>

church is mostly associated with any religion so by you saying 

I guess we’re lucky that the church and state aren’t intertwined in Israel then!

most people, such as myself, assumed you were talking about religion in general, which is not the case as it seems
I thought Benjamin was facing a shut load of corruption charges and more. Did he beat them? >

No, he just bribed a bunch of parties in to backing him and got the premiership and the ability to screw with the police and company before he could get sentenced. >

Interesting. Can the Israeli PM pardon himself? (Also while we're at it: can the U.S. President pardon himself?) >

The US President can’t pardon themselves, but what Nixon did was resign and then have his VP pardon him once he became President >

We as a race need to realize that electing crooks just isn't in our best interests.
One day... >

Or electing politicians deep in a cult. (aka religion) >

I don’t think the problem with Bibi is his religiousness. The man is a snake who will say and do literally anything to get power. >

It is a related problem though, because Netanyahu is able to partner with fundamentalist religious parties (who don't care about civil liberties or the rule of law) to pre-empt his corruption cases in exchange for inflicting religion on the rest of the public, such as forcing public transportation and stores to close on the sabbath, and allowing majority-fundamentalist communities to discriminate against the non-religious. >

Yeah I agree. What I meant was Bibi himself has no religion (or principles), and that he’ll govern as religiously or secularly as he needs to keep power. In this case, you’re right that means governing ultra religiously. >

This is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 73%. (I'm a bot)


Thousands of Israelis protested on Saturday against Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's new government, regarded as the most right-wing in Israeli history, an AFP correspondent said.
Some waved Israeli and rainbow flags while others held a large banner reading "Crime minister" - a slogan widely used by Israelis during regular demonstrations against Netanyahu in past years.
Netanyahu, 73, who himself is fighting corruption charges in court, had already served as premier longer than anyone in Israeli history, leading the country from 1996-1999 and 2009-2021.


Extended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: Israeli^#1 Netanyahu^#2 includes^#3 protested^#4 against^#5 >


Thousands of Israelis protested on Saturday against Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's new government, regarded as the most right-wing in Israeli history, an AFP correspondent said.
Protesters brandished signs with slogans including "Democracy in danger" and "Together against fascism and apartheid" in the coastal city of Tel Aviv.

...

Netanyahu took office late last month at the head of a coalition with extreme-right and ultra-Orthodox Jewish parties, some of whose officials now head key ministries.
It includes a politician who late last year admitted tax evasion and a clutch of far-right personalities, including one who once kept a portrait in his home of a man who massacred scores of Palestinian worshippers.

...

Israel's new justice minister this week announced a reform programme including a "derogation clause" allowing parliament to override decisions of the Supreme Court.
Opposition leader Yair Lapid denounced the reforms, saying on Twitter that it "endangers the entire legal system of the State of Israel". >

Trump looks on and drools with envy. >

Interestingly enough, this court reform will make the courts in Israel a lot more like the American ones.
In Israel, judges are chosen by a non-political, professional entity - and not directly by politicians. One of the biggest changes of the reform is that judges will be picked by politicians - just like in the US.
Basically, Bibi is trying to replicate the situation in the US, where the SC is clearly divided into right wing and left wing judges, is highly political and vote according to whatever president nominated them. So in a way, Trump already had (and heavily exploited) the system that Bibi is trying to create. >


where the SC is clearly divided into right wing and left wing judges, is highly political and vote according to whatever president nominated them

Close. It’s actually divided into those that follow logic, precedent, and the Constitution versus the ones appointed by Republicans. >

I’m sure I will get downvoted for this BUT the issue isn’t the SC, it’s congress. Take the Roe v Wade repeal, the SC said there is nothing in the constitution that specifically guarantees the right to an abortion, therefore according to the constitution laws regarding abortion should be left up to the states. If congress wanted to guarantee rights to abortion, they could have passed a law that said that, but they never did and according to the constitution, anything that’s not a specific federal law, is left up to each state to decide. >


If congress wanted to guarantee rights to abortion, they could have passed a law that said that, but they never did and according to the constitution, anything that’s not a specific federal law, is left up to each state to decide.

Yeah but no. Congress doesn’t have to pass a law protecting freedom of speech because it IS in the Constitution. Congress doesn’t have to pass a law against self incrimination because it IS in the Constitution. Congress doesn’t have to pass a law protecting a right to privacy, because it IS in the Constitution… at least according to the 1973 SCOTUS it was.
The Supreme Court has the final say on how to read the Constitution and they almost always follow precedent, so there was no reason to think Roe was in danger. EVERYONE was under the impression that the matter was settled, which included the Republican judges who said it was settled in their confirmation hearings.
You’re basically arguing that Congress should pass laws protecting freedom of speech, freedom of religion, the right to own guns, the right to a defense, etc, just in case the SCOTUS overturns those too. >

I don't think you realize you accidentally proved his point. There's no constitutional amendment protecting abortions. There are constitutional amendments protecting the rest of the examples you used. If Congress had codified the decision then there would be no argument but because they didn't it left it open to challenge. But they didn't. That's the whole point. >

I didn't do anything I didn't intend to do. Read Thomas's concurrence on Hobbs. He's (erroneously) making the argument that unenumerated rights aren't protected by the Constitution.
Let's see what the Constitution has to say about that...

Ninth Amendment: The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

The Roe decision was correct. The Hobbs decision is wrong. It's as simple as that. Congress shouldn't have had to do shit. Fascists do the same thing in every country on earth... they take away human rights. That's what happened here. >

It's not a right and not protected under the 9th amendment until it is law. The very next amendment states anything not under federal law is left to the states to individually decide. It's that simple. I don't agree with the decision either but that doesn't change the fact Congress dropped the ball. If anything be mad at your Congress person and senators for not codifying the decision for literally 50 years. >


The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

That's fine and all, but the 9th Amendment literally protects rights that aren't enumerated anyway. So this simply states any powers not given to the government are held by the states >


Thousands of Israelis protest

Must be Tuesday. >

I only protest when Shas wants to defer train maintenance on Shabbos. Like bruh, you’re a convicted tax cheat, not a transportation expert. If that train ain’t here at 7:05 AM, Tel Aviv gonna erupt like it’s Yamit 2000. >

Demonstration MARCH, no destruction....quite different from Brazil. >

How many died in Brazil? >

The coalition of church and state bring out the worst in humanity, it’s old power.  If there’s one thing that dooms our civilization, it will be this. >

I guess we’re lucky that the church and state aren’t intertwined in Israel then! >

did you miss the /s or are you just delusional? >

What do you mean? Israel is a Jewish country. Jews go to the synagogue and not the church.