Posted by James K on August 16, 2006, at 15:08:15
In reply to Lou gives definitions to antisemitism, posted by Lou Pilder on August 16, 2006, at 8:59:29
The EUMC also points out that "criticism of Israel similar to that leveled against any other country cannot be regarded as antisemitic".
I believe this concept would apply to regulation of the civility rules of this board as well. I say this because I believe it to be true. That is the basis for my assertion.
Prosecuting a Jewish bank robber is not persecuting a Jew. Unless Christian bank robbers were let go.
The religious belief of my parents, based upon their reading of the english language translation of the books that make up the Gospels in what Americans call the Holy Bible, is that Jesus was killed by the Romans at request of the Jewish religious and political leaders called pharisees. This was all part of God's ancient plan according to these books. What happened that day? Did that day happen? Some persons have used versions of this story as an excuse to hurt Jewish people. Jews mostly don't believe that Jesus is/was the Messiah. People's beliefs don't hurt anybody, only the actions they take based upon those beliefs.
I haven't myself seen any antisemitism published on Psychobabble. I also haven't detected any racial or religious bias in the enforcement of the civility rules. My perceptions, however, only work for me.
I've never violated the three consecutive post rule, (that I'm aware of), so It doesn't seem that onerous a rule to me. If we are discussing the three consecutive post rule and antisemitism, I hope my response makes sense as a response, nothing more. If we are discussing something else, I'm still happy for the chance to look up the EUMC.