It has, as you might guess, been a long and annoying day. While I have gotten a few hits from people who cared enough about my former rival's editorial to google the phrases quoted from this site, I haven't heard anything negative. My mother, who has graciously opened her house to everyone and anyone for years now is more upset than anyone else in the town, and I have received a fair piece of support from both Jews and Gentiles alike in the Goshen area.
That being said, for those resolute enough to search for this site, I would like to share with you my defense to my accusers. I was going to compile a listing of all reference to the word "Jew" on the entire website in the last two and a half years, but you can do that easily enough. Type "Jew" into the search bar at the bottom of the page. It's really amazing, 1020 posts, I talk about theological issues constantly, and there are 11 total post related references to the phrase "jew". One is within the word "jewel" and I don't find any of the others to be even remotely offensive. But you can see that for yourself. I have however, with some difficulty, found the comment string which started the entire fiasco. It is here.
Anyway, here's my defense:
As Joe, I cannot speak to the opinions of Mary. I would, however, be very interested in the research which is mentioned in the article. There is no doubt in the article that it is copious and I will investigate each one of them.
There have been times when I have regretted things which I have written in the past, especially during high school. While I do not regret pointing out the historical significance of the Hall of Fame of the Trotter (Hanna's Bar/Bat Mitzvah was, after all, the only time I've been there), the other mentions of my egregious crimes are spotty at best. I don't recall the "Jew Fest" comment though I don't doubt that it exists, but I would like to point out how libelously out of context the Santa Claus on lawn reference is. I saw no mention in the article that it was Ad@m Weiss's lawn. As a long time friend, he took no offense, and found it to be an amusing prank. In the article, it is presented as though I was burning a cross on his yard in a random act of bigotry. In that instance, at the very least, it is legally fortunate that my name wasn't used.
And I appreciate that. In context, I expect to be held accountable for my words. While I know that Hanna has always enjoyed stirring the pot for the cause of social change (and, for what it's worth, I shared her mutual respect throughout high school), if she were interested in actually investigating the reality of the situation instead of simply rabble rousing for suitable editorial fodder, she would have consulted me on the issue. As it stands, her ludicrous and sweeping comment was replied in kind. As far as I knew, that was the end of the story. Typically, 2 pages worth of angst is worthy of at least the other side of the story.
While the decision to go to press neglecting my input indicates otherwise, I will assume for a moment that you actually care what my real opinion is on Judaism. As a Christian, I realize that a full 2/3rds of my faith is derived from the Jewish Old Testament. I have always had the deepest respect for the religion. The quote from the Bible study is taken from a valid interpretation of the book of Romans "Circumcision of the Heart" passage, where the outward sign of circumcision was held as a symbol of national pride, while the inward nature of the heart was neglected. The question was clearly understood by the readers to be asking if we sometimes rely on symbols instead of relying on actual faith. For a cultural Jew, the reliance on symbols and the absence of the faith which defined the religion in the first place might not be an issue, but I can assure you that practicing Jews feel the same way as practicing Christians on that matter. In fact, almost all religions agree that outward signs without inward belief is a negative.
In any case, I thank you for your time. I can be reached reliably at this address, or through my cell phone, 845-***-****. Feel free to call if you wish to discuss this further. I currently live in Maryland, and if you are ever in the area, I would be happy to show you around. While you may be disappointed by lack of swastikas and other anti-Semitic propaganda, I would be happy to field questions should you desire to write another editorial.
There is a very good chance that a copy of this email will be posted online, as there are many who will be very interested in my response to your accusations. I will hold off until the evening to do it, but if you have any good reason why it would inappropriate to post this, feel free to let me know.
Addendum
Apparently capitulation in the face of unjust accusations is not in the air tonight. Bess has posted her stuff.
Dear Eric, I am H**** I****'s mother and as you know I was the one who originally found all of the references to Jews on your site that Hanna referenced in her column, as well as several others that she did not mention. I have forwarded them to you by private e-mail so that you can confirm that nothing was exaggerated.
When Hanna talked about writing this column we spoke about what the backlash would be. I told her to expect to be punished for saying "ouch." The responses from you and Bess were predictable: can't you take a joke; you're just too sensitive; you are just trying to engrandize yourself; you took us out of context; my best friend's Jewish; the Jews make such jokes themselves, etc.
Here is what I think. Racism, bigotry, and prejudice is often displayed in jokes. It doesn't make it right, or terribly clever. When someone makes a joke about the Jews controlling Goshen, or the media, or the Government, or whatever - it usually is indicating a simmering resentment and anger. Again, not terribly funny.
There is only one appropriate answer when your friend says, "you have hurt me to the core." The answer is "I am terribly, terribly sorry."
You suggest that you did not realize that you were being offensive or cruel. You seem to think that the only bigots are the ones with swastikas on their armband. Not true. Any chance you can grow from this? Why not consider saying in your blog - "I intend to make every effort in the future not to make jokes at the expense of other people's religion, race, or heritage because its just not right." Barbara Strauss
At some point, it has to be said that you do not have a portal into my soul. I apologize for assuming the existence of a soul if you are of the belief system that humans are strictly biological and don't have souls, but you get the idea. I know what malices and predjudices I have and do not have. I know how my relationships with rational human beings work; I deal with human beings almost every day! It is not possible to live in a way when you actually stand for something, yet offend absolutely no one. I refuse to live my life trying to please everyone else, as, were I to adopt the collective belief systems of all of humanity, I would not stand for anything for myself. I would be a generic amalgamation of overly complicated mud.
That being said, I will continue to not say anything which I deem inappropriate. I do notice that the most recent of your sources was written in May of 2003. If nothing else, I have committed no crimes against humanity for nearly 2 years! I will remain committed to being true to the ethical standard which I live by. I will refuse to tolerate bigotry spoken in malice, and will oppose those who oppress for the sake of self gain. I will seek the truth.
I still wonder if that was ever your intention. You were under no obligation to consult me before writing your article, but it seems to me that if you were concerned about my viewpoint, and were interested in REAL healing...well, it makes me wonder if you were interested in that in the first place.
Also, I have redacted your response in order to remove names. It has occurred to me that perhaps names are not the best idea, given people's tendency to search for themselves. It is inappropriate. Please point out other instances, and I will remove them as well.
Posted by: E1st on February 13, 2005 10:37 PMDear Barbara--
I am AnneElena Foster. I am Eric Furst's friend. There was no joke made. There was a comment, and observation. There was no judgment attached to it. If a judgment was inferred by Hanna, then that is a problem that you and I, as Jewish women in the generation preceding hers, maybe need to take a look at.
I am also the one who made the comments about the Jews controlling the media and the government, etc. It was a sarcastic comment. I was actually quoting my own son, who made a similar comment in response to some anti-semitism, the "you fucking filthy Jews" kind of anti-semitism. Real anti-semitism.
I made the comment here because I was completely comfortable, speaking among friends whom I came to know slowly, over a period of time, as utterly bereft of any anti-semitism whatsoever. I didn't go scrumming through their websites with that fear in my mind, finding something here, something there, that might indeed support my suspicion. I'm not saying you are wrong to be mindful of anti-semitism, I am just saying that in this case, you are wrong.
You did take it out of context, Barbara. But there was no joke. There was no snide aside nor any snicker behind the hand. The context was that of an ongoing conversation among people who generally understand their shared values, as well as those they do not share ... people who ongoingly discuss those similarities and differences with candor and intellectual challenge. That is the context. Your daughter made a faint stab at the discourse and jumped to a conclusion, then together, you went about looking for data to support it. That is bad science, Barbara. That is bad journalism.
I implore you to consider the damage it might do to your family if your son -- or daughter -- were publicly accused of having sex with an underage student. It's a gross analogy, Barbara, but it is apt. Because the damage can't be erased. Even if you can prove irrefutably that the charge is baseless, the taint hangs. And what you and your daughter are doing to this man and his family and friends cannot be erased, because the calumny you level against them cannot be disproven.
I urge you to read the letter I wrote to your daughter. You are welcome to call me. I am happy to discuss this with you Jew to Jew, mother to mother, or on any other basis.
But Eric Furst owes no one an apology. Bess Jankowski owes no one an apology. They have maligned no one. Your daughter, however, and now you, have very specifically and publicly accused them -- along with Eric's completely innocent and uninvolved parents -- of something both repugnant and dangerous.
You have needlessly slandered good people without cause. The correct thing to say now is "I intruded without participating. I reached one-sided conclusions without discussion. I accused you without giving you the opportunity to explain or defend. That was wrong of me, and I am terribly, terribly sorry."
How you will apologize to Eric Furst's parents, I have no idea.
And ERIC--- If you remove anything from your site because of this I will be LIVID!!! Do NOT capitulate! I will write you directly on this. With all the blatant Jew-bashing on the web, this is ludicrous. You haven't got a damn thing to apologize for.
Posted by: ae on February 13, 2005 10:50 PMMs. Strauss, I agree that when your friend tells you face-to-face that you've hurt her to the core, the only correct response is an apology. But I think that the response tends to be -- and should be -- slightly different when your friend goes straight to the press and tells all of the Hudson Valley that because of some off-hand, out-of-context remarks you once made, all of Goshen just might secretly be harboring anti-semitic feelings. There's a difference there. A pretty big one, actually.
Posted by: Bess on February 14, 2005 12:27 AM