| Author |
Message |
    
C Bataille
Citizen
Username: Nakaille
Post Number: 2381
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 11, 2006 - 7:38 pm: |     |
Well, they may be leaving because they see an opportunity to make a fistful of cash with which they can buy bigger homes elsewhere or buy a similar or even smaller home but finance the kids' education or their own retirement dreams. Just speculating here. |
J. Crohn
Supporter
Username: Jcrohn
Post Number: 2306
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 11, 2006 - 9:56 pm: | |
Exactly, C Battaille.
But I'm waiting to see what BobK's going to come up with. |
Rabbi Moshe Peking
Citizen
Username: Rabbimoshe
Post Number: 4
Registered: 12-2005
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 11, 2006 - 10:19 pm: | |
Hello my darling J. Crohn! A big hug and a kiss on each cheek for you!
I appreciate the sentiments you have expressed on this point. My mishpachim are good people and we love everyone!
By the way, candle lighting this Friday evening is at 4:34!
A big kiss for you. And a boiled chicken too! |
Bob K
Supporter
Username: Bobk
Post Number: 10241
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, January 12, 2006 - 4:30 am: | |
J. Chron, of course they are now leaving because they are a bunch of racists, which is the thrust of your post, now isn't it?
Do you know any neighborhood where large numbers of Ultra Orthodox move in and non Orthodox people don't leave?
Cathy, wishful thinking?
|
C Bataille
Citizen
Username: Nakaille
Post Number: 2382
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, January 12, 2006 - 9:46 am: | |
BobK, I fail to see anything in JCrohn's response to you that suggests racist motives on anyone's part. Seems you are reading into this, not sure why.
As for me, the wish I have is to stay here at least as long as my kid is going to school here. I love this town as a place to raise my kid. If you offered me a bunch of money over the market rate to buy out my house, I'd probably seriously consider it if I could find another house in town that I could afford. Otherwise, maybe not. At least until the kid is launched. So, I think you're stuck with me for another 10 years or so, minimum.  |
Debby
Citizen
Username: Debby
Post Number: 2178
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, January 12, 2006 - 10:24 am: | |
I'm not getting why people are equating eruv with hasidim. Eruv is a helpful thing for all orthodox, and even for more observant conservative Jews - the kind of people who send their kids to Solomon Schechter or Kushner, people who wear jeans and drive minivans just like you. Why are people jumping to black hats?
P.S. Rebbe, you're getting a little rusty...it's mishpachot. |
Bob K
Supporter
Username: Bobk
Post Number: 10252
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, January 12, 2006 - 10:44 am: | |
Cathy, as you know I am hypersensitive about slurs against Christians and I interpreted (possibly wrongly) that JC was saying that cops and firemen (an overwhelmingly Christian/Catholic group) were moving because they couldn't handle living with Jews.
Debby, I agree. I think most of us, and most certainly myself, are well off into to land of speculation. The two men I see most often walking to services on Saturdays used to own and run Maplecrest Hardware. The only "issue" I have with them is that they closed when Home Despot opened down the road.
|
J. Crohn
Supporter
Username: Jcrohn
Post Number: 2309
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, January 12, 2006 - 11:10 am: | |
BobK, I believe you have no objective data whatosever to offer about Gerritsen (not "Garriston) Beach. I think someone you know told you that "large numbers" of orthodox Jews are moving in, AND THEREFORE honest, hardworking firefighters and cops are moving out--the implication being that the Jews are taking over and will somehow ruin the former residents' standard of living if they stay.
Because you fear Orthodox Jews will take over Maplewood, you have accepted this assertion uncritically and have repeated it here without even saying why you think it's true.
"J. Chron, of course they are now leaving because they are a bunch of racists, which is the thrust of your post, now isn't it?"
Not yet it isn't. But I think I know enough about Gerritsen Beach at this point to conclude that there's a strong likelihood that exaggerated fears are playing into the decisions of any of the old guard who might be leaving that community (which, again, we haven't even established is happening to any significant extent). Whether it's antisemitism (we're not a race, BobK) that's playing into residents' decisions or some garden-variety provincialism and a preference for living among one's own, I can't say.
Absent any published data, or web cite, or even any identifiably sourced second-hand information to suggest that non-Jews are in fact leaving because Jews are moving in (and not because they're cashing in on their homes, etc.), my first impulse is to consider your claim... questionable.
And so, for reasons I will cover after you have had ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY to supply any objective data you can find that legitimate fears of an Orthodox takeover are forcing the residents of Gerritsen Beach to leave their community, my assumption at the moment is that someone you know has asserted as much, and that you have taken his or her assertion as gospel and are now reporting it here as though you know it to be true.
So, what's your source? Do you know someone in Gerritsen Beach who can attest to recent changes? What is his or her estimation of what "large numbers" means?
One more thing: if you can substantiate anything you've said on this subject, kindly follow up by explaining to me why the spectre of white flight from invasive Jewish orthodoxy is so different from the spectre of white flight from black crime and class differences, or white flight from failing schools, that it cannot be dealt with by means other than keeping orthodox Jews sequestered in "their own" neighborhoods? Because this--and forgive me if I've misunderstood the ineluctable logic of your argument--is what you seem to be suggesting. Of course no one--not I, at any rate--is suggesting that integration doesn't have its difficulties. But what rational, defensible information makes you think orthodox Jews pose such an insurmountable problem here? |
J. Crohn
Supporter
Username: Jcrohn
Post Number: 2310
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, January 12, 2006 - 11:18 am: | |
"I'm not getting why people are equating eruv with hasidim."
Because people are scared of chasidim.
|
J. Crohn
Supporter
Username: Jcrohn
Post Number: 2311
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, January 12, 2006 - 11:30 am: | |
"P.S. Rebbe, you're getting a little rusty...it's mishpachot."
Which is right, and any rabbi would know it, but I've actually heard "mishpochim" used colloquially. It might be Yiddish, or some sort of American-Jewish patois...
(What would that be--Englew? Hebrish?)
Anyway, I credit Moishy for striving for some sort of verisimilitude. He started out addressing his "mishpachas," which gave me shpilkes. |
Debby
Citizen
Username: Debby
Post Number: 2180
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, January 12, 2006 - 1:08 pm: | |
"Because you fear Orthodox Jews will take over Maplewood..."
JC - I don't see where you're getting this from Bob. Just above he said
"I doubt that Maplewood is going to become the new in place for the ultra-Orthodox to be quite honest. The Eruv will help the people who live here, some of whom many of us know I am sure and possibly help with the revitalization of Springfield Avenue. "
Sounds pretty open and unafraid to me.
|
Bob K
Supporter
Username: Bobk
Post Number: 10254
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, January 12, 2006 - 1:18 pm: | |
BobK, I believe you have no objective data whatosever to offer about Gerritsen (not "Garriston) Beach. I think someone you know told you that "large numbers" of orthodox Jews are moving in, AND THEREFORE honest, hardworking firefighters and cops are moving out--the implication being that the Jews are taking over and will somehow ruin the former residents' standard of living if they stay.
First off my comments were about Hasidic Jews. Like a great many
people I make a distinction between Orthodox and ultra Orthodox. My information in anecdotal, which I will freely admit. Do you expect people are going to write letters to the editors on this subject? One way or another a large influx of a different ethnic group moving into a community changes that community and often leaves current residents uncomfortable. Who makes who uncomfortable is a matter of debate and a little like the
classic chicken and egg debate.
Because you fear Orthodox Jews will take over Maplewood, you have accepted this assertion uncritically and have repeated it here without even saying why you think it's true.
I don’t fear it (I also don’t think it likely) and my purpose for posting in this thread is simply to offset a lot of Pollyannaish views (at least the way I see it) that have been creeping in here.
"J. Chron, of course they are now leaving because they are a bunch of racists, which is the thrust of your post, now isn't it?"
Not yet it isn't. But I think I know enough about Gerritsen Beach at this point to conclude that there's a strong likelihood that exaggerated fears are playing into the decisions of any of the old guard who might be leaving that community (which, again, we haven't even established is happening to any significant extent). Whether it's antisemitism (we're not a race, BobK) that's playing into residents' decisions or some garden-variety provincialism and a preference for living among one's own, I can't say.
Why? Because the current residents tend to be white ethnic Christians?
I should have used the term “anti-Semitic” , not racist. I will spend considerable time examining my belly button to determine why I used racist as I am well aware Judaism is a religion, not a race.
Absent any published data, or web cite, or even any identifiably sourced second-hand information to suggest that non-Jews are in fact leaving because Jews are moving in (and not because they're cashing in on their homes, etc.), my first impulse is to consider your claim... questionable.
Your privilege, but again I think you are making an assumption that
the current residents are in some way prejudiced.
And so, for reasons I will cover after you have had ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY to supply any objective data you can find that legitimate fears of an Orthodox takeover are forcing the residents of Gerritsen Beach to leave their community, my assumption at the moment is that someone you know has asserted as much, and that you have taken his or her assertion as gospel and are now reporting it here as though you know it to be true.
I doubt any evidence would satisfy you.
So, what's your source? Do you know someone in Gerritsen Beach who can attest to recent changes? What is his or her estimation of what "large numbers" means?
Dozens of families in a small community.
One more thing: if you can substantiate anything you've said on this subject, kindly follow up by explaining to me why the spectre of white flight from invasive Jewish orthodoxy is so different from the spectre of white flight from black crime and class differences, or white flight from failing schools, that it cannot be dealt with by means other than keeping orthodox Jews sequestered in "their own" neighborhoods? Because this--and forgive me if I've misunderstood the ineluctable logic of your argument--is what you seem to be suggesting. Of course no one--not I, at any rate--is suggesting that integration doesn't have its difficulties. But what rational, defensible information makes you think orthodox Jews pose such an insurmountable problem here?
Then you are saying here that Hasidic Jews want to live in a culturally
And racially diverse community? I think some of the postings in this
thread explain why they often want to live in homogenous
communities. I, of course, may be wrong about this. I am not an
expert on Jewish culture in general and Hasidic culture specifically.
|
Angstrom
Citizen
Username: Angstrom
Post Number: 1
Registered: 1-2006
| | Posted on Thursday, January 12, 2006 - 1:55 pm: | |
What's so weird is that government, by it's agreement to even vote on the matter, is condoning the patently absurd notion that there exists a supernatural being who does not want you to carry things one day a week unless you're inside a Circle of Trust. It's as absurd a notion as transubstantiation in the Catholic church or advocating not using birth control in sub-Saharan Africa (which is a form of terroism, IMO). Until we begin acknowledging these things religious zealots of all stripes will keep befuddling the world with nonsensical ideas, and ideas can kill. Don't even get me started on Islam. |
J. Crohn
Supporter
Username: Jcrohn
Post Number: 2314
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, January 12, 2006 - 2:27 pm: | |
Debby, Bob spent a fair amount of time in the other eruv thread worrying about the orthodox before coming to this conclusion, which he then turns around and undermines by implying that orths really are wealthy enough to infiltrate M'wd, because look at what's happening in Gerritsen Beach. Why, the claim that chasidim don't tend to colonize socioeconomically healthy communities is just "rampant PCism".
Only, as far as I can discover, there is nothing happening in Gerritsen Beach, aside from a recent influx of Koreans, Chinese, and Russians into this historically all-white, Christian neighborhood:
"Gerritsen Beach is pretty self-contained," said the pastor, the Rev. ElizaBeth Nebrasky, who characterized the area as "ethnic and blue collar."
"You are either Roman Catholic or Lutheran out here, and Norwegian, German, Irish or Italian," she said. "We are firefighters, nurses, police officers, teachers, construction workers, electricians and plumbers."
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/03/03/realestate/03LIVI.html?ex=1137128400&en=94ac31 dd31a8847b&ei=5070
There must be some orthodox there, too, as there’s a nearby yeshiva, but I can find no evidence for a significant recent influx of Chasidim. Of the 21 public and private schools in Brighton, Manhattan Beach, and Sheepshead Bay, which apparently serve Gerritsen, only five are Jewish schools, and it appears not all of these are orthodox. Altogether, they serve a total of 926 students, as compared with 15,469 students in public and non-Jewish private schools in the same areas.
Not exactly my idea of a demographic threat.
BTW, I don't know exactly what Bob means when he says Gerritsen is a "working class/middle class community.” With a median household income of $32,873, the place is not exactly comparable to Maplewood. Houses, as of about three years ago, were commanding prices of only $250,000 to $350,000. (An apparently rare, large, single-family home on a double lot sold for all of $412,000.)
So if someone is pulling in $100-200K premiums off sales to Jews…well, it’s hardly surprising that they’re taking their windfall and leaving for less isolated neighborhoods and bigger houses (that have back yards) elsewhere.
|
J. Crohn
Supporter
Username: Jcrohn
Post Number: 2315
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, January 12, 2006 - 2:30 pm: | |
"I think you are making an assumption that
the current residents are in some way prejudiced."
Oh, I certainly leave that open as a possibility. Do you honestly believe I should rule it out a priori?
Talk about PC. |
Bob K
Supporter
Username: Bobk
Post Number: 10257
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, January 12, 2006 - 2:42 pm: | |
J. Chron, can't you find something newer than 2002, although I have to admire your web skills? 
A lot happens in four years as is the case in MW where most houses in Middle Maplewood were selling in the same range in 2000.
Most of my earlier postings on the subject were, again,just trying to learn something. I believe I "blessed" the eruv (complete with holy water) early in the game.
|
Tom Reingold
Supporter
Username: Noglider
Post Number: 11915
Registered: 1-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, January 12, 2006 - 2:49 pm: | |
Angstrom, allowing people to practice their religion as they choose to is not the same as endorsing their beliefs. I hope you consider the very big difference between the two.
All religions have weird beliefs, pretty much by definition. Government has a duty to allow (which you call condoning) religious organizations and practices to exist. That doesn't amount to endorsement.
|
Bob K
Supporter
Username: Bobk
Post Number: 10258
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, January 12, 2006 - 2:54 pm: | |
BTW, here are some current RE listings.
http://bestseller1properties.com/bestseller1propertiescgi/listing.pl |
J. Crohn
Supporter
Username: Jcrohn
Post Number: 2316
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, January 12, 2006 - 2:57 pm: | |
"Then you are saying here that Hasidic Jews want to live in a culturally and racially diverse community?"
I think that, if we're talking about SO-MA, they have no alternative!
That's not to say that they don't wish to live together in neighborhoods full of other Chasidim. I'm just sort of dismayed that you brought up Gerritsen Beach, a neighborhood (not a township, not a school district) where people apparently also have enjoyed, for a very long time, living amongst people just like themselves. Which is to say, amongst other white Christians. Now that's changing and, oh no, all the firemen and policemen and teachers must flee!
Wasn't a similar argument made about Maplewood when blacks began moving here in numbers, how ever many years ago?
"I think some of the postings in this thread explain why they often want to live in homogenous
communities."
I think it would be difficult to do so here.
"my purpose for posting in this thread is simply to offset a lot of Pollyannaish views (at least the way I see it) that have been creeping in here."
Fair enough. I'll just reiterate that no one ever claimed integration is easy. And just FYI, I've read that orthodox leaders have begun raising issues internally about avoiding stomping on the toes of non-Jews in communities where they're established. Plus, as I said, I'm pretty confident we have the institutional strength here--for now, anyway--to ensure no single group comes to dominate the community.
|
Bob K
Supporter
Username: Bobk
Post Number: 10259
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, January 12, 2006 - 3:26 pm: | |
Actually a great many people beat feet from Hilton between 1990 when the area was 90% white to 2000 when the white population shrank to around 35%. This is according to census data.
I am not holding up the Gerristen Beach folks as suitable for induction into the PC Hall of Fame, but they don't belong in the Hall of Shame either.
I work with a number of Orthodox Jews inclding at least one Hasidim. We get along fine, although I have to give myself a Poppy Head Medal (second award) for teasing one of our modern Orthodox actuaries for leaving early on a Friday. Once I came to my senses, I left a very appologetic voice mail and was waiting for him when he came in on Monday to "mia culpa" in person. He thought it was funny and if anything our relationnship improved after my goof. Sometimes you can't account for people or their reactions.
|
Angstrom
Citizen
Username: Angstrom
Post Number: 2
Registered: 1-2006
| | Posted on Thursday, January 12, 2006 - 3:40 pm: | |
Tom,
Religions can practice whatever they like on their own terms and on their own land. If they want to come before a governing body for support or even the slightest nod of consent for their pretend world and their privately held completely absurd beliefs, they should be told, simply, no. |
Tom Reingold
Supporter
Username: Noglider
Post Number: 11922
Registered: 1-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, January 12, 2006 - 3:43 pm: | |
Angstrom, you couldn't possibly be more mistaken. Religion doesn't need to ask government for consent. The right exists and may not be taken away. The government may not make a judgement about which beliefs are absurd.
|
Angstrom
Citizen
Username: Angstrom
Post Number: 3
Registered: 1-2006
| | Posted on Thursday, January 12, 2006 - 3:48 pm: | |
As I understand it from reading about the eruv, this is a privately funded religious artefact that the town needed to grant approvals to so it could be constructed. That sounded like voting on an issue to permit a physical area to be zoned, if you would, for a religion. Furthermore, the government, if it was a moral force in society, would spend more time pointing out the patent absudities of religion that are let loose by idiots every day. It's a form of pollution as real as car exhaust and as harmful. |
Tom Reingold
Supporter
Username: Noglider
Post Number: 11925
Registered: 1-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, January 12, 2006 - 3:54 pm: | |
Angstrom, please tell us you're not a troll.
Anyway, I invite you to read the archives of these threads. You'll learn some useful things, such as the fact that the eruv will be invisible. That wouldn't qualify as pollution.
Thank goodness the government is not the type of moral force that decides whose beliefs make sense. They might decide yours are the kind they need to squash. Really now, if you believe (!) in regulation of beliefs, what criteria should they use, and who should be the arbiter? How can we be sure the arbiter has good beliefs?
Quote:Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
|
Angstrom
Citizen
Username: Angstrom
Post Number: 4
Registered: 1-2006
| | Posted on Thursday, January 12, 2006 - 4:03 pm: | |
If it's invisible, why is it a wire? If it's invisible, why are we even discussing it? If I'm a troll for calling them out on wasting the public's time and making government jump through imaginary hoops, then so be it. The law you point out (the establishment clause) is the main reason why government shouldn't be jumping through imaginary hoops for crazy people whose holy book spends most of its time showing how the answer to most societal "problems" is to stone people who steal bread or have sex before being married. We lend credence to the abomination of religion by allowing an eruv. Or by hosting a creche. Or by pretending that being open-minded about religion is reasonable or at least (that weepy mystical term... diverse!) in the face of the nightmare of religion and its long history of oppression, enslavement and war. |
Tom Reingold
Supporter
Username: Noglider
Post Number: 11929
Registered: 1-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, January 12, 2006 - 4:14 pm: | |
Some people went to the township committee and asked if they (the TC) minded if they (these people, whoever they were) constructed the eruv. The TC essentially said they didn't care. What would you have said if you had been on the TC?
It's fine for you to take cracks at people's beliefs, but the government may not do so, and if I understand what you're saying, you are claiming that it should. It's not an opinion that you are wrong about that; it's fact. If you want to overturn the 1st amendment, you have a long uphill road ahead.
|
Angstrom
Citizen
Username: Angstrom
Post Number: 5
Registered: 1-2006
| | Posted on Thursday, January 12, 2006 - 4:41 pm: | |
Here's what I would have said to them: "The matter you bring before us is something which we can neither vote for nor against because the constitution says we are not allowed to do so. Enjoy your worship in private." I would have liked to ask them a few pointed questions about the barbarism of religion and the general low-level of intelligence it must take to believe in it, but I'd probably hold back for their first visit. |
Tom Reingold
Supporter
Username: Noglider
Post Number: 11933
Registered: 1-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, January 12, 2006 - 4:48 pm: | |
Your proposed quote would have been fine, up to -- and excluding -- the words "in private" because government may not restrict worship in public any more than in private. Questions about barbarism of religion are inappropriate for a government official. Are you truly unaware of this?
The matters of free speech, religion, and assembly cannot be properly discussed unless you answer WHO would regulate these things if someone were to regulate them and WHOSE standards you would apply. Those are not trivial or tangential questions. They are the essence. I believe there is good and bad thought, but I also believe that appointing someone to decide what's good and bad is worse than bad thought. And such an appointment is what establishing and abridging are.
|
dougw
Citizen
Username: Dougw
Post Number: 690
Registered: 3-2005
| | Posted on Thursday, January 12, 2006 - 4:59 pm: | |
Angstrom - if all the founding fathers were so dumb as to be religious - how did they write the Constitution you hold in such high regard? Luck? |
Gordon Agress
Citizen
Username: Odd
Post Number: 317
Registered: 8-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, January 12, 2006 - 5:02 pm: | |
I love it when believers are called "idiots". Yeah, like that famous idiot Kurt Godel, who single-handedly exploded Bertrand Russell's life's work, and in only forty pages to boot. Or that world class moron Socrates. And Aquinas -- does he remind me more of Larry, Mo or Curly? Yes sir, when people refer to people like this as idiots, it sure does help figure out who the idiots are.
|
Angstrom
Citizen
Username: Angstrom
Post Number: 7
Registered: 1-2006
| | Posted on Thursday, January 12, 2006 - 5:04 pm: | |
In the sense that they were saying one thing (freedom! liberty!) while doing another (owning and raping slaves), we need to make sure we never return to those days. Wouldn't you agree? |
dougw
Citizen
Username: Dougw
Post Number: 691
Registered: 3-2005
| | Posted on Thursday, January 12, 2006 - 5:08 pm: | |
Angstrom - answer my question and I will answer yours. |
Angstrom
Citizen
Username: Angstrom
Post Number: 8
Registered: 1-2006
| | Posted on Thursday, January 12, 2006 - 5:12 pm: | |
Gordon,
Godel was also a paranoid schizophrenic. You wouldn't want him babysitting your kids, yet he's your example. OK.... Socrates? People kept their kids away from him, too. (Anyway, it was really Plato who did the heavy lifting)
Dougw,
The founding fathers were gnostics and hardly "religious" in the sense of people who believe in absurdities. |
Tom Reingold
Supporter
Username: Noglider
Post Number: 11935
Registered: 1-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, January 12, 2006 - 5:14 pm: | |
Claiming religion is good or bad is beyond the point. It's also a dangerous tangent. The crux(pun intended) -- to me, anyway -- is that government should have no opinion about religion. This is for everyone's benefit.
And this is one reason I love this country. The government is not allowed to have an opinion on religion.
|
dougw
Citizen
Username: Dougw
Post Number: 692
Registered: 3-2005
| | Posted on Thursday, January 12, 2006 - 5:17 pm: | |
They were all Christians and believed in God. They belived that Christ was the Son of God and rose from the dead. They believed in heaven and hell. This is what religion, which you so easily dismiss as being for people of low inteligence, is all about. Are these absurdities? |
J. Crohn
Supporter
Username: Jcrohn
Post Number: 2317
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, January 12, 2006 - 5:18 pm: | |
BobK: "Dozens of families in a small community."
Again, BobK, it's a neighborhood, not a township, so when you say "community" you mean an area within a larger municipality. As far as I've been able to discover, Gerritsen has no school district of its own, nor separate governance, so I can't see what might be lost--other than overwhelming gentileness--as a result of this neighborhood becoming infiltrated by orthodox Jews.
But anyway, let's say I assume "dozens" means three dozen, rather than, say, two, and that your source is accurate.
In the first place, most lots in Gerritsen are apparently small, so I guess you can figure on fitting no fewer than 12 houses on a block. Maybe more. And let's say that all these Chasidim (singular of which, BTW, is "Chasid"), preferring to clump together around a synagogue to which they must be able to walk on Saturdays, have decided they want to live right next to each other.
That gives you three blocks' worth of Jews in a neighborhood of... how many Catholics et al.?
Even if I give you four dozen families, it's only four blocks full of Jews, out of fifty-five streets in the neighborhood as a whole. Why exactly should this prompt working class whites to move out? What, other than being there, does your source tell you these particular Jews (not some other group of Chasidim in some other commmunity) are doing that is so upsetting?
"Do you expect people are going to write letters to the editors on this subject?"
They certainly do in other communities! Huge, public spats seem to be the order of the day. But you know, when I perused the threads of www.gerritsenmemories.com, the local message board, the only complaint about newcomers that I found was from some poster who seemed unhappy about an influx of Russians.
Maybe he meant Russian Jews?
"Actually a great many people beat feet from Hilton between 1990 when the area was 90% white to 2000 when the white population shrank to around 35%."
No kidding. But you know, I've never heard that laid at the feet of the blacks who moved in. Not in civilized society anyway.
It's quite another thing to discuss bad behavior on the part of--and even characteristic of--particular groups of people. But if "bad behavior" really only amounts to exercising demographic power, then I think you have to ask yourself to what extent that's illegitimate, and whether people with whom you identify don't do exactly the same thing.
|
dougw
Citizen
Username: Dougw
Post Number: 693
Registered: 3-2005
| | Posted on Thursday, January 12, 2006 - 5:21 pm: | |
Angstrom - you will be in my prayers tonight. I will pray to St Jude for you. |
Angstrom
Citizen
Username: Angstrom
Post Number: 9
Registered: 1-2006
| | Posted on Thursday, January 12, 2006 - 5:24 pm: | |
dougw,
Go re-read your history.
--
Question with boldness even the existence of a god; because if there be one he must approve of the homage of reason more than that of blindfolded fear.
-Thomas Jefferson, Letter to Peter Carr, August 10, 1787
--
In every country and in every age, the priest has been hostile to liberty. He is always in alliance with the despot, abetting his abuses in return for protection to his own.
-Thomas Jefferson, letter to Horatio G. Spafford, March 17, 1814 |
J. Crohn
Supporter
Username: Jcrohn
Post Number: 2318
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, January 12, 2006 - 5:41 pm: | |
dougw: "They were all Christians... They belived that Christ was the Son of God and rose from the dead."
"Angstrom": "The founding fathers were gnostics..."
No and no. I think the Founders were mostly Deists (Deism being 'a philosophy of natural religion that emphasizes morality, and, usually, denies interference by a Creator with the laws of the universe') and Unitarians.
Thomas Paine (a deist and author of "The Age of Reason"): "I do not believe in the creed professed by the Jewish church, by the Roman church, by the Greek church, by the Turkish church, by the Protestant church, nor by any church that I know of...Each of those churches accuse the other of unbelief; and for my own part, I disbelieve them all."
John Adams: "Twenty times in the course of my late reading, have I been upon the point of breaking out, "This would be the best of all possible worlds, if there were no religion in it!""
Ethan Allen: "That Jesus Christ was not God is evidence from his own words." And: "[I am generally] denominated a Deist, the reality of which I never disputed, being conscious that I am no Christian."
James Madison: "During almost fifteen centuries has the legal establishment of Christianity been on trial. What have been its fruits? More or less in all places, pride and indolence in the Clergy, ignorance and servility in the laity, in both, superstition, bigotry and persecution."
Thomas Jefferson, a "Christian Deist" who branded the Revelation of St. John "the ravings of a maniac":
"The Christian priesthood, finding the doctrines of Christ levelled to every understanding and too plain to need explanation, saw, in the mysticisms of Plato, materials with which they might build up an artificial system which might, from its indistinctness, admit everlasting controversy, give employment for their order, and introduce it to profit, power, and pre-eminence. The doctrines which flowed from the lips of Jesus himself are within the comprehension of a child; but thousands of volumes have not yet explained the Platonisms engrafted on them: and for this obvious reason that nonsense can never be explained."
|
J. Crohn
Supporter
Username: Jcrohn
Post Number: 2319
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, January 12, 2006 - 5:43 pm: | |
"The government is not allowed to have an opinion on religion."
Tom Reingold is correct, and, thus far anyway, the courts have decided that Angstrom is not. |
Gordon Agress
Citizen
Username: Odd
Post Number: 318
Registered: 8-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, January 12, 2006 - 5:44 pm: | |
Google sure helps with the name calling, doesn't it? And it beats reading the books. Here, google these: Bonhoffer, Niemoller, Anselm, More, King.
By the way, it's not necessary to use the width of your brain as a screen name.
|
Bob K
Supporter
Username: Bobk
Post Number: 10262
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, January 12, 2006 - 6:52 pm: | |
JC
NYC, and specially Brooklyn and Queens, is a bunch of communities. Ask someone where they are from and they are going to mention the community or neighborhood where they live or grew up. Separate governments, etc. aren't a factor, although most areas have community planning boards and until recently school boards.
You mentioned the demographic changes in Maplewood and I told you the facts. People left because they were afraid they would lose their equity. Some were encouraged by block busting tactics, which in PC Maplewood were never addressed. Everyone was hurt by this, most certainly including the people who moved here thinking they were moving to an integrated community.
|
Angstrom
Citizen
Username: Angstrom
Post Number: 10
Registered: 1-2006
| | Posted on Thursday, January 12, 2006 - 7:07 pm: | |
J.Crohn,
Please advise me when the next service is then.
Gordon: what on earth are you talking about? Did I attack you personally? |
Pizzaz
Supporter
Username: Pizzaz
Post Number: 3051
Registered: 11-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, January 12, 2006 - 7:39 pm: | |
I've been partial to these quotes myself.
"Is life so dear or peace so sweet as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take, but as for me, give me liberty, or give me death!" (Patrick Henry).
"Associate with men of good quality, if you esteem your own reputation; for it is better to be alone than in bad company." (President George Washington).
"The propitious smiles of Heaven can never be expected on a nation that disregards the eternal rules of order and right which Heaven itself has ordained." (President George Washington, 1789 Inaugural Address).
"Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports . . . . In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness, these firmest props of the duties of men and citizens . . . . [R]eason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle." (President George Washington, September 17, 1796).
"We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." (President John Adams, 1798).
"God who gave us life gave us liberty. Can the liberties of a nation be secure when we have removed a conviction that these liberties are the gift of God? Indeed I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just, that His justice cannot sleep forever." (President Thomas Jefferson).
"Freedom is the natural condition of the human race, in which the Almighty intended men to live. Those who fight the purpose of the Almighty will not succeed. They always have been, they always will be beaten." (President Abraham Lincoln, 1861).
"With malice toward none; with charity for all; with firmness in the right, as God gives us to see the right, let us strive on to finish the work we are in." (President Lincoln's second inaugural address, March 4, 1865).
"Honor is better than honors." (President Abraham Lincoln).
"To educate a person in mind and not in morals is to educate a menace to society." (President Theodore Roosevelt).
"When the nazis came to power, I looked to the universities that prided themselves upon their intellectual freedom, and they failed me. I looked to the German press, which prided itself on the freedom of the press, and it failed me. Until at last the churches stood alone, and that for which I once had little regard earned my respect." (Albert Einstein, after World War II).
BTW: I wholeheartedly agree that an eruv is an appropriate request to grant by the town council.
|
Gordon Agress
Citizen
Username: Odd
Post Number: 319
Registered: 8-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, January 12, 2006 - 9:32 pm: | |
Angstrom, you are the one who said that Jews who believe that God commands an eruv, with anyone who believes in the God but not the command, is an idiot and a barbarian. So I think it's a little late to be crying foul.
|
J. Crohn
Supporter
Username: Jcrohn
Post Number: 2321
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, January 12, 2006 - 10:14 pm: | |
"J.Crohn, Please advise me when the next service is then. "
Is this in response to anything I've said recently or are you just hallucinating? |
Bob K
Supporter
Username: Bobk
Post Number: 10263
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Friday, January 13, 2006 - 4:42 am: | |
A couple of points:
Many of the leading lights among the Founding Fathers were Deists, although the Unitarian/Universalists claim John Adams for their own.
Luckily our country was founded during what is often called The Age of Reason where the religious pendelum had swung a long way to the left (for lack of a better term). There is only one reference to a Superior being in the Constitution and the rather non-specific term "the Creator" is used. The pendulum swung in the other direction by the mid 1800s. If the Constitution had been written then it probably would be a much different document.
There are a lot of false quotes from the founding fathers around on religion. Quotes also have to be taken in the context of the time. While now most Protestants and Catholics live in a fair amount of harmony, this wasn't always the case, especially after the Irish began to arrive in the United States. Negative references about "priests" should probably be examined in that light.
|
|
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page