That would mean the USA are a theocracy too, given most senators are Christian. That doesn’t make too much sense.

Theocracy is a form of government in which religious leaders rule in the name of a deity, and religious law is the basis for all legal and political decisions.

This is not how it played out if you talk to Iranians.

They will tell you that the theocracy folks were a small minority of the entire resistance and first built a government of unity.

Once in charge they started annihilating all other opposition factions one by one.

> Iran became a theocracy through a popular uprising, too.

OP referred to democratic votes, whereas you talk about "popular uprising". Can you explain in your own words why you believe these are even comparable?

The problems of Israeli democracy are not the ones you list.

The fundamental issue is the population of the West Bank, who, outside of Palestinian Authority areas (aka "Area A"), are largely controlled by Israel but cannot vote. Note that 1-2 million West Bank Palestinians live in Area A under the Palestinian Authority.

- Within Israel, there is a Communist Party (which rejects religion and ethnicity) and other parties (including two Arab parties).

- A key problem in Israeli democracy, which it would be helpful if you noted, is that although there are two Arab parties (and majority Jewish parties who welcome Arabs), the Arab population of Israel votes at a low rate. This results in their being under-represented in the Knesset.

- The Basic Law you refer to made zero change to who can have political power.

- The 50% you refer to is neither the right percentage, nor does it take into account areas of great Palestinian autonomy.

- Function of the legal system has never been relevant to who can vote or hold office.

If you want to reflect what is on the ground, I suggest you take in the whole picture.

Enlighten me, which part of my comment was a lie?

If you have a problem with laws defining this sort of thing, you're going to have problems with the constitution of any muslim-majority country. Including ... of course Palestine.

Hamas/Gaza:

“The Day of Judgement will not come about until Moslems fight Jews and kill them. Then the Jews will hide behind rocks and trees, and the rocks and trees will cry out: O’ Moslem, there is a Jew hiding behind me, come and kill him,”

And the west bank's government pays pensions according to how many Jews you hurt:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinian_Authority_Martyrs_...

(No worries the "parliamentary democracy" that the WB is - hah! - promises to stop that now. Well, except for the payments)

But this is a general problem with all muslim-majority nations. Take an extremely moderate one - Morocco - defines itself as:

"A sovereign Muslim State, attached to its national unity and to its territorial integrity, the Kingdom of Morocco intends to preserve,"

I think you have not paid attention to European and Middle Eastern countries.

They are all ethno states.

The very concept "nation-state" is an alignment of "ethnic tribe" with "political borders"

You might want to hit a history book or two.

In this regard, Israel is more normal and places like the U.S. are abnormal. (Once you get outside the U.S....)

It's a bad law (although somewhat covered with 'good intentions', it does have a scent of racism which shouldn't exist in state laws). However, note that the outcome was the unintentional creation of Jewish/Arabs communities in the Galilee, which actually help bring Jews and Arabs together. It is also important to note that Arab Israelis have full rights as citizens, have representatives in the parliament and even were a part of the previous coalition. This, of course, is not the case for Palestinians in the occupied territories, and this issue MUST be resolved (one- or two-state solution, either way the current situation is unbearable). With that, the current coalition does include extremists, and many (according to recent polls, >60%) in Israel want to see them replaced.