Eliyyahu

I'm sure a lot of people are swayed by such simplifications, but I will put it bluntly. Israel makes sure Gaza gets all of the humanitarian aid that it needs. Hamas has even admitted that there is nobody going hungry in Gaza. Gaza and West Bank elected Hamas, Hamas seized Gaza from Fatah, and they have done nothing but attack Israel from the territory since. They constantly violated every "cease fire," but Israel does not go into Gaza on a whim. They let it build up until they can't justify allowing it anymore. Hamas' existence is based on the notion that not only are Ramallah, Hebron, and Jerusalem occupied (which the West accepts to different extents), but that so are Tel Aviv, Haifa, and Tiberias, which most of the world accepts as cities in Israel. So Israel sees to it that they have what they need in terms of food and medicine, but they feel no obligation to supply the hostile entity with treats. You can choose to disagree, but that is the policy. It would change in a heartbeat if Hamas accepted the terms of its acceptance into recognition, or if Hamas was replaced in Gaza by a moderate Palestinian entity capable of controlling the territory, but so long as they are the power the current situation can't be improved upon to any great extent.

America is undeniably a christian nation. Despite all attempts to keep religion out of politics, it is constantly used to gauge candidates, and becomes one of the most important issues, accusing this or that person of not being born again enough, because that is the kind of stuff that is important to the christian majority. I know you guys like to disown the people who embarrass you, but it's not your call to make. There are a large majority of christians in the country, and they shape everything, down to the content of the textbooks we use. All groups have their greats, their evils, and the large majority dispersed in between. Life is difficult, people have to make decisions, those decisions have repercussions on themselves and beyond, and they are not always easy black and white situations. And you can talk about the vengeful "old testament god," but what we endure here is the extent of our suffering. His side of the christian bible isn't the one sending non-believers to hell.

Films are just that. You can't take them too seriously. Have you ever seen David portrayed as a thirty year old man against Goliath? Or Isaac as a nearly forty year old man when Abraham bound him? They are constantly portrayed as children or young teens, which is not consistent with the source of the stories. That is just what film does. Look at Lynch's take on Dune. Regardless of what Alexander did or did not do behind closed doors, he was just as highly regarded by the conservative Jews of Jerusalem as he was by less conservative areas of his empire. I can't recall coming across any non-Greek source from ancient times which portray him as a sissy.

All of the original novels were just Norma Cenva dreaming.

I would be happy to explain to you. Since the activists made clear their intention to try to break through the bloackade in spite of the alternatives offered, Israel was not required to wait for them to enter their territorial waters. That aside, the flotilla never intended to enter recognized Israeli Territorial Waters in the first place. They were attempting to go directly to Gaza. So either way they would have been conducting this in waters internationally considered to be outside of those of Israel.

Haven't posted here in a while (can't recall my login and pw and all that). Anyway, came across this thread, and for some reason decided I would go ahead and torture myself, lol. Hwi, Anyone else could make this claim. But they'd quickly be shown to be ignorant or lying if they made such a claim to people who actually know and observe the Torah (which means instruction, not law, and which contains hundreds of laws, not just a "law"). There are laws concerning only Nazarites. There are laws concerning only the King. There are laws which apply only to women. There are laws which apply only to men. There are laws which apply only to Kohanim (priests descent from Aharon), or to Levites. There are laws which only concern the Temple, and which are only in effect when the Temple stands. There are laws which only apply in the land of Israel, and not in the diaspora. Last but certainly not least, there are laws which regard the nation as a whole, which no single person can keep or break on behalf of the entire community, such as the command to appoint judges and officers in every community in Israel (Deut. 16:18). There is no basis in reality to say that Jesus fulfilled "Old Testament law". I am perfectly fine with the notion that there was a historical basis for Jesus who did in fact observe Jewish law (according to the teachings of the Pharisees, in fact), in which case he was not a lot different than millions of other Jews in his day and in the days since. Talking about one person fulfilling and accomplishing "Old Testament law" is every bit as ridiculous as claiming that one person fulfilled and accomplished (rendering obsolete) American law. A look at Jeremiah 31 in context shows how superficial the use of "new covenant" is in the New Testament. Regarding the topic, it is the act and not the feelings and attraction to the same sex which is an issue in Judaism. Judaism accepts that this attraction is not a choice whatsoever. Furthermore, to carry out a penalty for this act there is a long list of circumstances and requirements to be met which ensure such penalties are not likely to ever be carried out.