You and I see things very differently here, for me it is a living legal system with well defined rules of jurisprudence not freestyle dismissal of the past.
2 Likes
I agree that itâs a living legal system, although not one Iâm subject to. But you canât tell me that every rabbi agrees on the interpretation of the Torah and Talmud, because I know a few rabbis. 
Good night and blessings to all!
2 Likes
If you arenât a Jew then it does not apply to you any more than Argeninian law applies to Canadians.
As for disagreement between rabbis that is natural and the is a system for that as well.
4 Likes
Thank you for sharing such a thoughtful and interesting answer.
Itâs so interesting, Iâm in danger of heading offtopic.
So Iâll add the actual language for the sake of the original question of whether itâs âmoralâ of U.S. workers to be against cheap immigrant labor.
(Itâs from the Chabad translation you cited.)
The stranger who sojourns with you shall be as a native from among you, and you shall love him as yourself; for you were strangers in the land of Egypt. I am the Lord, your God.
2 Likes
Sounds like tonightâs caucus is going well.
3 Likes
In context (and outside of Jewish legal context) Iâd say âyesâ. âLoving the stranger amongst youâ doesnât extend all the way to tolerating behavior which undercuts or damages the greater community.
In regard to the translation I cited, aside from me affiliating with Chabad, for one that site has the broadest and deepest translated resources to where even Reform Jews use it and for two when it comes to translation of theHebrew bible I want it done by Jews. The only other Jewish translation on the web is a JPS one from the earlier part of the 1900s and itâs a bit stiff.
1 Like
You can laugh at me and Iâll laugh at you laughing at me.
I made substantive points. You threw insults. Could your candidate have orange hair and eat pizza with a fork?
But, No, youâre apparently an aggrieved Sanders fanboi, so I probably shouldnât break it to you but: Sanders truly has no chance given how the Superdelegates work: all Hillary has to do is tread water, keep at or near 45-50% in delegates every state and she cruises easily to the win. (spoiler alert?)
Maybe the Republicans were slightly right about voter fraud.
1 Like
What, like ballot collectors who are wearing Trump gear?
Or candidates for Congress (oh, look, itâs that lunatic friend of the Bundyâs again) printing the ballot papers?
1 Like
Live from Nevada:
We do a normal primary here where you vote like itâs an election and there are election officials who act like grown-ups. This is Texas. That should be enough to shame other states.
5 Likes
Obama wasnât as left as Sanders, never has been.
But he sure wasnât viewed a centre or centre-right in the run-up to 2008, and your naming Jewish as an insurmountable negative (clarification required, @petzl is talking electability, not intentionally making an anti-semitic statement or holding that view AFAIK) is radically similar to what supporters of a certain candidate said about Obama when they werenât intentionally being racist by claiming his skin colour made him unelectable and thus the primary should goto the white lady.
Black
Jewish
Female
Latino
Letâs be clear, none of these are unelectable. Not anymore. Socialist, maybe excepting that Socialist is also anti-establishment, which is also more in play than ever before.
In fact Iâd go so far as to say that unelectable isnât a thing. Not anymore.
3 Likes
Reminds me of this:
1 Like
Good news, itâs all cool. Nothing to see here, move along.
1 Like
The lunatics have taken over the asylum.
5 Likes
And thatâs why Obama won twice. And was able to do it with a 3-5% electoral âhandicapâ of not having the skin tone of the majoritarian demographic.
Actually, he kind of was. Did you hear a peep out of him regarding marriage equality? No. He was smart enough to talk about âcivil unions,â and then was able to pivot later, claiming he had âevolvedâ on the issue. In '08 we knew healthcare was on the agenda, which, sure, is a left-ish issue-- but you sure didnât hear âMedicare For All.â
I didnt say it was insurmountable at all. I said the âJewish Socialistâ combo is the insurmountable negative. I mean, it really is laughable Sanders even calls himself a âSocialistâ-- WE all know what he means by it. But HE should know that word sends out the worst optics possible (almost as bad as âatheistâ-- he almost went there when he called himself ânot particularly religiousâ). Really, he couldnât have set himself up any worse, in terms of making first impressions with Americaâs famously low low-information voter. (Uh, also, canât Bernie ever comb his damn hair? He looks like a hurried high school guidance counselor. Optics again.)
Funny I never heard that Hillary was making argument. Or if she did, it was lost in the wind because Obama came out so powerfully in the early 2008 primaries. (Perhaps she was making those arguments before Iowa/NH?)
Personally, as an atheist leftist myself, nothing would please me more than a Sanders presidency, but I just donât see it. I did see it for Obama. When he announced in 2007, I was thinking âJesse Jackson was a joke. Sharpton was a bigger joke. Obama can do it.â And, here again, Obama steered widely away from being pigeonholed as âthe black candidate.â It took Sharpton 6 years to get a call through to Obama.
So even complete fucking knobs hate Trump?
1 Like
This sounds like telling Donald Trump heâll never win if heâs not more polite.
Lots of people think they know what is needed to win and what is fatal to winning. Somehow peopleâs rate of success at calling elections is abysmal even with excellent polling that should make it very easy. The electorate is a living thing that adapts to the strategies that candidates use to try to win it over. Sandersâs rising popularity in the Democratic party and Trumpâs popularity in the Republican party both suggest that this could be one of those elections where conventional wisdom about electability fails, which shouldnât be a surprise, since it fails about every two or three elections.
3 Likes
