“Can we all just get along?” This sentiment emerged from the Los Angeles race riots 25 years ago, but it speaks directly to contemporary Jewish life.

Yair Lootsteen’s recent CJN cover story (“In Jerusalem, grappling with the haredim,” Sept. 8) gives ample evidence of why we are not ready to get along. Drawing on some of the worst stereotypes of other Jews, with sneering insinuation, broad projection of his own feelings onto others, and dog-whistle keywords that we would denounce as anti-Semitic if they didn’t come from the pen of a Jew, Lootsteen determinedly takes the low road in a facile attempt to provoke sympathy to his cause. He has an axe to grind, perhaps understandably, as an officer in the Israel Movement for Reform and Progressive Judaism. Yet his shrill rhetoric does little to advance his cause.

Let me be clear: no one can ignore tensions in Israel between secular and religious, the intertwining of money, power, and influence with the functioning of civil society, or Israel’s ever-precarious coalition politics bound up in all that. We in North America might be forgiven our relief at living in a society where religion functions completely in the private sector. Putting myself in Lootsteen’s sandals, I might experience the same rage. Nevertheless, to dehumanize and denigrate the other seems to me singularly unproductive in eliciting sympathy.

Lootsteen’s dismissive and disparaging language and his self-righteousness render him in many ways indistinguishable from the same intolerant, unruly “ultra-Orthodox” that he decries. He writes that “only one child out of six entering the city’s school system is a non-Orthodox Jew.” This appears to be an alarm – “they” are reproducing faster than “we” are – and he further bolsters the sense of panic by noting the shifting demographics of a Jerusalem neighbourhood.

READ: HAREDI-SECULAR GULF STILL WIDE IN JERUSALEM

He also relates an unfortunate story about his daughter, who was apparently harangued by haredi passengers aboard a bus because of her choice of clothing. None of us who were not on the bus will know exactly what happened when that ill-fated ride occurred, yet I am puzzled at his conclusion that his daughter was “not considered worthy of her fellow travellers.” I wonder, did the fellow travellers articulate that sentiment in so many words? Or is it something that she “felt?” Did the author deduce this conclusion from what he heard second hand, or did he inject his preconceptions into recounting the tale?

My wonderment is deepened by the “vociferous Yiddish insults” Lootsteen says were hurled at his daughter. Now, it may well have happened just as he describes. Then again, I wonder, does she speak fluent Yiddish? If not, how did she understand the “vociferous” nature of the insults? Perhaps they were shouting in Yiddish, “Hey lady, don’t forget your phone!” or “Miss, your shoe is untied! Don’t trip!” Most likely not, but then again, maybe. Claims of insult turn a bus of hooligans into something much more than they are.

Lootsteen presents facts with no context that are intended to horrify us. “On Aug. 9,” he writes, “we learned from documents submitted by the state to the Supreme Court that this year, government funding of haredi educational institutions for students over 18 will reach an all-time high of 1.119 billion shekels.” First of all, as economies grow, each new year of spending will necessarily be noted as an “all-time high,” but that is beside the point. More importantly, it’s instructive to look at overall government expenditures for post-secondary education (i.e., Israel’s university system). Israeli government figures show, a 56.7-billion shekel expenditure on education in recent years, with about 20 per cent, or a little more than 11 billion shekels, going to post-secondary/college/university education. So the nine per cent of that directed to haredi post-secondary institutions makes a little more sense and is considerably less scary. It’s not at all the takeover Lootsteen would have us believe it is.

Another pseudo-scary fact is the canard about religious avoidance of conscription, always trotted out to elicit outrage. First of all, the religious Zionist sector of Israeli society distinguishes itself in military service, so the religious community as a whole cannot be accused of avoidance. Secondly, the deferments given to haredi yeshiva students are part of the legal process. They may be the product of much wheeling and dealing in Knesset, but they are an undeniable part of the legal system. Of course, the fact that secular Israelis also avoid conscription by leaving the country, entering into sham marriages (as some notable celebrities have done), or other means somehow never becomes part of a larger, more meaningful conversation about the IDF in Israeli society. Avoidance of conscription may be regrettable, but it is a fact for nearly half of Israeli men, and a majority of Israeli women, religious and secular alike.

In short, Lootsteen’s experience in Israel is indeed lamentable . In my view, no one should shout insults at anyone else, nor should anyone compare any Jew to Nazis or blame anyone else for the Shoah, under any circumstances. The question at hand is should intolerance be met with intolerance? Is innuendo, fear-mongering and disdain for “the other” – in this case, fervently religious Jews – justified by anyone, for any reason?

Lootsteen decries the name-calling, blanket disparagement, lack of compassion and insensitivity of the religious right toward those who are not of similar mind. In response, he offers his own name-calling, blanket disparagement, lack of compassion and insensitivity. Like everyone else, Lootsteen is waiting for someone else to take the first step toward appreciation of our common destiny. It looks like we all have a long wait ahead of us.

Rabbi Joseph Kanofsky is rabbi of Kehillat Shaarei Torah in Toronto.