The following quote is from an editorial in a popular newspaper that I often use as a source for many of my writings.
‘If Jewish community leaders in the United States are genuine in their desire to slow the processes weakening their community, they would do well to reexamine their entrenched opposition to state or federal support for religious education, including Jewish education. They fear that such support, even in the form of tax rebates, would violate the absolute separation of church and state, which could in the long term harm the Jews above all. But it would appear that the proven danger of assimilation must take precedence over fears of potential dangers, particularly after the experience of other Jewish communities that receive funding from the countries they live in without being hurt as a result.’
This sounds very much like something Agudah spokesman, Rabbi Avi Shafran would write. It is aimed at a secular Jewish establishment that has been subverting any and all attempts to relieve the religious community of the oppressive tuition burden. But it wasn’t Rabbi Shafran. It was Ha’aretz. That’s right. It was the ‘anti religious’ Ha’aretz arguing that assimilation is a far greater danger than the violating the principle of absolute separation of church and state.
I have never thought that Ha’aretz was anti- religious. At least not the English language version. And this editorial proves it. Why would they care about Diaspora Jews assimilating if they are anti religious? This does not mean to say that they are pro Torah. I don’t think they are. But they are not anti-Torah.
Yet whenever I use them as a source, I will always get at least one comment asking how I can rely on such a proven Torah hating newspaper. And telling me not to believe anything I read in it. Of course what they are really saying is that I shouldn’t believe anything in there that disagrees with their worldview. According to them, that is always a lie.
The fact is that newspapers like this are reliable to the extent that any journalistic enterprise is that adheres to journalistic standards. To the extent that they occasionally err is to the extent that human beings are involved. Mistakes in perceptions, failing to double check sources, and personal biases of the reporters, no matter how objective, play a role. But there is no deliberate intent to mislead.
So why is there all this rejection by many religious Jews? Well, it isn’t only religious Jews who complain when they get an unflattering story about themselves. It’s all about whose ox is being gored. And for religious Jews newspapers like Ha'artez are an easy target because the editors are not observant. And the pre-supposition by many in the Orthodox world is that as secular Jews they are anti-Frum.
Another editorial in Ha’aretz is an example where they would accuse it of anti religious bias. And the tone of that piece does make it seem that way. Here is an exerpt:
‘Against this background, it is shocking to learn that yesterday the Knesset decided to extend the so-called Tal Law for another five years due to the government's need to keep Shas in the coalition. This is a cynical, immoral law that absolves a significant portion of Jewish Israelis from the need to either do army service or work for a living. The fact is that 80 percent of ultra-Orthodox men do not work; instead, they live on government grants and stipends and the earnings of their wives. After all, why should they risk their lives? Why should they leave their comfortable incubators as long as the secular donkey is there to bear the burden for them?’
Very crude! It even rubbed me the wrong way. But the fact is I have made pretty much the same arguments this editorial has. And even though I wouldn’t quite put it the way Ha’aretz did (to say the least) that is how many secular Jews look at it. Of course I realize that for the truly dedicated Ben Torah, it isn’t about dodging the draft or risking their lives. It is about devoting full time to learning L’Shma. But the facts remain the same. They are not risking their lives. As for dodging the draft, I saw a statistic recently that one in four eligible Israelis (meaning those not already exempted by Yeshiva exemptions) managed to dodge the draft themselves. This should certainly give pause to those who accuse only the Bnei Torah of draft dodging.
One might still say that tone of the editorial is anti-religious. Perhaps. But I would take that tone with a huge grain of salt. Firstly because that editorial has some underlying valid points. Secondly because that perspective about the Bnei Troah is held by a great number of people whose sons and daughters do serve. Thirdly, the personal bias of any given editorial writer is going to be expressed somehow in what he or she writes. And finally, angry rhetoric makes for more exiting reading which is always a goal because that sells more newspapers.
Whenever one sees an article like this, one should consider these facts and read between the lines. And remember that not everything is black and white. One should not judge a newspaper's over all attitudes based on one unfavorable editorial and realize that journalistic integrity must in the long run be the driving force in any newspaper if it is to maintain any long term credibility among its readers.
