that's not what outsourcing means

but we do get the gist of it.

It is insourcing.

I wonder if there's some term though, like shabbos goy, for this sort of thing?

You can't hire a shabbos goy. If you're paying them, they have to follow the same Shabbat while on the clock..

Oh, I know, I was just kidding.

Oh. That explains why your comment was funny, then. Well, that and that the entire situation is kind of hilarious.

Definitely one of those only-in-NYC moments (though I could also see it happening in Israel). The whole thing with me goes back to a silly joke idea I once had of opening a shabbos goy agency, which would screen each candidate to ensure only the best goyim get picked for turning on lights, etc. Probably work better in a story or movie than in real life.

reminds me of the joke about the jewish guy who gets fatally injured in a car crash on a stormy night and asks for a priest, because he wouldn't want to make the rabbi come out on such an awful night.

I can appreciate that, as a long-since lapsed Catholic!

What a bunch of exploiting assholes.

"They took our jerbs!"

It needed illustration. Lulz.

http://www.whyimcray.com/wp...

What a revolting religion.

As opposed to which other ones?

Celtic Reconstructionism.

Those are the people who deem in retrospect that Larry Bird wasn't really all that great.

heresy!!!

They're pretty much all revolting religions.

No, it's, "what a revolting development this is!" http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-M...

You're revolting. We know what millions of Christians think of gay marriage and Muslims had fun throwing them off buildings this week. Sure these fanatics suck, but chastise them, not the whole religion. Your antisemitism is showing, as the kids on the interwebs would say.

"But they do it too!" is the most ridiculously stupid of schoolyard excuses. Grow the fuck up.

That's not a fair summary: Bob says to chasten these fanatics rather than condemn Judaism as a whole, which is pretty reasonable, considering I think most people would say the same thing about Westboro & Christianity.

Nalano635 your antisemitism is showing - cool kids on the interwebs

You gonna try to shut down any debate with that reply? OK
your anti-goyism is showing-cooler kids on the interwebz

Dude your apologies have basically been "I'm sorry for what I said about Muslims but other people are being antisemitic and its true anyway."

Glass houses.

When they say "the Jewish faith is against this," do they not expect people to take them at their word? Don't make this a "no true Scotsman" argument, because at the end of the day, there won't be any true religious people left.

Ignorant people who would take anything these losers say seriously? Yeah, I guess them. The truth is the Orthodox (i.e., these fanatics, like any strict religions sect) opposes same sex marriage, while the majority of Conservative and Reformed Jews support same sex marriage. Since you're clearly Muslim, have fun digging up all the Muslims groups around the world that support same sex marriage, let alone homosexuality, let alone not punishing homosexuality by death. Go ahead, I'll wait!

The inclusion of Islamophobia into your comment isn't helping.

I apologize, I just hate how this small group that no one usually gives a shit about incites such antisemitism. People would be wise to educate themselves on how much American Jews have done and fought for civil rights movements in this country (e.g., Mississippi Burning) and gay rights movements. I was enraged, and while it is true that Islam deplores homosexuality, I shouldn't have taken the conversation there.

I think most people very aware of the long tradition of progressive American Jews and the role many played in the civil rights movement. They are also aware that they were not fanatical, orthodox and ultra-orthodox Jews.

Sanders '16!
A nice progressive Jewish boy from Brooklyn (and more recently, Vermont)

When Westboro says God is against it, does that make it true?

You can claim whatever you want. Reconstruction, Reform, & even Conservative Judaism all allow homosexuality. Pointing to hardline Orthodox & accepting them as the sole arbiters of what the Jewish faith is & isn't against doesn't make sense. That's not a No True Scotsman. Why take the radical fringe as representative? These guys are such a small sample that they literally had to pay people to help them protest.

It's true that many Jews are very progressive but to say that these guys are a small sample isn't. "According to The New York Times, the high fertility rate of Orthodox Jews will eventually render them the dominant demographic force in New York Jewry.[29]A 2009 article published by the University of Florida stated that the growth of Hasidic Judaism may cause Jewish politics in the US to shift towards the political right" 40% of all jews in the US are orthodox. these guys are not fringe like the westboro guys are fringe.

Orthodox Jews, by and large are integrated into modern society. I'd say the biggest faction is what is referred to as modern orthodox. Then you have your Lubavitchers, who are quite religious and recognizable are still quite respectful of others. The ultra religious zealot assholes (such as these guys) are still a very small percentage of even Orthodox Jews (birth rate be damned).

I'm sorry, you have been misinformed. 13% of American Jews are Orthodox. Similarly, your other citations are speculations, people making predictions about the future...not germane to a discussion about reality. More than 26% of American Christians are Evangelical, if we're comparing conservative wings of religions by percent.

Well if you want to compare Orthodox Jews to evangelicals that's fine with me. Not fringe at all and not a small sample.

the nonorthodox jews making up the vast majority all had orthodox ancestors, mostly pretty recently. they need to keep the birth rate that high to make up for low retention.

Is anything a religious person says as to the will of their deity objectively true?

In the eyes of a non-faithful, they're all fanatics to a greater or lesser degree. Yes, there are many sects of Judaism which are very liberal - and have a very storied history of fighting and dying for equal rights for themselves and others in America - but is it the Judaism that makes them liberal or is it their liberalism that caused them to reform Judaism?

If I can't take scripture at face value, and its own adherents can't agree on such, who's to say these guys are fanatics and those guys are bearers of the one true faith? Either y'all are or none of you are. So when one side hides behind their faith to propogate their bigotry and the other side declines even to call the first true representatives of the religion at all, none come out with clean hands.

You are all over the place, & logically inconsistent. You say there are sects of Judiasm with a "very storied history of fighting and dying for equal rights for themselves and others"; why doesn't your previous invocation of "No True Scotsman" apply to those sects? Why are we arguing about whether a denomination of a religion is objectively true or not? That is also completely immaterial. Your "ya'll are or non of you are" argument doesn't hold up under scrutiny. Kim Jon Il was an atheist; does that means he speaks for atheists? Strom Thurmond was a Democrat; does that mean all Democrats are segregationists? No, dude, that's...that's just not how it works.

My argument was that there doesn't appear to be any consistency in what defines a religious person. If you say "this person is but that person isn't," and the next guy disagrees with you, then it's all bunk. You may argue that I'm all over the place, but why should I say "Reform Jews are the real Jews and Haredi Jews are outlandish whackjobs," other than the fact that I find Reform Jews more agreeable to my own sensibilities?

If that's the standard by which we're to go by - or worse, that mere majority rules and that the whackjobs "are a tiny percentage" - then literally anything goes. That's the heart of culture war, an irreconcilable series of worldviews in which reality is itself strained through a lens. If "Christian," for instance, can mean a humble, giving person and a punitive, judgmental monster with equal degree of veracity, then "Christian" means nothing. If you say the former is the real Christian and the latter isn't, then it's a No True Scotsman, because by that same logic you can say that any self-described Christian who does something you don't like isn't a real Christian - and many do.

As for Atheism, that's another debate entirely, as Atheism is more the lack of a belief structure than one in itself. It's not an alternate religion. In fact, as far as any structure of ideals goes, religion seems particularly pernicious in that it is impervious to being locked down to a set of discrete stances. If anybody disagrees with a stance, poof, a new sect is formed, and yet they're all under the same umbrella. It is literally what you say it is, but it all relies on the idea that it comes from a long tradition of moral righteousness, which if nothing else undermines the very concept of morality.

Sorry man, but this is some basic set theory stuff. Some [Jews/Progressives/Christians/Atheists] are [Racists/Billionaires/Sexists/Homophobes]. That doesn't mean all in the set are. It's just not how it works. Some grapes are green but that doesn't mean purple grapes don't exist or that all grapes are green.

As purveyors of a moral guideline, "some Christians are immoral shits" means something, just as as purveyors of law and order, "some cops are corrupt asshats" means something. It undermines the whole principle and erodes faith in the system.

To argue that they're not really Christians or they're not really cops is a rhetorical method to sweep the hypocrisy under the rug. To say, "well, that's just how they are, but I'm not like that" doesn't exactly fill one with assurance, any more than the existence of decent cops makes the asshole cops disappear.

That's right, & that's why the original commenter's point about condemning the bigotry & the bigots, rather than hanging the blame on their religion, is a good one. You also keep talking about "some." Let's stop being vague & be specific. 83% of Jewish people supported gay marriage. That's more than the percent of unaffiliated people (76%). (At this point it should be mentioned that I am an atheist white guy.)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wi...

The "some" in this protest literally needed to pay people to be there. These guys are exactly like any other right wing group. Why are these guys apparently a representative sample but the Hebro Pride Party guys aren't? Can't those guys be the official spokespeople? You can condemn these old schmucks & their cartoonish antics of bigotry, & you should, but don't conflate your causes.

Well, if we're going to parse statistics, we can say that Jewish people in America are overwhelmingly middle class and urban, and thus more likely to be liberal, same as how the gay pride movement was overwhelmingly middle class and white - and thus politically viable - despite the actual nature of being homosexual likely spread evenly across the populace.

But that's parsing statistics, and the point is taken. But I'm not going to sit here and accept the most optimistic of predictions and proclamations for the same reason I didn't the last time we butted heads. I see religion as being a retardant when it comes to this stuff, and the Haredi (along with Evangelical Baptists et al) as the grand "creepy uncle" of hopefully normal folks. I see it as what religious folks can become if they're left to their own devices.

Orthodoxy shouldn't be a four letter word, but time and time again it seems like just about everything painfully wrong with our society is tied to that word. That progress is made through actively rebelling against orthodox mindsets, which still exist, and repeatedly show up at inopportune times such as this. Yet another thing to be thrown back in the closet, hopefully forgotten. But never truly forgotten.

Strom Thurmond can be laughed at, but nobody turned and said, "but his views must be respected because that's his faith." I can't take any Christian at face value because we have a great power in this country trying its best to undermine the separation of church and state. I don't believe Jews get a pass just because there's fewer of them.

they didn't pay people to "grow their numbers" but to "protect their eyes". You can't take the subcontractor presence as proof of a small sample of fanatics.

Well let me put it this way. I believe there are bigoted Orthodox Jews. I believe there are bigoted atheists. I believe there are bigoted Christians. I think it logically follows to condemn bigotry, rather than religious category.

Also, just to be a little more clear, I mean "these guys" as in "literally these guys, that the story is about" & not "Orthodox Judaism."

I think your responses are fair and measured, and I generally agree. However, calling someone antisemitic for falling into the common trap of generalizing a religion based on its extremists is what Bob did, and that's total bullshit.

Generalizing a religion based on its extremists is...
...wait, that is exactly what religious intolerance is.

And accusing people of antisemitism is an extremely loaded statement that goes beyond general intolerance.

By that process, he'd be very Islamophobic.