4 ms·

This article fails to explain the reasons for which proponents believe that marriage with Palestinians would threaten security or Jewish character of the countr

This article fails to explain the reasons for which proponents believe that marriage with Palestinians would threaten security or Jewish character of the country, failing the supposed neutrality of the article or compromising the supposed quality of journalists in charge of investigating this.

rjzzleep 5y ago
Then please enlighten us, what's the rationale?
- 1337shadow 5y ago
  Exactly my question.
- namlem 5y ago
  There have been cases of Israeli citizens marrying terrorists to get them into the country. Though this law is an overreaction. It's one thing to do background checks and impose a waiting period on Palestinian spouses, but a total ban is ridiculous.
  - 1337shadow 5y ago
    Thanks, at least we have an idea what this law is an overreaction of, I think telling a bit about that would have made the reuters article on-par with the journalistic quality that I expect from my standards.
  - themaninthedark 5y ago
    "Israel’s parliament on Thursday passed a law denying naturalization to Palestinians from the occupied West Bank or Gaza married to Israeli citizens" Don't agree with the headline or the law. They aren't banning spouses, they are banning naturalization of them. I don't know what other visas are applicable for Israel, in Japan if you get married you can get a spouse visa(1,3,5 year) but you won't be able to get a permanent residency right away.
    - 1337shadow 5y ago
      Right ... So we here are opposing theories about this: 1) Journalists at Reuters suck, 2) It's standard clickbait to drive traffic in, or 3) Journalists at Reuters purposedly oriented their article. Whatever the explanation is for this debacle of an article, I don't like it.
  - codedokode 5y ago
    But one does not need citizenship to explode a bomb. How is the law going to help here?
moltke 5y ago
Plenty of people in other countries feel the same way about their native population, I don't see why Israel gets a pass.
- 1337shadow 5y ago
  Exactly why I'm asking why proponents believe they do: it's not in the article. Sorry if this wasn't clear, I'm non native. I'm also asking why it's not in the article. I don't mind the downvotes, but I'd love an answer ;)
  - kergonath 5y ago
    I think it’s just about making their lives miserable so they go live somewhere else.
    - 1337shadow 5y ago
      That is a probability, but seems too simple, and is in complete contradiction with all the other stuff Israel has done so far make the life of arabic Israelians enjoyable there, such as hiring arab police officers, the entry of an Arab political party—the Islamist United Arab List, or Ra’am—into government for the first time has signaled that progress could be in the offing, having the same rights as Jewish Israelis...
      - kergonath 5y ago
        From what I have seen with my Israeli friends (so caveat, sample size of 2 and one of them was quite a long time ago) there seem to be a serious case of collective cognitive dissonance. It’s not that they really want to hurt the Arabs (though some of them definitely do), it’s just that they don’t see this sort of things as bad. An example is the borders walls and checkpoints. Or bombing Gaza.
    - pthread_t 5y ago
      You're not wrong. https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/israeli-right-wing-party-wants-to-pay-palestinians-to-leave-israel-1.5449087 https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/israeli-right-wing-party...
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
basisword 5y ago
If you start dating and marrying “the enemy” suddenly they’re not the enemy anymore. You start to understand them and treat them as an equal. As more mixing happens, opinion will start to shift and the state will start to see some resistance to the disturbing and inhuman way they treat Palestinians. The state doesn’t want to have to start treating Palestinian’s like equals. This law may not make marriage between the two groups illegal but it makes it unworkable.
- 1337shadow 5y ago
  Interesting conspiracy theory, but the actual rationale has been shared in another comment: it's an overreaction to a number of events involving marrying terrorists to get them in the country. About "the enemy", one side is constantly attacking the other, but you might be surprised to know which is which - or, you believe you have justifications. Anyway, my conspiracy theory is that this article purposely omits contextualisation so to drive the opinion to believe that's it's a free act of pure hate, which makes it fall into the "propaganda" category rather than the "journalism" category. And I'm not even supporting this stupid bill, but I've had more than enough of this kind of jorunlasmism which purpose is apparently to tell us how to think... IMHO this jurnolims is not a solution: it's a problem. Again, not discussing the silly law, discussing about the article in itself.
  - pthread_t 5y ago
    The actual rationale was outright given by the politicians who enacted this law: it allows Israel's favored demographic to maintain a majority. It's in the article.
    - 1337shadow 5y ago
      I'm sorry, I'm non native, I've read the article again and didn't find that, can I ask you to quote that please?
      - vageli 5y ago

rjzzleep 5y ago

Then please enlighten us, what's the rationale?

1337shadow 5y ago
Exactly my question.
namlem 5y ago
There have been cases of Israeli citizens marrying terrorists to get them into the country. Though this law is an overreaction. It's one thing to do background checks and impose a waiting period on Palestinian spouses, but a total ban is ridiculous.
- 1337shadow 5y ago
  Thanks, at least we have an idea what this law is an overreaction of, I think telling a bit about that would have made the reuters article on-par with the journalistic quality that I expect from my standards.
- themaninthedark 5y ago
  "Israel’s parliament on Thursday passed a law denying naturalization to Palestinians from the occupied West Bank or Gaza married to Israeli citizens" Don't agree with the headline or the law. They aren't banning spouses, they are banning naturalization of them. I don't know what other visas are applicable for Israel, in Japan if you get married you can get a spouse visa(1,3,5 year) but you won't be able to get a permanent residency right away.
  - 1337shadow 5y ago
    Right ... So we here are opposing theories about this: 1) Journalists at Reuters suck, 2) It's standard clickbait to drive traffic in, or 3) Journalists at Reuters purposedly oriented their article. Whatever the explanation is for this debacle of an article, I don't like it.
- codedokode 5y ago
  But one does not need citizenship to explode a bomb. How is the law going to help here?

moltke 5y ago

Plenty of people in other countries feel the same way about their native population, I don't see why Israel gets a pass.

1337shadow 5y ago
Exactly why I'm asking why proponents believe they do: it's not in the article. Sorry if this wasn't clear, I'm non native. I'm also asking why it's not in the article. I don't mind the downvotes, but I'd love an answer ;)
- kergonath 5y ago
  I think it’s just about making their lives miserable so they go live somewhere else.
  - 1337shadow 5y ago
    That is a probability, but seems too simple, and is in complete contradiction with all the other stuff Israel has done so far make the life of arabic Israelians enjoyable there, such as hiring arab police officers, the entry of an Arab political party—the Islamist United Arab List, or Ra’am—into government for the first time has signaled that progress could be in the offing, having the same rights as Jewish Israelis...
    - kergonath 5y ago
      From what I have seen with my Israeli friends (so caveat, sample size of 2 and one of them was quite a long time ago) there seem to be a serious case of collective cognitive dissonance. It’s not that they really want to hurt the Arabs (though some of them definitely do), it’s just that they don’t see this sort of things as bad. An example is the borders walls and checkpoints. Or bombing Gaza.
  - pthread_t 5y ago
    You're not wrong. https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/israeli-right-wing-party-wants-to-pay-palestinians-to-leave-israel-1.5449087 https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/israeli-right-wing-party...

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

basisword 5y ago

If you start dating and marrying “the enemy” suddenly they’re not the enemy anymore. You start to understand them and treat them as an equal. As more mixing happens, opinion will start to shift and the state will start to see some resistance to the disturbing and inhuman way they treat Palestinians. The state doesn’t want to have to start treating Palestinian’s like equals. This law may not make marriage between the two groups illegal but it makes it unworkable.

1337shadow 5y ago
Interesting conspiracy theory, but the actual rationale has been shared in another comment: it's an overreaction to a number of events involving marrying terrorists to get them in the country. About "the enemy", one side is constantly attacking the other, but you might be surprised to know which is which - or, you believe you have justifications. Anyway, my conspiracy theory is that this article purposely omits contextualisation so to drive the opinion to believe that's it's a free act of pure hate, which makes it fall into the "propaganda" category rather than the "journalism" category. And I'm not even supporting this stupid bill, but I've had more than enough of this kind of jorunlasmism which purpose is apparently to tell us how to think... IMHO this jurnolims is not a solution: it's a problem. Again, not discussing the silly law, discussing about the article in itself.
- pthread_t 5y ago
  The actual rationale was outright given by the politicians who enacted this law: it allows Israel's favored demographic to maintain a majority. It's in the article.
  - 1337shadow 5y ago
    I'm sorry, I'm non native, I've read the article again and didn't find that, can I ask you to quote that please?
    - vageli 5y ago