The same First Amendment that can protect the Jewish students at UCLA allows for a vast array of religious expression. Jeff Jacoby reflects on what that means after, while wearing a kippah, he was accosted by an eager Christian missionary in a parking lot:

It doesn’t offend me in the least when Christians try to awaken in me an interest in their religion, so long as they are courteous about it. (The woman in the parking lot crossed the line, but in my experience she wasn’t typical.) As an observant Jew who takes his religion seriously and embraces its values and teachings, I can certainly understand why devout Christians might wish to interest me in the values and teachings of their religion. . . . Unlike some Jews and Jewish organizations, I have never regarded Christian attempts to convert Jews as hostile, indecent, or anti-Semitic.

To the Jewish mind, [however], the claim that God was born in human form and died on the cross to atone for the sins of mankind is not only incomprehensible, it is blasphemous. That is why countless Jews throughout history were willing to go to their deaths, or to be expelled from their homes, rather than convert to Christianity.

Nevertheless, I am grateful to live in a nation where freedom of religion—including the freedom to reject religion—is vigorously protected, and where my tiny Jewish minority has flourished for generations alongside numerous other faiths. The same Constitution that guarantees my liberty to practice my religion guarantees the liberty of evangelizing Christians to try to talk me out of it.

Yesterday, the Iranian foreign minister flew to Geneva to meet with European diplomats. President Trump, meanwhile, indicated that cease-fire negotiations might soon begin with Iran, which would presumably involve Tehran agreeing to make concessions regarding its nuclear program, while Washington pressures Israel to halt its military activities. According to Israeli media, Iran already began putting out feelers to the U.S. earlier this week. Aviram Bellaishe considers the purpose of these overtures:

The regime’s request to return to negotiations stems from the principle of deception and delay that has guided it for decades. Iran wants to extricate itself from a situation of total destruction of its nuclear facilities. It understands that to save the nuclear program, it must stop at a point that would allow it to return to it in the shortest possible time. So long as the negotiation process leads to halting strikes on its military capabilities and preventing the destruction of the nuclear program, and enables the transfer of enriched uranium to a safe location, it can simultaneously create the two tracks in which it specializes—a false facade of negotiations alongside a hidden nuclear race.