[LottiFurmann]

Let me think about that for a while.

[9mm_fan]

I have to say that such hateful post as Reffo's I haven't seen in a long time.
That is not sarcasm (too obvious) that is not cynical (too rude) this is plain ugly offensive bitterness.
but what would an elitist snob arab loving liberal leftist like me would know ...

I voted yes - freedom of worship is a fundamental civil right. Everyone should, in theory, be allowed to pray wherever they wish.
I say in theory b/c in practice that is not so (you wouldn't allow Muslims to pray in the western wall, or inside a synagogue - would you?)
However, there are technical difficulties in this specific case. Jews obviously cannot pray in a mosque or any other type of Islamic temple. I think that excludes all the structures that stand today on the temple mount. we cannot erect a new building on that sensitive place. perhaps Jews can perform their worship in open air?

[Lt_Apple]

I have to say that such hateful post as Reffo's I haven't seen in a long time.
That is not sarcasm (too obvious) that is not cynical (too rude) this is plain ugly offensive bitterness.
but what would an elitist snob arab loving liberal leftist like me would know ...

I voted yes - freedom of worship is a fundamental civil right. Everyone should, in theory, be allowed to pray wherever they wish.
I say in theory b/c in practice that is not so (you wouldn't allow Muslims to pray in the western wall, or inside a synagogue - would you?)
However, there are technical difficulties in this specific case. Jews obviously cannot pray in a mosque or any other type of Islamic temple. I think that excludes all the structures that stand today on the temple mount. we cannot erect a new building on that sensitive place. perhaps Jews can perform their worship in open air?

Thank you sharonbn for reminding me that I am hateful, bitter ugly and rude too. I should have included those descriptions of myself in my original post.

[Slonopotam845]

Now let's do a reality check ...

Currently, any Jew praying at the temple mount is arrested at the insistence of the waqf (the Arab Islamic trust). Even if the prayer is a silent prayer or even if it is only a suspicion of prayer.

In 2000 when the then Israeli opposition leader Sharon went up to the Temle Mount, after Ehud Barak's peace offer, the Arabs rioted and started the second Intifada. At the time, the Arabs claimed that Sharon's visit to the holiest site of the Jewish people was an unbearable offense to them. That's why they rioted.

But I am bitter, hateful, ugly and rude for making that statement that our sharonbn got so uppity about? It couldn't be his political correctness gone amok instead?

[doctorzlo]

...we cannot erect a new building on that sensitive place....

We will, one day.

[brraverishhh]

There is a Rabbinic consensus against prayer on the Temple Mount. The reason, as it was explained to me, is that the place has been defiled - not by Muslims, mind you, but by Roman paganism before them. There are, however, a handful that insist on doing it because of nostalgia and the historic meaning of the place.

On the Muslim side, Muslims really suffer to see another religion next to theirs. It is really a serious internal conflict. On one hand, you are told that you are a member of God's only, first and last revealed religion, on the other you see other religions standing straight. Understand how unbearable it is.

It was not too long ago that in some Arab countries, Jews, even in their holiday clothes, were made to take off their shoes outside in certain towns or when passing a mosque, rain or shine. That humiliation that they inflicted on those Jews - who represent Judaism - helps them soothe somewhat that anger. But in Israel it is different.

And so, because none of the parties concerned wants it - except for some fringe - I thought it was a bad idea.

[Paul Bunyan]

Sylvia

The following reference talks about how Jewish religious law views accessing the site ...

In August 1967 after Israel's capture of the Mount, the Chief Rabbis of Israel, Isser Yehuda Unterman and Yitzhak Nissim, together with other leading rabbis, asserted that "For generations we have warned against and refrained from entering any part of the Temple Mount."[72] A recent study of this rabbinical ruling suggests that it was both "unprecedented" and possibly prompted by governmental pressure on the rabbis, as well as "brilliant" in preventing Muslim-Jewish friction on the Mount.[17][73]

Rabbinical consensus in the post-1967 period in the Religious Zionist stream of Orthodox Judaism held that it is forbidden for Jews to enter any part of the Temple Mount,[74] and in January 2005 a declaration was signed confirming the 1967 decision.[75]

Nearly all Haredi rabbis are also of the opinion that the Mount is off limits to Jews and non-Jews alike.[76] Their opinions against entering the Temple Mount are based on the danger of entering the hallowed area of the Temple courtyard and the impossibility of fulfilling the ritual requirement of cleansing oneself with the ashes of a red heifer.[77][78] The boundaries of the areas which are completely forbidden, while having large portions in common, are delineated differently by various rabbinic authorities.

However, there is a growing body of Modern Orthodox and national religious rabbis who encourage visits to certain parts of the Mount, which they believe are permitted according to most medieval rabbinical authorities.[17] These rabbis include: Shlomo Goren (former Ashkenazi Chief Rabbi of Israel); Chaim David Halevi (former Chief Rabbi of Tel Aviv and Yaffo); Dov Lior (Rabbi of Kiryat Arba); Yosef Elboim; Yisrael Ariel; She'ar Yashuv Cohen (Chief Rabbi of Haifa); Yuval Sherlo (rosh yeshiva of the hesder yeshiva of Petah Tikva); Meir Kahane. One of them, Shlomo Goren, states that it is possible that Jews are even allowed to enter the heart of the Dome of the Rock, according to Jewish Law of Conquest.[79] These authorities demand an attitude of veneration on the part of Jews ascending the Temple Mount, ablution in a mikveh prior to the ascent, and the wearing of non-leather shoes.[17] Some rabbinic authorities are now of the opinion that it is imperative for Jews to ascend in order to halt the ongoing process of Islamization of the Temple Mount. Maimonides, perhaps the greatest codifier of Jewish Law, wrote in Laws of the Chosen House ch 7 Law 15 "One may bring a dead body in to the (lower sanctified areas of the) Temple Mount and there is no need to say that the ritually impure (from the dead) may enter there, because the dead body itself can enter". One who is ritually impure through direct or in-direct contact of the dead cannot walk in the higher sanctified areas. For those who are visibly Jewish, they have no choice, but to follow this peripheral route as it has become unofficially part of the status quo on the Mount. Many of these recent opinions rely on archaeological evidence.[17]

The law committee of the Masorti movement in Israel has issued two responsa (a body of written decisions and rulings given by legal scholars) on the subject, both holding that Jews may visit the permitted sections of the Temple Mount. One responsa allows such visits, another encourages them http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Temple_Mount#section_5

[Beerinkol]

Yes, but I don't see any major posqim on that list. If you don't have on it Rav Obadia Yosef Rav Eliachiv or Rav Mordekhai Eliahu for example, you have nothing - with all due respect to the others.

[doctorzlo]

Now let's do a reality check ...

Currently, any Jew praying at the temple mount is arrested at the insistence of the waqf (the Arab Islamic trust). Even if the prayer is a silent prayer or even if it is only a suspicion of prayer.

In 2000 when the then Israeli opposition leader Sharon went up to the Temle Mount, after Ehud Barak's peace offer, the Arabs rioted and started the second Intifada. At the time, the Arabs claimed that Sharon's visit to the holiest site of the Jewish people was an unbearable offense to them. That's why they rioted.

But I am bitter, hateful, ugly and rude for making that statement that our sharonbn got so uppity about? It couldn't be his political correctness gone amok instead?

according to your first post, any Jew praying at the temple mount is arrested at the insistence of the apeasing leftists. that is why you are hateful - you hate the political opposition more than our joint enemy.

you should take example from ppl like dayag - his views are perhaps the extremist of all in this topic, yet he manages to express them without spewing venom on his fellow jews...

[Peptobismol]

according to your first post, any Jew praying at the temple mount is arrested at the insistence of the apeasing leftists. that is why you are hateful - you hate the political opposition more than our joint enemy.

you should take example from ppl like dayag - his views are perhaps the extremist of all in this topic, yet he manages to express them without spewing venom on his fellow jews...

No sharonbn, I don't hate my fellow Jews. At least, not those fellow Jews whom I perceive have Israel's interests at heart even if their proposed solutions are opposite to what I believe is right for Israel. As long as I feel that the leftists are trying to do what is good for Israel rather than have a specific intent to hurt Israel (some leftists, of the extremist variety DO try to do that. People like Chomsky and Finkelstein and a few others too).

I don't think you are one of those, sharonbn, so I just dislike some of your opinions. NOT you personally. But then again, who knows, it is possible that my opinions are the ones that are wrong. I do acknowledge that. Only time will tell who is right and who is wrong. But the stakes are so high that I don't think Israel can afford to take insane chances on nebulous theories and wishful thinking ...

[PhillipHer]

I thank you from excluding me from the list of the Jews you hate.
However, despite these reassuring words, I stand by my own words. you couldn't help yourself in your first post, and just say your views, you had to (once again) take the opportunity and attack the left wing. the general left wing, without any disclaimers.

never mind that the reason for the restriction is practical and not ideological, never mind that the mainstream of orthodox Jewry forbids praying on the site.
don't confuse me with the facts....

[Ifroham4]

I thank you from excluding me from the list of the Jews you hate.
However, despite these reassuring words, I stand by my own words. you couldn't help yourself in your first post, and just say your views, you had to (once again) take the opportunity and attack the left wing. the general left wing, without any disclaimers.

never mind that the reason for the restriction is practical and not ideological, never mind that the mainstream of orthodox Jewry forbids praying on the site.
don't confuse me with the facts....

Believe what you want sharonbn. Be the victim of us right wingers whom of course you would otherwise love whole heartedly right?

[Beerinkol]

I would add that there should be times set aside for Christians as well.

MK Aryeh Eldad (Ichud Leumi) believes he has found a way for Israel to give Jews the freedom to pray at their holiest site, while avoiding Muslim violence. Jews should be granted certain times to ascend to the Temple Mount and pray, he said.

Eldad has submitted a bill that would set aside separate prayer hours for Jews and Muslims. His proposal coincided with a U.S. report criticizing Israel for failing to grant Jews freedom of worship on the Mount.

“The Temple Mount is the holiest place to the people of Israel, the place where the First and Second Temples stood,” Eldad said. “The Temple Mount is also a holy place to Muslims, where the Al-Aqsa Mosque stands, and the Temple Mount is special to Christianity as well.”

“In order to allow freedom of worship and the right to visit the Mount, special visiting days should be established for Jews and Muslims, and hours during which the Mount will be open only to Jews or only to Muslims,” he continued.

Eldad proposed a daily division that would allow each religious group to access the Temple Mount during its usual daily prayer times. Jews have three set prayer times on weekdays, while Muslims have five.

In addition, he proposed giving each group access on its holidays. Jews would have full access on Rosh Hashanah, Yom Kippur, the first and last days of Sukkot and Passover, Shavuot, and Tisha B’Av. He listed several Muslim holidays on which Muslims would have full access, among them Id al-Fitr, Id al-Adha, and Ashura.

When holidays overlap, he said, the day would be split between the two faiths.

Eldad’s proposal is reminiscent of the arrangement in the Tomb of the Patriarchs (Maarat Hamachpelah) in Hevron. There, the sacred hall over the burial place of the Biblical patriarchs and matriarchs is split between Jews and Muslims during the year, with members of each faith having access to half of the tombs. On select Jewish holidays, Jews have full access to the building while Muslim worshipers are barred, and on Muslim holidays, the opposite... source: http://www.israelnationalnews.com/Ne...5#.UCQfhkx0gfw

[brraverishhh]

update:

The bill, which has yet to be officially submitted because the Knesset is on an extended summer recess, states that the site must be open to Jews every day, except for Friday, the Muslim holy day, and on other Muslim holidays. It will be open to Muslims every day except for Saturdays and Jewish holidays.

Jews would be allowed to worship on the Temple Mount from 8:00-11:00, 14:00-18:00 and 21:00-23:00. Muslims could pray at the site from 4:00-7:00, 11:00-14:00 and 18:00-21:00.

Christian and other tourists' visiting hours would overlap with some of the Jewish and Muslim hours. source: http://www.jpost.com/DiplomacyAndPol...aspx?id=280937

[Slonopotam845]

I voted yes even though there are some who I am sure would say that it is illegal for an "occupier" to allow it's population to worship at the holy site which is under "occupation". Even if the holy site is the number one holy site of the population of the "occupiers" and the holy site of the "occupiers" precedes as a holy site as compared to the site being holy site for the population of the "occupied" by at least two milenia. But according to some, all that is irrelevant because anyone else worshiping God is provocative to the population of the "occupied" who are a highly excitable and short tempered lot and the occupying power must be sensitive to those cultural feelings of the poor "occupied" people.

I voted yes, because I believe in freedom of worship for everyone. But what would I know? After all I am a right winger and I don't know anything about humanism, fairness and "the rule of law" ...