Like a Prayer? Applying Conflicts with Religious Dimensions Theory to the Muezzin Law Conflict

What is the nature of the dispute around an Israeli law that proposes restricting how Muslim followers are called for prayer? And, why does the nature of this dispute hold any importance? LeBaron and Senbel have developed a theory differentiating conflicts with religious dimensions (CRDs) from other types of conflicts. The importance of this distinction stems from and highlights the unique role that religion plays in conflicts, which liberal, rational, and individualistic orientations to conflict management fail to address. This article offers a trial run of LeBaron and Senbel’s innovative theoretical framework. We apply CRD theory to conduct an analysis of a legislative attempt to amend an environmental law in Israel. The proposed amendment would limit the use of public address (PA) systems to amplify the Mouzins’ calls for prayer. Proposed limitations on this Islamic practice triggered a public outcry and a sharp societal dispute in Israel. The analysis in this article exposes the real conflict over the proposed amendment to be a CRD, rather than what it seemed on its face: an environmental regulation conflict. This article also contributes to further developing CRD theory. We elaborate on the combined effects of the conflict’s intensity, its duration, and the proximity of its subject to the core values of a religion. We suggest that identifying the unique amalgam of these aspects in a CRD is important to its effective management

Pitfalls of vaccinations with WT1-, Proteinase3- and MUC1-derived peptides in combination with MontanideISA51 and CpG7909

T cells with specificity for antigens derived from Wilms Tumor gene (WT1), Proteinase3 (Pr3), and mucin1 (MUC1) have been demonstrated to lyse acute myeloid leukemia (AML) blasts and multiple-myeloma (MM) cells, and strategies to enhance or induce such tumor-specific T cells by vaccination are currently being explored in multiple clinical trials. To test safety and immunogenicity of a vaccine composed of WT1-, Pr3-, and MUC1-derived Class I-restricted peptides and the pan HLA-DR T helper cell epitope (PADRE) or MUC1-helper epitopes in combination with CpG7909 and MontanideISA51, four patients with AML and five with MM were repetitively vaccinated. No clinical responses were observed. Neither pre-existing nor naive WT1-/Pr3-/MUC1-specific CD8+ T cells expanded in vivo by vaccination. In contrast, a significant decline in vaccine-specific CD8+ T cells was observed. An increase in PADRE-specific CD4+ T helper cells was observed after vaccination but these appeared unable to produce IL2, and CD4+ T cells with a regulatory phenotype increased. Taken into considerations that multiple clinical trials with identical antigens but different adjuvants induced vaccine-specific T cell responses, our data caution that a vaccination with leukemia-associated antigens can be detrimental when combined with MontanideISA51 and CpG7909. Reflecting the time-consuming efforts of clinical trials and the fact that 1/3 of ongoing peptide vaccination trails use CpG and/or Montanide, our data need to be taken into consideration

Romantics in Israel's Legal Politics: Arabic Through The Lens of the Partition Plan

This Paper argues that despite the Israel High Court of Justice's prima facie holding in favor of Arabic being an official language, still the Court has failed to decisively resolve the question concerning the meaning, scope, and consequences of such recognition. Thus, the Court has missed an opportunity, which could have been faithfully addressed had the Court viewed the question at stake romantically, through the genesis of its legal-political premises, upon which it was established; namely, the 1947 Resolution 181 (II) of the United Nations General Assembly (the Partition Plan), wherein the collective rights, including linguistic rights, of the Arab minority citizen, were promised to be constitutionally protected

Romantics in Israel's Legal Politics: Arabic Through The Lens of the Partition Plan

This Paper argues that despite the Israel High Court of Justice's prima facie holding in favor of Arabic being an official language, still the Court has failed to decisively resolve the question concerning the meaning, scope, and consequences of such recognition. Thus, the Court has missed an opportunity, which could have been faithfully addressed had the Court viewed the question at stake romantically, through the genesis of its legal-political premises, upon which it was established; namely, the 1947 Resolution 181 (II) of the United Nations General Assembly (the Partition Plan), wherein the collective rights, including linguistic rights, of the Arab minority citizen, were promised to be constitutionally protected

Interactions of polar and nonpolar volatile organic compounds with methyl ester solvents

The interactions of polar and nonpolar volatile organic compounds (VOC) with methyl ester solvents were studied. In order to establish trends two polar and two nonpolar solutes were selected for the study. Solubility computations were performed using the Modified UNIFAC Dortmund group contribution model using a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet. It was found that the solubility of nonpolar solutes in methyl esters increases with an increase in ester chain length, but decreases with an increase in the solute chain length. Furthermore the solubility of nonpolar solutes decreases with an increase in the degree of ester solvent unsaturation. In contrast the solubility of polar solutes in methyl esters decreases with an increase in solvent chain length and increases with increasing solute chain length. Solubility of polar solutes also improved with an increase in the degree of solvent unsaturation. An increase in branching on polar solutes results in an increasing trend towards nonpolar behavior due to the shielding effect of the branches on interactions with the polar site of the solute

When "Allahu Akbar" Becomes a Crime: The Israeli Case

This Article examines the constitutionality of an Israeli bill that criminalizes the use of PA systems in prayer houses, punishable by a fine of 5000–10,000 NIS (the Muezzin Law).  The Bill was presented to the Israeli Parliament (the Knesset) as a religiously-neutral environmental law.  This Article asserts that a careful reading of the Bill’s language reveals that it is specifically tailored to apply precisely to Muslim prayer houses, thus criminalizing the Muslim call for prayer (the adhan), especially the call occurring between dawn and sunrise (the Fajer adhan).  As such, we perceive the Muezzin law as violating the right to equality and the right to dignity of the Muslim minority in Israel, as well as infringing upon its religious feelings.  Additionally, we contend that the Muezzin Law is not truly driven by environmental concern, but rather that it represents a conflict with religious dimension (a CRD)—namely, the perception that the adhan, as a Muslim symbol, poses a threat to the identity of Jews in Israel.  Examining the constitutionality of the Muezzin Law introduces a crucial question relating to the interplay between constitutional law and criminal law.  Our assertion is that in any constitutional democracy, in order for the legislature to validly classify conduct as a crime, such criminalization must befit the values of constitutional democracy, serve a proper purpose, and be proportionate.  The requirement for proportionality consists of three subtests: (a) the rational connection test; (b) the necessity test; and (c) the balancing benefits test.  It is our contention that the Muezzin Law comprises an unconstitutional criminalization of the Fajer adhan.  It stands in contrast with the basic values of constitutional democracy, primarily that of tolerance towards a religious minority, particularly, the Muslim community.  Additionally, we assert that the Muezzin Law’s purpose is improper as it aims at infringing upon the religious feelings of the Muslim minority in Israel, holding that the value of protecting religious feelings is a constitutional value.  Finally, we view such criminalization as provided in the Muezzin Law as being unproportionate.  In this latter regard, we hold the view that our CRD analysis provides a more delicate, proper, and proportionate solution to the question at stake

When "Allahu Akbar" Becomes a Crime: The Israeli Case

This Article examines the constitutionality of an Israeli bill that criminalizes the use of PA systems in prayer houses, punishable by a fine of 5000–10,000 NIS (the Muezzin Law).  The Bill was presented to the Israeli Parliament (the Knesset) as a religiously-neutral environmental law.  This Article asserts that a careful reading of the Bill’s language reveals that it is specifically tailored to apply precisely to Muslim prayer houses, thus criminalizing the Muslim call for prayer (the adhan), especially the call occurring between dawn and sunrise (the Fajer adhan).  As such, we perceive the Muezzin law as violating the right to equality and the right to dignity of the Muslim minority in Israel, as well as infringing upon its religious feelings.  Additionally, we contend that the Muezzin Law is not truly driven by environmental concern, but rather that it represents a conflict with religious dimension (a CRD)—namely, the perception that the adhan, as a Muslim symbol, poses a threat to the identity of Jews in Israel.  Examining the constitutionality of the Muezzin Law introduces a crucial question relating to the interplay between constitutional law and criminal law.  Our assertion is that in any constitutional democracy, in order for the legislature to validly classify conduct as a crime, such criminalization must befit the values of constitutional democracy, serve a proper purpose, and be proportionate.  The requirement for proportionality consists of three subtests: (a) the rational connection test; (b) the necessity test; and (c) the balancing benefits test.  It is our contention that the Muezzin Law comprises an unconstitutional criminalization of the Fajer adhan.  It stands in contrast with the basic values of constitutional democracy, primarily that of tolerance towards a religious minority, particularly, the Muslim community.  Additionally, we assert that the Muezzin Law’s purpose is improper as it aims at infringing upon the religious feelings of the Muslim minority in Israel, holding that the value of protecting religious feelings is a constitutional value.  Finally, we view such criminalization as provided in the Muezzin Law as being unproportionate.  In this latter regard, we hold the view that our CRD analysis provides a more delicate, proper, and proportionate solution to the question at stake

The Legal Status of Israeli-Arabs/Palestinians in Israel

The authors argue for accommodating the interests of the Israeli-Arabs/Palestinians. Israel should strive to safeguard equal rights and liberties for all citizens notwithstanding religion, race, ethnicity, colour, gender, class or sexual orientation, and insisting that citizens have also duties to fulfil. Israel needs to strive for equality in housing, in municipal budgets, in allocation of resources; fight against racism, bigotry and discrimination, and introduce changes to accommodate interests of Israeli-Arabs/Palestinians so that citizens would " feel at home " in their own country. It is argued that delegates of the Arab/Palestinian minority should be represented, in accordance with their size in society, in the parliament and in the government. Symbols of the state should be accommodated to give expression to all citizens of Israel. Since Israel is defined as a Jewish and democratic state, there is a responsibility to embrace all Israeli citizens. In doing so, Israel does not negate the essence of its being Jewish. Furthermore, studies of all religions that exist in Israel should be made available