Wednesday, May 06, 2015

"To the Detriment of the Religious Zionist Sector?" I Think Not.

י"ז לחודש השני תשע"ה

YNET: Time running out for Netanyahu as coalition talks stall again
With departure of Lieberman and his six seats, the prime minister is dependent on winning over Bayit Yehudi [Jewish Home] to form even the narrowest of coalitions; Lapid: 'PM decided to do anything to stay in power'.

Moran Azulay, May 5, 2015

With less than 48 hours to present his new government to President Reuven Rivlin, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu once again ran into difficulties Tuesday as negotiations with key coalition partner Bayit Yehudi stalled over the allocation of portfolios.

On Tuesday, senior Likud MK Miri Regev accused Bayit Yehudi of intransigence and scuppering the chances for a "right-wing nationalist government."

The prime minister has already asked Rivlin for an extension to the period allocated for forming a government. The Wednesday night deadline cannot be extended in this round of coalition negotiations.Netanyahu has summonded Likud's negotiating team to discuss the crisis in negotiations with Bayit Yehudi, but has yet to arrange a meeting with Bayit Yehudi leader and former protege Naftali Bennett.

Bayit Yehudi is fuming over the Likud coalition agreement with Shas, which gives the Sephardi Orthodox party control over the Ministry of Religious Services. Bayit Yehudi is concerned that this will mean the reforms it has made in the ministry will be overturned, to the detriment of religious Zionist sector.

When the issue of Shas receiving the ministry was first raised, Bennett stated on Twitter that giving them the ministry would put an end to negotiations with Bayit Yehudi. Now that Shas has indeed been given this portfolio, Bayit Yehudi is trying to decide how to respond.

The departure of Avigdor Leiberman and his six-seat Yisrael Beytenu party on Monday has left Netanyahu with what looks likely to be a narrow 61-member government, if he can in fact put a coalition together. (cont.)

Esser Agaroth (2¢):
PM Bibi Netanyahu
"Bayit Yehudi [Jewish Home Party] is concerned that this will mean the reforms it has made in the ministry will be overturned, to the detriment of religious Zionist sector."

To which reforms is Bayit Yehudi referring?

Opening up the marriage market to the likes of Tzohar, mamlakhti (diehard state loyalist) rabbis?

Granting the authority over conversions to local rabbinical courts, and thus reducing the scrutiny of those expressing a desire to convert? Pseudo-conversions by the various "movements," will be only one Supreme Court legislation from the Bench, instead of two.

Even with all of Sha"S's flaws, and there are many, including the Oslo "Death" Accords, let us not forget that it was Interior Minister Eli Yishai who stood up to the Israeli Supreme Court's decision to accept a pseudo-conversion not only for the purpose of religious identity, but for the purpose of nationality as well.

Let us not forget that it was MK Nissim Ze'ev (Sha"S) moved into a housing structure in Hevron set for expulsion of its Jews, while Jewish Home Party Head Naftali Bennett proposes autonomy for some Pseudostinian Arabs, and Israeli citizenship for others.

Bennett's Plan vs. Arafat's Plan
Can you see the difference? Neither can I.
MK Naftali Bennett
This conversion situation will become even more disastrous with the increasing numbers of Christians sneaking their way into Israeli citizenship through false conversions, in other words outright lying to the Israeli Chief Rabbinate.

The Sha"S Party has led protests against Christian missionaries, as have the Gerer Hassidim, who are part of Agudas Yisroel (half of UTJ). Whereas, aside from a handful of rabbis, the "religious Zionist sector" is not known for its stance against missionaries. Nor have they come out against the Christians with eyes on our Land, quite the opposite, in fact.

And so, I ask you, how exactly is it that overturning of the reforms, which Bayit Yehudi has made in the Religious Affairs Ministry, to the detriment of religious Zionist sector?

Answer? It's not.

No comments:

You Might Also Like...