Yisrael Beitenu leader Avigdor Lieberman announced that his party is not opposed to the Torah or the observance of Shabbos, but rejects a nation run by chareidim.
Lieberman demands a separation of religion and state in support of his party’s pro secular issues, including the sale of pork and offering couples the possibility of a civil marriage instead of in accordance to halacha, as is the case today.
Lieberman insists his party is a viable option for Shomer Shabbat voters who do not wish to see the nation ruled by chareidim, rejecting criticism that he is trying to destroy the Jewish character of the state.
(Yechiel Spira – YWN Israel)
Join the official YWN WhatsApp status
10 Responses
Maybe it’s time to separate human beings from oxygen.
To number 1. Very good analogy.
Would a white politician in the United States, who ran on a platform that excluded African Americans from the system, be deem acceptable. You would have to go back 150 years to find that as a theoretical position that was taken seriously.
We must remember that the Hareidim are to the Israeli political system, what Black are to the American system, except that America is more open and has a traditional of tolerance.
He’ll go down the way of Shinui.
see berachot 61b the conversation btwn pupus ben Yehuda and R’Akiva, deja vu
Hey Mr. Lieberman, it’s only the Torah that says you own all of Eretz Yisrael.
#4 U R dreaming
Lieberman wants separation of religion and state not religion and people AKA oxygen and humans. That is the way things are run in these USA and it works out great. The chareidim can continue to vote and have rights just like the jews and chareidim -and African Americans for that matter- in the U.S.
I think he is appealing to a large amount of chareidim in Israel who are not interested in having the state decide what their school curriculum should be etc..
#7 – they said that about Shinui too, when their demise was predicted.
#3, I do not like Lieberman’s statements and tone at all, but he did not talk about exclusion of Chareidim. It’s a shame that his view on arabs is tainted by his view on Torah. The problem is, Lieberman is open and tolerant, literally, to a fault.
A fitting analogy would be South Africa where whites rule in a continent whose character is that of the black race. Israel, in character, is that of Judaism and Lieberman is missing a few cards from that deck.
I