From: jon+usenet@unequivocal.eu 
  
 On 2025-08-05, Jeff Gaines  wrote: 
 > On 05/08/2025 in message  
 > Jon Ribbens wrote: 
 > 
 >>On 2025-08-05, Jeff Gaines  wrote: 
 >>>On 05/08/2025 in message <106sgpv$2c33g$1@dont-email.me> Jethro_uk wrote: 
 >>>>On Mon, 04 Aug 2025 21:14:53 +0100, JNugent wrote: 
 >>>>>On 04/08/2025 10:12 AM, Jeff Gaines wrote: 
 >>>>>>On 03/08/2025 in message <5996360858.0795274f@uninhabited.net> Roger 
 >>>>>>Hayter wrote: 
 >>>>>> 
 >>>>>>>>Yes, why should any one religion have precedence? It would refer to 
 >>>>>>>>"religion" (to be defined) rather than each specific religion. 
 >>>>>>> 
 >>>>>>>I'm rather confused; what law are you referring to that protects one 
 >>>>>>>religion more than another? Are you sure they just haven't been any 
 >>>>>>>attempts to persecute or whip up hatred agains members of most 
 >>>>>>>religions? Are you sure that a serious threat to persecute or kill 
 >>>>>>>methodists would not be severely punished in the unlikely event that 
 >>>>>>>it happened? 
 >>>>>> 
 >>>>>>I have pruned this, it's getting a bit long. 
 >>>>>> 
 >>>>>>The various laws relating to antisemitism protect the Jewish faith, I 
 >>>>>>am not aware of anything similar for other faiths. 
 >>>>> 
 >>>>>Those laws don't protect the Jewish faith and that isn't the intention. 
 >>>>> 
 >>>>>They protect Jewish people. 
 >>>> 
 >>>>And it seems we are back at the beginning of a large circle. 
 >>>> 
 >>>>Is "Jewish" a designation of the religion a person practices ? Or of some 
 >>>>sort of geographical origin ? 
 >>>> 
 >>>>Can I become Jewish tomorrow (or later today if the barber is open) ? 
 >>>> 
 >>>>Would that make me a semite ? Like all the other people from historical 
 >>>>Judea - including Muslims ? 
 >>>> 
 >>>>Can I have my cake and eat it ? 
 >>>> 
 >>>>These - and no other questions - are still to be decided. Luckily we now 
 >>>>have the concept of quantum physics to guide us. We may yet get there. 
 >>> 
 >>>This is completely new to me as may have been apparent from my posts. 
 >>> 
 >>>I have never been taught that being a Jew reflected anything other than a 
 >>>religion and "Jewish People" to me is people of the Jewish religion. 
 >> 
 >>But the membership of the religion is almost entirely defined by your 
 >>mother being a member of the religion, because they very rarely accept 
 >>converts. So it's both a religious group and an ethnic group, because 
 >>there's very little difference between the two in this specific case. 
 >> 
 >>>If it is something else it throws me back to my original post on this 
 >>>which, broadly, asked why we had antisemitism laws but nothing similar for 
 >>>other religions, it now seems I should have been asking why we have 
 >>>nothing similar for the equivalent of "Jewish People" not for other 
 >>>religions but for what, other races, nationalities, origins? 
 >> 
 >>We don't have any laws about Jewish people either (any more), except 
 >>for the Marriage Act thing I already mentioned. 
 > 
 > Still confused, antisemitism seems to be a crime, how does that arise 
 > if we have no laws about Jewish people? 
  
 Antisemitism isn't a crime. But you can commit crimes that involve 
 antisemitism. e.g. if you assault somebody that's a crime. If you 
 do it because they're Jewish, it's an antisemitic hate crime. If 
 you do it because they're gay, it's a homophobic hate crime. etc. 
  
 --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05 
  * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)