aries:
“…unless you know how to help the child or you know what the situation is, then in all honestly you are not looking to help anyone just to pass on information.”
Why do you assume that is the case? Why can’t the informant just be alerting the parents of the situation so they can deal with it?
“In your interpretation it might not be messirah at its highest level where it involves the authorities and goyim, but none-the-less, if you masser on someone no good will come of it.”
The way I see it, there are two seperare dimensions to this question: one is a Halachic question, and one is a Hashkafic question.
If you’re addressing the halachic aspect here, I’m not quite sure what you’re saying. I am not aware of something being more or less assur in halacha; it’s usually either a yes or a no. So something would either mesira and assur, or it would not be.
If you are looking at the hashkific aspect of the question, then you are definitely entitled to your own opinion (even if I completely disagree with it). But let me ask you this – if your child was ch”v being mechalel Shabbos, wouldn’t you want somebody to let you know about it?
“Stay out of it, it is NOT your business… Everyone that passes through the life of a child has an obligation to that child.”
Aren’t those two statements contradictory?
And why can’t the witness’s “obligation to the child”, as you so eloquently put it, be fulfilled by setting the parents (who presumably know the details of their child’s situation far better than anybody else, and are therefore far more qualified to act) on the case?
Oh, and sorry for the late response.
bobmaniac:
Huh?