Sam2: I’m okay with no further response from you, though I certainly did provide examples. The “student dynamics of YU”, whatever possible explanation there could theoretically be for those dynamics, have nothing to do with co-ed MO schools and other gender mixing, and the resultant aveiros (chamuros) that result from that laxity yet the laxity is intentionally not fixed thus allowing the aveiros (Chamuros) to continue.
Quote from your previous post:
“Yes, “MO” mixes the genders more. Not because they say the modern ideal of mixing genders trumps Halacha (as you claim), but because they believe that whatever gender-mixing they participate in is Muttar.”
Again, there are numerous issurim that come up when you mix the genders. In other words, if you care at all about the Torah, you do NOT want to needlessly mix the genders. Yet, as you admit, MO (proudly) does mix the genders and you claim they believe that “they are halachic decisions”.
But they can’t be “halachic decisions” if they go against halacha (or many halachos). So either they’re using a different Shulchan Aruch than traditional Orthodox does, or else it must be that they let modernity trump the Torah. The name is MO. The halacha is not like their alleged piskei halacha. What else could it be that causes them to claim something is “muttar” when it clearly is not? MO.
Your last quote:
“No one, and I mean no one, who honestly believes they are Orthodox (“Modern” or otherwise) thinks that any considerations not provided for in Halachah ever trumps Halachah.”
While I believe this to be theoretically true, people do transgress. And people then rationalize those transgressions with anything from plausible to outright foolish reasons. And the ones who transgress biShitah (gender mixing, social kissing, women wearing pants, et al.) still consider themselves Orthodox. How? The rationale is that MO says so.
As for the other examples, like the story, et. al., that I brought: again, these are indicative of a lack of sensitivity and Torah hashkafos and a corresponding immersion in secular culture, which your own Rav JBS decried and which MO still holds by despite Rav JBS’s position.
I’ve been waiting to hear your answer to why MO ignores the Rav (and traditional orthodox poskim), but none has been forthcoming. It seems obvious that the answer is that simply the lack of proper Torah education is the cause.
Neither you nor Feif Un have offered any answers to anything I’ve posed. All you’ve done is ignore the evidence and attempt to halachicly justify that (co-ed) which is not halachicly justifiable and then attack chareidim for “chumras” when those “chumras” have far greater basis in halacha than any kula you’ve come up with.
Once again, whether you claim it’s halachicly valid or it’s like my position that MO shitos are clearly halchicly invalid, you’ve still proven my point, with the above admission, that when it comes to these matters, a traditional orthodox Jew should not ask an MO Rav as he will get an MO answer which, at least in these matters, is not in accordance with traditional orthodoxy. Like I said a number of posts back, if you ask a Satmar Chassid if you can daven mincha well past shkiah, he will say that you can; a traditional Rav will not. That’s just the facts. So, too, here. As per your own admission, MO is more tolerant of mixing of the genders than is traditional orthodoxy.
So you will get different answers to the same question depending on if you ask an MO Rav or a traditional orthodox Rav. That was and is the essential point.