By Donald H. Harrison
SAN DIEGO – About the only thing good I can think about the circumcision battle in San Francisco is that it has brought the Muslim and Jewish communities together in defense of their religious freedom and parents’ right to choose what is best for their children.
Bringing action to prevent a November vote on an initiative that would ban circumcision within that city’s boundaries are plaintiffs from both religions, including, on the Jewish side, the Anti-Defamation League and the Jewish Community Relations Council of San Francisco.
We may be at the dawn of a new era in San Diego with the reconstitution of a Jewish Community Relations Council here under the presidency of Tad Seth Parzen and directorship of Linda Feldman – all under the aegis of the Jewish Federation of
San Diego County.
Parzen and Feldman worked together before in similar capacities for the now inactive San Diego chapter of the American Jewish Committee. The AJC and other national Jewish organizations have closed regional offices in locations throughout the United States primarily for economic reasons. National organizations and their local affiliates have an ever-constant tug of war over how money from local donors should be used. Regional officers believe local programming is at least as important as national programming, but this is not a view often shared at the national headquarters. When money doesn’t come into the national headquarters, regional programs often are viewed as unnecessary distractions.
As spokespeople for the Jewish Community Relations Council, Parzen and Feldman won’t have to worry directly about fundraising. Other arms of the Jewish Federation of San Diego County will look after that. As they did when the AJC was in
full swing, they will be able to concentrate on building good relationships with other ethnic and religious communities in San Diego County. It was the AJC that fostered the local development of a Latino-Jewish coalition, and I remember that meetings with representatives of the Chaldean community also were held under AJC auspices. Perhaps we can anticipate more
of the same outreach under the reconstituted JCRC.
While the JCRC will not be directly concerned with fundraising, of course it will be indirectly concerned. Many of us
old timers remember the media storm that was created in San Diego County one year when a JCRC director asked city officials to explain the policies governing the erection of crèches each December in city-owned Balboa Park. The various stalls depicting the life of Jesus are a regular feature of the celebration of winter holidays in Balboa Park, along with Santa Claus and its reindeer.
City officials over-reacted to the inquiry, announcing that the crèches would have to be removed. Public reaction was
furious, with some radio hosts excoriating the Jewish community. Eventually, it was ruled that so long as religious displays and secular displays (like Santa) are shown together, and if other religions have similar access to the park, such temporary exhibits do not violate the doctrine of separation of church and state. But the controversy had a profound impact on
the Jewish community. The inquiring director soon departed for other pastures. The JCRC was reduced from a quasi-independent “Council” to a “Committee” which was rarely heard from thereafter.
While the JCRC and ADL in San Francisco now are in the thick of a religious liberty battle there, our own communal organizations refrained from taking active stands in the ongoing controversy over the Mount Soledad Cross, which
clearly is an inappropriate symbol for a memorial that is supposed to honor all veterans of the U.S. Armed Forces. It’s the national Jewish War Veterans—not any local organization, and not even the local JWV chapter – that put forward its
name as a plaintiff in the ACLU-filed case after the death of the original complainant, local atheist Philip Paulson.
Is the silence from the local Jewish community because San Diego Jews believe the cross is appropriate? For the most
part, no. (There are always exceptions). The silence demonstrates the degree to which our communal organizations
have been cowed into such rationalizations about the 43-foot cross as “it’s been up there for so long” and “it’s a piece of history.” Yes, it has been there for a long time, since 1954, when it was the site for Easter services, long before anyone thought to convert the site into a veterans memorial.
Now, we’ll see if the new JCRC is more activist on this and other issues, or whether organized Jewry in San Diego County will continue to duck local controversies, perhaps in the belief that the greater good demands not risking financial support for Israel from donors wary of making waves.
Meanwhile the Anti Defamation League in San Diego County has also gone through a transformation. Under the leadership of Morris Casuto, whom news media could count on to provide a Jewish viewpoint whenever a controversy erupted, the Anti-Defamation League often provided the communal leadership that the JCRC refused to provide. Now, however, Casuto has retired. His successor, Tammy Gillies, today (Sunday, June 26) is shepherding an event called “Diversity Day” at the Children’s Museum, meant to showcase how America’s multi-ethnic, multi-national, multi-religious makeup is the source of our strength. Bravo for such programming! However, Gillies has not yet replaced Casuto in the public mind as an outspoken advocate for Jewish community causes—and perhaps she may never do so.
*
Harrison is editor of San Diego Jewish World. He may be contacted at donald.harrison@sdjewishworld.com
Comments are closed.
Good observations, Don (as always). But maybe this saga demonstrates one thing: that the focus of the community went the wrong way. While many people were busy getting all upset about the Mount Soledad Cross and Nativity Scene in Balboa Park, a far more important issue went completely unattended by the same JCRC mentioned in the article (and everyone else for that matter): the infiltration of the Palestinians into the House of Pacific Relations community (the famous international houses, of which the House of Israel is a proud member). So now here we are today, with a Palestinian “House”, which is incidentally another blatant lie since they don’t have a “house” as such (despite their claims to the contrary on their web site), but rather a simple little display window in the main building or the House of Pacific Relations nearby. Where was the JCRC then? Where was the community? No one paid any attention! Now we’re stuck with it. Go try to evict the Palestinian “House”, as fictional as it is, from the HPR. Good luck. Note however that the HPR is not consistent: among the actual houses, we have Porto-Rico and Scotland, both of which are not sovereign nations any more than “Palestine” is. So the logical course of action for the JCRC, if it wants to prove the value of its rebirth, would be to right that wrong caused by past negligence mixed with obsession with far less consequential issues, and obtain that all three be evicted from the HPR.