Page 2-THE NEWS-March, 1985
THE CHARLOTTE JEWISH NEWS
Published monthly by:
Charlotte Jewish Federation
Foundation of Charlotte Jewish Community
Marvin Bienstock, Director
Jewish Community Center
Martin Schneer, Director
Charlotte Hebrew Academy
Eleanor Weinglass, Director
Editor. Rita Mond
Advertising. Blanche Yams
Copy deadline the lOtb of each month
P.O. Box 13369. Charlotte. N.C. 28211
Tkm mppmmrmmcm ot mdvmrtlmlma Nmwm do*m mot eonmtttaf m kmmhrmtk
•mdormmmmat.
EdltoHal
Who Is A Jew?
Some people only recognize someone as being a Jew
if the parents are Jewish, or at least the mother is
Jewish. Others have the belief that only if they have
been converted by an Orthodox rabbi then they are
a Jew. Still others believe that if there is any Jewish
bloodline (Hitler's theory) then one remains a Jew.
Those converted to Judaism by Conservative and
Reform rabbis feel that they are now Jews. Personal
ly, I believe that all of the above should prevail.
However, this is only my opinion and unfortunately
has not been the prevalent one in Israel.
The Israeli parliament recently rejected the
controversial “Who is a Jew” bill last month, at least
temporarily resolving an issue that threatened to
estrange many American Jews from those in Israel.
The Knesset voted 62-51 to defeat the bill, which
would have recognized only those conversions to
Judaism performed by Orthodox rabbis.
Under the measure, people converted to Judaism
by non-Orthodox rabbis would not have been con
sidered Jews or allowed to become Israeli citizens
under the Law of Return. A centerpiece of Israeli
legislation, the Law of Return guarantees citizenship
to any recognized Jew.
Introduced by elements of Israel’s religious parties,
the bill was actively opposed by leaders of Judaism’s
Reform, Conservative and Reconstructionist move
ments. They, and even some supporters, soon dub
bed it the “Who is a Jew” bill.
Much of the opposition came from the U.S., where
many Jews asserted that the bill's passage would
divide the worldwide Jewish community and damage
Israeli fund rziising efforts.
Under Israeli law, a defeated bill cannot be re
introduced to the Knesset for at least six months, and
some supporters of the measure said they might
resubmit it. Let us hope not!
-R.M.
From the Desk of Marty Schneer
—JCC Executive Director
As the new Jewish Com
munity Center facilities take
shape, our attention becomes
increasingly focused on the
emerging role and function of
the JCC. Based on my con
tacts with the Jewish com
munity over the past year and
a half I feel there are a number
of expectations that we all
share. It’s my opinion that we
would all agree that we want
the physical plant to be pro
perly maintained. We all
would like the Center to offer
a wide variety of programs
and services for all age groups,
and we also want the Center to
serve as a meeting place for
the entire Jewish community.
On these basic points there
must certainly be a great deal
of unanimity. Our goal over
the next year is to develop a
more far-reaching ‘vision’ of
what the Center can be and to
translate this vision into an
operational plan.
I submit that our two main
tasks are one, to create an en
vironment where individuals
£ire encouraged to fulfill their
potential and two, that the
Center be a place where our
sense of Jewish identity can be
strengthened and helped to
flourish. There are some very
concrete steps that we can
take to begin to accomplish
this first task. In developing
our schedule of programs and
services we need to seek a
balance between providing
programs that the community
requests with a smattering of
new initiatives from the pro
fessional staff. It is absolute
ly essential that we employ
and train the kind of instruc
tors and group leaders who
possess a variety of skills and
who are able to conmiunicate
and nurture the creative and
physical talents of our
members. In structuring the
evolving program areas at the
new ‘J’ (i.e. drama, dance,
athletics) we need to provide
participants with an oppor
tunity to advance to a higher
level of skill development.
Perhaps our most important
goal in bridging both tasks is
to instill a feeling of accep
tance, enabling people to feel
comfortable and at home in
the JCC.
Enhancing one’s Jewish
identity seems to me to be the
more difficult of the two tasks
•4
is
MEN •:
l\AEN '
1 ORTHODOX)
1 OTHERS
I
c
& 1
i
1
* I
I
\ ^
•• !
1
1%
On The Issues.
Jra Gissen, Director NC/VA Region Anti Defamation League
Before The Supreme Court
The Anti-Defamation
League, together with the
American Jewish Committee,
American Jewish Congress
and the National Jewish Com
munity Relations Advisory
Council have submitted a
“friend of the court” brief to
the United States Supreme
Court. The issue on which they
stand united is their opposi
tion to an Alabama law pro
viding for a moment of silence
for meditation or voluntary
prayer in school.
Whatever way the decision
goes, the case, Wallace v. Jaf-
free, will become a landmark in
the history of religious free
dom in America.
A constitutional chaUenge
to the Alabama law was dis
missed in the District Court.
The Court of Appeals held the
moment of silence statute to
be unconstitutional because it
violated the religious estab
lishment clause of the First
Amendment to our Constitu
tion. It was then appealed to
the Supreme Court.
By way of background, Ala
bama law provides two prayer
statutes: one with a prescrib
ed prayer and another which
allows teachers to require a
period of silence “for medita
tion or voluntary prayer.”
Mobile County, Alabama
teachers conducted various
prayer activities including Bi
ble readings and prayer songs.
Parents filed complaints in
District Court against the
state’s statutes and the
teacher’s prayer activities. A
preliminary injunction was
issued against the school
prayer statute, but subse
quently Federal District
Judge Hand dismissed both
actions because, in his view,,
the First Amendment estab
lishment clause only applied to
the Fed^al Government!
The plaintiffs immediately
appealed to the Court of Ap
peals and to the Supreme
Court for a stay of the District
Court’s decision and an injunc
tion.
Justice Louis F. Powell
ordered a halt to the prayer
sessions in Alab£una public
schools and reinstated an in
junction outlawing the prayer
sessions pending the ruling of
the Court of Appeals.
The Court of Appeals decid
ed in favor of the plaintiffs,
ruling that both the prescrib
ed prayer statute and the
silent prayer statute were un
constitutional. It was then a|>-
pealed to the Supreme Court
which sununarily affirmed the
ruling on Alabama’s vocal
prayer statute and agreed to
hear an appeal on the silent
prayer meditation statute.
TTie brief filed by the Jewish
Agencies points out that the
Alabama law is unconstitu
tional because it uses a
government activity for a
religious purpose. In addition,
the agencies maintain that the
prayer and meditation statute
tends to establish religion in
violation of the constitutional
prohibition. Further, the agen
cies assert the statute pro
vides for a “religious exercise”
which in fact is a ritucd per
formed in an organized group
every day at the same time. In
addition the Alabama law re
quires school authorization
and teacher supervision of a
supposedly voluntary relig
ious activity which in fact has
already been found unconsti
tutional by the Supreme Court
in the 1960s.
The brief submitted by the
Jewish agencies points out
that there are many alterna
tives to the method used in Al
abama. There is no restriction
against prayer by individual
students during the school
day or at any oth^ time.
to accomplish and measure.
Our goal in this regard must
be to create opportunities for
positive Jewish experiences. I
would agree with many who
stress the importance of
Jewish education and content
as a means of helping people
get in touch with their own
Judaism. I also feel that there
is intrinsic value in enabling
Jews to socialize and par
ticipate in a whole range of ac
tivities with other Jews. Our
building must be so obviously
Jewish that one is struck by
this pervasive feel and tone as
soon as one steps into the
Center. Jewish programming
and holiday celebrations
should be key ingredients of
our overall program and
wherever possible joint pro
gramming with the synago
gues and other Jewish institu
tions and organizations should
take place.
We recognize at the JCC
that we are in the ‘people’
business. Our goal is to pro
vide people with quality pro
grams and services that
enhance their lives. There is
great excitement at the JCC
as we engage in this continu
ing dialogue to crystalize our
‘vision’ for the Jewish Com
munity Center. I look forward
to hearing from other mem
bers of the Jewish conununity
as we determine what we are
£dl about and where we need to
be at this time next year.
As you may be aware the
JCC conducted a random
survey of the membership last
month to help us better define
the needs and expectations of
the membership for the new
JCC. We plem to foUow-up our
telephone sampling with a
questionnaire to the rest of the
membership. Our preliminary
findings have been quite
enlightening and we look for
ward to publishing our results
in a future issue of the
Charlotte Jewish News after
all the data has been
tabluated. I would like to
thank the following in
dividuals who helped us com
plete the random telephone
sampling: Ann Abel, Meg
Goldstein, Vicki Hopkins, Lila
Josephson, Harold Josephson,
Sandy Rosenberg, Lynne
Sheffer and Cheryl Spangan-
thal.
THE CHARLOTTE JEWISH
NEWS encourages its readers
to submit articles and letters
expressing their opinions on
matters of interest to the
Jewish community. Such
submissions should be typed
and double-spaced. They may
be edited in order to fit the
available space. Mail to CJN-
P.O. Box 13369, Charlotte,
N.C. 28211.