Doesn't being Jewish refer to one's religion, not their ethnicity?

It's best to just refer to them as Raghead-Hebes

 

It is both. Jews consider anyone who had a Jewish mother to be Jewish race wise. Anyone can convert to Judaism.

 

I guess technically he could, as Palestine is technically part of Israel, not its own nation. But cultural influences on both sides would almost certainly prevent him from doing so.

I'm pretty sure Chief Tony is right on the Jewish identity issue. I'm pretty sure the terms "Jew" and "Judaism" come from the people of Judah, one of the original 12 tribes of Israel. At some point in history, Judah was the strongest of the 12 provinces, and it's capital -- Jerusalem -- was where the great temple was built, and where the kings of Israel reigned from. The point is that the citizens of that culture were identified not only by their geographic location, but also by their faith.

Modern Jews are still identified by the ancestry of those original tribes, but can also assume the identity of being Jewish by converting to Judaism. Whether or not the children of a converted Jew are considered Jewish, I don't know. I doubt it, though.

 

I believe it's considered an ethnicity as well because there is a genetic problem that has a high occurrence among a particular branch/sect/whatever of Jews. I'm not sure what it is, Taye-Sachs, maybe. But if two Jewish people are planning to have kids they should be tested for the gene. So it's heritage and ethnicity as well as a religion.

 

"jewish" can refer to either religion or ethinicity and it's up to you to determine what they're getting at.

israeli arabs are called just that, israeli arabs.

 

they's also called "dune trash."

 

This just goes to show that it's a valid question by Hulk, because nobody seems sure. I thought that Jewish only referred to religion, and I always figured everyone but black and asian people were considered part of the white race. It boils down to your definition of race, but even the definition in the dictionary is too vague to really answer the question. It's kind of amazing that "race" is always such a social and political issue, but there's not really even a good definition of the term.

This, from dictionary.com:

A local geographic or global human population distinguished as a more or less distinct group by genetically transmitted physical characteristics.
A group of people united or classified together on the basis of common history, nationality, or geographic distribution: the German race.
A genealogical line; a lineage.
Humans considered as a group.
Biology.
An interbreeding, usually geographically isolated population of organisms differing from other populations of the same species in the frequency of hereditary traits. A race that has been given formal taxonomic recognition is known as a subspecies.
A breed or strain, as of domestic animals.
A distinguishing or characteristic quality, such as the flavor of a wine.

Usage Note: The notion of race is nearly as problematic from a scientific point of view as it is from a social one. European physical anthropologists of the 17th and 18th centuries proposed various systems of racial classifications based on such observable characteristics as skin color, hair type, body proportions, and skull measurements, essentially codifying the perceived differences among broad geographic populations of humans. The traditional terms for these populationsCaucasoid (or Caucasian), Mongoloid, Negroid, and in some systems Australoidare now controversial in both technical and nontechnical usage, and in some cases they may well be considered offensive. (Caucasian does retain a certain currency in American English, but it is used almost exclusively to mean “white” or “European” rather than “belonging to the Caucasian race,” a group that includes a variety of peoples generally categorized as nonwhite.) The biological aspect of race is described today not in observable physical features but rather in such genetic characteristics as blood groups and metabolic processes, and the groupings indicated by these factors seldom coincide very neatly with those put forward by earlier physical anthropologists. Citing this and other pointssuch as the fact that a person who is considered black in one society might be nonblack in anothermany cultural anthropologists now consider race to be more a social or mental construct than an objective biological fact.

 

I met a black skin-head once, who hated blacks.

 

I met a Chinese klansman once, who hated Brussel sprouts.

 

Was it before or after he used them as anal beeds on himself?