fbpx

January 19, 2011

“Sharpening Our Instincts for Empathy”

Last week, when President Obama delivered his ” title=”press reported” target=”_blank”>press reported this morning that the governor of Alabama delivered a speech yesterday, the day of his swearing-in, at a Montgomery Baptist church where he declared that,

“If you’re a Christian and you’re saved…it makes you and me brother and sister….Now I will have to say that, if we don’t have the same daddy, we’re not brothers and sisters…so anyone here today who has not accepted Jesus Christ as their savior, I’m telling you, you’re not my brother and you’re not my sister and I want to be your brother.”

On its face, these remarks could easily spark indignant responses from Jewish and other non-Christian spokesmen. Indeed, the head of American Atheists called the remarks, “outrageous”.

But, the head of the Birmingham Jewish Federation, Richard Friedman, was temperate, indeed, it was as if he had absorbed Obama’s admonition “to pause for a moment and make sure we’re talking in a way that heals.”

He spoke about sensitizing “our leaders to the fact that there are non-Christians in this state, and encourage them whenever possible to be sensitive to that.”

And in a comment which seemed to reflect Obama’s suggestion to “expand our moral imaginations,” the Federation’s head assessed the context of the governor’s comments,

“these folks typically don’t mean any harm at all…it never occurs to them that they’re saying anything that would make others uncomfortable. They are simply motivated by their passion for their own religious faith.”

Friedman appropriately said he would assemble a delegation of Jews and Christians that would try to meet with the governor “as soon as possible to initiate a dialogue.”

This incident could just have easily devolved into name calling and nasty assertions of bigotry. The Jewish leaders could have ended up as media stars on cable news networks and a flashpoint for demagogues and publicity hounds would have been created.

Instead, our “instincts for empathy” were sharpened and an opportunity created for greater understanding and less rancor. The Birmingham Federation’s leader didn’t assume the worst motivation so as to “score points and further the pettiness that drifts away in the next news cycle” (the President’s words).

There is always time for anger and outrage, an effort of understanding can’t hurt.

 

“Sharpening Our Instincts for Empathy” Read More »

Limmud becomes a Jewish networking nexus

Journalist and author Lisa Alcalay Klug flew across the country this month to present at the annual New York version of Limmud, one of the Jewish learning gatherings that occur worldwide. She’ll fly in the other direction next month to attend the fourth annual LimmudLA, Feb. 18-21 in Costa Mesa.

LimmudLA will be Klug’s eighth Limmud gathering in 12 months. Like the hundreds of other Limmud presenters whose paths she crosses, she doesn’t get paid for her time.

“I’ve met amazing people, developed new friendships and reinforced past relationships,” said Klug, who splits her time among California, New York and Israel. “My world has grown exponentially because of it.”

LimmudLA, which attracted 600 attendees last year, has around 75 people signed up to present sessions — usually around 10 in any given timeslot, from morning till morning, on topics ranging from medical ethics to the Jewish Jesus to the Israeli military to challah baking. In addition to sessions, the conference, which will be held in Costa Mesa, will feature dozens of films, theatrical presentations, comedy acts and performances by one of Israel’s top alternative bands, Aharit Hayamim.

Limmud started out 30 years ago in Britain as a conference for professional Jewish educators and has burgeoned into the world’s largest network of gatherings promoting informal Jewish education. It has become a creative and professional hub for presenters, some of whom have become regulars on the Limmud circuit.

More than 35,000 people took part in one of 55 Limmuds held last year from Siberia to South Africa, according to the organizers. As more branches opened in more countries — there are eight now in the United States alone — it has become a collaborative opportunity for musicians and visual artists, who meet at Limmud and begin working together.

Some performance acts formed for a Limmud event have continued afterward, including Los Desterrados, a British band that sings in Ladino, and the klezmer-house dance mash-up project Ghettoplotz. Limmud gives writers an opportunity to promote their books and educators a chance to try out new topics. It also puts Jewish organizations in front of new audiences and potential donors.

Much has been written about Limmud’s impact on those who attend — the celebratory atmosphere, the array of learning opportunities and the radical egalitarianism of its all-volunteer structure that encourages participants to present and presenters to participate.

That was all intentional from the beginning, says Raymond Simonson, the project’s Britain-based executive director. But what he and other organizers didn’t foresee was how Limmud would become a networking tool for presenters.

Unlike most festivals and conferences, which tend to invite experts, anyone can apply to be a Limmud presenter — a big draw for inexperienced presenters and established professionals wanting to try out new material.

“We tell them, you don’t get money, but there’s an opportunity for people to have access to your merchandise,” said Karen Radkowsky, founding president of Limmud NY, which in 2005 became the first Limmud in the United States. “It’s an opportunity for them to be exposed to other thoughts and ideas. When they’re not giving their own presentations, they go to others.

“It’s very different from the GA, where you might fly in, speak, and then leave,” she said, referring to the annual General Assembly of the Jewish Federations of North America.

The Limmud structure facilitates this cross-pollination, said Uri Berkowitz, co-chair of Limmud International, which oversees all branches outside the UK. Last month, some 2,500 people went to Coventry, England, for the 30th anniversary Limmud Conference.

“Each Limmud is its own community, with a fresh audience, but they’re still part of the same family,” Berkowitz said. “That’s why presenters can go from one to another. Now that there are enough of them, they’ll often know at least one or two other presenters, and can continue the conversations and collaborations.”

That’s what happened to Klug. In February 2009 she went to LimmudLA on her own dime to talk about her new book, “Cool Jew,” and was spotted by friendly spies from Limmud UK. They invited her to present at Warwick in December 2009, which led to invitations to Limmuds in Atlanta, Berlin, Amsterdam and Budapest. Next month she’ll be back at LimmudLA, then on to Winnipeg in March for that Canadian city’s first Limmud.

Limmud usually covers travel and accommodations for invited presenters but does not pay them for their presentation. Around a dozen of the 75 presenters at LimmudLA are invited, while all the others pay for their own travel and the conference.

Organizations leverage the Limmud opportunities as well — Pardes and the Hartman Institute, both educational organizations in Jerusalem, have longtime partnership with Limmud, and both will be presenting at LimmudLA.

This year, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center is partnering with LimmudLA and will have some its staff as presenters, and Rochelle Shoretz, founder of Sharsheret, an organization for young Jewish women with breast cancer, is bringing her message to the West Coast audience.

“It’s a great place to network for fundraising, a great place to network for relationships and a great place to leverage explorations into new communities,” said Shep Rosenman, a founder of LimmudLA.

Schools as well have used LimmudLA to teach leadership to students; teens from Milken Community High School have been training throughout the year to lead sessions for adults.

LimmudLA will have a wide range of political expression this year, from the progressive activist Andrew Lachman to a representative from Ateret Cohanim, which buys land and settles Jews in East Jerusalem.

Religious expression will be varied as well, from Web sensation Rabbi Simon Jacobson, who runs the Meaningful Life Center, to Rabbi David Saperstein, head of Reform’s Religions Action Center in Washington.

Yavilah McCoy, an African American Jewish woman, will talk about moving beyond the hyphen, and Amy-Jill Levine, an Orthodox scholar who is a professor of New Testament and Jewish Studies at Vanderbilt University, will offer another view of diversity.

Joel Chasnoff, a stand-up comedian and author of “The 188th Crybaby Brigade,” the story of his experience in the Israeli military, has presented four times at Limmud UK. Last year he led Limmud sessions in New York, Philadelphia and Atlanta, and this February he’s headed to Los Angeles.

“The first time I went, I had no idea what it was,” he said. “I love it. It’s like summer camp. In terms of the audience, I find them smart and interested in Jewish thought. They’re in tune with what I talk about.”

Arthur Kurzweil, a well-known genealogist, educator, magician and former book publisher, has presented at four Limmuds in New York and is headed to his first LimmudLA next month. Like Klug, he is an invited presenter. An experienced public speaker, Kurzweil gets more invitations than he can accept. Limmud is one to which he says yes.

“These are my people,” Kurzweil said. “It’s what I do. Limmud is one more great opportunity to teach and share my interests.”

Julie Gruenbaum Fax, Jewish Journal senior writer, contributed to this report.

Limmud becomes a Jewish networking nexus Read More »

Ehud Barak quits Labor: what’s next?

Was it an act of political self-preservation, a feat of political destruction or a bid to stabilize Israel’s government ahead of some dramatic move?

And for Israel’s Labor Party, was it another sign of the once-leading party’s demise or a precursor to a revival and the ideals for which it stands?

What’s certain is that Defense Minister Ehud Barak’s decision this week to quit Labor, which he had headed until Jan. 17, has sent shock waves throughout the Israeli political establishment.

Ironically, the split of Labor — until this week a part of the Israeli government but now in the opposition — may yet strengthen the coalition of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Barak’s decision to quit Labor and found a new political party along with four other Labor defectors leaves Netanyahu with eight fewer members in his coalition, but the 66 who remain are considered far more stable than the 74 he had predefection.

Before Barak’s dramatic announcement, Labor was threatening to withdraw all 13 of its Knesset members unless Netanyahu could show real progress in peacemaking with the Palestinians. That would have left the prime minister with only 61 coalition members, the vast majority right-wingers and the minimum necessary to stay prime minister in the 120-seat Knesset. Such a narrow coalition would have opened up Netanyahu to harsh domestic and international criticism for leading a perceived hard-line government.

Now, in what appears to have been a coordinated move, Netanyahu and Barak have pulled the rug out from under the feet of their opponents. With a more stable coalition, Netanyahu almost certainly has secured a full term in office, until 2013. Barak pre-empted attempts to oust him as Labor leader and force him to leave the Defense Ministry by cutting a deal in which he can stay on as defense minister after leaving Labor.

Many Israelis on the left and right viewed Barak’s move with deep skepticism. The new party he heads, called Atzmaut, which means Independence, has a hazy future other than the assurance of four ministerial berths in Netanyahu’s government and the chairmanship of a Knesset committee.

The leader of Israel’s opposition, Kadima Party leader Tzipi Livni, called it the “dirtiest and ugliest maneuver” in Israel’s political history. Her own party was a breakaway from Likud in November 2005, when then-Prime Minister Ariel Sharon led an exodus of moderates, including Livni, from Likud.

The regional implications of the upgraded Netanyahu-Barak partnership could be far-reaching.

It would appear that the peace process with the Palestinians is over, as the more dovish members of Netanyahu’s coalition have exited. Even if Netanyahu wanted to cut a deal with the Palestinians, his remaining coalition partners likely would block it.

Barak and Netanyahu, however, put a much different gloss on things. Until now, the Palestinians had been hoping for the Israeli government to fall and be replaced by one more amenable to their demands, representatives of the two men argue, and this has kept the Palestinians away from serious peace talks. Now, with a more stable government, the Palestinians will see this is who they have to deal with for the foreseeable future and may become more serious about returning to the negotiating table.

Furthermore, Netanyahu and Barak confidants have been dropping broad hints that a new Israeli peace initiative is in the offing, suggesting that this is the part of a the Netanyahu-Barak understanding.

There is another theory for Barak’s move: that Netanyahu is seriously contemplating a pre-emptive strike against Iran’s nuclear installations and believes he needs Barak at his side. According to this line of thinking, with the Labor Party threatening to force Barak to leave the government, Netanyahu could have found himself with a new defense minister who was less inclined to attack Iran.

Barak says his new party will run in the next elections. But many Israelis are wondering if Barak really intends to make an electoral pact with Netanyahu and run on the Likud ticket.

Where does all this leave the Labor Party?

Many had accused Barak of ruining the party with his high-handed leadership style, lack of people skills and loss of ideological direction — and now delivering the coup de grace by splitting the party in two. Many Israelis believe that the party, whose leaders founded and built the state, holding uninterrupted power for Israel’s first three decades, has run its course and that a new left-center constellation will rise from the ashes.

But the eight former ministers and Knesset members who have remained in the party insist that it could still be at the heart of a center-left revival.

Party activists, especially the young guard, say that with Barak gone, people will rejoin in droves.

Most important, though, the results of the next election likely will be decided by how the new Netanyahu-Barak partnership fares. That has only just begun.

Ehud Barak quits Labor: what’s next? Read More »

Joel Osteen, Israel and the Jews: an exclusive Q&A

Saying they want to “show solidarity with the nation of Israel and the Jewish people,” mega-pastors Joel and Victoria Osteen will bring their musical, charismatic brand of Christianity to Israel.  The Osteens announced they will hold to hold “A Historic Night of Hope” at the Jerusalem Theater on Thursday, February 3 at 7:00 pm. The event will be broadcast around the world by the Trinity Broadcasting Network (TBN).  While in Israel, the Osteens will meet with President Shimon Peres and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu as well as a tour of the Holy Land.

“As Christians, Victoria and I feel that it is important to stand in support of the nation of Israel and the Jewish people,” said Pastor Joel Osteen in a press release.  “As always, we pray for the peace of Jerusalem.”

In April 2010, The Jewish Journal sat down with the Osteens for an exclusive interview, their first ever to appear in the Jewish media.  Rabbi Naomi Levy conducted the interview which appears below.


Rabbi Naomi Levy: I watched an interview you did with Larry King. I was so amazed when you said Jews can indeed go to heaven, and then I saw that you later took heat for it, and you rephrased yourself. Is it wrong to believe that people who don’t believe in Jesus have a place with God and have a place in heaven?

Pastor Joel Osteen: Sure. You know, to me it’s up to every person. I mean, what the Scripture teaches is that Jesus came so that we could have salvation through him.

NL: Your Scripture.

JO: Yeah, that’s true. So that’s why I don’t judge anybody else. … You know, I don’t believe in telling one group who can and can’t go to heaven. I believe that’s up to God.

NL: So do you think it’s possible that our God, the God of the universe, might have an equal plan for all good people?

JO: I believe that any of that is possible.


NL:
I saw another video where you spoke about how you’ve stopped eating pork, and I’m curious if you’ve taken on other aspects of being kosher.

JO: I just see that in the Scripture as well. I don’t always follow it 100 percent.  But I appreciate the Jewish tradition and what’s in the Scripture, what it says about it.

NL: How do you respond to the person who says, ‘I’ve prayed, and it’s done me no good. I hear what you’re saying about what God can do for a person, and if you pray, look how this person was healed.  But my child died, and I prayed with all my heart.’? 

JO: You know, I try to encourage people to believe for the best, but that God will always give you the strength to make it through and faith is all about trust. … Yesterday I prayed for a family.  They had a little girl that had cancer and she’s in a wheelchair.  You know, our prayer is that she’s going to live every day that God’s planned out for her.  I hope it’s until she’s 90 years old. I don’t know if it will be, but I also pray that God gives these parents strength, and they get to that place of trust to say, ‘OK, God, I believe you’re in control of my life, that you have a plan for my little girl and a plan for my life.’ I think when you come back to that place of trust to believe that there’s something bigger than yourself, that’s what gives you the faith and strength to move on.

Joel Osteen, Israel and the Jews: an exclusive Q&A Read More »

Spain Indicts Demjanjuk for Crimes Against Humanity

The Supreme Court of Spain has indicted accused Nazi war criminal John Demjanjuk on charges of being an accessory to genocide and crimes against humanity.

The court on Jan. 14 requested an international arrest warrant for Demjanjuk, who is accused of being a Nazi concentration camp guard. The court issued the ruling a week earlier but did not make it public until Jan. 14.

Demjanjuk is accused of being responsible for the deaths of 50 of 155 Spanish prisoners in the German concentration camp Flossenburg. He is being charged in Spain under the country’s legal doctrine of universal jurisdiction, which allows it to try human rights crimes even if they did not take place on Spanish soil.

Demjanjuk, 90, a former Ohio autoworker, is currently being tried in Germany on charges of accessory to the murder of 27,900 Jews in the Sobibor death camp in 1943.

The Spanish court has requested that Demjanjuk be extradited to Spain following his trial in Germany, according to reports.

Demjanjuk’s trial in Munich began on Nov. 30, but it has been postponed several times because of his ill health.

Spain Indicts Demjanjuk for Crimes Against Humanity Read More »

Israel Project adds China desk

The Israel Project has set up a China desk.

The Washington-based group, which promotes Israel in the international media, announced the addition of veteran China expert Alex Pevzner to its staff on Wednesday as Chinese President Hu Jintao arrived in Washington for meetings with President Obama.

With a staff of about 60, the Israel Project targets media in the United States, Latin America, Europe and the Arab world.

Israel Project adds China desk Read More »

Tunisia: the first Arab revolution

Every July 23 for the past 58 years, Egypt, my country of birth, has celebrated its “July revolution” that overthrew King Farouk and ended the monarchy and British occupation once and for all. It was no revolution: It was a coup staged by young army officers.

And so it has been with a series of “revolutions” around the Arab world in which a succession of military men went on to lead us in civilian clothes — some kept the olive drabs on — and rob generations of the real meaning of revolution. For years I looked at the Iranians with envy — not at the outcome of their 1979 revolution, but because it was a popular uprising, not a euphemism for a coup.

So you’ll understand why, along with millions of other Arabs, I’ll forever cherish Jan. 14, 2011 — the day Zine al-Abidine Ben Ali fled Tunisia, his 23-year rule toppled by 29 days of a popular uprising. A real revolution for a change.

It’s the first time Arabs have toppled one of their dictators, so you’ll understand why, despite the reports of chaos, looting and a musical chairs of caretaker leaders, I’m still celebrating. Let’s have no whining about how those thousands of pesky Tunisians who risked their lives to face down a despot ruined the idyllic package-holiday-in-a-police-state for so many European tourists.

The equations circling Tunisia right now are very clear: We have no idea who or what kind of coalition of leaders will emerge, but there is no doubt who’s rooting for the failure of this revolution: every Arab leader who has spent the past month watching Tunisia in fear. You can be sure the region’s dictators are on their knees right now praying for chaos and collapse for Tunisia.

Some Arab countries have simply ignored what happened: no official statement from Algeria or Morocco. Others said they respect the wish of Tunisians but filled their state-owned media with reminders that they weren’t anything like Tunisia: Egypt.

Leave it to Muammar Gaddafi, the world’s longest-serving dictator, to best portray that panic. Addressing a nation where thousands had faced down the bullets of Ben Ali’s security to protest unemployment, police brutality and the corruption of the regime, Gaddafi told Tunisians they were now suffering bloodshed and lawlessness because they were too hasty in getting rid of Ben Ali.

If every Arab leader has watched Tunisia in fear, then every Arab citizen has watched in hope because it was neither Islamists — long used by our leaders to scare many into acquiescence — nor foreign troops that toppled the dictator: It was ordinary and very fed up people.

Tunisians must remember that during these days of chaos. We’re hearing reports that neighborhood watch committees have sprung up to protect against looting and violence, which many blame on Ben Ali’s loyalists.

Interestingly, both Western observers and Gaddafi have been crediting WikiLeaks but for different reasons. By buying into the idea that leaked U.S. embassy cables about corruption “fueled” the revolution, commentators smear Tunisians with ignorance of facts and perpetuate the myth that Arabs are incapable of rising up against dictators. Gaddafi railed against WikiLeaks because he, too, wants to blame something other than the power of the people — and cables from Tripoli portray him as a Botox-using neurotic inseparable from a “voluptuous” Ukrainian nurse.

Gaddafi’s Libya has had its own protests over the past few days. Nothing on the scale of Tunisia, but enough that his speech to Tunisians could be summarized thus: I am scared witless by what happened in your country.

That’s why I insist we stop and appreciate Tunisia: Relish the revolution that is not a euphemism for a coup.

Mona Eltahawy is an Egyptian-born columnist and public speaker on Arab and Muslim issues. This essay originally appeared in The Guardian and is reprinted with permission of the author.

Tunisia: the first Arab revolution Read More »

Still want to bomb Iran?

If ever the term “game-changer” could be applied without fear of exaggeration, it could be applied to Meir Dagan’s statement on his last day as Mossad chief, that Iran will not have nuclear weapons before 2015.

And that’s the worst-case scenario, he told reporters and Knesset members — that’s if Israel, the United States and the rest of the world suddenly take the pressure off and let Iran go on its merry way to the bomb. If, on the other hand, the campaign of covert operations — i.e. sabotage and assassination — and sanctions continue, then, Dagan said, Iran will be unable to go nuclear for many years beyond 2015.

This is extraordinary news in and of itself, but also because it means that starting a war against Iran has just become almost impossible for Israel to justify. It means that Benjamin Netanyahu and other Iran hawks will have to think twice before rolling out the Holocaust imagery to make their case.

This is such an embarrassment for the war camp, starting with the prime minister. Before Jan. 6, as Dagan was getting ready to leave office, all these tough guys were praising him to the skies, treating him like he was almost a god, a miracle-worker, and why? Because of all the daring, mysterious acts of sabotage and assassination he’s assumed to have orchestrated.

After eight years of this at the Mossad, Dagan was the man — the single-most revered figure in the security establishment, the unchallengeable last word on how to deal with the enemy. Then, on his very last day in the job, he showed not only his boldness but his lucidity, and explained that precisely because Iran’s nuclear plans had been stymied so often, it was much less of a pressing threat than it had been in years past.

No one in the government wanted to hear that. And when Dagan restated his opposition to war, saying it would bring missiles pouring down on this country, and cautioned against bombing Iran’s nuclear facilities unless “the sword is not just pointed at our neck, but cutting into the flesh,” he suddenly became a non-person among the political establishment. After all the glory they gave him, the hawks went silent, except for the grinding of their teeth.

Finally, on Jan. 4, Netanyahu tried to neutralize Dagan and recoup his own credibility. The 2015 forecast was “only” an intelligence assessment, the prime minister said, one among many. “They range from best-case to worst-case possibilities, and there is a range, there is room for differing assessments,” he told foreign correspondents.

Pathetic. Imagine if Dagan had predicted that Iran would have the bomb in another six months; would Netanyahu have called that just one more assessment, nothing to get excited about? No, he would have ordered urgent preparations for “Operation Meir” and we’d all be lining up for gas masks again.

Still, there is one legitimate concern over Dagan’s forecast, one that was expressed by Hillary Clinton — the concern that the world will now become complacent about the Iranian nuclear threat, specifically by easing off sanctions.

Yet Dagan is making just the opposite recommendation — he’s saying that since sanctions and covert operations have distanced Iran from the bomb and proved a much safer, saner option than war, the thing for Israel, the United States and the rest of the world to do is stay the course.

Makes sense, doesn’t it?

I have to say that Dagan’s approach carries a lesson not only for hawks but for doves like me. We of the “containment” camp have argued that Iran is almost certain to get nuclear weapons, and while that’s not good at all, neither is it the catastrophe that the hawks foresee, because Iran will be deterred from using those nukes by the vastly superior ones held by Israel, the United States and the other nuclear powers. And since a nuclear Iran would not be a catastrophe, it would be preferable to our starting a war, which would be a catastrophe, and would just delay Iran’s nuclear project anyway, not end it.

But Meir Dagan, the Answer Man himself, says we doves were wrong, too.

Sanctions work, sabotage and assassination work; the proof is that Iran’s nuclear project has been going backward.

Myself, I don’t like starting fights, I don’t like having scientists killed, even Iranian nuclear scientists. I don’t like giving anybody a score to settle against my side. But coming back to the idea that a nuclear Iran, while not a catastrophe, would not be a good thing, would instead be a really bad, dangerous thing, then I have to say that although blowing up some Iranian facilities and killing a few Iranian scientists were risky acts of aggression, they were worth it. They contributed to the hobbling of Iran’s pursuit of nuclear weapons, pushed its goal off by at least several years, so these acts of sabotage and assassination were justified.

And they still are.

There’s no way to overestimate the importance of Dagan’s words (not to mention his actions). Hopefully, they will begin to ease the fear and aggression that grips this society. It’s a new ball game now, and guess what — Iran is losing. l

Still want to bomb Iran? Read More »

Six degrees of Senator Joe Lieberman

It was an innocuous interview about a subject I no longer remember.  A dozen years ago, I made arrangements to meet Joe Lieberman in a Manhattan office building where he had other business.  The Connecticut senator, who announced this week he won’t seek re-election for a fifth term, would be able to spare 15 or 20 minutes between appointments for a taped conversation to be broadcast on the television network where I was then employed.

I arrived at the location with my cameraman, who had barely started to unload his equipment when Senator Lieberman walked into the room.  Knowing that it would take a minimum of 15 minutes to set up the lights and camera, I had to play for time… and what better game than Jewish geography?

“You know, Senator”, I began, “I think we know some people in common.  My friend Mindy is principal of a day school in New Haven, where you live”.  “Ezra Academy?”, he replied.  “Of course I know it… and I know who she is too!” 
We went down the list of who among his friends and relatives attended or supported the school, and spoke of other acquaintances in the area.

The videographer was barely halfway through his process, and paying little attention to our banter as he tested camera angles and audio levels.  I started to shvitz… just a little… and the lights weren’t even on yet.

“You’re not originally from New Haven, though, are you?”, I ventured.  “Oh, no”, Lieberman said, “I’m a Stamford boy, born and bred.  My mom still lives there”.
“Really?  Do you know the Goldsteins?”, I asked.  “The Goldsteins?  With those two wonderful disabled sons?  Sure I do.  How do you know them?”  “Went to Camp Ramah with the older boy, Howie”, I answered.

And so my filibuster went for another ten minutes until finally, thankfully, we were ready to roll tape.  The interview went well, and we bid each other a fond farewell after taking a typical politician-posed photo together.

As we packed up the equipment, the cameraman said, “So, how do you know him?”  “What do you mean?”, I asked, confused at the question.  “Obviously, you guys go way back; I was eavesdropping a little as I set up”.

“Actually, no”, I said.  “Never met him before”.  The cameraman looked at me, incredulous.  “What are you talking about?  You were like old buddies, talking about all your friends and relatives!”

I mumbled something about “Coincidence, I guess”, as my colleague continued to express his astonishment at the many links between Lieberman and myself.
I had no idea how to explain to a non-Jew the concept that we Hebrews are all connected somehow in one grand, global mishpacha… and that a member of Congress can be just another Member of the Tribe.

Steve North is a longtime broadcast journalist, currently with CBS News

Six degrees of Senator Joe Lieberman Read More »

Honor your father and mother

The Case for the Torah: Part I / Part II / Part III / Part IV / Part V

To make the case for the Torah, I can think of no better verse with which to begin than the fifth of the Ten Commandments: “Honor your father and your mother so that your days be lengthened on the land that I give you.”

Proper understanding — and living by — this commandment is indispensable to making a good society.

And to properly understand it, perhaps the most important point to be made is that the Torah commands that we honor our mother and father; it never commands us to love them.

The psychological and moral insights here are remarkable. Given that the Torah does command love elsewhere — “Love your neighbor as yourself,” “Love the stranger,” “Love God with all your heart …” — the absence of a commandment to love our parents is obviously deliberate. The Torah recognizes that there are people who, for whatever reasons, do not love their parents, and it does not command what cannot be observed.

But even more important from the Torah’s perspective is this: Whether or not we love our parents is irrelevant; what matters is that we show them honor.

As I wrote in my opening column on the case for the Torah, taking the Torah seriously means challenging and even upsetting many modern ideas. This is one of the biggest challenges to modern thinking: One of the Torah’s greatest teachings is that our feelings are far less important than our behavior.

If you don’t love your mother or father, that is sad. But you still owe them honorable conduct.

Let me offer an analogy. At every presidential press conference, all the members of the press rise from their seats when the president enters the room. They do this even if they dislike the president. They, therefore, do not stand because they feel like doing so. They do so because they honor the presidency.

That is why many of us were dismayed when Jon Stewart, while interviewing President Obama, called him “dude.” One wonders how many young people felt the same way. Not having been raised with the concept of showing deference to anyone, let alone not having been raised with the Ten Commandments, most young Americans probably thought nothing of it.

The great lesson of the fifth commandment is that in life we are obligated to behave in certain ways whether we feel like it or not.

Yes, there are some cases wherein honoring a parent may be impossible. No legal or moral code can account for every possible situation. Were Adolf Eichmann’s children obligated to honor their father, the architect of the Holocaust? And what about honoring parents who terribly physically abused their child — real physical abuse, not an occasional spanking — or who seek to harm a child who is now an adult?

But even here, one must be very careful about violating the fifth commandment. The moment one puts an asterisk on the commandment, it is an invitation to those who are angry with a parent to deem themselves as having been improperly treated and thereby avoid honoring a parent.

What does “honor” mean? The Hebrew word for “honor” (ka-bed) consists of the same letters as the Hebrew word for “heavy” (ka-ved). The only difference is a dot in the second letter.

In other words, “honor” means treating one’s parents with the gravity that their position demands. In one of many examples of the genius of Torah Hebrew, the opposite of “honor” is “kalel.” The word is always translated as “to curse,” but its literal meaning is to make light of (from the Hebrew “kal,” light). One curses one’s parents not only if one directs curses at them, but if one treats them lightly.

One honors one’s parents through speech and actions. We do not speak to our parents with the same abandon we do to our peers — no “dude” and no use of expletives are two examples. Actions would include getting up to greet a parent, offering them one’s seat, and maintaining regular contact with one’s parent(s) — such as calling them every week.

Honor does not mean blind obedience. In another great Torah lesson, one learns from Abraham, who disagreed and even argued with God, his Father in Heaven, that one can argue and disagree with one’s father on earth. But one also learns from the way in which Abraham did it how to differ with one’s parent respectfully.

This commandment is the only one that lists a reward for its fulfillment — long life as a viable society. Clearly, the Torah wants us to understand that a society in which children cease showing honor to their parents will cease to be a functioning society. Its days will be numbered.

This makes one worry about America, where, too often, parents do not demand respect from, but seek to be loved by, their children.

One consequence is a large number of adult children who do not honor their parents.  An especially painful example is the number of adult children who have severed contact with a mother or father.

That is horribly painful to a parent, but the child who does not honor a parent will also suffer. First, not honoring one’s parents almost guarantees that a child will grow up to be a narcissist. Second, when such children become parents, they may in turn receive the same disrespectful treatment from their children, thanks to the example they have set. And third, there is the guilt that adult children suffer when they realize their mistake in not treating their own parents better, often after the parents are deceased.

It is difficult to overstate the significance of the commandment to honor one’s parents — to parents, to children and to society.

It remains vital. Too many parents seek to be loved by their children and do not demand that their children honor them. Sadly, these parents usually end up being neither loved nor honored.

Dennis Prager is a nationally syndicated radio talk-show host, columnist, author and public speaker. He can be heard in Los Angeles on KRLA (AM 870) weekdays 9 a.m. to noon. His Web site is dennisprager.com.

Honor your father and mother Read More »