> I'm trying really hard to put aside the racist comments...
I'm interested in what racist comments you would apply. These people live a different culture than Western culture - what they call marriage is foreign to what you call marriage. But I see that I'm communicating poorly, if you would like to tell me what you perceive as racism I would actually appreciate it very much. You can tell me here or in email if you prefer - my Gmail username is the same as my HN username.
Now I understand your question. It is possible that because the first and second wife are not registered with the state, the men are "marrying" for the first (official) time. That could even be why this practice is usually done for the third- and forth- wife, and not the first or second. It is possible that these marriage are the "official" state-registered marriage. That's my guess, I don't really know.
My guess would be because it is impossible to enforce any "law" governing how these people lead their everyday lives (who they marry) but it is possible to enforce laws regarding the movement of people across borders.
I applaud your patience, as the thread was really clear about this from the beginning, and comments were missing the point one by one. This is a beautiful HN moment were people managed to have a debate about a very touchy topic, and everyone stayed very polite.
Pointing out dramatic differences between cultures is not racist, and pretending they do not exist to honor misguided western virtues while supporting loose immigration policies breeds resentment among those (typically lower income) who are forced to suffer the friction of cultural clash.
Third world immigrants are far less likely than natives to care about your laws, just as they are far less likely to honor your ideas about morality, justice, etc. It's not a stretch to imagine Muslims from poor middle eastern countries having multiple wives regardless of the legality of the practice, particularly given their religiously inspired oppression of women - what proportion of those wives are even willing to speak out?
It's ironic that western champions of women's rights are totally silent on the issue, apparently not being a "racist" is more important than standing against abuse among immigrant populations.
I think you are missing their point, which is that under Israeli law the multiple wives are already not legally recognized, so this change (not recognizing Palestinian spouses for citizenship) was not needed to prevent what you are talking about.
I don't think anyone "in the west" is advocating for the treatment of women you are talking about. People here are just pointing out that a) this is an incredibly broad brush and b) doesn't seem to be directly related to whether the state of Israel recognizes legal marriages to foreign Arabs as a path to citizenship for those people.
Thank you.