Thank you for running Steve Lipman’s article “Jewish Secularism’s Moment” (May 20). The topic is important: a challenge to both synagogues and the organized Jewish community to probe more deeply into what is meaningful and sustaining about Jewish life — secular and religious.
Francine Klagbrun’s column about the image of Chinese vs. Jewish mothers gives one pause. I wonder if she might be willing to take some advice from a man (“Jewish Mothers Aren’t Tigers,” Opinion, May 13).
If the “Tiger” model is so wrong, shouldn’t we be asking why the children of Chinese immigrants, by and large, still retain deep respect of their parents?
One of the main themes Gary Rosenblatt addressed in his column, “Recognizing And Responding To Real Enemies” (May 13) is to take seriously those who talk of the destruction of Israel and its people. He points out that nothing has changed with Hamas and its leadership since they merged with the Fatah.
Everyone lauds all efforts that will result in a quality Jewish education for our children (“‘Radical’ Hebrew School Model Takes Shape,” April 29). Producing proud and literate Jews will guarantee a Jewish future. However, as indicated, “Hebrew school” has failed to do this. In fact, since students rarely know Hebrew after years in Hebrew school, we now call these schools congregational schools, religious schools or complementary schools. The term “supplementary school” has fallen out of favor.
I am concerned that remarks of mine quoted in James Besser’s article on Newt Gingrich and Jewish Republicans left an incomplete and therefore misleading impression (“Will Gingrich Bomb With Jewish Republicans?” May 13).
When I was asked how Jewish voters would assess a Gingrich candidacy, I mentioned one consideration that might hamper him — the perception that his rhetoric is too hard-edged and that he emphasizes social issues more than some Jewish voters may think is called for.
Regarding “Alienation from Israel Hitting Liberal Seminaries” (editor’s column, May 6), I am sorry that the names of the students who are supporting/participating in anti-Israeli propaganda were not published.
These students may become the future leaders of Jewish communities in America and abroad, and I'd certainly like to know who they are. These students may become the teachers of my children and grandchildren, and I don’t want that to happen.
I was deeply disappointed to hear about young rabbinical students feeling “alienated” from Israel (“Alienation From Israel Hitting Liberal Seminaries,” Editor’s column, May 6).
Gee, if I had a year to spend in Israel to study and absorb the culture, I could think of many other ways to experience it besides the chic existential “alienated” pose that these students demonstrate.
I am surprised and dismayed that while the editorial on Tony Kushner and Jeffrey Wiesenfeld left it an open question whether a great artist who has serious criticisms of Israeli government policy but affirms Israel’s right to exist deserves to receive an honorary doctorate from CUNY (he already has from Brandeis), it did not even think to ask whether someone who believes that Palestinians are not human beings deserves to be a trustee of CUNY (“Welcome To The CUNY Bin,” Editorials, May 13).
I am writing to correct a misconception that your article, “For Staten Island Jews, A Central Address” (March 4), may have created. The Jewish community of Staten Island has indeed had a central address since 1968 in the form of the Council of Jewish Organizations of Staten Island. The Council is made up of representatives of many of the local Jewish organizations, especially the interdenominational synagogue community.