You’ll find the laws and decrees governing access to Argentine citizenship by naturalization here. It’s stated on more than one occasion that citizenship can’t be denied to someone for political, ideological or religious reasons. Lovely.
However, Article 7 of Decree 3214/84 states that in order obtain citizenship applicants have to swear an oath to “faithfully respect” the Constitution which in its Chapter 1, Section 2 establishes that:
The Federal Government supports the Roman Catholic Apostolic religion.
So, your political, religious or other beliefs won’t constitute an impediment to your obtaining Argentine citizenship as long as they don’t block you from swearing to faithfully respect that.
I love this tendency by rightwing guys to start looking for precedents every time Israel is doing something that doesn’t look too well: Oh, the US is using targeted killings too! and France bans Burkahs! and in Argentina, they have some article that might - stretched far enough - sounds similar to the Israeli one. and what do you end up with? a country which is the sum of all the faults of Liberal Democracies around the world.
My friend, Not everything Lieberman and Netanyahu are doing is worth defending.
As for your Argentina story, I wonder if they apply this article only to none-Christians.
It’s called comparative politics, Noam. Not a discipline you’d be comfortable with, since it doesn’t leave much room for presenting Israel as the worst country in the world - and then what would you write about, eh?
If you want to get British citizenship you need to swear the Oath of Allegiance to the Queen. So I think that me, as an anti-monarchist, am excluded from British citizenship too.
“As for your Argentina story, I wonder if they apply this article only to none-Christians.”
The article is in the Constitution. It applies to everyone. I have double citizenship Argentinian-Israeli, so I know what I am talking about.
Personally, I don’t really understand the practical implications of the new Israeli law. I have not delved deeply into the law, but I guess the worst case scenario could be the following?
A Palestinian gets Israeli citizenship because he or she marries an Arab Israeli. He swears loyalty to Israel as a Jewish and Democratic State. He/she then decides to campaign for a binational state or an Arab state in Israel. His citizenship is taken away and he/se goes back to being a Palestinian (with a homeland 10 km away from where he lives). This is the worst reasonable possible scenario, or am I mistaken?
Noam: you don’t seem to know much about Argentina. Let me tell you something: if an Argentinian starts ranting against Israel, and you plan to become a friend of him, remember that Argentinians actually ethnically cleansed their natives from their land and settled in their place. Most of the natives were exterminated, but the remnants are literally dying of starvation in reserves. Just a thought in comparative politics, like Ben correctly notes. You might want to switch your focus of attention once in a while. My dear grand-grandparents settled in the countryside thanks to the Baron Hirsch in a region where 20 years before was Indian territory. They never saw a single Indian. Care to guess why? Because Argentina “settled” their “Palestinian” problem in a way that Israel never even think about. They killed them all. Food for thought. Stop demonizing Israel. It is the most moral country in the world.
I am not sure that such an oath is necessary since what makes Israel a Jewish State is its history, language and culture and not merely its religion.
Still, as long as the oath is framed in the spirit as Ehud Barak said of the declaration of independence I have no problem with it.
It is telling that among the opponents of such an oath is the Israeli-Arab Mk Ahmad Tibi. Yet he himself has “…served as a political advisor to the late Palestinian Authority President Yasser Arafat for several years, even representing the Palestinians at the 1998 Wye River negotiations. He’s quoted as saying (7/13/94): “The person responsible on behalf of the Palestinians people for everything that was done in the Israel-Palestinian conflict is Yasser Arafat…”[21] He resigned from the post in 1999, upon deciding to run for the Knesset. Tibi described his relationship with Arafat as “close” and “extremely interesting and important to [him].””
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ahmad_Tibi#Controversies
It should also be said that Tibi supports the Hamas’ tyrannical Islamicist rule in Gaza.
Hence, and his supporters want Israel to be democratic but not the Arab countries that surround it.
http://www.jpost.com/Israel/Article.aspx?id=190865
noam sheizaf “I love this tendency by rightwing guys to start looking for precedents every time Israel is doing something that doesn’t look too well…”
Noam, not everyone who takes a position contrary to yours is a “right wing” guy.
Would have all people take an oath of allegiance to your point of view?
Just because Israel passes a law doesn’t make that law automatically “evil.”
The oath may or may not be “politics” at its worse, as Livni said, but in itself loyalty oaths in the world are as common as sand in the Middle East.
I don’t get the controversy. Aren’t those seeking US citizenship required to swear allegiance to our constitutional order? The Israeli corollary of which is the Jewish and democratic character of the State?
I just read noam sheizaf’s web site and I am sorry I answered his malicious post.
He is in favor of a one State solution which is to say of the erasing of the Jewish State from the world map since a single State with an Arab Muslim majority would merely create another Arab State in the region with the eventual cleansing of most Jews from the region.
It is ironic that Sheizaf opposes an oath in the name of “democracy” but is working for a non-democratic solution to the conflict since most Jews do not desire to live in single State as a minority.
Noam - Jacob’s right. You are basically calling for the end of the State of Israel as it exists. Only in Israel could a journalist get away with that - anywhere, else in the region…
Please, do occasionally engage in comparative politics. It’s intellectually healthy.
“As for your Argentina story, I wonder if they apply this article only to none-Christians.”
Noam: my Argentina story, eh? I have lived here for many years and longer than some of your 972 comrades have lived in Israel and I speak and read the language. I give credit to you for having first hand knowledge of Israel which I lack, even when I don’t agree with your views, and would appreciate the same courtesy.
I think the fact that the oath will apply on to non-Jews is disgraceful and I speak as a fervent lover of Israel. This is not a left/right but racist/anti-racist issue. It is about Israel Beiteinu’s hold on the cabinet and Netanyahu’s cowardice.
Bella “I think the fact that the oath will apply on to non-Jews is disgraceful and I speak as a fervent lover of Israel. This is not a left/right but racist/anti-racist issue. It is about Israel Beiteinu’s hold on the cabinet and Netanyahu’s cowardice.”
Bella, I admire your website and post articles from it whenever I can. My views on Lieberman and Netanyahu are similar to yours.
I even agree that such an oath is unnecessary. Still, you have to agree that most countries do require some sort of oath for its newly minted citizens.
You yourself on your web site offered an example of why such an oath might be necessary:
“While yesterday I posted a preposterous suggestion made by Michelle J. Kinnucan that Jews were taking over spokesmen-ship of the Palestinian solidarity movement, today we have the revelation that Edith Lutz, one of the passengers of last week’s Jewish boat to Gaza, is a Christian who faked her conversion to Judaism in order to proclaim her solidarity with Palestinians. Can you beat it? I wonder how many others are out there clamoring to be chosen by The Chosen in order to choose Hamas.”
http://mideastparalleluniverse.blogspot.com/2010/10/funny-you-dont-look-jewish_08.html
Your post also shows that such an oath be made mandatory of all those offered citizenship and not just non-Jews since people have been known to convert to Judaism in order to undermine the Jewish State.
I trust that the example you offered and I am sure there are others will be used as evidence to mount a challenge to the oath at the Israeli Supreme court.
Where we part company is your view that the law is racist. It isn’t racist in the strict use of the term since Jews are not a race. Still, the law was badly conceived and hastily enacted. It should be challenged.
I cross posted the above comment on TNR webiste on a post dealing with the same issue:
http://www.tnr.com/blog/the-spine/78295/the-old-likud-idealists-against-the-thugs-the-new-israeli-right#comment-295460
Jdyer, thank you for your support. Dan Meridor makes my point better than I can, “”Lately there has been suggestion, after suggestion, after suggestion meant to send messages to the Arab public - ‘this is not yours, this is not your country,’ and there are even those who say ‘we will soon transfer you to a Palestinian state.’ The Arab citizens are constantly reminded that they do not belong, and yet we demand loyalty from them,” Meridor added.” (Quoted from Haaretz.)
What about anti-Israel oaths:
http://www.jpost.com/JewishWorld/JewishNews/Article.aspx?id=191385
‘European Jewish communities are in serious danger’
“European Jewish Congress calls on governments to launch campaign against intolerance, anti-Semitism to remember “Never Again” concept. “
“The statement gave a recent example of a respected and government-funded Catholic school in Antwerp that hosted a ‘Palestine Day’, which was replete with anti-Semitic references and activities for youngsters.
One stall at the event was titled “Throw the soldiers into the sea” where children were invited to throw replicas of Jewish and Israeli soldiers into two large tanks, the organization highlighted.
The EJC, which is the democratically elected representative umbrella organization of European Jewry, is calling on European governments and the European Union to launch a campaign against intolerance and anti-Semitism, so to remind European citizens that the new Europe was established after the Second World War on the concept of “Never Again.””