not some automatic punishment thing but an actual decision... and on top of that, we don't believe in hell)

Non-Christians use it because many of them are convinced that all religions are basically Christianity with slight differences.

Unknown parent

Shiri Bailem

@Shannon (she/her) @Pedestriansfirst I suppose you're technically correct, I guess I usually never think about it because there's always more apt descriptions (ie. Nazis are often Zionists because "Blood And Soil").

And yes on the antisemitism of it, I just chose not to say anything about that in favor of a chance at education. (Also a love for getting into arguments with aggressive militant atheists because it's so fun to see their talking points shatter and the confusion that comes from it)

And I didn't bring it up later because I felt from the conversation that it wasn't going to be a problem again from them because they learned some things about Judaism, Jewish Culture, and that religions people can in fact own and acknowledge bad behaviors in their own communities.

Unknown parent

Shiri Bailem

@Shannon (she/her) I don't think believing all zionists are jews isn't that messy of a idea because it impacts so little, especially since the zionist behavior of non-jews is already easily discernible on it's own as awful anyways.

And keep in mind that the comparison is that this started from assuming that all Jews condoned the atrocities committed by the Israeli government and has walked away knowing that it's not uniform.