There's something exquisitely ridiculous about listening to the British lecture Israel and Jews on religious equality and democratic citizenship. Israel, the Jewish nation-state, has no established state religion, no religious qualification for its president or prime minister, and no hereditary religious monarch. Jewish, Muslim, Christian and Druze citizens can vote, serve in the Knesset, hold government office and participate in the country's political life. Israel's Declaration of Independence explicitly promises equal social and political rights to citizens regardless of religion, race or sex. Now, let's visit Britain, that magnificent self-appointed guardian of enlightened democratic values, shall we? 🤡Britain actually has an established church. Not metaphorically. Not culturally. Not because someone hung a crucifix in a government office. An actual church, established by law, with the monarch serving as its Supreme Governor. 🤡Twenty-six Anglican bishops are entitled to seats in the House of Lords simply because they're Anglican bishops.They can debate legislation, propose amendments and vote on laws governing Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Catholics, atheists and everyone else. Do rabbis get 26 reserved seats? No. Imams? No. Catholic bishops? Absolutely not. 🤡England still has a legal requirement for daily collective worship in state-funded schools. In ordinary nonreligious state schools, worship is required to be Christian. 🤡The British monarch must be Protestant and in communion with the Church of England. So the next time someone declares that Israel's Jewish national identity is inherently incompatible with democracy, perhaps they could explain why Britain's formally established Anglican church, constitutionally Protestant monarchy and parliamentary bishops supposedly present no comparable problem. Better still, they could explain why Jewish national self-determination is treated as inherently suspect while Britain's centuries-old religious establishment is waved away as charming tradition. One might almost begin to suspect that the objection isn't really to the principle at all. 🤔