Anti-Christian-Israel-Property Rights

You gotta hand it to Leftyblogger Nathan Newman; he sure knows how to consolidate his prejudices:

Well, they claim not to, many being quite upset [Newman's link], according to the New York Times, with the recent Kelo decision [my link] allowing eminent domain for economic development purposes.

Except those same rightwing Christian groups also love Israel, which has made pervasive land seizure one of its main policies to oppress the Palestinians. The erection of "the Wall" is just the most recent large-scale version of that policy.

The kind of abusive, politically targetted seizure of land, usually without compensation, that Israel engages with is the kind of violation the 5th Amendment Takings Clause was meant to prevent. It is pathetic hypocrisy for rightwingers to bemoan the Kelo decision -- which guarantees full compensation for landowners -- yet endorse Israel's full-scale destruction of any property rights for the Palestinians.

It would seem obvious to thinking people that there's a difference between taking someone's property for "economic purposes" and destoying homes to punish terrorists, and to protect national security. Sometimes hatred causes you to not think straight, right?

Newman's way ahead of me. Never once in my prolonged outrage over Kelo did I think of Israel's policies. The issues are so far removed only a professional arguer and demeaner (Newman is a labor lawyer, after all) could connect them, and the connection is specious, not substantive.

Besides, a certain leading Christian conservative recently raised concerns about Israel's condemnation policy:

The United States has expressed its concern over the confiscation of the land and Condoleezza Rice, the new Secretary of State, is expected to raise the issue when she visits Israel next week. (source)

Nathan ... Newman ... a union lawyer ... from New York ... I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess that the author of this piece is Jewish. Anti-Israel Jews: Talk about a lost cause!