Trump presidency

Seen something interesting in the news or on the intertubes? Discuss it here.

Moderators: Zamfir, Hawknc, Moderators General, Prelates

User avatar
Pfhorrest
Posts: 5008
Joined: Fri Oct 30, 2009 6:11 am UTC
Contact:

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Pfhorrest » Thu Nov 01, 2018 3:19 am UTC

not that it matters for me to say so but Jose just knocked it out of the park here
Forrest Cameranesi, Geek of All Trades
"I am Sam. Sam I am. I do not like trolls, flames, or spam."
The Codex Quaerendae (my philosophy) - The Chronicles of Quelouva (my fiction)

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10270
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby CorruptUser » Thu Nov 01, 2018 4:13 am UTC

The Great Hippo wrote:
CorruptUser wrote:Removing citizenship is much different than charging citizens with sex crimes. I dont think it would be able to be applied retroactively, but if it does that's basically my Rubicon.


Seriously, this is your Rubicon?


The Rubicon for rebellion of some form, and I don't mean the "post stuff on facebook" sort of rebellion. Like, hiding "criminals" in my attic sort of rebellion. All the other stuff was warning signs of a descent into a fascist police state that would start disenfranchising citizens. This is actual disenfranchisement of citizens.

WriteBrainedJR
Posts: 155
Joined: Tue Apr 16, 2013 3:08 pm UTC
Location: Right Behind You
Contact:

Re: Trump presidency

Postby WriteBrainedJR » Thu Nov 01, 2018 6:15 am UTC

I mean, we're talking about the same people who claim that the globe isn't warming, and that 7000 starving refugees seeking asylum constitute an invading army that threatens a republic of approximately 300,000,000 people. I mean, Jesus Christ, you couldn't successfully invade any state on our southern border with a force of 7000 actual soldiers. Too many people who own too many guns there. They'd get lit up like a Christmas tree.

My point is that these people are not concerned with facts, only with advancing their agenda. Would they deign to declare that non-citizens are not subject to the jurisdiction of the US and then prosecute them anyway? Of course they would.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10270
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby CorruptUser » Thu Nov 01, 2018 6:31 am UTC

In fairness, the concern isn't that there is 7000 "invaders", but that letting them in will result more making the attempt as well. If the US hadn't been letting in millions of illegal immigrants and/or providing amnesty in the past, this caravan wouldn't formed at all.

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 6563
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby sardia » Thu Nov 01, 2018 6:40 am UTC

CorruptUser wrote:The Rubicon for rebellion of some form, and I don't mean the "post stuff on facebook" sort of rebellion. Like, hiding "criminals" in my attic sort of rebellion. All the other stuff was warning signs of a descent into a fascist police state that would start disenfranchising citizens. This is actual disenfranchisement of citizens.

That's a bad one, because they are already doing this around the edges.
1. Using government benefits denies you citizenship/greencard
2. Stripping citizenship for committing crimes
3. "Minor" stuff like opposing consent decrees and trying to mass incarcerate the black population(which denies them all sorts of rights like voting).

User avatar
The Great Hippo
Swans ARE SHARP
Posts: 7212
Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2007 4:43 am UTC
Location: behind you

Re: Trump presidency

Postby The Great Hippo » Thu Nov 01, 2018 6:58 am UTC

WriteBrainedJR wrote:I mean, we're talking about the same people who claim that the globe isn't warming, and that 7000 starving refugees seeking asylum constitute an invading army that threatens a republic of approximately 300,000,000 people. I mean, Jesus Christ, you couldn't successfully invade any state on our southern border with a force of 7000 actual soldiers. Too many people who own too many guns there. They'd get lit up like a Christmas tree.
They're also mobilizing several thousand military troops to go meet this 'invasion'.

Beyond the simple budgetary, logistical, and human costs, this also means there's now going to be several thousand more people armed with guns at the border -- guns that will be pointed at a crowd of terrified, exhausted, and unarmed refugees.

Yeah, this will totally end well.

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 6563
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby sardia » Thu Nov 01, 2018 7:39 am UTC

The Great Hippo wrote:
WriteBrainedJR wrote:I mean, we're talking about the same people who claim that the globe isn't warming, and that 7000 starving refugees seeking asylum constitute an invading army that threatens a republic of approximately 300,000,000 people. I mean, Jesus Christ, you couldn't successfully invade any state on our southern border with a force of 7000 actual soldiers. Too many people who own too many guns there. They'd get lit up like a Christmas tree.
They're also mobilizing several thousand military troops to go meet this 'invasion'.

Beyond the simple budgetary, logistical, and human costs, this also means there's now going to be several thousand more people armed with guns at the border -- guns that will be pointed at a crowd of terrified, exhausted, and unarmed refugees.

Yeah, this will totally end well.

Nothing will happen unless Trump remembers to specifically order them to violate the Posse Comitatus Act. Well, you'll have overpaid babysitters sitting there, providing logistical/background support. They aren't allowed to guard the border, much less anything law enforcement related. I suppose he could order them to ignore reality (invasion as a metaphor for immigration becomes literal).

Edit: reading the history of the Posse act in the US is much darker than I expected.

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Tyndmyr » Thu Nov 01, 2018 11:41 am UTC

sardia wrote:Wait, I knew a Messianic Jew in college. Are they bad people? He at least had the decency not to convert me.


No more or less so than anyone else. Or at least, anyone else Christian.

It's not surprising that Pence picked such a person, he's definitely in the religious faction. However, the earlier complaint mixed up Jewishness as a religion with it as a race. Yeah, Messianic sorts are all about Christianity rather than the traditional Jewish faith. Describing them as "not Jewish at all", as natraj does is a bit of a stretch, though. Sure, they view one aspect of tradition differently, but that doesn't inherently make them anti-Semetic. It's just a different faith.

It'd be like getting a catholic priest to officiate at a protestant funeral. Insensitive on a religious level, but calling it racism is probably not right.

WriteBrainedJR wrote:I mean, we're talking about the same people who claim that the globe isn't warming, and that 7000 starving refugees seeking asylum constitute an invading army that threatens a republic of approximately 300,000,000 people. I mean, Jesus Christ, you couldn't successfully invade any state on our southern border with a force of 7000 actual soldiers. Too many people who own too many guns there. They'd get lit up like a Christmas tree.

My point is that these people are not concerned with facts, only with advancing their agenda. Would they deign to declare that non-citizens are not subject to the jurisdiction of the US and then prosecute them anyway? Of course they would.


Your facts also have a bit of a slant. They're not necessarily starving, and they've all been offered asylum by Mexico already, which they've refused. It's not that they have no other options, it's just that they prefer living in the US to either living in Mexico or their country of origin. Nothing intrinsicly wrong with that, but it means portraying them as starving people in desperate need of help from us isn't quite right.

Nobody is actually worried about them overthrowing the government. It's just the usual anti-immigrant/anti-illegal immigrant sentiment on a larger scale, as it's a larger incident.

Mobilizing troops to the border in an anti-illegal immigration capacity has happened before. It's not particularly new, nor is it likely to lead to any real armed conflict. It is highly unlikely that the "caravan" poses any significant military threat to the US military. It's merely expensive posturing for the most part(they will provide some actual logistical support, but it's an expensive way to do that). So, if your beef is regarding efficiency, fair. If it's some projected warfare, not a great concern.

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26542
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: Trump presidency

Postby gmalivuk » Thu Nov 01, 2018 11:48 am UTC

What atrocities would it take for you to finally admit that this isn't just more of the same?

CorruptUser wrote:
The Great Hippo wrote:
CorruptUser wrote:Removing citizenship is much different than charging citizens with sex crimes. I dont think it would be able to be applied retroactively, but if it does that's basically my Rubicon.


Seriously, this is your Rubicon?


The Rubicon for rebellion of some form, and I don't mean the "post stuff on facebook" sort of rebellion. Like, hiding "criminals" in my attic sort of rebellion. All the other stuff was warning signs of a descent into a fascist police state that would start disenfranchising citizens. This is actual disenfranchisement of citizens.
The actual disenfranchisement of citizens (including stripping them of citizenship altogether) has already been happening. As has been pointed out repeatedly in the last couple pages of this thread.
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

User avatar
Yakk
Poster with most posts but no title.
Posts: 11092
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2007 7:27 pm UTC
Location: E pur si muove

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Yakk » Thu Nov 01, 2018 2:20 pm UTC

cphite wrote:Look at how long we've stuck with the interpretation that the 2nd amendment guarantees the right for ordinary citizens to keep and bear arms;

What, since 2008?

As opposed to the previous 70 years, where it was a collective right:
In 1939 the U.S. Supreme Court considered the matter in United States v. Miller. 307 U.S. 174. The Court adopted a collective rights approach in this case, determining that Congress could regulate a sawed-off shotgun that had moved in interstate commerce under the National Firearms Act of 1934 because the evidence did not suggest that the shotgun "has some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated milita . . . ." The Court then explained that the Framers included the Second Amendment to ensure the effectiveness of the military.
One of the painful things about our time is that those who feel certainty are stupid, and those with any imagination and understanding are filled with doubt and indecision - BR

Last edited by JHVH on Fri Oct 23, 4004 BCE 6:17 pm, edited 6 times in total.

cphite
Posts: 1297
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2011 5:27 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby cphite » Fri Nov 02, 2018 5:48 pm UTC

sardia wrote:Unless cphite is open to the idea that his sources are crazy fringe pundits, it's a lost cause. Is cphite open to receiving criticism on this?


Sure; I haven't exactly taken a poll or anything among constitutional scholars.

Below are some links I found with a quick Google search. It's definitely not a popular interpretation, and it tends to get shot down whenever it comes up; but it's not something that's new. I recall discussing this exact question in school many years ago; and I've read about this exact thing many times over the years since then, from both sides. So it at least seems like something that folks in the field are talking about.

Lino Graglia, a law professor in University of Texas: https://lawprofessors.typepad.com/files/graglia1.pdf
John Eastman, Fowler School of Law: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm ... _id=905570
Schuck and Smith; professors at Yale and University of Pennsylvania: https://nationalaffairs.com/publication ... itizenship
Gerald Magliocca, Indiana University: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm ... _id=965268

My point from the beginning has been this is the argument Trump is most likely to use; I base this on the fact that he and his supporters have said they're going to use it. Do a quick Google search on the issue and most of the articles that come up will mention this specific argument; your own NPR link indicates that this is the argument that they're going to use. NPR says it's a fringe thing; so fair enough.

But honestly, I don't think it's as "fringe" as it probably should be. It's something that anyone with even a passing interest in the issue would have a hard time missing if they actually did any reading about it. Literally the first five articles I found on the subject today mention the interpretation of jurisdiction; I didn't find one that didn't at least make a reference to it.

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26542
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: Trump presidency

Postby gmalivuk » Fri Nov 02, 2018 6:23 pm UTC

"This is a fringe interpretation that people sometimes talk about" isn't the same as "there are plenty of legal scholars who disagree [with the other interpretation]".
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

User avatar
Dauric
Posts: 3943
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 6:58 pm UTC
Location: In midair, traversing laterally over a container of sharks. No water, just sharks, with lasers.

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Dauric » Fri Nov 02, 2018 6:34 pm UTC

A:
cphite wrote:My point from the beginning has been this is the argument Trump is most likely to use; I base this on the fact that he and his supporters have said they're going to use it.


B:
Do a quick Google search on the issue and most of the articles that come up will mention this specific argument; your own NPR link indicates that this is the argument that they're going to use. NPR says it's a fringe thing; so fair enough.


Point A means your search of Point B will be skewed simply because it is what Trump's supporters are claiming is the basis of their argument.

You have to dig through your results and control for date of publication to really determine how "fringe" the opinion is.
We're in the traffic-chopper over the XKCD boards where there's been a thread-derailment. A Liquified Godwin spill has evacuated threads in a fourty-post radius of the accident, Lolcats and TVTropes have broken free of their containers. It is believed that the Point has perished.

User avatar
Thesh
Made to Fuck Dinosaurs
Posts: 6331
Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 1:55 am UTC
Location: Colorado

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Thesh » Fri Nov 02, 2018 6:40 pm UTC

cphite wrote:Lino Graglia, a law professor in University of Texas: https://lawprofessors.typepad.com/files/graglia1.pdf
John Eastman, Fowler School of Law: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm ... _id=905570
Schuck and Smith; professors at Yale and University of Pennsylvania: https://nationalaffairs.com/publication ... itizenship
Gerald Magliocca, Indiana University: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm ... _id=965268


So the first dude you linked is a Republican politician, the second spends half their time complaining about liberal activist judges, and the fourth rebuts the third.

CONCLUSION
There is undoubtedly some tension between the right of a nation
to control its borders and a rule of birthright citizenship that applies
to illegal aliens. From the common law, we have inherited a welcom-
ing tradition that considers birthright citizenship too precious to be
left in the hands of Congress. Though the federal government re-
tains broad discretion to deport illegal immigrants, any child born
under the legal and actual authority of the United States is a citizen.
The revisionist arguments by Schuck and Smith cannot overcome the
formidable authority standing in their way.


You can always find people to support something. Showing that their arguments are taken seriously by their peers takes more doing.
Summum ius, summa iniuria.

cphite
Posts: 1297
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2011 5:27 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby cphite » Fri Nov 02, 2018 6:57 pm UTC

Dauric wrote:Point A means your search of Point B will be skewed simply because it is what Trump's supporters are claiming is the basis of their argument.


The oldest of the four articles I posted was from 2006 which is well before Trump entered the discussion. Also, as I mentioned previously, this is something that I have seen debated since I was in college in the 90s. This is not something new that Trump or his cronies just came up with last week; and the fact that folks here haven't heard it before proves only that they haven't heard it before.

You have to dig through your results and control for date of publication to really determine how "fringe" the opinion is.


No, I really don't have to do any of that. This is an discussion forum; it's reasonable to be asked to cite sources for specific claims - which I have - but I'm not taking the time to give you a historical analysis of a legal argument I don't even agree with.

My original point was that this was the argument Trump and his side would use; I don't think that's even disputable. It's easy enough to find and verify, including in the article linked by sardia.

The rest of this is a whole lot of nit-picking over whether or not the interpretation is "fringe" or not; which is frankly too pointless and ridiculous to warrant even the time I've already wasted on it.

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26542
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: Trump presidency

Postby gmalivuk » Fri Nov 02, 2018 6:59 pm UTC

cphite wrote:
My original point was that this was the argument Trump and his side would use

That may have been your original point, but the point people disputed was that plenty of legal scholars agreed with the argument.
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

User avatar
Dauric
Posts: 3943
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 6:58 pm UTC
Location: In midair, traversing laterally over a container of sharks. No water, just sharks, with lasers.

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Dauric » Fri Nov 02, 2018 7:12 pm UTC

gmalivuk wrote:
cphite wrote:
My original point was that this was the argument Trump and his side would use

That may have been your original point, but the point people disputed was that plenty of legal scholars agreed with the argument.


And it's not a minor nitpick, a fairly significant point of the discussion is that the argument of misinterpretation of the jurisdiction clause is such a fringe argument that it's not likely to get any actual traction in the courts, even if it was to reach the Supreme Court. There's no debate that Trump & Co. would be using that argument, they've said as much. The question is does that argument have any kind of validity or support, thus "is it fringe?" is rather core to the issue.

The problem being that our current administration has a talent for raising marginal fringe groups to mainstream status, intentionally or otherwise.
We're in the traffic-chopper over the XKCD boards where there's been a thread-derailment. A Liquified Godwin spill has evacuated threads in a fourty-post radius of the accident, Lolcats and TVTropes have broken free of their containers. It is believed that the Point has perished.

User avatar
The Great Hippo
Swans ARE SHARP
Posts: 7212
Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2007 4:43 am UTC
Location: behind you

Re: Trump presidency

Postby The Great Hippo » Fri Nov 02, 2018 7:34 pm UTC

Dauric wrote:The problem being that our current administration has a talent for raising marginal fringe groups to mainstream status, intentionally or otherwise.
This is part of my concern, and why "plenty of legal scholars" is such a problem for me, yeah -- there aren't plenty of legal scholars who agree with this nonsense, and acting like there are plays into the narrative that Trump & friends will try to sell.

This is clearly an extremely fringe interpretation -- but, as you point out, Trump sells fringe like hot cakes.

cphite
Posts: 1297
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2011 5:27 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby cphite » Fri Nov 02, 2018 7:44 pm UTC

Dauric wrote:
gmalivuk wrote:
cphite wrote:
My original point was that this was the argument Trump and his side would use

That may have been your original point, but the point people disputed was that plenty of legal scholars agreed with the argument.


And it's not a minor nitpick, a fairly significant point of the discussion is that the argument of misinterpretation of the jurisdiction clause is such a fringe argument that it's not likely to get any actual traction in the courts, even if it was to reach the Supreme Court. There's no debate that Trump & Co. would be using that argument, they've said as much. The question is does that argument have any kind of validity or support, thus "is it fringe?" is rather core to the issue.


Fair enough.

The fact is, I dunno. I know there are legal scholars who agree with the argument, because I've read them over the years; and they haven't all been on the right. One of the better articles I've read on the matter was written by someone years ago who wanted to rewrite the clause preemptively to avoid it being used by someone like Trump - I don't recall the author. Whether the number equates to "plenty" or "fringe" or whatever other qualifier, I simply don't know; it seems to me based on my own experience that it's more common than you and others believe it to be; I frankly don't even care at this point.

If this thing gets to the SCOTUS they're either going to rule according to the law - in which case this thing will be shot down and hopefully killed permanently; or they're going to rule according to party lines in which case it quite frankly won't matter if it's a fringe interpretation or even if it's something that only one guy sitting on a rock somewhere in the mountains of Montana believes. If the five conservative members of the SCOTUS decide that Trump can do this, he gets to do it.

The problem being that our current administration has a talent for raising marginal fringe groups to mainstream status, intentionally or otherwise.


I don't disagree - which is why its appropriate to pay attention to how they're planning to do this stupid thing.

User avatar
Pfhorrest
Posts: 5008
Joined: Fri Oct 30, 2009 6:11 am UTC
Contact:

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Pfhorrest » Fri Nov 02, 2018 8:14 pm UTC

I'm sure there's plenty of legal scholars who hold that opinion just like there's plenty of scientists who don't think climate change is happening. Teach the controversy!
Forrest Cameranesi, Geek of All Trades
"I am Sam. Sam I am. I do not like trolls, flames, or spam."
The Codex Quaerendae (my philosophy) - The Chronicles of Quelouva (my fiction)

User avatar
The Great Hippo
Swans ARE SHARP
Posts: 7212
Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2007 4:43 am UTC
Location: behind you

Re: Trump presidency

Postby The Great Hippo » Fri Nov 02, 2018 9:34 pm UTC

cphite wrote:One of the better articles I've read on the matter was written by someone years ago who wanted to rewrite the clause preemptively to avoid it being used by someone like Trump - I don't recall the author.
I find myself extremely skeptical about this -- it requires an absurd and complete misreading of the clause to get to where Trump wants to get, and it seems extremely unlikely any credible legal scholar would want to shore up the language as a defense against people who are just going to ignore the language in the first place. You can't defend the word of law from someone who has a complete disregard for the word of law. Are you sure the article was written by a credible Constitutional scholar?

ETA: Beg pardon, I didn't see your previous post where you provide articles written on this subject. I'll try reading them later; that being said, at a glance, it appears two are written in response to Trump.

User avatar
addams
Posts: 10010
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: Trump presidency

Postby addams » Fri Nov 02, 2018 10:53 pm UTC

cphite wrote: If the five conservative members of the SCOTUS decide that Trump can do this, he gets to do it.

The problem being that our current administration has a talent for raising marginal fringe groups to mainstream status, intentionally or otherwise.


It's appropriate to pay attention to how they're planning to do this stupid thing.
(raises hand) If, by chance, we stumble into that horror of an alternate reality with its alternative truths; How? How will Citizenship be determined?

I wonder: Will I make the grade?
Life is, just, an exchange of electrons; It is up to us to give it meaning.

We are all in The Gutter.
Some of us see The Gutter.
Some of us see The Stars.
by mr. Oscar Wilde.

Those that want to Know; Know.
Those that do not Know; Don't tell them.
They do terrible things to people that Tell Them.

gd1
Posts: 210
Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2012 5:42 am UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby gd1 » Fri Nov 02, 2018 11:56 pm UTC

addams wrote:
cphite wrote: If the five conservative members of the SCOTUS decide that Trump can do this, he gets to do it.

The problem being that our current administration has a talent for raising marginal fringe groups to mainstream status, intentionally or otherwise.


It's appropriate to pay attention to how they're planning to do this stupid thing.
(raises hand) If, by chance, we stumble into that horror of an alternate reality with its alternative truths; How? How will Citizenship be determined?

I wonder: Will I make the grade?


At that point, would you still want to?
There is no emotion more useless in life than hate.

User avatar
Thesh
Made to Fuck Dinosaurs
Posts: 6331
Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 1:55 am UTC
Location: Colorado

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Thesh » Sat Nov 03, 2018 12:13 am UTC

I'm gone the instant I can apply for refugee status.
Summum ius, summa iniuria.

User avatar
Dauric
Posts: 3943
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 6:58 pm UTC
Location: In midair, traversing laterally over a container of sharks. No water, just sharks, with lasers.

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Dauric » Sat Nov 03, 2018 1:53 am UTC

Frontline: The Facebook Dilemma

A two hour documentary on Facebook and it's influence on the 2016 election as well as events around the world, including the Russian misinformation campaigns and how they worked.
We're in the traffic-chopper over the XKCD boards where there's been a thread-derailment. A Liquified Godwin spill has evacuated threads in a fourty-post radius of the accident, Lolcats and TVTropes have broken free of their containers. It is believed that the Point has perished.

jewish_scientist
Posts: 956
Joined: Fri Feb 07, 2014 3:15 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby jewish_scientist » Sun Nov 04, 2018 3:27 am UTC

Tyndmyr wrote:
sardia wrote:Wait, I knew a Messianic Jew in college. Are they bad people? He at least had the decency not to convert me.

No more or less so than anyone else. Or at least, anyone else Christian.

It's not surprising that Pence picked such a person, he's definitely in the religious faction. However, the earlier complaint mixed up Jewishness as a religion with it as a race. Yeah, Messianic sorts are all about Christianity rather than the traditional Jewish faith. Describing them as "not Jewish at all", as natraj does is a bit of a stretch, though. Sure, they view one aspect of tradition differently, but that doesn't inherently make them anti-Semetic. It's just a different faith.

It'd be like getting a catholic priest to officiate at a protestant funeral. Insensitive on a religious level, but calling it racism is probably not right.

Imagine there was a movement to help Native Americans reconnect to their ancestral traditions, beliefs and culture. You would probably support. Now imagine that you learned that this movement was claiming that Native Americans were monotheists whose traditions prophesies that the son of the Creator would be born in a far away land. How would your view change?
"You are not running off with Cow-Skull Man Dracula Skeletor!"
-Socrates

idonno
Posts: 233
Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2015 3:34 am UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby idonno » Sun Nov 04, 2018 5:24 am UTC

jewish_scientist wrote:Imagine there was a movement to help Native Americans reconnect to their ancestral traditions, beliefs and culture. You would probably support. Now imagine that you learned that this movement was claiming that Native Americans were monotheists whose traditions prophesies that the son of the Creator would be born in a far away land. How would your view change?

Um... Hasn't Judaism has been pretty strongly monotheistic since at least 500 BC? Wasn't Jesus supposed to have been born in Bethlehem a location that was pretty close to their capital at the time of his birth and well within their territory under the Romans? Your imagined changes to Native American religion seem much more extreme than this group's changes to Jewish religion.

Based on the "in depth knowledge" I gained from the Wikipedia page, the movement started as a bunch of Jewish Christian's who had assimilated into European practices of Christianity that wanted to maintain their religion while shifting back toward their cultural roots? I am really not seeing any issue with people wanting to observe traditional cultural practices while maintaining a different religion and arguing that they are reconnecting with ancestral traditions is absolutely correct if their starting point was being assimilated into European Christianity. Direction is determined by starting point and ending point.

Also, if a group of outsiders was trying to impose such changes on Native Americans it might be a concerning issue but if a bunch of Native Americans want to modify the understanding of their own cultural history, why should that matter to anyone else exactly? It seems like an internal issue for competing groups in their culture to resolve.

User avatar
addams
Posts: 10010
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: Trump presidency

Postby addams » Sun Nov 04, 2018 6:06 am UTC

Dauric wrote:Frontline: The Facebook Dilemma

A two hour documentary on Facebook and it's influence on the 2016 election as well as events around the world, including the Russian misinformation campaigns and how they worked.
That helped with my sense of chronology.
What went wrong and when.
Life is, just, an exchange of electrons; It is up to us to give it meaning.

We are all in The Gutter.
Some of us see The Gutter.
Some of us see The Stars.
by mr. Oscar Wilde.

Those that want to Know; Know.
Those that do not Know; Don't tell them.
They do terrible things to people that Tell Them.

User avatar
The Great Hippo
Swans ARE SHARP
Posts: 7212
Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2007 4:43 am UTC
Location: behind you

Re: Trump presidency

Postby The Great Hippo » Sun Nov 04, 2018 9:09 am UTC

ETA: Nevermind; after talking to someone else about this subject (Messianic Jews), I realized I definitely don't know enough to comment on it.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10270
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby CorruptUser » Sun Nov 04, 2018 1:29 pm UTC

To get the Jewish perspective on "Messianic" Jews, imagine that you've been forced to live amongst people who for the past 1700 years have been calling for your destruction in one way or another, whether it's through forced conversion, oppressive taxes, ethnic cleansing, humiliations, or worse. Now imagine that there is a group of people who claim to be like you, whose faith is a thinly veiled version of the faith of the people who have been oppressing you for all those years, and who are openly dedicated to getting you to convert. It's going to come across as yet another attempt at destroying your people, and an insultingly transparent one at that.

As for actual Messianic Jews, I could always join the Chassidic groups. They believe that their rebbe, Joel Teitelbaum, was the messiah, but because they aren't completely bonkers they believe the messiah is born into every generation and that only when the world is ready will that messiah be the messiah to fulfill all the prophecies. Interestingly, while the messiah is presumed to be Jewish, there has been one notable case of Jews declaring a non-Jew the messiah; the Persian king Darius, who conquered the neo-Babylonian empire, ending the Babylonian exile and building the second temple. Of course this led to a quasi-civil war between the Jews and the Samaritans...

idonno
Posts: 233
Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2015 3:34 am UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby idonno » Mon Nov 05, 2018 3:42 am UTC

I understand why Jewish groups wouldn't like them I just don't see why anyone else should care one way or the other. Sure it was a faux pas but it isn't like the people attacking synagogues don't want the entire people group dead no matter what their religion is. If say a Muslim VP had a African American Muslim religious leader pray for the victims of a racist attack on an African American Christian church, I'd say the same thing to all the Christians that would inevitably be pissed off about it. It isn't like any of these religions condemn their people for having someone of a different religion pray for them.

As for the thinly veiled, to be fair Christianity, Judaism, and Islam all share enough commonality that it doesn't take much of a veil for one to start bleeding into the other.

I don't know if this makes it better or worse in the minds of people who think this is an issue but Pence's aid claims they didn't know who the guy was and I sort of believe that they didn't properly vet him. Not because I don't think Pence would have approved of a Messianic Jew but because the guy was defrocked 15 years ago and I think he would rather not be associated with people who don't even bring the support of their own religious group to the table.


I will say that the reasoning, according to Wikipedia, behind the Messianic Jews makes me a little bit leery of them because it sounds like return of Israel help bring about the Apocalypse stuff which could be actually dangerous.

User avatar
Sableagle
Ormurinn's Alt
Posts: 1935
Joined: Sat Jun 13, 2015 4:26 pm UTC
Location: The wrong side of the mirror
Contact:

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Sableagle » Mon Nov 05, 2018 7:39 am UTC

A little background:
Trump, 'purveyor of hate speech', not welcome in Pittsburgh, says former synagogue leader

“We have people who stand by us, who believe in values – not just Jewish – but believe in values, and those are not the values of this president and I do not welcome him to Pittsburgh,” she said.

The comments followed an open letter signed by a coalition of local Jewish leaders and published by the Pittsburgh chapter of Bend The Arc, a progressive advocacy group, that also called for the president to avoid the city.

“President Trump, you are not welcome in Pittsburgh until you fully denounce white nationalism,” the letter states.

Trump, who labelled the shooting an “evil antisemitic attack”, is set to visit Pittsburgh on Tuesday, the White House confirmed on Monday afternoon.


Pittsburgh mayor says he ended call with Trump after complaints over death penalty laws

Peduto spoke with The Washington Post on Saturday about dealing with the aftermath of the shooting late last month that killed 11 people — the deadliest attack on Jews in U.S. history.

He told the newspaper that he was standing outside of the synagogue in Pittsburgh’s Squirrel Hill neighborhood when he received a call from the president.

Trump offered thoughts and prayers and vowed to help Peduto with anything he needed, the mayor said. The president even offered a direct line to the White House.

The president quickly veered into discussing the need for harsher death penalty laws as a method of deterring mass murderers, Peduto recalled to The Post.

Peduto said he was so stunned, he could not respond to Trump’s remarks.

“I’m literally standing two blocks from 11 bodies right now. Really?” Peduto thought at the time, he told the Post. He noted how he felt numb.

The mayor thought that talking about the death penalty wasn’t “going to bring them back or deter what had just happened."

"I ended the conversation pretty quickly after that," he added, saying the conversation only lasted about three minutes.


Outrage as Pence brings out Messianic ‘rabbi’ to pray for synagogue victims

US Vice President A Wet Rag Stuffed Into a Tailpipe sparked outrage on Monday when the “rabbi” he invited onto the stage to say a prayer for the victims of the Pittsburgh synagogue massacre turned out to be a Messianic Christian, who invoked “Jesus the Messiah” at the event.

However, a spokesperson for Pence later said he did not know Rabbi Loren Jacobs of the Messianic congregation Shema Yisrael, when he called him onto the stage to offer a prayer for the victims during a Michigan campaign stop.

“God of Abraham, God of Isaac, God of Jacob, God and Father of my Lord and Savior Yeshua, Jesus the Messiah, and my God and Father too,” Jacobs, wearing a tallit, intoned, causing much consternation, two days after a gunman who said all Jews should be killed shot dead 11 worshipers at a Pittsburgh synagogue, the worst attack on Jews in US history.

As Pence stood next to him, Jacobs ended his prayer by saying, “in the name of Jesus.”

Epstein, who touted her own Jewish heritage, said said anyone attacking her or Pence over the prayer is “guilty of nothing short of religious intolerance.”

Jordan Acker, a Jewish lawyer who is running for the University of Michigan Board of Regents as a Democrat, criticized Epstein on Twitter. He said she was “deeply insensitive for bringing a group on stage whose entire mission is to convert Jews,” days after the worst instance of anti-Semitic violence in American history.


With some obfuscation on the inside, the Repubs have gone from "YAY! NEO-NAZIS! WHOO! ATTACK JOURNALISTS! ANTIFA ARE SCUM! HOORAY FOR NEO-NAZIS!" via being told that victims of a mass shooting at a synagogue don't want a neo-nazi cheerleader at the memorial service to using that memorial service as an opportuinity to spit in the victims' faces and say anyone who's got a problem wid dat is jus' bein' intoleran' an' tranna suppress dare rights to follow dare relijun.
Oh, Willie McBride, it was all done in vain.

User avatar
The Great Hippo
Swans ARE SHARP
Posts: 7212
Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2007 4:43 am UTC
Location: behind you

Re: Trump presidency

Postby The Great Hippo » Mon Nov 05, 2018 1:23 pm UTC

idonno wrote:I understand why Jewish groups wouldn't like them I just don't see why anyone else should care one way or the other.
For me, the biggest red flag is that literally all Jewish groups reject them as Jewish1 -- and yet they still describe themselves as Jewish. This permits them to do things like try to hijack the narrative of opposition to antisemitism and wield it against the Jews themselves (criticism of this non-Jewish faith by Jews who are tired of it being equated with Judaism is intolerant and antisemitic. Why do you hate Jews so much, Jews? Etc). This type of antisemitism (hijacking Jewish identity to use against Jewish people) strikes me as a particularly pernicious type of antisemitism.

Regarding the Pence thing: Imagine if we had a mosque shooting. Now imagine that an organization that exists solely to proselytize to Muslims ("Muslims for Christ", a Christian organization that claims to be Muslim but rejects Muhammad and the immutable sanctity of the Qur'an, and instead claims Jesus was God's prophet and the son of God) was invited by the VP to pray in response. They come up on stage and cosplay as a Muslim, praying for Muslims, while making sure to end all their prayers extolling Christ. How fucked up does that sound?

Well, swap "Muslim" for "Jew" and that's literally what happened here.

1Literally all of them. I'm not well educated in regards to Judaism, but I'm pretty sure getting every Jewish organization in the world to agree on anything is a miraculous feat in of itself, and speaks to the fundamental failure of this self-proclaimed "Jewish" faith to actually be Jewish.

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Tyndmyr » Mon Nov 05, 2018 3:11 pm UTC

idonno wrote:
jewish_scientist wrote:Imagine there was a movement to help Native Americans reconnect to their ancestral traditions, beliefs and culture. You would probably support. Now imagine that you learned that this movement was claiming that Native Americans were monotheists whose traditions prophesies that the son of the Creator would be born in a far away land. How would your view change?

Um... Hasn't Judaism has been pretty strongly monotheistic since at least 500 BC? Wasn't Jesus supposed to have been born in Bethlehem a location that was pretty close to their capital at the time of his birth and well within their territory under the Romans? Your imagined changes to Native American religion seem much more extreme than this group's changes to Jewish religion.


Indeed. Monotheism isn't a disputed portion. Traditional Judaism doesn't hold Christ up as divinity, isn't so into the new testament, and places significant importance on rabbinical tradition relative to Christianity, and Messianic Jews generally lean on the Christian side of that divide. Religiously, there's definitely a split there. As for which one is "right", feh? I'm an atheist. There is no objective "right" religion so far as I'm concerned. It's just propriety. Generally, one would prefer to ask a catholic priest to officiate at the funeral of a noted catholic, not a protestant. There are circumstances where it's close enough, or joint ceremonies are better when many faiths are involved, but rule of thumb, it's more proper to get the same faith religious leader to officiate.

Anti-Semitic sorts would probably not differentiate much. There may be some overlap of religious differences and racism, but converting faiths alone has generally not sufficed to keep Jews from being targeted by racism.

idonno
Posts: 233
Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2015 3:34 am UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby idonno » Mon Nov 05, 2018 5:23 pm UTC

Tyndmyr wrote:Generally, one would prefer to ask a catholic priest to officiate at the funeral of a noted catholic, not a protestant. There are circumstances where it's close enough, or joint ceremonies are better when many faiths are involved, but rule of thumb, it's more proper to get the same faith religious leader to officiate.

But this was a campaign rally not a funeral. Also, apparently the members of the Michigan Board of Rabbis are not participating in political campaigns (I wish more groups would behave like that) so it was probably not possible to get anything closer than this for the event (except for possibly a non defrocked Messianic Rabbi).

The Great Hippo wrote:Now imagine that an organization that exists solely to proselytize to Muslims

I'm pretty sure the people practicing it aren't only practicing it for the purpose of proselytizing other Jews.

The Great Hippo wrote:hijacking Jewish identity to use against Jewish people
What gives one set of descendants more right to the identity than another? From your argument, it sounds to me like other groups are claiming ownership of a historical identity that these people have just as much ethnic claim to. This is a dispute between two Semitic groups.

The Great Hippo wrote:end all their prayers extolling Christ.

Just a side note but while this would be extremely unusual for a Muslim prayer, would that even be a major issue for them? They believe he was a great prophet.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10270
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby CorruptUser » Mon Nov 05, 2018 5:51 pm UTC

The organization Jews for Jesus is an organization dedicated specifically to eradication conversion of all Jews, and it is very heavily tied in with Messianic Jews. Don't give me the ferkakta mishegoss of "well, that's not all they do".

User avatar
ObsessoMom
Nespresso Bomb
Posts: 762
Joined: Sun Sep 29, 2013 5:28 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby ObsessoMom » Mon Nov 05, 2018 5:56 pm UTC

idonno wrote:
The Great Hippo wrote:end all their prayers extolling Christ.

Just a side note but while this would be extremely unusual for a Muslim prayer, would that even be a major issue for them? They believe he was a great prophet.


Although Muslims believe that Jesus was a great prophet, they also believe that worshipping Jesus as part of the Trinity, as Christians do, is blasphemous. There's no wiggle room on that point, because the Qur'an reports God as saying this on the matter:

People of the Book, do not exceed the limits of devotion in your religion or say anything about God which is not the Truth. Jesus, son of Mary, is only a Messenger of God, His Word, and a spirit from Him whom He conveyed to Mary. So have faith in God and His Messengers. Do not say that there are three gods. It is better for you to stop believing in the Trinity. There is only One God. He is too glorious to give birth to a son. To God belongs all that is in the heavens and the earth. God alone is a Sufficient Guardian for all.

http://corpus.quran.com/translation.jsp ... &verse=171


So, yeah, a prayer declaring that Jesus is Lord--i.e., God--would, indeed, be a major issue for Muslims.

User avatar
The Great Hippo
Swans ARE SHARP
Posts: 7212
Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2007 4:43 am UTC
Location: behind you

Re: Trump presidency

Postby The Great Hippo » Mon Nov 05, 2018 6:00 pm UTC

EDIT: Ninja'd, but still relevant (I think).

idonno wrote:I'm pretty sure the people practicing it aren't only practicing it for the purpose of proselytizing other Jews.
Then why not just call themselves "Christians", or "Hebrew Christians"? Why is it so important that they be Jewish?
idonno wrote:What gives one set of descendants more right to the identity than another? From your argument, it sounds to me like other groups are claiming ownership of a historical identity that these people have just as much ethnic claim to. This is a dispute between two Semitic groups.
Judaism is much more complicated than an ethnic identity. The fact is that -- again -- literally every denomination of Judaism (as well as Jewish organizations!) rejects Messianic Jews as spiritually Jewish. You can't believe Christ is the messiah and also be spiritually a Jew.

This isn't a dispute between two Semitic groups; it's a dispute between numerous Semitic groups and one group who happens to have some Semitic people in it.
idonno wrote:Just a side note but while this would be extremely unusual for a Muslim prayer, would that even be a major issue for them? They believe he was a great prophet.
You don't think it's weird if a Muslim at a rally supporting a tragedy targeting Muslims ends the prayer by extolling Christ?

Even outside the context of the virulent anti-Islamic and anti-Semitic strain of pro-White Nationalist Christianity that supports and is supported by the current administration, it would still be absurdly tone-deaf to end a rally about violence against a religious group by promoting the savior of a completely different religion that's currently experiencing precisely zero persecution (in America, at least).

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10270
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby CorruptUser » Mon Nov 05, 2018 6:06 pm UTC

Fun story. Back in my hometown, we were implementing the International Baccalaureate program. The IB program was, obviously, internationally focused rather than America-centric. There was a PTA meeting, and all the Christian families were furious, because in the textbook it was saying that Muslims viewed Christians as polytheists. The Christian families were bewildered, 'why do they hate us, the trinity is very simple it's just a 3 sided paper, we aren't polytheists how could they say that about us' etc etc, while the Jewish families just rolled our eyes and said we accepted Christianity as monotheistic at swordpoint, and that we've known for centuries the rest of the world disliked Christians (as well as Jews). This was in the 90's, well before 9/11 and everything like that.

Even today, I don't think even a large percentage of Americans truly understand the rest of the world. Hell, I think I'm one of them, and I know more than most.

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Tyndmyr » Mon Nov 05, 2018 6:20 pm UTC

idonno wrote:
The Great Hippo wrote:end all their prayers extolling Christ.

Just a side note but while this would be extremely unusual for a Muslim prayer, would that even be a major issue for them? They believe he was a great prophet.


It's...a context thing. In context, praising Christ for being God is different than praising him for being a great prophet. You can try to simplify that away, but in religious terms, who is god and who isn't is pretty fundamental as differences go.

As other stated, Christianity/Islam has a similar distinction, and both religions view it as pretty important. There's even been a bit of violence and conflict over it. Sure, there's a shared history between Judeochristian faiths, but that doesn't mean the participants themselves see them as "close enough".

As for why Messianic Judaism isn't simply "Christian", well, that gets into further subdivisions. Christianity has all sorts of subdivisions, and even fairly modest differences have significant schisms. Messianic Judaism varies from other subsects of Christianity in that it values Jewish tradition a lot higher. Christianity in general doesn't get into that a great deal. Sure, some religious holidays and stuff are shared, but they've diverged to the point where Christian tradition and Jewish traditions are often quite different. Messianic Judaism ends up somewhere in the middle. But of course, also insisting that it's right, and it's the true faith.


Return to “News & Articles”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Leovan and 12 guests