JTF.ORG Forum
General Category => General Discussion => Topic started by: Chaim Ben Pesach on May 26, 2025, 12:18:32 PM
-
בס''ד
G-d willing, tomorrow I will debate Aviv Franko, the spokesman for the main atheist organization in Israel, on the subject "Should Israel be a secular state or a Jewish state?" The debate will be on Rosh be-Rosh, which sponsors debates like this on youtube and other internet sites. G-d willing, I plan to discuss the Hilltop Youth, a "Palestinian" state and other crucial topics. The leftist atheists have already alerted all of their supporters to come and respond on youtube, so the responses will be overwhelmingly leftwing unless we show up to counter them. The debate is in Hebrew, but you can respond in English saying that you agree with Chaim Ben Pesach, using your own original language. The debate will be prime time in Israel but in the U.S. Eastern Standard time zone it will start at 1 PM.
Where?
https://www.youtube.com/live/6uSmo9hrMoI
When?
Tuesday, May 27 at 1 PM Eastern Standard time in the U.S. (that's 8 PM in Israel).
-
Chaim - may G-D grant you prophecy and wisdom so that you can overwhelm your opponents. Godspeed.
-
:usa+israel: :fist:
I am quite sure that all of your points, counterpoints,
rebuttles etc will be great, right on the money and
‘second to none,’ no matter how complex the issues/topics
“might be.” Plenty of ometz and ‘Mazal!’
-
Promoted on Telegram and Reddit.
Good luck Chaim!
-
I would love to hear you on the Sid Rosenberg show on WABC radio sometime.
-
Good job Chaim... Aviv is a buffoon and he could not keep quiet for more than ten seconds without constantly interrupting you.
-
One thing about atheism is that it can never have a true basis for morality because atheism doesn't allow for absolute truths. Most of atheist morality is based on the societies in which Biblical morals have predominated in the recent past. However societies can shift and shift quickly, and so the atheist's morals will shift with it.
-
:usa+israel: :fist:
I thought Chaim did an excellent and professional job debating
this individual who was obviously biased and reactionary,
that constantly either intentionally or perhaps unintentionally
not seeming to absorb much of anything and as Dovid_2
said; (kept interrupting,) to a certain extent ‘talking over’ as
well as tried finishing his sentences. The ‘moderator’ was
to a degree more professional and maybe ‘more’ neutral and
unbiased but even there, there was not a world of difference.
It should also be mentioned that the unmitigated chutzpah of
some people and their reactions to this great segment were biased,
ignorant, less than fair, and that Chaim and the excellent things he
stressed and points he made were once again, absolutely necessary,
had to be said and were ‘right on the money!’