France, Norway, Germany and most of western societies are not the same. Because all these countries DO NOT define their state as Christian. History, tradition, holidays, customs, heritage are clearly and mainly christian, but not the state itself. It is the other way around: Their constitutions separate strictly between religion and state. Especially France. That's why these countries forbid by law to treat citizens differently, while in Israel clearly puts the Jewish citizens in a privileged position (by "The right of return", by the the duty to serve in the army etc.). That does not have to be bad. There are/may be good reasons for that. But the author is right to say, that you cannot have both to the full extent: jewish and democratic. In the end a decision has to be made, it cannot be avoided.

True there are some laws that give jews preference such as the Law of Return but for the most part when it comes to that actual democratic process everybody is equal. Jews get 1 vote and arabs get 1 vote. There are arab political parties who have people in the 2 Knesset. There is currently a druze who is a government minister and when Olmert was PM there was an arab minister. As they are not citizens the palestinians have no rights in Israel same way jews cannot go to the US and expect equal rights to American citizens. In theory the arabs could take over the country through the political process and there is nothing we can do to stop it. The only thing that stops them is demographics. This is why there can be no right of return to these non Israeli citizens because then they would outnumber the jews and take over the political process trough numbers. Israel is was from day 1 defined as a jewish state the same In the UK its officially a christian state, the monarch must be law be a christian and they must marry a christian but jews, muslims and everybody else have the equal rights to the christians. Its like that in many other countries with official religions of state. Israels national identity is that of a jewish state but it is also a democratic one so in reality the concept of a jewish state and a democratic one are compatible. Israel must also always keep its identity as a jewish state otherwise it has no right to exist because it was created for the sole reason of being a jewish state.

Mr. Meltzer, you should tell the United Nations: "Sorry, we wronged you. When you said that Zionism is racism, you were absolutely right. Sorry we made such a big fuss about it."

Freedom of expression is something, Democracy is something else entirely. Think with your mind not with your toes !

Irish constitution: "We, the people of Ireland, humbly acknowledging all our obligations to our Divine Lord, Jesus Christ, Who sustained our fathers through centuries of trial [...]" Greek constitution: "Article 3: (1) The prevailing religion in Greece is that of the Eastern Orthodox Church of Christ [...]" Cypriot constitution: "Article 2: (1) the Greek Community comprises all citizens of the Republic who are of Greek origin and whose mother tongue is Greek or who share the Greek cultural traditions or who are members of the Greek-Orthodox Church [...]" Slovenian constitution: "Article 5: (2) Slovenes not holding Slovene citizenship may enjoy special rights and privileges in Slovenia." German Basic Law: "Article 116: (1) [...] a German[...] is a person who possesses German citizenship or [...] of German ethnic origin or as the spouse or descendant of such a person." Are these EU countries not democratic or, G*d forbid, racist theocracies?

The Right of Return does not privilege Jews as a religious group but as a national one. Jews in the diaspora are seen by the government of Israel as nationals living overseas. In privileging them over non-nationals, Israel is doing exactly the same as every other nation.

Why when a country is overwhelmingly Jewish does making it Jewish make it non-democratic? Why does having an immigration policy favoured by the majority of Israelis make Israel anti-democratic? You think the germans treat people who are "ethnically German" and people who are turkish german the same way? Does that make Germany anti-democratic?

The American Heritage Dictionary says that democracy is “Government by the people, exercised either directly or through elected representatives.” The Merriam-Webster dictionary says “government by the people; especially : rule of the majority.” All citizens in Israel have the right to vote for their representatives, so Israel is definitely a democracy. Israel could limit immigration to green eyed, redheaded, pagan amputees but it would still be a democracy. Israel could require people with curly hair to live in cardboard boxes under bridges, but it would still be a democracy. Israel could do any number of strange or nasty things but, as long as every citizen has the right to vote for their representatives, Israel would still be a democracy. By definition.

Israel was established as the Jewish Homeland. In our sole tiny Homeland, Jewish must come before democratic. Democracy simply means the majority rules. Democracy is not necessarily consistent with Jewish safety. After all, the Weimar Republic of Germany, which preceded Nazi Germany , was every bit as democratic as today's America. In Israel, Jewish is essential. Democratic comes second. Thus Israel must be empowered to take necessary measure to assure that Arabs are never able to take over Israel either by bullets or ballots.

And what of Greece? They have both a 'right of return' and a state religion. Are they a dictatorship? The UK is a 'Christian' nation with a state religion of which only 17% of the population belongs. Guess they ain't a democracy according to your criteria. Germany has a right of return and it has a state religion so that means that you are what? Sweden became a democracy in 2000 when they stop being a 'Christian' country? According to you that must be a criteria right? As for our immigration policies well those were written as part of international law. San Remo Treaty and the Covenant of the League of Nations. But that is an internal matter for us to decide. As for serving in the IDF - it is a REQUIREMENT for Jews, Druze and some others, but we do not bar anybody from service. The non-Jewish population has the privilege of not being drafted. Perhaps you should look in the mirror.

at this article's truth. In the case of Israel, Western-style democracy leads to Jewish ethnic, religious and political suicide. If anyone can prove the opposite, let's have facts and numbers.

concern which will become increasingly important in Israel as the Charedi and Arab sectors grow and demand more and more specialized benefits. I, too, agree that the nature of the state needs greater and more precise definition. Right now, we seem to be in a semi-state of anarchy.

anybody noticed that england and/ or scotland are publicly proclaimed christian states, of even a particular form of christianity, but nobody questions if they are democratic states for all their people.The only post you cannot hold in england if you are not church of england is that of head of state and church i.e. King or Queen.Why is there here all this bullshit that we cant be a jewish state for all its citizens

Democracy is the rule the majority with respect for the right of the minority, not rule by a minority that seems to be happening here. There is no reason that Israel cannot be a democratic state but it first must reorganize to recognize all the streams of Judaism and not just the ultra-orthodox. Israel should be a State for (all) Jews and not a Jewish (religious) state. Other nations have successfully declared a religious preference for their state but are democratic in nature. Israel can do the same.

Political rights only to arabs in Iraq,Syria,Lebonan,Jordan+scores of other countries

The jewish state must be a security state democracy is less vital examine dutch suffering in ww2 and the mass famine imposed as sadism revenge by nazism as it sunk..THE RIGHT TO A DIGNIFIED LIFE IS FAR GREATER THAN MOB RULE.

there is no cofusion, only the writer is confused and suffer from inferiority complex because of being a jew with diaspora mentality. he ignored the fact that jewish is a religion and nationality. iran is the islamic republic which means islamic and (in theory) democratic denotes being a republic. there are other examples and i do not see it causing these countries any problems. the antisemites will continue to blame israel and the us for any problem on the planet regardles of the name. the international media refers to israel as the jewish state and underlines it with "the only democracy in the middle east" so mister meltzer if you need to justify your salary do not write garbage but pick other topics

First of all, thanks for taking the time to respond. I really appreciate that, regardless of whether or not you agree with me. Regarding the commonalities that Israel has with other democracies in the world, specifically with those that have significant ethnic or religious minorities, I agree that there are similarities. However, there are some major differences. First of all, and this might irk some of you, the Jewish people were brought back to Israel for a purpose. Yes, I’m talking a religious purpose. The Jewish people, specifically in the land of Israel, have a mission which described in the words of the prophet is to be a “light unto the nations”. For this reason, and this reason only, God brought us back to Israel. Accepting, or not accepting this mission, is basically the crux of the problem. This is what has been swept under the carpet for years. Either we’re here to be “something Jewish” in an idealistic sense, or we’re here to be a nation just like any nation. We can try as much as we want to avoid this question but one day we’ll have to deal with it. Moreover, I’m not talking about being a “religious” state in the usual simplistic understanding of the word but rather something much more profound. I’ve touched upon this point in several articles so I’m not going to elaborate here. The State of Israel, until now, has basically been trying to have its cake and eat it too. It’s Jewish, in certain aspects, but it’s certainly not dedicated to the idealistic mission of Judaism. Thus, rather than choosing to fulfill its mission and be a Jewish nation in the profound sense of the word, it’s chosen to be like many other nations that have various types of democracies with large ethnic and religious minorities. However, this path is literally bringing Israel to destruction. As a result of failing to be true to its real mission and declaring sovereignty over all of eretz yisrael following the six day war, Israel is now being pressured to relinquish large parts of its homeland to an enemy nation. Also, when I say this path is bringing Israel to "destruction", I mean destruction. To naively believe that a Palestinian state in Judea and Samaria will not pose an existential threat to whatever is left of the State of Israel is simply avoiding reality. This is obviously another major difference between Israel and all the other countries since as far as I know. no one at the moment is pressuring England or Norway or Sweden or France or Holland or etc, etc, etc, etc, etc to relinquish significant sections of their homeland to an enemy nation. Finally, I’m not worried about what the UN or White House or European Union will say. I’m worried about my people and my country.

Read the book: "Israel and the Family of Nations" that was written by Alexander Yakobson and Amnon Rubinstein (world renowned expert on constitutional law), then show me why Democracy couldn't have national expression of the majority of it charter. Israel and the Family of Nations The Jewish Nation-State and Human Rights: http://www.meforum.org/2494/israel-and-the-family-of-nations 7#, I don't know if you are real refugee or not, but your fantasy will never be materialized. LEGAL ASPECTS OF THE PALESTINIAN REFUGEE QUESTION: http://www.jcpa.org/jl/vp485.htm

Thank you for your comments. Regarding your question, a “Jewish State” would be permeated by a sense of mission. Moreover, this would be the guiding principle for both the rulers as well as for the ruled. No one would be above this and everyone would harmoniously being striving together for the fulfillment of the mission. There might be some democratic aspects in such a state but democracy is not the guiding principle. A "democratic Jewish state" has some Jewish aspects or a “Jewish flavor” but it’s not driven by a sense of mission. Thus it’s like many other democratic states. However, for the Jewish people in the land of Israel, this is a path to self-destruction. Please see my lengthy response # 48.

Thank you for your comments. Although I’m someone who would be labeled “religious” or “orthodox”, I personally hate such labels because reality is much more complex than simplistic black and white labels. Thus, although my idea of a Jewish state would not be according to the tenets of the reform or conservative movements, it would also not be according to the simplistic understanding that unfortunately many of my coreligionists in the orthodox world have. For me, a Jewish state would simply be “Jewish”. There would be some features that are associated with the orthodox but it certainly would not be a clerical state. Regarding this last point, if you can somehow get a copy of Chaim Zimmerman’s out of print classic “Torah and Existence”, he has a section called “A Clerical State is not a Torah State”. It’s worth reading (as is the whole book).

sir ..i think the real citizin must carry his homeland but i see israil want the homeland to carry them becouse of that i think they will not be light to other nations sure not to themselve .. iam a believer and i believe that god help them to be the light but they do not rule in god laws of justice and mercy

This is the most intelligent, and first interesting, discussion I've see in ynet to date. The self destruction is built into the self-conflicting mutually exclusive definitions of "Jewish" assumed by Mr. Meltzer AND all of the tbers. Some writers assume that "Jewish" is defined by the state of Israel, the K'nesset and gov't. Others assume "Jewish" is as defined by Hitler. Still others, including me, recognize only the definition stated in Torah: those who shoulder the b'rit of Torah. It cannot be otherwise than cognitive dissonance and internal conflict when everyone blames democracy while ignoring the contradictions in the term "Jewish"; whether a "Jewish" nation includes homosexuals, a Hitlerian racist definition of Jews that includes distant relatives with no connection to the Jewish people other than "Hitler would have defined them as Jews." Of course there is no shared vision of a "Jewish" nation or state. Some "Jews" envision a "Jewish" democracy that is a homosexual utopia. Other "Jews" envision a "Jewish" democracy that is misojudaic: atheist or purely secular. There is no possibility of resolving the questions that all of you are discussing without first resolving just who is a Jew. This includes the conversion issue and how marriages and burials are adjudicated. While you're at it, you'll need to recognize the relevance of a Judaic, RATHER THAN "Jewish" nation and how all of this dictates the meaning, and relevancy, of Am Ekhad. A plethora of self-contradictions will have to be resolved that "Jews" aren't even aware of and don't yet even acknowledge. Paqid Yirmeyahu Paqid 16, The Netzarim, Ra'anana, Israel Israeli Torah-reverer: Teimani, Baladi, Dor Dai Jew Advocate for Logic as Hermeneutic Halakhic Authority www.netzarim.co.il Welcoming All Torah-reverers (Jews & non-Jew geirim)

No 38 is right whne he cites the original definition of the term "democracy". It means that the majority of citizens in a country decides how it should be called and gouverned. The Jews are overwhelmingly majority in Israel, as are Arabs in their countries( though latter lacking the democracy!) . That is why I believe Israel can be both Jewish and democratic country. However, the modern meaning of that word sometimes substantially differenciates from the original one and has been often ridiculized. Exemple: North Corea is by name a democratic republic, as almost all ex-Soviet Union satellite countries were, although we all know that there has never been a democratic choice for their population.

this is the same guy that claims he was converted legitimately YET can't and won't prove that his conversion was kosher in light of his un-orthodox beliefs that are anti-jewish (if they're jewish, why can't he get a rabbi's endorsement on that, hmm?). it's called 'true colors', baby.

ur arrogant Xn nose n2 Jewish matters where ur completely ignorant and have no business? Go convince ur "Palestinian" Arab Xn wife & leave us Jews alone in OUR own--not a Xn--country!

the fact is, israel currently is NEITHER.

kind of arrogant to defend a cult that no rabbi of any repute endorses, don't you think? and i'd think by your own words you'd not defend that 'netZERim' cult - that's not a very jewish thing to do in a jewish country...

1st I'm not so sure it was G*d who brought Jews back to Israel and 2nd, even if I were, I wouldn't assume to know his motives. But even assuming the Jewish people was brought to Israel by God for a mission, I wouldn't necessarily mix the state and the people. A state which guarantees freedom and security for the Jewish people is all the _state_ needs to do. The rest is up to the people.

starting to post anonymously? i thought you hated those who do that, too?