all of the above? - Comment - Israel News | Haaretz Daily Newspaper
  • p.TextOutput { R static java.lang.String p.mt = 'com.polopoly.cm.app.policy.SingleValuePolicy'; R static java.lang.String p.publicInterfaces = 'com.polopoly.cm.app.policy.SingleValued'; R static java.lang.String p.beanClass = 'com.polopoly.cm.app.policy.SingleValuePolicy'; RW java.lang.String value = '54'; R transient java.lang.Object _data = 'com.polopoly.cm.app.policy.NumberInputPolicy'; },ModelStore=com.polopoly.model.ModelStoreInMap p.TextOutput { R static java.lang.String p.mt = 'com.polopoly.cm.app.policy.SingleValuePolicy'; R static java.lang.String p.publicInterfaces = 'com.polopoly.cm.app.policy.SingleValued'; R static java.lang.String p.beanClass = 'com.polopoly.cm.app.policy.SingleValuePolicy'; RW java.lang.String value = '0'; R transient java.lang.Object _data = 'com.polopoly.cm.app.policy.NumberInputPolicy'; },ModelStore=com.polopoly.model.ModelStoreInMap
    • Anna
    • 22.07.10 | 08:35 (IDT)

    Yes, I have a "problem" with - the definition: An "ordinary person" may very well discriminate, so that's not an appropriate standard here. Besides, we may all create our own identities, there's nothing wrong with that in itself. It's only wrong if we commit a crime doing so... but this definition makes it a crime even to create our own identities! - the fact that the court believed this definition fit the case. - with "just following" precedent, yes. If a court thinks that a precedent is wrong, it should not follow it. Everything else is not democracy (sorry to all you case law believers!), but just believing that a higher hierarchy has the right to prohibit your opinion. A lower court will be overruled by the higher court, fine, but they should voice dissent to show if the higher court is backed by others' opinions or not. - with a woman who first chooses to have consensual sex and then sue him because she believes he's of the wrong race. Yes, I have an enormous problem with such racist behavior. This woman should be sued for a hate crime. *That* would be reasonable. And yes, finally, I simply have a problem with undermining the term "rape" by defining that any such misrepresentation + sex = rape. That's a hit in the face of actual rape survivors. Call such misrepresentation fraudulent or whatever. Is it illegal? Maybe, in rare cases (though not here). Anyways, it's just not rape.

    from the article: He impersonated a human
    First published 02:04 22.07.10 | Last updated 02:04 22.07.10
Haaretz Headlines
Scene of the bus-truck collision in central Israel, February 14, 2016.

At least six dead in truck-bus collision in central Israel

Egged 402 bus appears to have crashed into truck that was parked on the side of the road, emergency services volunteer says.

Palestinian construction workers in the West Bank settlement of Susya, in 2014.

Israel broke ground on 1,800 settlement homes in 2015, Peace Now says

The government's message to the settlers is that construction will be approved after the fact, the group says.

Screenshot from a video showing a Border Police officer pushing a disabled Palestinian to the ground

Israeli trooper filmed pushing disabled Palestinian to the ground

Incident appears to have occurred during riots after an attempted terror attack in Hebron.

U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, Oct. 8, 2010.

The Chutzpah and Yiddishkeit of Justice Antonin Scalia

Though dubbed 'bad for the Jews' for his stance on religion and state, the fiery Italian Catholic judge was a friend of the former Israeli Chief Justice, and brought 'chutzpah' into the Supreme Court.