[pavelrub]

> this is about Arab or Christian Israeli citizens

This is incorrect. There is no distinction in the law between Arab Israelis and Jewish Israelis. The law applies equally to Israeli Jews who wish to marry a resident of the WB/Gaza, or one of the other countries mentioned in the law.

[zarzavat]

The law, in its majestic equality, forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal their bread.

[coeneedell]

Are you trying to say that there's something inherent to the Jewish population that they're less likely to marry a non-Jewish person than a Muslim is to marry a non-Muslim?

[borispavlovic]

It would be interesting to see the ration between the Arab Israelis wishing to marry an Arab from WB/Gaza and Jewish Israelis wishing to marry a Jewish from WB/Gaza. Laws make sense in a context of a society.

[pavelrub]

There is a fundamental difference between a law that prohibits a specific ethnicity from doing X, and a law that prohibits everyone from doing X, but a specific ethnicity/minority is more affected by it than others. The former is pretty much never legitimate, while the latter is often unavoidable, and I imagine exists to some extent in any country with minorities.

[helge9210]

> The law applies equally to Israeli Jews who wish to marry a resident of the WB/Gaza

There is no problem for Israeli Jew to marry a resident of WB/Gaza who is also Israeli Jew. This happens all the time (except Gaza, no Israeli Jews live there).

Concept of Israeli Jew marrying a non-Jew (no matter the residency) doesn't exist in Israeli law.

The state may (but not obliged to) recognize the marriage registered abroad.

For non-Muslim non-Israeli spouses of Israeli Jews there is a 5+ year naturalization procedure where outcome is not guaranteed and every half a year one has to recount all the spots and birthmarks of significant other in front of state official to prove the marriage is not a fake.

This specific law is for Muslim non-Israeli spouses. Instead of 5+ year procedure it's just a firm "No".