• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Zionism

I.S.L.A.M617

Illuminatus
Really? Then this would mean Filistinians have no right to the land still on a moral basis and would leave Jews without a country and on top of this you history is heavily off.

You are claiming ALL of Israel was Arab? :facepalm:

I never said all of Israel was Arab; I acknowledged the fact that there were and still are indigenous Jews there, and it still doesn't differ from my example in post 23. And I will say it again; the only right the Palestinians had to the land is the fact that they were currently living there, I'm not attributing any moral or genealogical entitlement to that claim.
 

Shermana

Heretic
Now this I agree with. Not to mention that the majority of "Jews" who live in Israel are secular (which is a contradictory term when applied to religion in my opinion) and not traditional Jews.

The term "Jewish" when applying to Israel is about the Jewish Ethnicity, not the religion. Atheist Jews are still "Jews", ethnically speaking. What religion the "Ethnic" Jews follow has little to do with it.

Also, it had little to do with the Nazis and the Holocaust. It had to do with who legally held what territory at the time through land deeds. The Arabs didn't legally hold claim to all the land they directly sold to the Jews, it wasn't "Their" land.
 

Shermana

Heretic
I never said all of Israel was Arab; I acknowledged the fact that there were and still are indigenous Jews there, and it still doesn't differ from my example in post 23. And I will say it again; the only right the Palestinians had to the land is the fact that they were currently living there, I'm not attributing any moral or genealogical entitlement to that claim.

Currently living on a piece of land is by no means whatsoever a valid claim of being able to have autonomy and independence from the "occupying" power. Should the Jews of Los Angeles be able to separate and form the independent country of Jewville? Likewise, the Arabs had no claim on Jewish held land in British controlled "Palestine", likewise they had no claim in Jordanian occupied "West Bank" from 1948-1967, or today whether it's Israel or Jordan occupying it. Might makes right when it comes to how borders are defined, for all time, for all places, no exceptions, end of story.
 

I.S.L.A.M617

Illuminatus
all the Jewish People have the right to call the Land of Israel their homeland and go and live there.

I take it from your location that you live in Chicago. Say hypothetically that the indigenous Illiniwek people that used to inhabit the area decided they wanted their ancestral homeland back tomorrow. Would you vacate your house with no struggle and allow them to move in because they have a right to their ancestral homeland? If the Illiniwek had adopted a bunch of Chinese immigrants as their own, would you also acknowledge their right to live in your house?
 

Shermana

Heretic
I take it from your location that you live in Chicago. Say hypothetically that the indigenous Illiniwek people that used to inhabit the area decided they wanted their ancestral homeland back tomorrow. Would you vacate your house with no struggle and allow them to move in because they have a right to their ancestral homeland? If the Illiniwek had adopted a bunch of Chinese immigrants as their own, would you also acknowledge their right to live in your house?

You do realize that's a completely different story than the Zionist pioneers who bought the land directly from the Arabs, right? (And at extremely high prices too! Like 10x what good American land was going for.) It's not like the Jews just said "This is our land now, get out", at least for the most part. The groups like the Irgun and Stern Gang don't represent more than a tiny fraction of the overall Zionist movements.

And from your own example, you should have no problem with denying the "Palestinians" their "Right of return", after all it's been quite a few decades anyway.
 

I.S.L.A.M617

Illuminatus
Might makes right when it comes to how borders are defined, for all time, for all places, no exceptions, end of story.

I completely agree with this statement, in fact it is the meat of my argument. I'm not morally against the conquest of Israel; anyone with the manpower to take a land over should have it. But the argument of Zionism is that there should be no fight over the land because the Jews have an entitlement by right of birth. This is what I have a problem with
 

Shermana

Heretic
I completely agree with this statement, in fact it is the meat of my argument. I'm not morally against the conquest of Israel; anyone with the manpower to take a land over should have it. But the argument of Zionism is that there should be no fight over the land because the Jews have an entitlement by right of birth. This is what I have a problem with

Then we're basically on the same page.

I personally don't have a problem with the Palestinians feeling that they can step up to the plate with armed conflict. More fodder for the cannons if that's what they want to do. What I have a problem with is people who do the same thing in trying to find some kind of flawed/hypocritical/factually lacking/distorted "moral" argument to act as if the Jews have no right to be there. In other words, bring the fight on, and let the bleeding hearts shut up.
 

I.S.L.A.M617

Illuminatus
Then we're basically on the same page.

I personally don't have a problem with the Palestinians feeling that they can step up to the plate with armed conflict. More fodder for the cannons if that's what they want to do. What I have a problem with is people who do the same thing in trying to find some kind of flawed/hypocritical/factually lacking/distorted "moral" argument to act as if the Jews have no right to be there.

I never made such a claim, just that they shouldn't feel entitled to the land.
 

Levite

Higher and Higher
I take it from your location that you live in Chicago. Say hypothetically that the indigenous Illiniwek people that used to inhabit the area decided they wanted their ancestral homeland back tomorrow. Would you vacate your house with no struggle and allow them to move in because they have a right to their ancestral homeland? If the Illiniwek had adopted a bunch of Chinese immigrants as their own, would you also acknowledge their right to live in your house?

If I were to study Native American society, and find that they had a ritual of adoption into their society; and if the Chinese immigrants had considered themselves Native Americans for some time, or if they went to great lengths to become as Native American as possible-- taking on the indigenous religious beliefs, lifestyle practices, spiritual philosophy, language, etc., and rejecting all original religious, cultural, and social aspects of their Chinese origins, then I would class everyone who that particular Native American society claimed as one of its own to be so, regardless of what they looked like or what their genetics might be.

And while I think it would be impractical for a very small number of Native Americans to expect a vast number of white and black folks to leave altogether, I would certainly acknowledge the right of Native Americans to sovereignty over at least part of their ancestral lands, and compensation for what could not be vacated. I would support the government of the United States giving up land and/or authority in various Native American domains throughout the US. And if my house fell into a place ceded back to the original Native American authority, I would either accept their rule, or leave-- though if I grant that if I were compelled to leave, I would expect some compensation for the loss of my house.

By the same token, I support a two-state solution, even though I actually believe that the Jewish People are entitled by ancestral right to the entire Land of Israel, from the river to the sea. But it would be impractical and ethically troublesome to expect that claim to be fulfilled, given how many Palestinians live in the so-called West Bank and Gaza Strip. So I expect Israel to cede authority in those areas to the Palestinians (once security can be reasonably expected), and to make some sort of financial or in-kind reparations to those individuals who might actually have a just claim. But in return, I expect the Palestinians to take what they get, make their peace with it, and stop with the terrorism.
 

I.S.L.A.M617

Illuminatus
Is anyone entitled to any land?

Are Americans not entitled to America?

What does it mean to be entitled?

Are Arabs entitled to Saudi Arabia?

Nobody's entitled to any land. The land only belongs to you for as long as you live there; once it's conquered by someone else you either have to fight for it or let it go.
 

I.S.L.A.M617

Illuminatus
.
And if my house fell into a place ceded back to the original Native American authority, I would either accept their rule, or leave-- though if I grant that if I were compelled to leave, I would expect some compensation for the loss of my house.

Are the Palestinians being displaced for the building of new Israeli settlements compensated for the loss of their homes? I'm not asking this to be confrontational, it's an honest question that I don't know the answer to.
 

PastorClark

Agnostic Christain
I'm going to end this debate right now with these big words.

The rightful owner of this planet is Allah(universe)
 

Tranquil Servant

Was M.I.A for a while
In this world, land belongs to whoever has the biggest gun. It's not right but that's just how it is. I don't agree with displacing people out of their homes by force. I don't like that it happened to the Jews so many years ago and I don't like that it's happening to Palestinians now.
Plus, IMO saying European Jews are ethnically Jews is like saying I'm a Taino Indian.
 

I.S.L.A.M617

Illuminatus
I actually believe that the Jewish People are entitled by ancestral right to the entire Land of Israel, from the river to the sea.

What gives them this right? Before 1946 the Palestinians had clearly conquered the land. I find this claim to be more than a little pretentious.
 

Shermana

Heretic
In this world, land belongs to whoever has the biggest gun. It's not right but that's just how it is. I don't agree with displacing people out of their homes by force. I don't like that it happened to the Jews so many years ago and I don't like that it's happening to Palestinians now.
Plus, IMO saying European Jews are ethnically Jews is like saying I'm a Taino Indian.

Oh, you'd be proven to be mostly Genetically homogenous with an isolated Taino tribe? Interesting, very rare to meet a true Native.
 
Top