As it's only the 5th of the month, and I'm already up to click 5 of my free 10 monthly NYT clicks, I'd better not re-open the link/NYT aticle you posted....but....<quoted text>
Truth be it, I was briefly a member of that congregation a long time ago. Their members are every bit as liberal as their leaders. And their leaders are unquestionably supportive of Israel.
Most of the comments seemed to be in support. Most of the unsupportive comments were from the usual rightwing playbook. A few unsupportive comments though were from the pragmatic camp (i.e. "its nice to do the kumbaya thing but ya gotta know that people in the middle east are mean and nasty...").
Personally, I am more in the pragmatic camp but I also realize that for a real peace inititiave to start it has to originate boldly - and that stand was definitely bold. It might encourage more voices.
I thought the whole point of the article was how outraged the congregants were over the letter signed by the congregation leaders in support of the UN decision re: Palestine's new status.
No, not every single congregant was outraged, but it sure gave the impression that was the general reaction.
I have no doubt that anyone there is not supportive of Israel. I guess the point to me was how supportive they are of the rights of Palestine. Like letting the Nazis march in Skokie (or wherever), it's a true test of liberalism and a groups or peoples' rights.