Ritual conversion is the only way
With all the wonderful Jewish weddings in the Bay Area your choice of highlighting a non-Jewish wedding in the Celebrations supplement (“At Marin JCC, two non-Jews throw a Jewish wedding for the ages,” July 15) was perplexing.
I appreciate the good work Melody Horowitz has done in the Jewish community. However, her quote, “I haven’t ‘officially’ converted, but that does not mean I’m not Jewish” is completely wrong.
I lived as a Jew for 14 years, raising my daughter as the blood Jew she is. In 1995 I formally converted after working with my rabbi, Rabbi David Cohen (then at Congregation Beth Am), and my beloved Jewish educator, Patti Moscovitz. This conversion included reading, testing, a beit din and a formal trip to the mikvah.
The most profound personal moment of my life took place at the mikvah.
For Ms. Horowitz to call herself a Jew is an insult to all of us who have taken the ritual path of conversion to reach our dream of calling ourselves Jews.
Jill Maleson, Fremont
Israel’s ‘appropriate’ action
Amy Teibel’s report (“Backlash heavy against Israel’s new boycott law,” July 15) contains errors and misinformation regarding the new anti-boycott law passed by the Knesset, and the New Israel Fund’s misguided attack on the government of Israel is unfortunate.
First, this law does not outlaw boycotts or exclusively address the settlements; it merely provides some balance by establishing a civil legal recourse for the injured parties (be it individuals or institutions) to seek remedy against all BDS (boycotts, divestment and sanctions) activities which aim to strangle Israel’s economy and isolate its academia and cultural life.
Second, BDS activity is not free speech as the NIF suggests; it’s similar to shouting “fire” in a packed theater. BDS is a seditious warfare short of arms conflict, and aimed at inflicting harm by destabilizing and delegitimizing Israel society. It is a clear form of collective punishment.
Third, democratic principles neither demands nor compels a democratic country to aid the actions of those who deny its right to self-defense and actively advocate for its dissolution by all means short of war.
Last, Israel’s refusal to support its detractors in their efforts to undermine its economy and blacklist its academic and cultural institutions is appropriate and about time.
Sam Liron, Foster City
Law not a blow to democracy
Israel’s anti-boycott legislation is no more anti-democratic than laws that forbid Holocaust denial or which ban hate speech (“Israel’s anti-boycott bill a blow to democracy,” j. editorial, July 15).
It has three main provisions. Companies that boycott Israeli products or people because of where they live will lose government contracts. Companies have the choice: Do business with Israel or with the Palestinian Authority. This is not anti-democratic; it is common sense, just as the provision that says that an institution that receives government handouts cannot boycott other Israelis because of where they live.
There is a choice: Take the money and serve all Israelis or manage without these funds. The Boy Scouts lost public support here because of their discrimination against homosexuals. Is this anti-democratic?
The third provision is more complicated because it involves private civil suits by those who claimed to be harmed by boycotts.
All three provisions are designed to protect people from discrimination. How can j. say that people who pay taxes, serve in the military and face daily terrorist threats are not worthy of such protection?
Gil Stein | Aptos
Let’s wait and see
The Knesset’s approval of the law against Israelis supporting BDS has set off alarms in all Jewish and non-Jewish quarters of the world.
Let’s stop the condemnation orgy and think a little bit about the situation that Israel is in. The country is in a factual state of war with her neighbors, except for the on-paper-only peace with Egypt and Jordan. And in a state of war some undemocratic steps may be taken.
Should we approve them or immediately ascribe fascist attributes to the decision? I believe the best approach here is wait-and-see. Most probably, there will be a balance struck between the Jewish values of freedom of expression and security needs.
Vladimir Kaplan, San Mateo
In enemies’ hands
Hooray for publishing the pro-flotilla op-ed by Lois Pearlman (“Singing klezmer and dancing a pro-flotilla jig,” July 15).
It shows that Jews are open to many points of view. Did not Voltaire say, “I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it!”
But, halevai (Hebrew for “I wish”) Ms. Pearlman could show me an article in any Arab publication reciprocating the same freedom by accepting the right of Israel to exist as a Jewish state in a two-state solution.
She and her ilk would do well to read page 13a of the same j. edition, wherein FLAME outlines a partial but significant history of Arab-Jew hatred and stubborn rejection of many peace proposals.
Or maybe she should read the Hamas charter, which unyieldingly calls for the death of all Jews, including Pearlman. (Yeah, and no one took Hitler seriously either, right?)
The claim that “I am Jewish” or “I am a survivor” does not confer any moral or logical superiority in judging this conflict. Pearlman and those like her, play into the hands of our sworn enemies, or in the alleged words of Lenin, they are “useful idiots.” With friends like these, who needs enemies?
Dr. Marvin L. Engel, Piedmont
‘Start with Sderot’
What can I say to Lois Pearlman, who defends the Gaza flotilla and praises the Jews taking part — Jews who would put their own people at risk. Ditto for Pearlman’s omission that some Gazans, especially Hamas, are undeniably threatening to the security of the people of Israel. She made my blood boil.
The United Nations voted to reinstate the Jewish State of Israel in 1947 because when the concentration camp gates opened, the nations of the world recognized that the Jews do need a state of their own. Why Israel? Because the Jews put Jerusalem on the map and their historic connection is unbroken for 3,000 years.
I understand Ms. Pearlman being drawn to those suffering and her wish to help in the tradition of the Jewish people. Why not start with the people of Sderot, who suffered 10,000 rockets from Gaza?
There are 56 Muslim majority states, 21 of them Arab, who all are speaking out in support of the Muslim Arabs of Gaza. There is only one Jewish state — the size of New Jersey.
Ms. Pearlman, our Jewish state needs us now. Please support the people of Israel and defend our right to peace and security.
Sheree Roth, Palo Alto
Where’s the love?
Lois Pearlman’s attempt to justify her support of the failed flotilla is an astounding piece of hypocrisy.
After claiming that aiding the genocidal Hamas regime in Gaza is somehow based in Jewish values, she closes with “if you love Israel, you have to recognize the rights of the Palestinian people.” Yet not once does she ever indicate any support for Israel.
Perhaps her definition of “loving Israel” includes standing shoulder-to-shoulder with demonstrators shouting “From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free.” Perhaps it includes participating in delegitimization events such as the “Never Again for Anyone” tour. And it certainly includes supporting a flotilla in part organized and paid for by Hamas, which vows jihad against Jews whether in Israel or in the diaspora.
My definition of “loving Israel” is standing against individuals like her, and groups such as Jewish Voice for Peace, which claim to be working for “peace” while they support endless war against Israel.
I ask Ms. Pearlman and her fellow agitators one simple question: Do you support peace between a Jewish state of Israel and an Arab state of Palestine?
Their answer will tell you everything you need to know.
Dr. Michael Harris, San Rafael