I don’t like the school’s stance, but I don’t think it’s the government’s place to make them change their beliefs.

Why not just convert the child according to the Orthodox standards? It seems like this would have been simpler.

And why would you want to be a part of any school that didn’t accept the legitimacy of your faith?

Also, if the school is state funded, it should accept ALL children no matter their religion. We have that here. You don’t have to be one of the faithful to attend.

Jen, the point of the Orthodox standard is that you can’t convert, you must be born Jewish. Progressive temples allow conversion, but Orthodox temples don’t acknowledge conversion. You’re born Jewish, or you’re never going to be Jewish. That’s the problem faced here.

I’m conflicted about the ruling. I’m not Jewish, but I have a lot of friends that are, and several of them would be up in arms about this ruling. This ruling contradicts thousands of years of Jewish law in favor of modern political correctness. I think part of the issue is that the school is state funded. Maybe the school should be required to use the Progressive standard for Judaism? It would still be a (albeit partially) accepted definition for being Jewish, but be more inclusive and make more people happy. Maybe they could open one school that uses the Progressive definition, and keep this school using the Orthodox standards.

Cool,

You are wrong. Orthodox DO recognize conversion.. but only a strict Orthodox conversion by an Orthodox Beit Din. A strict Orthodox conversion requires 1 year of supervised adherance to Jewish law, much study and then conversion by an recognized Orthodox Beit Din complete with mikvah.

This woman is not considered Jewish because they do not recognize HER conversion because it was through a Reform (I believe in England they are called Progressive?) conversion.

This has nothing to do with race or ethnicity and EVERYTHING to do with the Orthodox refusal to recognize the other Jewish movements legitimacy.

The government should just stop funding religious institutions. Otherwise you get into these situations where your own government is establishing “who is a member of which religion”, and even answering the question of “what is (and is not) a ‘legitimate’ religion”. When you allow the government to help fund religious organizations, you are automatically using your tax dollars in discriminatory practices.

I wonder if the government is funding any white supremacist churches (those that believe that God created ‘whites’ as a superior race to all others, and who won’t admit blacks, etc to their churches or into their church run schools)? They exist, and even thought I’d disagree with them vehemently, if they base their ideas on actual religious beliefs, they are still a religion.

Is this much different from the school in question? Both are exclusionary, both are minorities (white supremacists aren’t the majority, I hope!), and as an excuse for their separatism both (white supremacists and Orthodox Jews) seem to whine and moan about how “we need to preserve our distinct way of life, and the purity of our beliefs and bloodlines”.

Instead of asking “who is Jewish”, so that the government can fund their discrimination that picks and chooses based on race and religion … the government should ask “do you discriminate (against ANYONE)?”, and then pull all funding (if the answer is yes).

To all the religions that take government funds, I have a question: Can religion survive without the government’s handouts? Or is it so feeble that it can’t? If you really can’t get by without my tax money, maybe you need to look into a different God or else give more of your own personal money as donations. If ancient Egyptian Pharaoh worshipers had lived in Britain, they’d still be around today, suckling at the teat of our taxes!

To do any less than walk away from religious endorsement and financial support … the government is actively contributing to and supporting discrimination.

Obviously in this case, however, this particular school is not “embracing” and “inclusive”. So they should get no government funding. They should be financially compartmentalized from the more open minded Orthodox groups (so that they don’t all have to lose government funding).
They do this in the States. They require that religious institutions separate off their religious activity and their discriminatory activity into separate organizations. In this way, they can still receive government funding for the secular and non-discriminatory things they do. In other words: A Catholic organization’s prayer meetings, construction of buildings which non-Catholics can’t enter, as well as religiously exclusionary activity (“not open to Jews, Muslims, Protestants) are under one umbrella organization. That organization is not allowed one bit of government funding. However, the same Catholic organization’s soup kitchens for the poor, and legal aide for the oppressed (to the extent that they don’t discriminate) is allowed funding from their government. These two entities can be run by the same organization, but they must be financially compartmentalized. If the religion doesn’t like it, they are free to take no government money at all. There is a strict rule that these two separate entities are not allowed to exchange funds.

This is the only way I can see to keep the government from spending OUR own taxes to discriminate against people. This method will still allow various religions and sects to be the bigoted organizations (as is a religion’s right to do so), but without forcing you and I (including Liane, who appears to support religion, but abhors bigotry (as she points out, not all religions discriminate)) to fund it.

If the government is funding the school they have the right to expect certain behavior in exchange. If it’s really that important to the school that the boy be excluded they can give up their federal funding.