Tag Archives: religious

Oklahoma school board approves what would be the 1st taxpayer-funded religious school in US – ABC News

  1. Oklahoma school board approves what would be the 1st taxpayer-funded religious school in US ABC News
  2. Oklahoma Approves First Religious Charter School in the U.S. The New York Times
  3. Oklahoma board votes to approve application for nation’s first publicly funded religious charter … KOCO 5 News
  4. Oklahoma Virtual Charter School Board approves nation’s first religious public charter school; gains instant pushback KFOR Oklahoma City
  5. Oklahoma school board approves what could be the 1st taxpayer-funded religious school in U.S. PBS NewsHour
  6. View Full Coverage on Google News

Read original article here

Prince Harry snubbed at King Charles’ coronation as new details on religious ceremony are revealed – Fox News

  1. Prince Harry snubbed at King Charles’ coronation as new details on religious ceremony are revealed Fox News
  2. Prince Harry “Is Like A Little Boy Stamping His Feet Not Telling Coronation Organisers His Plans” TalkTV
  3. ‘What are you doing there?’: Piers Morgan questions Prince Harry’s coronation attendance Sky News Australia
  4. Prince Harry ‘can’t expect tea time’ with King Charles ‘on the regular’ The News International
  5. Prince Harry “May Well Pull Out Of The Coronation At The Last Minute”, Says Royal Commentator TalkTV
  6. View Full Coverage on Google News

Read original article here

SCOTUS Christian postal worker case will change standard on accommodating religious Americans: Legal counsel – Fox News

  1. SCOTUS Christian postal worker case will change standard on accommodating religious Americans: Legal counsel Fox News
  2. USPS worker takes religious rights case to Supreme Court after forced to work Sundays KOMO News
  3. Latter-day Saints join brief asking Supreme Court to protect religious employees at work Deseret News
  4. Conservative Christians aren’t the only ones asking for accommodation in mailman case The Washington Post
  5. Supreme Court appears poised to expand, but not radically reshape, religious workplace accommodations, advocates say Jewish Insider
  6. View Full Coverage on Google News

Read original article here

Far-right MK says doctors could deny treatment on religious grounds, sparking uproar

Religious Zionism lawmaker Orit Strock, who is set to be a minister in the new Israeli government, said on Sunday that doctors should be allowed to refuse to provide treatments that contravene their religious faith, as long as another doctor is willing to provide the same treatment.

Strock’s comments were denounced as racist and discriminatory by numerous politicians from the outgoing coalition, while incoming prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu distanced himself from her position. Netanyahu also denied that his coalition would allow a law to this effect to pass, although nascent coalition agreements reportedly state that the current law against such discrimination will be amended.

Chair of the Israel Medical Association Prof. Zion Hagay insisted that doctors in Israel would defy any attempt to allow the use of discriminatory practices in the treatment of patients.

“If a doctor is asked to give any type of treatment to someone that violates his religious faith, if there is another doctor who can do it then you can’t force them to provide treatment,” Strock told Kan public radio.

“Anti-discrimination laws are just and right when they create a just, equal, open and inclusive society,” said Strock, who is slated to become the minister for National Projects in the new government, with authority over the Department of Jewish Culture — hitherto part of the Education Ministry. “But there is a certain deviation in which religious faith is trampled upon and we want to amend this.”

Strock was speaking with regard to treatments where a doctor may have some religious objection, such as fertility treatment for unmarried women, within the general context of her party’s proposed legislation to allow businesses or private enterprises to refuse service on the grounds of religious conscience.

According to the Kan state broadcaster, a clause in the coalition agreement between Likud and Religious Zionism stipulates that legislation will be passed by the new government to allow business owners to refuse service to customers if doing so violates their religious beliefs.

Netanyahu denied, however, that the coalition deal provided for such a law.

Likud leader MK Benjamin Netanyahu (left) speaks with Religious Zionism party head MK Bezalel Smotrich during a vote in the Knesset, December 20, 2022. (Yonatan Sindel/Flash90)

“MK Orit Strock’s words are unacceptable to me and my colleagues in Likud. The coalition agreements do not allow for discrimination against LGBT people or for harming the right of any citizen in Israel to receive service. Likud will guarantee that there will be no harm to LGBT people or any Israeli citizen,” Netanyahu said in a statement.

Despite Netanyahu’s denial, Kan journalist Michael Shemesh tweeted an image of the clause in question of the coalition agreement, which states that the law against discrimination will be amended “in a way that will prevent injury to a private business which refrains from providing service or a product due to religious faith, on condition that it is a service or product which is not unique and for which an alternative can be found nearby and for a similar price.”

According to Kan, the clause appears in every coalition agreement between the Likud and the other parties of the incoming government, although only the deal between Likud and Agudat Yisrael, one half of the United Torah Judaism faction, has been formally signed so far.

The law as it stands forbids discrimination by those providing public services or products on the basis of race, religion, gender, sexual orientation, and other similar considerations, and anyone doing so is liable to be fined.

According to Strock, the legislation she and Religious Zionism are advancing would allow such providers to refuse service if it they feel it violates their religious faith, as long as there is another similar service within reasonable geographic range.

Strock gave by way of example a situation in which a Christian wanted to hold a Christmas party with a Christmas tree in a venue owned by a religious Jew.

“I assume an observant Jewish person won’t want to do this because it contravenes his religious faith… Jews gave up their lives to not do such things throughout history. The law must not treat Jewish law as something of lesser value,” she said.

“The State of Israel is the state of the Jewish people, a people that gave up its life for its religious faith. It is unacceptable that, having established a country after 2,000 years of exile and of laying down their lives for the Torah, this country will call religious faith ‘discrimination.’”

Religious Zionism MK Simcha Rothman at a Knesset Arrangements Committee meeting on June 21, 2021. (Yonatan Sindel/Flash90)

Backing up Strock, fellow Religious Zionism MK Simcha Rothman made similar comments on Sunday, asserting that if a hotel wanted to refuse service to gay people on religious grounds it would be entitled to do so.

“A business owner can do whatever they like in his business. He created the business and he doesn’t owe anyone anything,” Rothman told Kan.

“The law states that a business cannot discriminate for a whole variety of reasons. This bill [proposed by his party] seeks not to abolish the general prohibition on discrimination but says that when there is a religious obstacle for someone to do something, it will be permissible for him to withhold service — rather than force him to do something that contravenes his beliefs,” said Rothman.

Asked if it would be permissible for a Jew to refuse service to Arabs on the basis that he believed Arabs should not live in the Land of Israel, Rothman declined to answer. He also refused to say what mechanism would be put into place to define whether or not refusal of service was based on a legitimate religious belief.

Strock’s and Rothman’s comments were castigated by numerous members of the incoming opposition and described as racist, homophobic and discriminatory.

Outgoing Prime Minister Yair Lapid denounced Strock’s remarks and blamed Netanyahu for the rise of such sentiments, saying he was “leading us to a benighted state [ruled by] Jewish law.”

Labor MK Gilad Kariv tweeted, “We should not be surprised by Orit Struck’s racist comments. It is her life’s teaching. We should be outraged by the equanimity of Likud MKs in light of these disgraceful and dangerous comments.”

Yesh Atid MK Ram Ben Barak said he did not believe Netanyahu’s denials and warned that the country was moving in a direction that would allow for widespread discrimination.

“We have lived through periods in which there were signs saying ‘no entry to Jews,’ and now we see these laws that state that business owners can decide whom they want to sell to. There will be grocery stores that will say ‘no entry to women’ and tomorrow there will be another that says ‘no entry to Arabs,” Ben Barak predicted.

Hagay, chairman of the Israel Medical Association, insisted that “doctors in Israel are committed to the doctor’s oath and will not allow any person or any law to change this fact,” in response to Strock’s comments.

“We will not allow foreign or political considerations to be introduced between doctors and patients. The health system has always been an island of sanity, a symbol of coexistence, a place in which Jews and Arabs work shoulder to shoulder, with the value of equality a guiding light for them,” tweeted Hagay.

“The Hebrew doctor’s oath says explicitly, ‘You shall help a sick person since they are sick, be they a foreigner or a non-Jew, and be they a citizen, despicable or honorable.’ And in Maimonides’ doctors’ prayer it is written ‘I will only see the human in a sick person.’ That is how it always was and how it will be forever.”

The chair of the Association for LGBTQ Equality in Israel, Hila Peer, also condemned the remarks, describing them and the proposed law as “un-Jewish” and disgraceful.

“MKs Strock and Rothman want to mark out LGBT people so that we’ll remain in our homes as in the dark days of humanity. We will not agree to this in any way,” said Peer, calling on Netanyahu to oppose such legislation.

Responding to the criticism, Struck said, “No one intends to discriminate against LGBT people because of their identity or what they identify with. Not in medical treatment, or any other manner. LGBT people are human beings deserving of respect and love like anyone else.”

She insisted, however, that if there was “medical treatment that contravenes Jewish law, a religiously observant doctor will not be forced to give it, regardless of the identity of the patient.”

FB.Event.subscribe('comment.create', function (response) { comment_counter++; if(comment_counter == 2){ jQuery.ajax({ type: "POST", url: "/wp-content/themes/rgb/functions/facebook.php", data: { p: "2907172", c: response.commentID, a: "add" } }); comment_counter = 0; } }); FB.Event.subscribe('comment.remove', function (response) { jQuery.ajax({ type: "POST", url: "/wp-content/themes/rgb/functions/facebook.php", data: { p: "2907172", c: response.commentID, a: "rem" } }); });

}; (function(d, s, id){ var js, fjs = d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0]; if (d.getElementById(id)) {return;} js = d.createElement(s); js.id = id; js.src = "https://connect.facebook.net/en_US/sdk.js"; fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js, fjs); }(document, 'script', 'facebook-jssdk'));

Read original article here

A Texas Judge Just Took Religious ‘Freedom’ Too Far

The long march of religious liberty exemptions is gaining speed. The people who brought you contraceptive care exemptions and Covid rule and vaccine exemptions have now moved on to insurance for anti-HIV drugs. Last week, a federal district court held that a Christian employer is entitled to an exemption from the requirement that all insurance plans must cover pre-exposure prophylaxis (PreP) drugs that prevent the spread of HIV.

Superficially, the court’s decision, under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA), seems to resemble the exemption from the Affordable Care Act’s mandatory contraceptive coverage that the Supreme Court granted in the 2014 Hobby Lobby case. But on a deeper level, the new decision goes much further than the Hobby Lobby decision.

If upheld by the appellate court and the Supreme Court, the Texas ruling would exempt an employer who refused to provide any health-care coverage of any kind on the ground that medical insurance encourages people to rely on medical science, not religious faith, in planning their lives.

To see how important this case is, you have to go back to 2014. In the Hobby Lobby case, the Christian employer claimed its religious liberty was burdened by providing insurance for contraception. And Hobby Lobby explained that it considered contraception religiously wrong.

In contrast, in the new case, Braidwood Management Inc. made a much less direct argument. It claimed its religious exercise was substantially burdened because providing PreP drugs “encourage homosexual behavior, prostitution, sexual promiscuity and intravenous drug use.”

In other words, Braidwood did not say that it was inherently religiously wrong to use the medicine, the way Hobby Lobby said it was wrong to use contraception. It said, rather, that providing insurance for it would “encourage” behavior they believe violates the Bible. The district court accepted that extraordinarily broad assertion.

The upshot is that, under the new ruling, anyone who wants to avoid almost any provision of federal law would be able to say that obeying the law would enable behavior that his religion disfavors.

The Department of Health and Human Services seems to have understood the enormous implications of Braidwood’s broad assertion of a right to exemption. In response, HHS argued that Braidwood’s claim was based on an “empirical” assertion, namely that these medicines “facilitate” gay and extramarital sex. Consequently, HHS reasoned, Braidwood should have to prove its fact-based claim about the world, not simply assert it without providing any evidence.

The court sharply rejected HHS’s position. “Defendants [HHS] inappropriately contest the correctness” of Braidwood’s beliefs, the court wrote, “when courts may test only the sincerity of those beliefs.” [Emphasis original.] In other words, it doesn’t matter if the assertion is true; all that matters is that Braidwood believes it. Under this logic, once Braidwood, or anyone else seeking an exemption on religious grounds, asserts its sincere belief that something (anything!) burdens its religious belief, that’s the end of the story. The courts must accept whatever the party says.

In support, the court cited a concurring opinion by Justice Samuel Alito in the 2020 case involving the Little Sisters of the Poor. In that case, the nuns objected on religious liberty grounds to the exemption from providing contraceptive insurance that HHS had already provided. Alito wrote that if an employer “has a sincere religious belief that compliance with the [law] makes it complicit” in conduct it rejects, “then RFRA requires that the belief be honored.” The court’s majority opinion in the Little Sisters case, by Justice Clarence Thomas, did not address the issue of whether the nuns’ claim was too indirect.

It’s understandable that courts don’t want to question the logic of people’s asserted religious beliefs. After all, for many people, religion is a matter of faith; and many forms of faith are and are meant to be outside of rational logic. As I’ve said before, interrogating people under oath about their religious beliefs feels too much like the Inquisition.

Seen from this perspective, courts should always defer to every sincere assertion of religious belief, no matter how much it may depend on factual claims about the real world that are unsubstantiated or even false. And although the law technically requires considering the sincerity of the objector’s belief, in practice, courts almost invariably defer to their sincerity as well.

The long-run consequences of accepting all asserted religious liberty claims, however attenuated their logic, is that there is no logical stopping place for what valid religious liberty claims can be made for religious exemptions from federal law. If you can state your objection in a sentence — maybe even if you can’t because it’s too mystical — then the law does not apply to you.

Indeed, it’s easy to imagine an employer saying that it should be exempt from providing any medical coverage of any kind under the Affordable Care Act because it believes having medical insurance facilitates people relying on science rather than divine faith when it comes to their health. This would be an easy claim for any denomination that denies the validity of Western medicine, as Christian Science once clearly did.

But recall that, under RFRA, anyone can make any religious claim. If you want an exemption, you don’t need to say that medical coverage is useless. Under the new decision, all you have to say is that providing health care coverage for your employees will make them less likely to rely on God. Boom: You’ve saved thousands or maybe millions of dollars in health care costs.

This result cannot be what Congress intended when it enacted RFRA. Exemptions so no one will have to personally violate their own religious beliefs are one thing. Exemptions dreamt up to drive a broader set of social-religious objectives are another. The appellate courts and, ultimately, the Supreme Court are going to have to set some limits to RFRA exemptions eventually. The Braidwood case would be a good place to start.

More From Writers at Bloomberg Opinion:

• Right-Wing Parties Are Selling Out Across Europe, Too: Pankaj Mishra

• The Midterms Are Now Even Harder to Predict: Jonathan Bernstein

• Hints of Russia’s Future in South Africa’s Sanctions Past: Clara Ferreira Marques 

This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial board or Bloomberg LP and its owners.

Noah Feldman is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist. A professor of law at Harvard University, he is author, most recently, of “The Broken Constitution: Lincoln, Slavery and the Refounding of America.”

More stories like this are available on bloomberg.com/opinion

Read original article here

Turkish singer Gulsen arrested over religious schools comment | Religion News

Turkish popstar Gulsen issued an apology on social media prior to her arrest, but a gov’t spokesman called her comments a ‘disgrace’.

The Turkish pop star Gulsen was arrested on Thursday after an Istanbul prosecutor opened an investigation into charges of “inciting people to hatred and hostility” after a remark she made on stage about religious schools, local media have reported.

Singer Gulsen Bayraktar Colakoglu – a 46-year-old woman known by her first name – was detained at home in Istanbul and taken to court.

A judge then remanded her in jail pending an investigation into remarks she made at a concert in April about Imam Hatip religious schools.

A clip of the comments went viral and created outrage among senior members of President Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s conservative AK Party this week.

Gulsen is a household name in Turkey and her case has turned into headline news in the highly polarised country.

The controversial comment saw Gulsen remark to an unknown person on stage, in apparent jest, that his “perversion” was caused by his upbringing in an Imam Hatip school.

“Targeting a fraction of society with the allegations of ‘perversion’ and trying to divide Turkey is a crime of hatred and disgrace of humanity,” AK Party spokesman Omer Celik said.

Gulsen issued an apology on social media prior to her arrest.

“A joke I shared with my colleagues with whom I have worked for many years … was featured and published by those who aim to polarise society,” she said.

“I am sorry that my words gave material to malicious people who aim to polarise our country.”

Gulsen’s lawyer Emek Emre promised to appeal the star’s arrest and seek her immediate release.

“Our client has not committed any crime,” he told reporters.

A clip of the comments went viral and created outrage among senior members of President Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s conservative AK Party this week [File: Burhan Ozbilici/AP]

Vote ahead

Erdogan and his ruling AK Party will need a strong turnout from their core of socially conservative voters to reverse a slide in the polls ahead of a general election next June.

The state-run Diyanet, or Religious Affairs Directorate, has seen its budget and public influence grow in recent years, prompting charges that Erdogan is using religion to boost his ratings ahead of tight elections set for next year.

Erdogan’s supporters say the moves are a reversal of anti-religious diktats issued by the AK Party’s fiercely secular predecessors in government.

Critics say Erdogan has bent the courts to his will to crack down on dissent and free expression, charges the government denies.

The Turkish opposition has seized upon Gulsen’s case to boost their support.

CHP party leader Kemal Kilicdaroglu called on Thursday for Turkey’s youth to come out and vote next year to save artists such as Gulsen from being jailed.

“I am calling out to the youth – these unjust rulings will come to an end,” Kilicdaroglu said in a social media post.

“They are trying to rule this country by provoking and dividing you.”

Late-night news of Gulsen’s arrest prompted some Fenerbahce football fans to start singing one of her songs at a Europa League match in Istanbul against Austria Vienna.

Social media posts showed a section of the packed stadium joining in the song in solidarity with the jailed star.

Read original article here

Supreme Court: Maine cannot bar religious schools from tuition program

Placeholder while article actions load

The Supreme Court on Tuesday extended a recent streak of victories for religious interests, striking down a Maine tuition program that does not allow public funds to go to schools that promote religious instruction.

The vote was 6 to 3, with Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. writing for the majority and the court’s three liberals in dissent.

The case involves an unusual program in a small state that affects only a few thousand students. But it could have greater implications as the more conservative court relaxes the constitutional line between church and state.

Under the program, jurisdictions in rural areas too sparsely populated to support public schools of their own can arrange to have nearby schools teach their school-age children, or the state will pay tuition to parents to send their kids to private schools. But those schools must be nonsectarian, meaning they cannot promote a faith or belief system or teach “through the lens of this faith,” in the words of the state’s department of education.

Roberts said that program could not survive the court’s scrutiny.

“There is nothing neutral about Maine’s program,” he wrote. “The State pays tuition for certain students at private schools — so long as the schools are not religious. That is discrimination against religion.”

Justice Sonia Sotomayor, one of the dissenters, answered: “This Court continues to dismantle the wall of separation between church and state that the Framers fought to build.”

The case, Carson v. Makin, is broadly similar to one from Montana decided by the court last year. In that case, the court ruled that states must allow religious schools to participate in programs that provide scholarships to students attending private schools.

Roberts, writing for the majority in the case, Espinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue, said a provision of Montana’s Constitution banning aid to schools run by churches ran afoul of the federal Constitution’s protection of the free exercise of religion by discriminating against religious people and schools.

“A state need not subsidize private education,” he wrote. “But once a state decides to do so, it cannot disqualify some private schools solely because they are religious.”

Maine requires rural communities without public secondary schools to arrange for their young residents’ educations in one of two ways. They can sign contracts with schools elsewhere, or they can pay tuition at public or private schools chosen by parents so long as they are, in the words of state law, “a nonsectarian school in accordance with the First Amendment of the United States Constitution.”

In opposing Supreme Court review, officials in Maine argued that the schools students attend under the program should mirror the teaching offered at public schools.

The Supreme Court has long held that states may choose to provide aid to religious schools along with other private schools. The question in the cases from Montana and Maine was the opposite one: May states refuse to provide such aid if it is made available to other private schools?

Read original article here

Hamas’s Sinwar threatens a ‘regional, religious war’ if Al-Aqsa is again ‘violated’

In a speech Saturday night filled with murderous threats and denunciations of Israel, Hamas’s Gaza leader Yahya Sinwar said the terror group “will not hesitate to take any steps” if Israel “violates” the Al-Aqsa Mosque.

“Our people must prepare for a great battle if the occupation does not cease its aggression against the Al-Aqsa Mosque,” Sinwar said.

“Violating Al-Aqsa and Jerusalem means a regional, religious war,” he said.

Gesturing at a photo behind him of Israeli police inside the Al-Aqsa Mosque, Sinwar threatened violence against synagogues around the world if the action were repeated.

“Whoever makes the decision to allow this photo to be repeated, the violation of Al-Aqsa — he has decided to allow the violation of thousands of synagogues all across the world,” Sinwar said.

In the over hour-long address, Sinwar praised the recent terror wave against Israelis that has left 15 dead; encouraged Palestinians in the West Bank and Arab Israelis to commit more attacks; hailed a “global shift” in favor of the Palestinian cause; and urged the Islamist Ra’am party to withdraw from Israel’s governing coalition.

But Sinwar, who directs Hamas’ Gaza bureau and serves as the enclave’s de facto governor, devoted most of his speech to threatening Israel over any actions at Jerusalem’s Temple Mount holy site, which houses the Al-Aqsa Mosque.

Clashes between Palestinian rioters and Israeli forces at the compound, which is revered by both Muslims and Jews, helped spark a war between Israel and Hamas last May. The hilltop is Judaism’s most sacred site as the place of the biblical temples, and Al-Aqsa Mosque is the third holiest shrine in Islam.

Hamas leader in the Gaza Strip Yahya Sinwar is greeted by members of the Izz al-Din al-Qassam Brigades, the armed wing of the Palestinian Hamas movement, in advance of a speech in Gaza City, on April 30, 2022. (Mahmud Hams/AFP)

Ever since the May war, which Hamas dubbed “The Sword of Jerusalem,” the Gaza-based terror group has threatened to fire rockets at Israel if it violated the organization’s “red lines” in Jerusalem.

“We drew and raised that sword so that the enemy would know that Al-Aqsa did not stand alone, and that our nation would stand if Al-Aqsa and Jerusalem were violated,” said Sinwar.

Palestinians clashed repeatedly with Israeli police at the Al-Aqsa Mosque over the past month, leading to fears that the violence could again spark a broader escalation. Palestinian rioters hurled stones at police, who responded with rubber bullets, sound grenades, and tear gas, injuring hundreds.

Israeli police also prevented extremist lawmaker Itamar Ben-Gvir from marching through Jerusalem’s Old City, which the terror group had also intimated could spark rocket fire.

“The echo of this operation is only increasing,” said Sinwar.

Sinwar further accused Israel of seeking to partition the Temple Mount as a “first step” to “destroy the Al-Aqsa Mosque and build a temple” in its place. He cited as proof the uptick in Jewish visitors to the holy site over the past few years.

“Al-Aqsa is indeed in danger,” Sinwar said.

Sinwar hailed what he deemed the changing winds of global opinion against the Jewish state. He praised Palestinians in the diaspora, who he said had brought about the shift in public opinion.

“There is a worldwide shift in favor of the Palestinian cause, in many countries. Those who follow the media and political discourse see a change,” said Sinwar.

The address was Sinwar’s first major public appearance in almost a year. Last June, the senior Hamas member gave a 90-minute speech in the aftermath of the May war with Israel, laying out his vision of what the terror group had achieved.

“If the conflict breaks out again — the shape of the Middle East will change. We have proven that there are those who defend the Al-Aqsa Mosque,” Sinwar boasted at the time.

Palestinians worshipers at the Al-Aqsa Mosque on the Temple Mount in Jerusalem on the last Friday prayers of the Muslim holy month of Ramadan, on April 29, 2022. (Ahmad Gharabli/AFP)

Weeks later, a new Israeli government was formed — this time with the support of the Islamist Ra’am party. Ra’am is the political branch of the Islamic Movement, some of whose senior leaders have ties with their counterparts in Hamas.

Sinwar slammed Ra’am and its party chief Mansour Abbas, whom he called “Abu Righal” — a legendary traitor in pre-Islamic legend.

“That you serve as a support to this government which violates Al-Aqsa is an unforgivable crime,” Sinwar said.

Ra’am suspended its membership in the coalition after the recent clashes between Palestinians and police at the Al-Aqsa Mosque. Although tensions have not escalated further, Ra’am has yet to officially rejoin the government.

Abbas has publicly embraced a political program that seeks to achieve tangible gains for Arab Israelis. In interviews in both Arabic and Hebrew, the Islamist has said that Israel “was a Jewish state and will remain so.”

“For an Arab to say that this is a Jewish state is the height of degeneracy,” said Sinwar. “You get a few achievements for Arab society, in exchange for the violation of Al-Aqsa?”

Sinwar also praised a wave of terror attacks that have left fifteen dead, the deadliest wave of violence against Israelis in years. On Friday night, two Palestinian gunmen shot dead a security guard outside the settlement of Ariel in the northern West Bank.

Hamas has not taken responsibility for any of the attacks — but the terror group’s officials have repeatedly extolled them. Sinwar singled out an attack by Ra’ed Hazem, a Palestinian from Jenin who killed three Israelis in late March on a bustling Tel Aviv boulevard.

“If one Palestinian with a pistol can do that in downtown Tel Aviv, what could ten elite resistance fighters do?” said Sinwar.

Sinwar praised Hazem’s father, retired PA security officer Fathi Hazem, for giving him “the best education, that produced an earthquake that shook [Israel].”

Palestinian rioters hurl stones toward Israeli security forces at the Al-Aqsa mosque compound atop the Temple Mount in Jerusalem’s Old City, on April 15, 2022. (Jamal Awad/Flash90)

“Our people in the West Bank, youth of the West Bank, don’t wait for anyone’s decision! Individual acts have proven themselves exceptionally successfully,” said Sinwar.

As for Arabs living in Israel, he urged them, too, to kill Israelis: “Our people living inside the occupier state — in the Negev, in the [northern] Triangle, in Haifa, in Acre, in Jaffa and in Lod — everybody who has a gun should take it, and those who don’t have a gun should take a butcher’s knife or any knife he can get,” he said.

Sinwar also slammed the United States and the international community for supporting Ukrainian refugees, but not Palestinians.

“The world’s conscience is sensitive and delicate… in the face of blue-eyed refugees. Well, our people and its cause have persisted for seventy years,” said Sinwar.

FB.Event.subscribe('comment.create', function (response) { comment_counter++; if(comment_counter == 2){ jQuery.ajax({ type: "POST", url: "/wp-content/themes/rgb/functions/facebook.php", data: { p: "2754106", c: response.commentID, a: "add" } }); comment_counter = 0; } }); FB.Event.subscribe('comment.remove', function (response) { jQuery.ajax({ type: "POST", url: "/wp-content/themes/rgb/functions/facebook.php", data: { p: "2754106", c: response.commentID, a: "rem" } }); });

}; (function(d, s, id){ var js, fjs = d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0]; if (d.getElementById(id)) {return;} js = d.createElement(s); js.id = id; js.src = "https://connect.facebook.net/en_US/sdk.js"; fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js, fjs); }(document, 'script', 'facebook-jssdk'));

Read original article here

Ukrainian historic, religious sites damaged in Russian invasion

At least 53 historical sites have been damaged in Ukraine, according to a report.

The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) has called for additional protective measures to be implemented to protect these invaluable sites, amid the ongoing Russian War. 

In total, UNESCO’s report listed 29 religious sites, 16 historical buildings, four museums and four monuments that have been totally or partially damaged.

“We are very concerned about both the situation at the humanitarian and (cultural) heritage levels. Humanity’s heritage is in danger (in Ukraine),” UNESCO’s assistant director-general for culture Ernesto Ottone said during a news conference, Reuters reported.

Russia to face additional economic actions: Ukrainian official

Russian forces lost more than 50 armored vehicles after fighting in Chernihiv, Ukraine: report

Translation: “In the Chernihiv region, in recent days, the enemy has suffered significant losses – more than 50 units of armored vehicles and [other] vehicles.”

“A number of settlements were liberated, in particular, the village of Shestovytsia near Chernihiv. Let’s win together!”

Ukraine claims Russian forces have left Chernobyl, handed over control

Ukraine state energy company Energoatom said Friday that Russian forces have handed back control of the Chernobyl nuclear power plant. 

Energoatom claimed the pullout happened after soldiers received “significant doses” of radiation from digging trenches in the forest in the exclusion zone around the closed plant.

Read more: Ukraine claims Russian forces have left Chernobyl, handed over control

U.S. to send $300 million in military equipment to Ukraine

The U.S. will provide an additional $300 million in military equipment to Ukraine as their war with Russia continues, the Defense Department announced.

Pentagon press secretary John Kirby shared the additional aid in a statement Friday evening, saying the new package “represents the beginning of a contracting process to provide new capabilities” to Ukraine.

The U.S. has given more than $1.6 billion to Ukraine since the start of the war.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.



Read original article here

Elon Musk reveals 3 existential threats he’s scared of, including a declining birthrate, religious extremism, and ‘artificial intelligence going wrong’

Elon Musk speaks during a press conference at SpaceX’s Starbase facility near Boca Chica Village in South Texas on February 10, 2022JIM WATSON/AFP via Getty Images

  • Mathias Döpfner, the CEO of Insider’s parent company, recently interviewed Tesla CEO Elon Musk.

  • In response to the question, “what is your biggest fear?” Musk listed three existential threats.

  • They included a declining birthrate, religious extremism, and “artificial intelligence going wrong.”

Tesla CEO Elon Musk revealed three “existential threats” he believes currently face humanity during a recent interview with Mathias Döpfner, the CEO of Insider’s parent company, Axel Springer.

The richest man in the world said he fears religious extremism, a declining birthrate, and “artificial intelligence going wrong.” Death, however, did not make his list.

“I spent a lot of time talking about the birthrate thing,” Musk said. “That might be the single biggest threat to the future of human civilization.”

Musk has long flagged his concerns of the declining birth rate, a trend that has accelerated amid the pandemic “baby bust.” A 2021 CDC report found that the US birth rate fell by 4% from 2019 to 2020, the sharpest single-year decline in nearly 50 years and the lowest number of births since 1979.

“I’m really worried about this birthrate thing,” Musk said. “That’s been troubling me for many years, because I just don’t see it turning around. Every year it’s worse. And I drive my friends crazy with this.”

While the fear of not enough birthing ranked high on Musk’s list, the fear of dying did not.

“I certainly would like to maintain health for a longer period of time,” he told Döpfner. “But I am not afraid of dying. I think it would come as a relief,” adding that he would like to live long enough to see SpaceX fully realized.

Several of the world’s billionaires — including Peter Thiel and Jeff Bezos — are on the hunt to discover the scientific fountain of youth. Musk, however, said he has no interest in increasing the human lifespan.

“I don’t think we should try to have people live for a really long time,” he said. “That it would cause asphyxiation of society.”

Musk specifically referenced US politicians who are older than the bulk of the population, an age gap he believes has caused the government to lose touch with the average constituent.

“The truth is, most people don’t change their mind. They just die. So if they don’t die, we will be stuck with old ideas and society wouldn’t advance,” he continued.

On the flipside, Musk said his greatest hope is for humanity to created a “self-sustaining city on Mars.”

“I would be happy if humanity has a self-sustaining city on Mars because then, probable lifespan of humanity is much greater,” he explained. “I think we really just got this little candle of consciousness, like a small light in the void. And we do not want this small candle in the darkness to be put out.”

Beyond Musk’s goals for the future of humankind, his feelings around personal happiness are less clear-cut.

“For one to be fully happy, I think you have to be happy at work and happy in love. So, I suppose I’m medium happy,” he said. Earlier this month, Musk split from singer Grimes after welcoming a second child together.

Read the original article on Business Insider

Read original article here

The Ultimate News Site