A) I don’t think dual citizens should be in political office, bureaucracy, military or lawyers/judges/DAs.

That seems odd, to me. Maybe there are ways in which it wouldn’t conflict, but I cannot see how someone can mean an oath to two nations.

B) The bill he talked about is real, and is dangerous. It is trying to make a 3rd party’s definition of racism, law. We already have issue with bureaucracy making such definitions, let alone advocacy groups.

Furthermore, Judaism is both a creed, and a race. Racial discrimination is widely prohibited throughout our legal system.

Discrimination based on a creed, is a requirement of our society. To prohibit discrimination based on a creed, is absurd.

(IE, when a Catholic school requires teachers to be Catholic, it is selecting based on creed.)

How is Judaism a “race”?

Yes, in recent times people looking for ways to give various advantages to different groups have changed, or tried to change, the traditional meaning of the word race, but even then it’s usually based to some degree on physical characteristics, most commonly skin color. What “racial” characteristics do Jews exhibit that sets them apart from anyone else?

And discrimination based on traditional racial grounds is legally prohibited for only certain activities, rights, etc. If someone never invites any Blacks to his BBQ parties someone might notice and call him on it, but in this country at least it’s not illegal. Racial discrimination is also one reason why interracial marriages are less common (despite what the advertisers would have us believe); it’s more common for people of all races to be attracted to people who are most like them rather than someone who looks completely different. There are strong evolutionary pressures for humans to be suspicious of and reluctant to associate too closely with “others,” and obvious racial characteristics are probably the strongest indicators that someone isn’t one of us.

Further, discrimination due to “creed” (religious belief) is indeed often prohibited. A restaurant may not refuse to serve an atheist because she is an atheist any more than it can refuse to serve a Black person because of his skin color. The fact that a Catholic school may require its teachers to be Catholics is actually a specific exception to the general prohibition against discriminating on the basis of religious belief. A nonreligious institution would not (normally) be able to legally discriminate on that basis.

I thought all Jews hold to be descended from Abraham? If I'm wrong about that, mea culpa.

As for the "race" thing - its the same way people call themselves "Atheist Jews." If it was only a creed, that would be an illogical statement.

Yes.
Physically descended.

Exception are converts.

They are considered "as born Jewish" and sons and daughters of Abram and Sarah.


Atheist Jew is an illogical statement.

Being a Jew/Jewish is not Judaism or Religion. Those are aspects.

Sort of like being a male. A male is defined as a sex that has the capacity by design to produce spermatozoa.

One does not need to father a child (Judaism), to be male nor even "act" (Religion), in traditional, cultural mannerisms that are recognized as "male", to be male.

Hope that helps a bit.

We are not "a race". There is one race, the human race, and the whole is made up of ethnic divisions.

There are the "nations", and "we" were taken from the nations and "set apart", not because we were the greatest or superior, in fact, we were chosen much like the "runt of the litter" in order that the One doing the choosing could express to the rest of the nations, the ability to manifest greatness through and in spite of the "weakness" of the "runt".

There is much more, but that is a starting place.

Based on today's strip, it appears that I took the bait. As someone else posted, wait until the story is over.

The cartoonist seems to think that everyone who sees one of his cartoons will follow the series to see today’s strip. I can readily imagine someone seeing an earlier one and thinking, “Yeah, enough of this crap,” and never coming back. And I find his method of showing dialogue to be unclear and confusing. He obviously believes that everyone who sees his work will make the effort to puzzle out everything that appears.