From: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org (fegmaniax-digest) To: fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Subject: fegmaniax-digest V13 #355 Reply-To: fegmaniax@smoe.org Sender: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk fegmaniax-digest Tuesday, December 14 2004 Volume 13 : Number 355 Today's Subjects: ----------------- FW: Rock and Roll Hall of Fame ["Bachman, Michael" ] Re: new most-hated thread - T vs A ["Randalljr" ] Re: new most-hated thread - T vs A [Benjamin Lukoff ] Reap [James Dignan ] Re: Reap [Tom Clark ] Re: Reap ["Stewart C. Russell" ] Re: new most-hated thread - T vs A [2fs ] Re: new most-hated thread - T vs A [] Re: new most-hated thread - T vs A [] Re: new most-hated thread - T vs A [2fs ] Jew vs. Judiast [Aaron Lowe ] Re: new most-hated thread - T vs A [] Re: Jew vs. Judiast [] Re: new most-hated thread - T vs A [2fs ] Re: new most-hated thread - T vs A (now with bad bar joke content!) [Rex ] Re: new most-hated thread - T vs A [Benjamin Lukoff ] Re: new most-hated thread - T vs A [Rex Broome ] Re: Jew vs. Judiast ["Jason R. Thornton" ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 13:58:40 -0500 From: "Bachman, Michael" Subject: FW: Rock and Roll Hall of Fame U2, O'Jays Are Rock Hall of Fame Inductees Dec 13, 5:43 AM EST Associated Press U2's music: listen & download The O'Jays's music: listen & download Irish rockers U2, R&B singers The O'Jays and soul balladeer Percy Sledge are among five musical legends to be inducted into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame during the foundation's 20th annual induction ceremony next year, the organization announced Monday. The Rock and Roll Hall of Fame Foundation will hold its induction ceremony March 14 at the Waldorf Astoria Hotel in Manhattan. U2, which became one of the planet's most popular bands in the 1980s with their megahit "The Joshua Tree," is still making the charts: Their November release, "How to Dismantle an Atomic Bomb," is the No. 2 album according to Billboard. The O'Jays had eight No. 1 R&B hits during the 1970s and '80s, including "Love Train" and "Use Ta Be My Girl." Sledge will forever be associated with "When a Man Loves a Woman," one of the songs that made him a figure in deep Southern Soul in the late 1960s. The Pretenders and blues guitarist Buddy Guy will also join the organization's Class of 2005. The artists beat out an impressive list of nominees including Grandmaster Flash & the Furious Five, which would have been the first rap group to be inducted; "Centerfold" singers the J. Geils Band, and the late country singer Conway Twitty. Also, Frank Barsalona and Seymour Stein will be inducted in the non-performer category. Barsalona is credited with creating the first legitimate rock and roll booking agency. His roster included acts like Led Zepplin, Bruce Springsteen and the E Street Band and The Who. Stein, who is chairman and co-founder of Sire Records, is noted as one of the most successful executives in the recording industry. He is known for signing artists like Madonna, The Ramones and The Talking Heads. Musicians, industry professionals and journalists vote on the nominations, which were announced in September. Artists are eligible to be inducted into the Rock Hall after at least 25 years have passed since their first record was released. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 17:03:44 -0500 From: Subject: Re: new most-hated thread - T vs A On Sat Dec 11 18:15 , James Dignan sent: >Or half Spanish because their father is Spanish? So a Spanish man moves to America when he is 17, becomes a citizen, gets married, and has children. The children don't speak any Spanish and have no hint of the Spanish culture and will never even visit Spain. Does that still make them 1/2 Spanish? I don't believe it does. They were born to an American, in America. That should make make them 100% American, for instance. But, a Jew practices Judaism. Whether you are a Jew or not is based strictly upon certain religious practices and beliefs. It is not a cultural thing, it is strictly a belief thing. I have many friends who were rasied by Jews, forced to practice Judaism until they were young adults and now make no claim what so ever about being Jews. In fact, many claim to not be Jewish specifically and some even eat bacon and marry black atheists. >Jewish is not just a religion but a genealogical thing. That is something Jews would like to have you believe but it is not true. I mean, the moment the first non-jew mated with a jew, it broke the whole chain. The Jewish bloodline has been impure since around 2317 BC. The pure Hebrew lineage was been mixed with the blood of common earthlings and now they are just like us. It is a silly, stretched, outdated, and ever diminishing crutch or actually more like a thorn, that has been used to help further divide earthlings. >If half of your ancestors >came from the twelve tribes in the dim past, them you're half Jewish. Nope, I'm all American. >James (whose partner is quarter Jewish but who, as far as he knows, >has no Jewish blood himself) Jewish blood? So, there is a genetic distinction in "true jews"? Kill the religion, save the man. Anyway, wasn't this thread supposed to be about how much more important the ass is than the tits? gSs - ---- Msg sent via WebMail ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 14:27:57 -0800 From: "Randalljr" Subject: Re: new most-hated thread - T vs A Yep, I'm the only Native American. Well, we're all African if current theory holds correct. I hang out in an Indian coffee shop, so I guess I'm with my own people, despite their Hinduism. Befuddled, Vince PS I like both T and A ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 14:50:19 -0800 (PST) From: Benjamin Lukoff Subject: Re: new most-hated thread - T vs A On Mon, 13 Dec 2004 gshell@americangroupisp.com wrote: > So a Spanish man moves to America when he is 17, becomes a citizen, gets > married, and has children. The children don't speak any Spanish and have > no hint of the Spanish culture and will never even visit Spain. Does > that still make them 1/2 Spanish? I don't believe it does. They were > born to an American, in America. That should make make them 100% > American, for instance. Of course they're Americans. But they are also half Spanish. Not saying they MUST identify themselves that way... but they certainly CAN identify themselves that way. > But, a Jew practices Judaism. Whether you are a Jew or not is based > strictly upon certain religious practices and beliefs. It is not a According to...? > cultural thing, it is strictly a belief thing. I have many friends who > were rasied by Jews, forced to practice Judaism until they were young So you're basing this on your friends' experiences? > adults and now make no claim what so ever about being Jews. In fact, > many claim to not be Jewish specifically and some even eat bacon and > marry black atheists. My father, though raised as a religious Jew, stopped keeping kosher once he left home, loved bacon, never went to synagogue if he could help it. Yet he identified as a Jew till the day he died (and kept a subscription to the Yiddish Forward). Are you going to tell me he wasn't a Jew? Wouldn't it make more sense to say he was--because he specifically identified as one? > >Jewish is not just a religion but a genealogical thing. > > That is something Jews would like to have you believe but it is not > true. I mean, the moment the first non-jew mated with a jew, it broke > the whole chain. The Jewish bloodline has been impure since around 2317 > BC. The pure Hebrew lineage was been mixed with the blood of common > earthlings and now they are just like us. It is a silly, stretched, > outdated, and ever diminishing crutch or actually more like a thorn, > that has been used to help further divide earthlings. Well, of course--there are no TRULY pure bloodlines anymore. Doesn't mean genealogy has nothing to do with it. > >James (whose partner is quarter Jewish but who, as far as he knows, > >has no Jewish blood himself) > > Jewish blood? So, there is a genetic distinction in "true jews"? I think he meant James's partner is a quarter Jewish, but James himself is not Jewish at all. > Anyway, wasn't this thread supposed to be about how much more important > the ass is than the tits? I still vote for the tits. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 12:02:33 +1300 From: James Dignan Subject: Reap Arthur Lydiard. Not sure how much that name will mean to any of you, but if you're interested in athletics it should. James - -- James Dignan, Dunedin, New Zealand -.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.- =-.-=-.-=-.- You talk to me as if from a distance .-=-.-=-.-=-. -=-. And I reply with impressions chosen from another time .-=- .-=-.-=-.-=-.-=- (Brian Eno - "By this River") -.-=-.-=-.-=-.-= ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 15:10:07 -0800 From: Tom Clark Subject: Re: Reap On Dec 13, 2004, at 3:02 PM, James Dignan wrote: > Arthur Lydiard. > > Not sure how much that name will mean to any of you, but if you're > interested in athletics it should. > I am an athletic supporter. - -tc ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 19:02:00 -0500 From: "Stewart C. Russell" Subject: Re: Reap Tom Clark wrote: > > I am an athletic supporter. To link this very tenuously to a previous thread: "You gotta wear your jock a lot". Stewart ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 23:01:27 -0600 From: 2fs Subject: Re: new most-hated thread - T vs A On Mon, 13 Dec 2004 17:03:44 -0500, gshell@americangroupisp.com wrote: > On Sat Dec 11 18:15 , James Dignan sent: > >Or half Spanish because their father is Spanish? > > So a Spanish man moves to America when he is 17, becomes a citizen, gets > married, and has children. The children don't speak any Spanish and have no hint > of the Spanish culture and will never even visit Spain. Does that still make them > 1/2 Spanish? I don't believe it does. They were born to an American, in America. > That should make make them 100% American, for instance. You are, hysterically, confusing several distinct concepts, including ethnicity, culture, citizenship, and self-identity. > But, a Jew practices Judaism. Whether you are a Jew or not is based strictly upon > certain religious practices and beliefs. It is not a cultural thing, it is strictly > a belief thing. This is pretty much appalling ignorance. Where did you grow up? Were there any other humans within miles? And most importantly: who the fuck are you to tell other people whether they're Jewish, black, Latino, whatever? > That is something Jews would like to have you believe but it is not true. I mean, > the moment the first non-jew mated with a jew, it broke the whole chain. The Jewish > bloodline has been impure since around 2317 BC. The pure Hebrew lineage was been > mixed with the blood of common earthlings and now they are just like us "Blood" in and of itself means nothing. Culture, religion - those are far more important. And, often, outwardly identifiable features (at least in the eyes of others). 'Sides which, I believe that rabbinical law states that the line of descent runs through the matrilineal line: if your mother is Jewish, you're Jewish - whatever you choose to believe. That, of course, is solely from a particular religious perspective, and has no particular bearing on what that particularly individual might think. (And didn't we talk about this a year or so ago...that by that very rabbinical law, Elvis himself is Jewish? Or so 'tis said - someone else can google it; I'm tired.) . > It is a silly, stretched, outdated, and ever diminishing crutch or actually more > like a thorn, that has been used to help further divide earthlings. It has - but not only that. And the reverse extreme - the insistence that everyone is all the same, that those pesky "others" should stop identifying themselves as anything but good ol' 'mericans - has caused untold harm as well. How 'bout this: respect each person as an individual. If it's important to them to be regarded as Jewish (for whatever reason), regard them as Jewish. If it's not, don't. And it shouldn't matter, between the two of you, for what reason the person thinks they're Jewish (or anything else) or not. > Nope, I'm all American. Yet another thing for us to apologize for. - -- ++Jeff++ The Architectural Dance Society http://spanghew.blogspot.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 10:09:14 -0500 From: Subject: Re: new most-hated thread - T vs A On Tue Dec 14 0:01 , 2fs sent: >You are, hysterically, confusing several distinct concepts, including >ethnicity, culture, citizenship, and self-identity. hysterically? wow, you should be around when i get excited. Am I? nice to have someone like you to put things straight. >> But, a Jew practices Judaism. Whether you are a Jew or not is based strictly upon >> certain religious practices and beliefs. It is not a cultural thing, it is strictly >> a belief thing. > >This is pretty much appalling ignorance. Where did you grow up? >Were there any other humans within miles? Cherry Hill, NJ., New Orleans, La., then Plano, Tx., surrounded almost entirely by Jews until I was 12. >And most importantly: who the fuck are you to tell other people whether they're > Jewish, black, Latino, whatever? i'll tell anyone anything i want to tell them. and i wasn't describing someone in pariticular as Jewish. i was describing someone in particular as not jewish. >'Sides which, I believe that rabbinical law states that the line of >descent runs through the matrilineal line: if your mother is Jewish, >you're Jewish - whatever you choose to believe. FUCK rabbinical law!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! it carries about as much weight as air. and on top of that my mother was a fucking jew. but that certainly does not make me one. >How 'bout this: respect each person as an individual. good idea, why don't you start. a person is one thing, a religion is something else entirely. on that, a culture and society is also something else entirely. >> Nope, I'm all American. > >Yet another thing for us to apologize for. yep, once again. gSs - ---- Msg sent via WebMail ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 10:35:21 -0500 From: Subject: Re: new most-hated thread - T vs A On Mon Dec 13 17:50 , Benjamin Lukoff sent: >Of course they're Americans. But they are also half Spanish. Not saying >they MUST identify themselves that way... but they certainly CAN identify >themselves that way. >> But, a Jew practices Judaism. Whether you are a Jew or not is based >> strictly upon certain religious practices and beliefs. It is not a > >According to...? According to the true, practicing Jews I still know. >> cultural thing, it is strictly a belief thing. I have many friends who >> were rasied by Jews, forced to practice Judaism until they were young > >So you're basing this on your friends' experiences? I was just using them as an example. It is in fact a personal experience, but to a lesser degree. >My father, though raised as a religious Jew, stopped keeping kosher once >he left home, loved bacon, never went to synagogue if he could help it. >Yet he identified as a Jew till the day he died (and kept a subscription >to the Yiddish Forward). Are you going to tell me he wasn't a Jew? >Wouldn't it make more sense to say he was--because he specifically >identified as one? you don't have to go to church to be a christian. all christians claim to sin or have sinned, which is in direct violation of their beliefs. yet they are still christians, right? sounds like he was a jew, but i guess only he knew about his true understanding and appreciation for the torah. and that's essentially what being jewish is all about as far as i'm concerned. >I still vote for the tits. man, your focusing your attention on the wrong end. gSs - ---- Msg sent via WebMail ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 10:04:49 -0600 From: 2fs Subject: Re: new most-hated thread - T vs A On Tue, 14 Dec 2004 10:09:14 -0500, gshell@americangroupisp.com wrote: > On Tue Dec 14 0:01 , 2fs sent: > >And most importantly: who the fuck are you to tell other people whether they're > > Jewish, black, Latino, whatever? > > i'll tell anyone anything i want to tell them. and i wasn't describing someone in > pariticular as Jewish. i was describing someone in particular as not jewish. "Whether" includes the negation. > FUCK rabbinical law!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! it carries about as much weight as air. See, this is what I mean. I'm not Jewish, but if someone is and does respect rabbinical law, who am I to get in their face and say "fuck rabbinical law"? It's none of my business how they live their life or identify themselves - except insofar as their doing so gets in my face, I suppose. > >How 'bout this: respect each person as an individual. > > good idea, why don't you start. Oh - I forgot: unless they've already proven to have lost it. > a person is one thing, a religion > is something else entirely. on that, a culture and society is also > something else entirely. Which was, of course, exactly my point. Sometimes, though, they have the same name (as in, say, Italian culture vs. Italian ethnicity) - and people confuse them. The whole point was that "Jewishness" is a culture, arguably an ethnicity, as well as a religion. You're attempting to limit the term to its religious meaning - which just isn't how the word is used. Thus my comments about your ignorance. - -- ++Jeff++ The Architectural Dance Society http://spanghew.blogspot.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 10:44:43 -0600 From: Aaron Lowe Subject: Jew vs. Judiast Most of the time I stay out of discussions like this, and my better judgment is telling me that I probably should have stuck to that philosophy in this case, but, I can't help it.... This is just silly. Yes, sometimes, the word "Jew" can be used to describe someone who ascribes to the belief system of Judaism, although this is far from the primary definition of the word. "Jewish" refers to a lineage and ethnicity of a people who descended from the ancient Palestinian Jews. If you are wanting to refer specifically to someone who practices Judaism as a religion, it would be much more proper (and less confusing) to use the terms "Judiast" or "Judiastic," rather than "Jew" or "Jewish." Since the primary definition of "Jewish" specifically involves ethnicity, it should be obvious to anyone who reads a sentence like "Mike is half Jewish" that we're referring to his lineage and not to his religious beliefs. I don't even remember who made the original inane post, asking how someone could be "half Jewish," etc. but I am sure that it did not occur to this person at the time that "Jewish" refers primarily to an ethnic group -- specifically to one that (traditionally) practices a certain religion. As soon as someone pointed that out, however, for YHWH's sake, this should have been dropped. Oh, hell, let me go back through the archives and find out... Ahhh, I should have known that it was Greg, who continues to proliferate this discussion ad nauseum. >Not to change the subject but, 1/2 Jewish? Can someone be for instance, >1/4 Wiccan, >or 11/32 Christian? That seems like classifying someone as 1/2 physician >because >their mother is a doctor. I'm positive that Greg just had a brainfart at the moment he was typing these couple of sentences, and just didn't think about the fact that "Jew" = "descendant of the ancient Tribe of Judah." Insert foot firmly in mouth, laugh it off, and move on. But the continual blathering on: >But, a Jew practices Judaism. Whether you are a Jew or not is based >strictly upon >certain religious practices and beliefs. It is not a cultural thing, it is >strictly >a belief thing. is ridiculous. I just hate people who do this. It's a pet peeve. So you said something stupid. It's OK -- we all do that once in awhile. For some reason, 10 or 11 years ago, I signed a message to this very list "the VIPER." I have no idea what I was thinking, my face gets red just thinking about it, but certain listmembers will never let me forget this embarrassing fact. ;-) Don't try to justify your misstatement, your lack of forethought before hitting "send," by somehow trying to justify your statement and make yourself seem like you knew what you were talking about in the first place. Trust me, it makes you look a thousand times worse. This is not a matter of opinion, or really up for discussion. It is simply a English linguistics/usage issue, and hopefully I've cleared up any confusion you might have had about it. >I have many friends who were rasied by Jews, forced to practice >Judaism until they were young adults and now make no claim what so ever >about being >Jews. Whether they claim to be Jews or not is completely irrelevant -- either they are, or they are not. Whether they are "practicing Jews" or "Judiasts" is another question entirely. There is no paradox in referring to a "Jewish agnostic," or even a "Jewish Christian" or "Jewish Buddhist." Sorry, Greg. Courtesy of Merriam-Webster (which lists primary, more commonly used definitions first, and is one of the top sources for American linguistic usage accuracy ... Main Entry:Jew Pronunciation:'j| Function:noun Etymology:Middle English, from Old French gyu, from Latin Judaeus, from Greek Ioudaios, from Hebrew YehudhI, from YehudhAh Judah, Jewish kingdom 1 a : a member of the tribe of Judah b : ISRAELITE 2 : a member of a nation existing in Palestine from the 6th century B.C. to the 1st century A.D. 3 : a person belonging to a continuation through descent or conversion of the ancient Jewish people 4 : one whose religion is Judaism Main Entry:Jew7ish Pronunciation:'j|-ish Function:adjective : of, relating to, or characteristic of the Jews; also : being a Jew ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 12:02:49 -0500 From: Subject: Re: new most-hated thread - T vs A On Tue Dec 14 11:04 , 2fs sent: >> FUCK rabbinical law!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! it carries about as much weight as air. > >See, this is what I mean. I'm not Jewish, but if someone is and does >respect rabbinical law, who am I to get in their face and say "fuck >rabbinical law"? your not jewish. congratulations. i was, and will say anything i please concerning the religion. >> >How 'bout this: respect each person as an individual. >> >> good idea, why don't you start. > >Oh - I forgot: unless they've already proven to have lost it. > >> a person is one thing, a religion >> is something else entirely. on that, a culture and society is also >> something else entirely. > >Which was, of course, exactly my point. >Sometimes, though, they have >the same name (as in, say, Italian culture vs. Italian ethnicity) - >and people confuse them. The whole point was that "Jewishness" is a >culture, arguably an ethnicity, as well as a religion. for someone who claims to not be a jew, you sure think you know alot about being a jew. >You're attempting to limit the term to its religious meaning - which just >isn't how the word is used. being a jew, at it's core, has everything to do with the religion. and i'll say it again, being jewish is based entirely upon the religion, it rituals and beliefs. and i should know. gSs - ---- Msg sent via WebMail ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 12:33:24 -0500 From: Subject: Re: Jew vs. Judiast On Tue Dec 14 11:44 , Aaron Lowe sent: >I'm positive that Greg just had a brainfart at the moment he was typing >these couple of sentences, and just didn't think about the fact that "Jew" >= "descendant of the ancient Tribe of Judah." so to truly be a jew, you have to have descended from the ancient tribe of Judah? >Whether they claim to be Jews or not is completely irrelevant -- either >they are, or they are not. so are you saying you can't be jewish by choice? > Whether they are "practicing Jews" or >"Judiasts" is another question entirely. There is no paradox in referring >to a "Jewish agnostic," or even a "Jewish Christian" or "Jewish >Buddhist." Sorry, Greg. i disagree but that happens. >Courtesy of Merriam-Webster (which lists primary, more commonly used >definitions first, and is one of the top sources for American linguistic >usage accuracy ... >1 a : a member of the tribe of Judah b : ISRAELITE how many israelis', especially those from around Stalingrad are members of the tribe Judah? >2 : a member of a nation existing in Palestine from the 6th century B.C. to >the 1st century A.D. how many jews do you know that are a member of a nation existing in palestine from 6th century bc to 1st century ad? >3 : a person belonging to a continuation through descent or conversion of >the ancient Jewish people so does that mean since i was a jew, years ago and not by choice, that my descendants will also be jewish, whether they want to be or not? >4 : one whose religion is Judaism it is my belief that to be a jew you have to practice judaism. i'll let it go at that, unless i decide to write something else. gSs - ---- Msg sent via WebMail ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 11:33:51 -0600 From: 2fs Subject: Re: new most-hated thread - T vs A On Tue, 14 Dec 2004 12:02:49 -0500, gshell@americangroupisp.com wrote: > your not jewish. congratulations. i was, and will say anything i please > concerning the religion. > for someone who claims to not be a jew, you sure think you know > alot about being a jew. The difference is, you stipulate an exclusionary definition, whereas I did not. I'm claiming no expertise and always specified when my conclusions were tentative. You, as usual, are firing off wildly in all directions and attempting to define people out of terms. And both Aaron L. and Benjamin (so far) have pointed out the problems with that. Being aware of what words mean has nothing to do with whether that word applies to oneself. - -- ++Jeff++ The Architectural Dance Society http://spanghew.blogspot.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 09:52:48 -0800 From: Rex Broome Subject: Re: new most-hated thread - T vs A (now with bad bar joke content!) > being a jew, at it's core, has everything to do with the religion. and i'll say it > again, being jewish is based entirely upon the religion, it rituals and beliefs. > and i should know. Okay, this is just retarded, and I should know, being retarded and all, or at least descending from Retarded-American ancestry, which is based entirely upon the religion as well. Numerous non-religious people refer to themselves as Jews. Most of the self-described Jews I know are non-religious. It's their right to call themselves whatever they want to call themselves for whatever reason they want to call themselves that. Yeah, this is based on what I've been told by my friends and relatives and from a hell of a lot of books, films, radio programs, newspaper and magazine articles, etc., on the subject, mostly created by Jewish artists or thinkers, many of whom spend quite a great deal of time and creative energy creating works about struggling with the meaning of their Jewish identity and whatnot. Now I'm being told something else by someone else who purports to have Jewish heritage. What evidence can you give me that your take on your own heritage is empirically more valid than the opinions of anyone else who shares it? Or might it just be an opinion, and a minority opinion at that? Yeesh. Happy Hannukah, y'all. As for the T. vs. A. argument... seriously, doesn't it all depend on the context? Two mice are hanging out in a bar. A complete knockout come through the door and catches both of their eyes. First mouse whistles and elbows his buddy... "Man, did you see the ass on that chick." Second mouse says, "I didn't even notice... I'm more of a titmouse myself." - -Rex, who suspects he's posted that joke before, but there's a lot of that going around. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 10:15:30 -0800 (PST) From: Benjamin Lukoff Subject: Re: new most-hated thread - T vs A On Tue, 14 Dec 2004 gshell@americangroupisp.com wrote: > FUCK rabbinical law!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! it carries about as much weight as air. > and on top of that my mother was a fucking jew. but that certainly does not > make me one. We may be approaching the root of the problem here. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 10:23:02 -0800 From: Rex Broome Subject: Re: new most-hated thread - T vs A gshell@americangroupisp.com wrote: > > > FUCK rabbinical law!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! it carries about as much weight as air. > > and on top of that my mother was a fucking jew. but that certainly does not > > make me one. > > We may be approaching the root of the problem here. > Quoth Mr. Byrne: He'll keep on diggin' for a thousand years / He'll keep on diggin', movin'... in the roots. I think that's in the Book of Love! - -Rex ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 10:24:29 -0800 From: "Jason R. Thornton" Subject: Re: Jew vs. Judiast At 10:44 AM 12/14/2004 -0600, Aaron Lowe wrote: >Since the primary definition of "Jewish" specifically involves ethnicity, >it should be obvious to anyone who reads a sentence like "Mike is half >Jewish" that we're referring to his lineage and not to his religious beliefs. Not to confuse the issue, but if you're talking about "ethnicity," as opposed to "race," you could very well still be talking about religion. Remember, "ethnicity" is a catch-all term, basically used to refer to any type of classification where a "group" of individuals is defined by some "background" characteristic. People forget this, as "ethnicity" has become over time more and more synonymous with what the now unfashionable term "race" once covered, basically skin color (although that's an oversimplification), but "ethnic" categorization really is a looser concept than "racial," defined as "of or relating to large groups of people classed according to common racial, national, tribal, religious, linguistic, or cultural origin or background." - --Jason "Only the few know the sweetness of the twisted apples." - Sherwood Anderson ------------------------------ End of fegmaniax-digest V13 #355 ********************************