Since most of the editorial staff at the Washington Post are either Jewish or Zionist non-Jews, this paper has endless stories about matters that interest them very much while ignoring lots of other important things. So a big editorial story today there is about the need to charge money to pray in synagogues. Oh, my goodness, gracious! The story isn’t about how all religions work hard to suck up money from believers. That would mean examining the tithing system of say, the Mormons or the history of the Catholic Church and its oppressive taxes.
Here is a fine example of how the Church leeches off of people forever and ever if they can: Swiss court relieves farmer of 656-year-old debt to Catholic Church | The Raw Story
The debt dated back to 1357, when a certain Konrad Mueller killed a man named Heinrich Stucki.
To save his soul and avoid revenge attacks from the victim’s family, Mueller gave a sanctuary lamp to a local church and vowed to finance its fuel “for eternity”.
If he failed to do so, his land would go to the Church, RTS reported.
The family had to go to court to stop this rip off. Note how they took as gospel truth the fact that this family had to pay forever. Or be evicted from their home. I would not be surprised to see them evicted if they ceased paying this tax. The Church was quite ruthless about this during the eras when they were allowed to control the people legally. Far from persuading them to worship, religion is often all about coercion. Brute force, not love, is what keeps many religions powerful.
This is universal. Using legal as well as social brute force, various religious groups control people. If you dare to leave a religious community, many of them including cults like the Amish, will then shun the person who doesn’t obey the community and cut them out socially and economically from their systems. The Scientologists enforce this to the hilt, too. Meanwhile, to make religions grow, there is a combination of having children or finding converts which is tedious work: Young Jews rebelling against paying dues – The Washington Post…
“The focus is on power, money and a lot of alienating stances,” says Rabbi Rick Jacobs…
HAHAHA. That is true of virtually all religions. And for Jews to complain about this is beyond funny. The editorial story doesn’t make much mention of the mysterious ‘alienating stances’ but I know from first hand experience what these are: mainly the Shiska problem. That is, the ‘dirty women’ that Jewish men marry. If a Jewish woman marries dirty, her children are still ‘clean’ but children of Shiskas are as dirty as their wretched mothers.
The Jewish believers in the synagogue will not eat the food touched by the dirty non-Jewish tribal women. They won’t go into their homes, either. No matter how physically clean the home is, it is still dirty according to this religion which is all about tribal isolationism. The Rabbis don’t want to fix this, they want to paper over this matter which is core to their religion.
The experiment also had a larger purpose. Across the country, young Jews are rebelling against the old, dues-paying model of synagogue membership. Their parents might have written the membership check without a second thought, but these folks don’t part with their money so easily. Not when there are so many other bills to pay. Not when Jewish identity has become as much about what you eat (or don’t eat) and who you marry (or don’t marry) as where you worship – or, in the old vernacular, “belong.”
And here is what I wrote to the Post: Dear Washington Post, why has grammar fallen apart? Example: ‘…and WHO you marry…’ is incorrect, it is ‘whom’ in this case. Why do I know this? Aside from being the dative, an easy test as to when to use ‘whom’ is to say it with the dative of ‘he’.
Example: you don’t say, ‘…and HE you marry’. Even that sounds rough so we switch it to ‘…and you marry HIM.’ Then it sounds correct, no? You don’t marry ‘he’. Nor do you marry ‘she’. You marry ‘her’. See?
I wish there were editors here. The editorial board is filled with non-editors who write all sorts of tommy rot, but no editors to correct them when they write poorly.
And there’s a third problem. Young Jews viscerally rebel against the money culture of the American synagogue, where dunning and giving are explicit transactions. Dollars separate not just insiders from outsiders — who gets tickets to High Holy Days services and who doesn’t. Cash donations also sort members into tiers on the basis of who gives the most. In Reform and Conservative Judaism, money talk has become a barrier to the kind of spiritual belonging that young people crave.
And what is this ‘spiritual belonging’ but mere tribalism? The problem becomes very intense when a mixed marriage couple sees the Jewish member becoming more religiously involved in this tribalism. Namely, it destroys the marriage. A woman can convert but is still viewed as dirty but her children may be forgiven in the future for being the spawn of dirty female sex. It amazes me that Ms. Miller could write a long screed about the flailing synagogues and not mention the high rate of Jewish to non-Jewish marriages as being the fundamental cause of the decline of religious worship in Jewish faith buildings.
And yes, the mainstream Jews worship money and power! As does the Pope and all those religious right wing preachers waving guns and screaming about god loving only them. And these people pull believers in so they can exploit them ruthlessly. They need more members so they can get more money and more power so they can then tell the rest of us, how to live, whom we may marry, what sort of sex we are allowed and what foods we can eat. This is dictatorship via supernatural powers.
And this affects real people who are not believers in this religion or that. And leads to religious wars as we see all over the Middle East, Africa, Asia, North America, Europe, etc. Maybe not on the South Pole but pretty much everywhere else: BBC News – Israel elections quandary for marginalised Arab citizens
In the first elections in Israeli history Arab parties ran as affiliates of the Mapai movement which was led by David Ben-Gurion, the architect of the state.
He was doing no favors here. He was desperate to corral inside of Zionism the victims of religious and tribal cleansing. He wanted to control these Palestinians who refused to flee when the Jews suddenly invaded.
Parties like The Democratic List of Nazareth may not have been very big but they were included in governing coalitions and they reflected the impulse of the left-wing founders of the new state that the Arab minority had to be included in the political process.
Israel has changed a great deal since those days…Around three-quarters of Arabs voted in Israel’s election in 1999. That fell to just over half last time around and several Israeli Arabs told me they thought it would fall again this time around.
They see no point in voting because the system is rigged so only Jews can emigrate into Israel while Muslims and Christians who lived there previously are not allowed to return or even marry Muslims and Christians inside of Israel. If they marry, the ‘citizen’ loses his citizenship and is ejected from his or her home and shipped out of the country forever. This noxious policy is totally racist. And deliberate. And endorsed and protected by the US.
Many even resent the title “Israeli Arab”, used here in the interests of clarity. Some prefer to be called “Palestinian citizens of Israel”….But on polling day it will also be worth checking how the Arab vote has held up.
The Jewish racism reaches far and wide. Many people at the BBC were thrown out of jobs a few years ago in a Jewish coup and many of these went over to al Jazeera. Now, the news from the BBC is Zionist. Note how the reporter here mentions casually how the Palestinians are angry about being called ‘Arabs’ because they are not Arabic at all, they mostly are people who lived there for thousands of years and never lived in the Arabian areas, ever.
Yet, this same reporter then used the word ‘Arab’ to describe the voters in Palestine! This is racism at work. The entire Jewish theft enterprise in the Middle East is an insistence that the land was ‘empty’ and no one lived there except for random desert tribes from Arabia who happened to pass through periodically and thus, have no rights to the land. For the BBC to endorse and promote this racist position is disgusting. But then, our own media does the same for the same reasons.
The war against Muslims rages onwards:
Of course, chaos and desert battles will continue in these sectors for historical reasons. The real fearful news is when various empires and rising powers who have nuclear bombs go at each other and the US is promoting war with China and Russia again which is insane.
3 Afghan Police Killed in Kabul also happened yesterday which shows that the Taliban are simply poking at us in the ribs as we try to pack up, declare victory and run away while Mali, French Forces Take Second Town in Insurgents’ Fight as the fighters in the Sahara do the usual thing that is, melt away again into the vast wastelands of the desert. There is no victory in these fights because the fighters we try to defeat are not defeated at all, they simply fade into the landscape to fight again at a place of their own choosing.
We thought that assassin drones would terrorize them into ceasing fighting us while we fix nothing that irritates them so they remain irritated and each generation vows to fight to the death and it goes on and on and on. The Vietnamese fought ferociously until we stopped fighting them and now they are quite friendly! Duh!
P.O. BOX 483
BERLIN, NY 12022
Make checks out to ‘Elaine Supkis’
Click on the Pegasus icon on the right sidebar to donate via Paypal.