What would Jesus do about anti-semitism?

BY MICHAEL TABOR

While the nation was focusing on comments by Rep. Jim Moran (D-Va.)—mistaken inferences, I hope—few Maryland voters have been paying attention to a much more troubling incident involving the Maryland Senate. On March 3, Moran said the nation would not be moving toward war if not for the influence of Jews. At the same time, a debate about Christian prayers in the chamber of the state Senate has taken an ugly turn in genuinely hateful and anti-Semitic columns by a local pundit.

Moran was closer to the truth than most of his critics would want to admit. In national polls, the Jewish community is much more critical of the war than the overall population, yet not a single major national Jewish organization has come out against the administration's plans. In a March 15 article in the New York Times, reporter Laurie Goodstein points out that Jewish organizations have remained silent on the war; some Jewish lobbyists support the war; Jewish groups have never before been hesitant about issuing resolutions on foreign policy; most Christian denominations have taken a stand against the war; and many "voices" in Arab and European countries believe that Bush is being prodded to war by a clique of Jews in the foreign policy establishment.

And on March 18, the Washington Post reported that neoconservative Jewish editor Bill Kristol of the Weekly Standard has been using his magazine since the early 1990s for "opinion leadership" in support of war and regime change in Iraq. Although Kristol dismisses the accusation that he and the other Jewish "neocons" have been pushing a war with Iraq to assist Israel, his theories and beliefs closely resemble Bush's foreign policy since September 11.

If a seven-term Representative loses his seat over this, it would ironically prove his point about Jewish power and influence.

Meanwhile, in Annapolis, progressive Senator Sharon Grosfeld (D-18) has encountered much more disturbing prejudice against Jews. After she wrote to Senate President Thomas "Mike" Miller Jr. to object to the reference to Jesus in the Senate's daily opening invocation, Christian colleagues struck back with legislative language implying that they were the ones being harassed or excluded. Delegate Emmett Burns (D-10) introduced legislation to allow persons who pray in public places in Maryland to refer to a particular deity or religious leader without being subject to "criticism or censure"–which sounds laudable, but its effect is to give cover to Senate rituals by Christians, for Christians, expressly excluding those duly elected Senators who don't happen to be Christians. Our own Del. Gareth Murray (D-20) co-sponsored this troubling bill.

But the anti-Semitism in this case revolves around a vicious column written by Blair Lee in the February 28 statewide issue of the Gazette. Lee has a long record of sensationalist writing from his days at the Montgomery Journal.

In his February 28 column, Lee compares Grosfeld's complaint to an earlier request by Delegate Carol Petzold, who suffers from MCS (Multiple Chemical Sensitivity), asking that members refrain from wearing perfumes and other fragrances in the closed chamber. Lee belittles the request of a "fragrance-free zone" by saying Petzold's condition isn't recognized by the AMA (and is, he implies, therefore an imaginary problem). And he smugly declares that Grosfeld has gone one step further and asked for a "Jesus-free zone."

Lee then recounts the history of Maryland's Catholic founders, and mistakes the two crosses on the state flag for religious symbols. (They are, as every Maryland fourth-grader knows, the crest of the Crossland family.) He then dismisses Grosfeld as one of these New York liberal Jews who support women's lib, abortion rights and same-sex marriage, and who "represents Kensington, that town that nixed Santa Claus from its Christmas tree lighting." It's not clear how any of these labels, however accurate, would justify the adoption of an official religious preference for the Senate.

Faced with a barrage of hostile letters in the March 14 issue, Lee tries to answer his critics with more insults and racist innuendo. He calls Grosfeld intolerant and labels her stance as a "mean-spirited attack on Christians and Christian prayer" and then compares her to a Klansman or neo-Nazi and calls her small-minded and bigoted. He would, no doubt, say the same of James Madison and George Mason, with their small-minded and bigoted notion that the government "shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion."

You've got to wonder whether Lee actually believes this tripe or whether he's just trying to pick fights that sell newspapers. I assume the latter. But in the process, he's strengthening the radical Christian right, and he's fooling around with some ugly and dangerous racist propaganda that can inflame some folks out there who don't understand that he's just being glib for malicious sport. Unlike Moran, Lee is not being challenged by people of responsibility and authority in the Christian community. At some point the Gazette needs to draw the line between responsible commentary and racist jingoism; between opinion and inflammatory name-calling.

In the March 21 issue, Duchy Trachtenberg, executive vice president of the Maryland chapter of the National Organization for Women, challenged Lee to a debate. Let's see if Lee is willing to pick up the gauntlet and also allow responsible commentary by Jewish, Catholic, and Protestant clergy as part of the debate.

And as for Moran, Jewish leadership has to allow his constituents to decide whether he should continue to represent them. Undoubtedly they're succeeding in making him be a bit more careful and thoughtful. Perhaps responsible Christian leaders should now speak up and do the same for Blair Lee. That's what I think Jesus would want.