- Andy
The Yale and Harvard situations are only partially comparable.
The situations are similar in that a religious group asked for special consideration, and American society granted it to Muslims while denying it to Jews.
The situations are dis-similar is that the religious Jews at Yale were not asking to inconvenience their class-mates in any way, and simply wanted the right to do their own thing without bothering anyone else. The Harvard situation, however, is completely unacceptable discrimination against the male half of the entire student body. (No puns intended.)
Please allow me to point out that religious Jews maintain their distinct practices usually discreetly, out of religious conviction, while most interviews with Muslim women wearing hijab say they do it out of “identity” – that is, Muslim pride.
Jews do not ask for religious accommodation as the camel’s nose of a “strategy of slices” to take over the world. Many Muslims DO have that basis for their demands for religious accommodation – backed by numbers ONE HUNDRED times that of the Jews.
The increasing Muslim population of the USA is bringing with it several catastrophic consequences:
- dhimmification
- discrimination against Jews and Christians
- threat to the USA-Israel alliance.
Liberal Jews should not naively insist on “non-discrimination” and should instead throw their political efforts in whole-heartdely with the pro-Israeli Christians to stop Muslim immigration and dhimmification.
- Mark Buehner
You are correct – but in the west it is acceptable to discriminate against men.
- Jblog
The error in your reasoning is that the Muslim request is nevertheless discrimination against men, no different from discrimination against blacks or Jews. It is illegal on the same basis and precendent of the lawsuits two decades ago which out-lawed sex-segregated eating societies on campus.
- Andrew
You’ve made a very good point concerning the left’s internal contradictions. I personally support socialist economics, but reject the identity politics of the left as an institutioalised means to discriminate against the 35% minority of the population which is white male. The slug-fest of accusations of racism and sexism within the Democratic party has been a joy to behold, an effect of the internal contradictions of the left.
- Jonathan
“I would wager that the Islamization of Harvard’s gym has less to do with Saudi money and more to do with its Women’s Studies Department.”
That may be, but it remains just as illegal as the cases I mentioned above. Discrimination against men is just as immoral as discrimination against infidels.
- Laika
“In the meantime can’t we get public funding to Harvard cut off? That’s the classic response to private universities that practice segregation, isn’t it?”
You are correct in principle, but since the victims are men, the (administrative or juridical) law will never be applied.
- P. Ami
Your err significantly. Offering kosher airplane meals does not inconvenience or discriminate against others. The Harvard plan illegaly discriminates against the male half of the planet.
- Sue
Brilliant comment.
- Albert
“One day the West will wake up to marinates broadcasting the call to prayer 5 times a day.”
Doesn’t one Detroit suburb already do so?
