Israelis and pluralism

Editorial

When we advocate for Israel – as most Canadians Jews have done formally or informally over the past six years of international dog-piling – we emphasize the necessity of supporting a pluralist, democratic, peace-seeking state against attack from theocratic, intolerant, violent extremists. The Canada Israel Committee, for instance, has a "shared values" campaign aimed at reminding Canadians that it is Israel, among the nations of the Middle East, that most closely shares our national commitment to peace, order and good government.

So it was illuminating to see Israel's reaction – or, let us say, the reaction of some Israelis – to last weekend's gay pride parade in Jerusalem. To call it a parade is something of a misnomer. The parade aspect was cancelled for fear of the safety of marchers (partly due to a heightened security alert following last week's shelling in the Gaza Strip that killed a number of Palestinians and prompted threats of renewed terrorist activity).

A rally was held instead in a Hebrew University stadium that some participants termed a "cage." A participant in last year's parade in Tel-Aviv was stabbed by a religious extremist. This year's event was altered after Jewish, Muslim and Christian opponents condemned it as, variously, unholy, an abomination and abhorrent to God.

But perhaps hate-fest is too strong a word. The opposition to the pride march – and to homosexuals more generally – ranges from thoughtful and peaceful theological positions to armed and violent fanaticism. Ehud Olmert, the Israeli prime minister, made reference to this difference and the media's failure to differentiate between fair comment and violence among opponents of the march.

Intriguingly, the events led Dana Olmert, the lesbian daughter of Israel's prime minister, to speak out about hostility toward gays and lesbians in Israel. She condemned the fact that a member of cabinet, Eli Yishai, could call the march an abomination without repercussion.

"There is a continuing history of violence and hatred, there is homophobia," she said.

The events of the past week speak not so much to the position of gays and lesbians in Israeli society as it does to larger issues of tolerance and pluralism.

Pluralism is a human invention allowing people to disagree peacefully, while permitting diverse peoples to co-exist. Pluralism is the most important foundational value in a democracy, permitting ongoing engagement over issues, while ensuring the security and freedom of different worldviews. Pluralism is antithetical to violence and coercion.

This means disagreements can be aired, but intolerance should be limited to words, not deeds, and civility, that easily invoked word but elusive value, must be a guiding principle.

From its moment of inception, Israel has been a pluralist state. It had to be. The invocation of God was one of the most difficult debates in the moments leading up to independence. At that time, it was determined that Israel would be a secular, Jewish state. This is an ongoing experiment, but Israel has generally succeeded in finding a peaceful balance between and within the diversities of religion.

Similarly, pluralism has been integral to the success of Israel in integrating people of different languages, heritages and national origins into its body politic. Now, Israel is faced with accommodating a form of tolerance and pluralism based on sexual orientation. There is no option but to succeed. To fail would not be a statement about Israel's view just of gays and lesbians; it would be a failure of the core underpinning of the democratic, pluralist state to accommodate citizens regardless of their personal identities.

Israel and her supporters are obligated to defend the pluralist, democratic, peace-seeking state against attack from theocratic, intolerant, violent extremists, even when those extremists come from within. Even when we might not agree with the specific nature of that diversity.

^TOP