Uncategorized
Vance says ‘religious liberty is a Christian concept.’ Where does that leave Jews?
During his speech at Turning Point USA’s annual convention on Sunday, Vice President JD Vance claimed the “famously American idea of religious liberty is a Christian concept.”
Vance has made this argument before. At the International Religious Freedom Summit, held in Washington, D.C. in February, he said it was “a conceit of modern society that religious liberty is a liberal concept,” adding that “religious freedom flows from concepts central to the Christian faith.”
Vance is correct that the philosophical defense of the right to religious liberty has roots in Christian theology. Tertullian, an influential second-century Christian writer, argued that genuine worship must be a matter of free will rather than coercion — and is credited with coining the term “freedom of religion.”
But while Thomas Jefferson owned a copy of Tertullian’s work, the Christian philosopher was not Jefferson’s only inspiration. The Founding Fathers also drew on Enlightenment thinkers such as John Locke and Jean-Jacques Rousseau, who justified religious freedom based on ideas about natural rights and limits on state power.
Nor is religious freedom an exclusively Christian innovation. Religious toleration predates Christianity — centuries earlier, the Roman Empire allowed conquered peoples to maintain their own religious practices, and the Persian Empire embraced religious pluralism.
And Tertullian’s ideas did not exactly translate into a durable Christian political tradition of religious liberty. The Crusades — a series of religious wars launched by Christian rulers — involved massacres, expulsions, and forced conversions of Jews and Muslims. During the Spanish Inquisition, Catholic authorities persecuted and expelled Jews and Muslims who refused to convert.
Indeed, the Founding Fathers’ commitment to religious freedom was shaped in part by Europe’s long history of Christian persecution — a record they sought to avoid replicating in the new American republic.
‘A Christian nation’
The First Amendment makes clear that religious freedom applies to all faiths — not just Christians. So why has Vance waded into a niche historical debate?
According to Rachel Laser, president and CEO of Americans United for Separation of Church and State, the telling line comes later in Vance’s speech: “The only thing that has truly served as an anchor of the United States of America is that we have been, and by the grace of God, we always will be, a Christian nation.” He added that he was “not saying you have to be a Christian to be an American,” but argued that “Christianity is America’s creed.”
Vance’s speech was attempting to “co-opt religious freedom and co-opt church-state separation, to make them all into the idea that Christians should have special favor in this country,” Laser, who is Jewish, said in a phone interview. “This is about an effort to redefine terms and distort them.”
Laser noted that this privileging of Christianity is already influencing federal policy, including allowing government employees to proselytize at work and encouraging co-workers to report each other for “anti-Christian bias” — as if Christians were the only potential targets of religious discrimination. At the state level, blurred lines between church and state have led to Bible-infused lessons in public schools and even an effort to make the Old and New Testament law — literally.
Those types of policies might ring alarm bells for Jews, who have long been among the strongest defenders of the separation of church and state, viewing it as a bedrock principle of religious liberty. The 1947 Supreme Court case Everson v. Board of Education of Ewing Township marked the first time Thomas Jefferson’s idea of a “wall of separation between Church and State” was explicitly recognized in law.
Yet some conservative legal scholars, such as Philip Hamburger, question the concept of church-state separation in its entirety, noting that the Constitution never explicitly mentions such a wall. Critics argue that the Supreme Court has, at times, offered not freedom of religion but freedom from religion, effectively privileging secularism and pushing religion out of the public square.
Vance, who converted to Catholicism in adulthood and has said he hopes his Hindu wife, Usha, will eventually convert to Christianity, has been a key proponent of that line of argumentation, explicitly rejecting church-state separation at an October Turning Point USA event.
“What I believe happened is the Supreme Court interpreted ‘Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion’ to effectively throw the church out of every public space at the federal, state, and local level,” Vance told the crowd. “I think it was a terrible mistake, and we are still paying for the consequences of it today.”
Laser rejected the characterization that church-state separation advocates are inherently secular, noting that roughly half of the plaintiffs in Americans United lawsuits are religious.
“Our opponents try to paint our cause as anti-religion, but it’s actually pro-religion,” Laser said. “Vance would be well served to remember that deeply religious people have been some of the greatest proponents of church-state separation, because they understand that it protects religion from being sullied by the government.”
The post Vance says ‘religious liberty is a Christian concept.’ Where does that leave Jews? appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
Mamdani touts ‘Babies not Bombs’ messaging after flexing political muscle in the New York primaries
(New York Jewish Week) — New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani celebrated the victories of the progressive candidates he endorsed in New York’s Democratic primaries describing their success as a “shift in the balance of power.”
Speaking to reporters on Wednesday, the morning after the primaries, Mamdani touted the triumphs as a shift in the balance of power between “working people” and “special interests.”
Mamdani-endorsed candidates Brad Lander, Darializa Avila Chevalier and Claire Valdez won Democratic nominations for Congress. During the press conference, the mayor repeatedly highlighted their calls to restrict U.S. military aid to Israel and redirect federal funding to domestic priorities.
Following Mamdani’s election night sweep in New York, President Donald Trump posted on Truth Social that “America the Beautiful will NEVER be a Communist Country!!!”
The victories offered an early demonstration of Mamdani’s political influence beyond City Hall, as several Democratic Socialist candidates he backed, including Chevalier, defeated established Democratic incumbents in their districts.
“The working person is struggling in our city to afford basic needs,” Mamdani said, adding that Avila Chevalier’s oft-repeated slogan of investing in “Babies not Bombs,” is “the kind of conscience, the kind of clarity, the kind of conviction that has been missing in our politics for far too long.”
Mamdani responded to the president’s post on Wednesday, telling a reporter who asked whether his goal is to make America a “socialist” country that his “goal is to make America a place that every American can afford.”
When asked about federal policies that could be affected by Mamdani’s endorsed candidates, the mayor cited Valdez’s support for “foreign policy that understands human rights for all” and Lander’s commitment to co-sponsoring the Block the Bombs Act, which prohibits the sale of certain U.S.-made offensive weapons to Israel.
Mamdani also dismissed a question about whether he was concerned about how the victories would play out in November as Democrats try to win back the House.
“Every time the fight for working people takes a step forward, you will hear Republicans say that this is actually going to jeopardize the existence of that very fight,” he said.
When asked whether the election of Chevalier, who has faced scrutiny for past social media posts attacking Democrats and her appearance at an Oct. 8, 2023, pro-Palestinian rally in Times Square, could “complicate campaigns for Democrats as a whole,” Mamdani replied “No.”
“[Chevalier] often speaks about a politics of life. She speaks about ‘Babies not bombs,’” Mamdani continued. “What could be a better example of what the people of the district want to see versus what the people of the district have been forced to experience, which is tens of billions of dollars being spent at a national level to bomb children overseas, while children in our own districts are struggling.”
The post Mamdani touts ‘Babies not Bombs’ messaging after flexing political muscle in the New York primaries appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
Jewish anti-Zionist David Orkin defeats incumbent in NY Assembly primary
(New York Jewish Week) — David Orkin, a Jewish anti-Zionist attorney and democratic socialist, defeated incumbent New York State Assemblymember Jenifer Rajkumar in Tuesday’s Democratic primary. Orkin won State Assembly District 38, which includes parts of Queens.
Orkin, an immigrant workers’ rights attorney and union organizer, received 58.8% of the vote, while Rajkumar, who has represented the district since 2021 and is the first South Asian woman ever elected to office in the state, received 40.9%. The district covers a swath of Queens, including parts of Ridgewood, Glendale, Ozone Park, Woodhaven and Richmond Hill.
“Pro-Palestine candidates are sweeping in NYC tonight,” Jewish Voice for Peace Action wrote in a post on Instagram celebrating Orkin’s win Tuesday. “Palestine was on the ballot — and won. David will be a champion for Palestinian freedom in Albany.”
The post from JVP Action echoed a message Orkin had highlighted throughout his campaign.
“It’s so incredibly meaningful to me to be running this race as an anti-Zionist Jew, to be one of the few anti-Zionist Jewish voices that is in an elected seat in the state government,” Orkin said in an Instagram reel posted by Jewish Voice for Peace Action earlier this month.
He added that, if elected, he would be able to go in front of the state legislature and assert that “criticizing Israel for genocide, demanding an end to the occupation, demanding an end to funding war abroad is not antisemitic.”
Orkin’s victory came amid a strong night for democratic socialist candidates across New York City, including left-wing congressional candidates Brad Lander, Darializa Avila Chevalier and Claire Valdez, who also defeated establishment-backed opponents in their primaries.
While Orkin was not endorsed by New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani, whose winning endorsements of Lander, Chevalier and Valdez signaled a pro-Palestinian lurch for the party in the city with the world’s largest Jewish population outside of Israel. Nonetheless, his victory elevated a self-described anti-Zionist to the ranks of New York’s elected officials at a time when debates over Israel have become increasingly prominent within Democratic politics.
While Israel-related issues were not listed on Orkin’s platform, which centered on affordability and immigration, he repeatedly expressed his support for a “free Palestine” and attacked Rajkumar’s record of support for the Jewish state during his campaign.
“In the past several years my opponent AM Rajkumar has walked in the Israel day parade but has said NOTHING against the war in Gaza, occupation of Palestine, or Islamophobic attacks faced by the people of New York,” Orkin wrote in a May post on X.
Rajkumar, who was a close political ally of former New York City Mayor Eric Adams, in her campaign platform vowed to combat antisemitism.
After establishing a Jewish Voice for Peace chapter in Tucson, Arizona, in 2014, Orkin remained involved in pro-Palestinian activism as a member of the anti-Zionist activist group.
“I’ve been involved in the Jewish Palestine Solidarity Movement for 12, 13 years,” Orkin told Democratic Left last month. “I’ve dedicated part [of my] life to making sure that Jewish people are creating religious spaces outside of Zionism, and to making more space for Palestinian organizing to have an impact.”
On the campaign trail, Orkin received a host of endorsements from prominent progressive groups and lawmakers, including Vermont independent Sen. Bernie Sanders, Democratic New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Jews for Racial and Economic Justice, JVP Action and NYC Democratic Socialists for America.
Rajkumar was endorsed by ActJew, the new nonprofit focused on combatting antisemitism, as well as the Queens Jewish Alliance and Assemblymembers Sam Berger, Kalman Yeger and Chuck Lavine.
Orkin received over $290,000 in campaign contributions for the election cycle, including over $156,000 from the office of the state comptroller, while Rajkumar received over $270,000, including $9,000 from health care executive Daniel Lowy.
“I have dedicated my life fighting for immigrants and workers, I am proud to have earned their support in this election, and I look forward to spending the rest of my life winning the beautiful and joyous lives we deserve,” Orkin said in a statement, according to QNS.
The post Jewish anti-Zionist David Orkin defeats incumbent in NY Assembly primary appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
Half of Americans think the U.S. is ‘too supportive’ of Israel
(JTA) — A new survey found that 48% of American voters think the United States is “too supportive” of Israel, the highest since the pollster started asking the question in 2017.
The survey published Wednesday by Quinnipiac University also found that 60% of respondents reported that military intervention in Iran was “not worth it” as opposed to 34% of voters who said it was “worth it.”
The number of respondents who think the U.S. support of Israel is about right is 38%, while just 7% think the U.S. is not supportive enough of Israel, the poll found.
Broken down by party, 66% of Democrats think the U.S. is too supportive of Israel, while 9% think it is not supportive enough and 18% think U.S. support for Israel is about right.
Among Republicans, 20% think the U.S. is too supportive of Israel, 69% think American support for Israel is “about right,” and 6% think the U.S. is not supportive enough.
Among independent voters, 55% think the U.S. is too supportive of Israel, 34% think U.S. support for Israel is about right, and 7% think the U.S. is not supportive enough.
The poll data were released one day after three Democrats critical of Israel swept their House primary races in New York City, and in races around the country even some reliably pro-Israel Democratic candidates distanced themselves from the pro-Israel lobby AIPAC.
A survey last year by Gallup found dwindling support for Israel among Democrats, as well as waning support among Republicans.
Still the party divide was also in sharp evidence in the latest poll. In responses to the question about whether the Iran war was “worth it”, Democrats disfavored military action in Iran at 93% and independents at 66%, while 75% of Republicans surveyed thought it was “worth it.”
Given a list of 10 issues and asked which, if any, they considered priorities in their decision-making process in the election for the U.S. House of Representatives, 41% of voters cited the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, above AI data centers (38%) and Donald Trump (38%). The high cost of living (70%) and health care (59%) topped the list.
The Quinnipiac poll was conducted from June 18 to 22, and includes responses from 1,165 self-identified registered voters.
The margin of error is 3.4 percentage points.
Among those surveyed, 48% said they had an unfavorable view of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Twenty percent said they had a favorable opinion, and 30% “haven’t heard enough” about him.
“Netanyahu gets poor marks from American voters as their appetite for supporting Israel wanes, with the share of voters who think the U.S. is too supportive of Israel hitting a new high,” Quinnipiac polling analyst Tim Malloy wrote in the report.
Voters were also asked about their views on the June 17 memorandum of understanding with Iran, which begins a 60-day negotiation period that does not outline an end to Iran’s nuclear program.
“After months of diplomatic fits and starts, global economic repercussions and a broad loss of life in the region, a majority of voters make their feelings clear: the Iran war was a bad idea,” Malloy wrote.
Voters who are either not confident or “not so confident” that the deal will succeed numbered 59%, and 61% think it is either likely or very likely that Iran will develop nuclear weapons.
The post Half of Americans think the U.S. is ‘too supportive’ of Israel appeared first on The Forward.
