December 8, 2008 7:59 pm at 7:59 pm #633089squeakParticipant
our laws come before their lawsDecember 8, 2008 9:46 pm at 9:46 pm #633090
Are you saying that the Torah mandates serving alcohol to those under 21 on Purim, even if laws exist prohibiting this? Does the Torah also mandate that adults drink alcohol on Purim, even if they are driving? Please elaborate.December 9, 2008 3:48 am at 3:48 am #633092Bais Yaakov maydelParticipant
squeak pretty much echoed my thoughts when i read anon’s “isnt it illegal…”
i think he meant that of course, we go according to the law but the Torah is Supreme and just because theres a law out there that says drinking alcohol when under the age of 21 is illegal, does that mean its a terrible thing to do and that we shouldnt try to keep a mitzvah of being b’simcha on purim?
unless the mitzvah doesnt specifically say to drink…butim not familiar with it.December 9, 2008 4:02 am at 4:02 am #633093
very nice. i expected more from you, BYM!
what happened to dina demalchusa dina?December 9, 2008 4:06 am at 4:06 am #633094
Rava said: A person is obligated to drink on Purim until he does not know the difference between “cursed be Haman” and “blessed be Mordechai”
Mesechtes Megillah (7b)December 9, 2008 4:07 am at 4:07 am #633095RoshYeshivahMember
I would let my son,let him try that first cigarete and cough it up! let his stomach hurt and his head turn. he’ll see it’s not so exciting! The reason i don’t smoke is cuz i still remember my first one!December 9, 2008 4:08 am at 4:08 am #633096
“What is the obligation of the [Purim] feast? That one should eat meat … and drink wine until he is drunk and falls asleep from drunkenness” (Rambam, Mishneh Torah, Laws of Megillah, 2:15).December 9, 2008 4:15 am at 4:15 am #633097
most guys are rolling around in vomit before they reach ad delo yada. and the mitzva is yayin – wine. not all the other stuff they’re drinking and smoking.December 9, 2008 2:08 pm at 2:08 pm #633098
Do you believe that one should serve alcohol to those under 21, even where this is against the law? Do you also believe that one should drink “until he is drunk” on Purim, even if he will be driving? Please explain.December 9, 2008 3:43 pm at 3:43 pm #633099
If someone is, or will be, driving he should not be anywhere near alchol. This is so obvious, I’m shocked you even asked. Pikuach Nefesh is ALWAYS first.December 9, 2008 5:32 pm at 5:32 pm #633100
Please understand that I’m not asking you for your opinion because I intend to follow your advice. I’m just trying to understand your point in citing m’koros for getting drunk on Purim.
Please answer the first part of my question: Do you advocate serving alcohol to those under 21 on Purim, even when this is against the law?
(If my opinion was not clear to any posters, I personally advocate neither of these).December 9, 2008 6:10 pm at 6:10 pm #633101
anon, answer this please. are you opposed to a father of children < 21 making kiddush with alchol, since he will then serve the alchol from kiddush to his children?December 9, 2008 6:26 pm at 6:26 pm #633102
The age of 21 is unique to the US, which has the highest legal age in the civilized world. In France, Switzerland, Germany, etc. its 16, and 18 in other countries.
And in the US, there are exemptions for underage drinking for religious reasons (by States that prohibit it otherwise.) Additionally, in most States [including New York State] the law prohibits those under 21 from PURCHASING (and public possession of) alchol, it does NOT prohibit DRINKING alchol by those under 21.December 9, 2008 6:53 pm at 6:53 pm #633103
I am aware that there are religious exceptions to laws prohibiting underage drinking. However, I think these laws are intended to allow children to drink small amounts of alcohol as part of religious services. (Yes, I do think it’s appropriate for children to drink small amounts of wine as part of kiddush). I don’t think these laws are intended to allow one to serve enough alcohol so that someone is “drunk and falls asleep from drunkenness”.
Do you advocate serving alcohol to those under 21 on Purim? If so, would you serve enough so that the person is “drunk and falling asleep from drunkenness”? I’d really appreciate an answer to this, since this is my third time asking you this question.
If so, please be aware that in many jurisdictions, one may be held liable for illnesses or accidents that result from serving excessive amounts of alcohol to those under 21.December 9, 2008 7:10 pm at 7:10 pm #633104
You did not address my points in my previous comment. Again, in the majority of U.S. States, the law prohibits PURCHASING alchol by those under 21, NOT CONSUMPTION.
I fully advocate following Shulchan Aruch, no ifs ands or buts.December 9, 2008 7:25 pm at 7:25 pm #633105
I just checked your States (New Jersey) law, and the religious exemption to the alchol law is not limited in quantity. (And this is generally the same for all States religious exemptions.)
Considering the numerous Mekors I provided above, specifically detailing how much alchol should be consumed on Purim, it can easily be demonstrated that the quantity consumed was for religious purposes.
END OF DISCUSSION.December 9, 2008 7:46 pm at 7:46 pm #633107
joseph –December 9, 2008 7:59 pm at 7:59 pm #633108
Would you please answer my question? Check my last three posts if you forgot what it is.December 9, 2008 8:31 pm at 8:31 pm #633109notpashutMember
L’choira you were just kidding, but on the one percent chance that you’re not, you can’t eat or drink stuff under a bed.December 9, 2008 8:41 pm at 8:41 pm #633110
lol ok maybe it’s in his closet. i’m not exactly sure because like i said, it’s hidden (from my other brothers, of course!)December 9, 2008 9:05 pm at 9:05 pm #633111
1) States and more commonly, municipalities, have laws against minors in possession and/or minor consumption.
2) Even if, in a hypothetical jurisdiction, there is no law against underage consumption per se, there will be a law against providing/serving alcohol to minors. Often times, adults who serve to minors are held liable for anything the minor does while drunk. If the minor gets in a car and kills someone, you’re looking at a LOT of trouble.
3) The religious exception is for sacramental wine used in religious services. Kiddush would be a good example. Purim would not likely fall under such an exception – there is no religious ritual or ceremony involved. Additionally, as there exist opinions that say one needs not necessarily drink on Purim, no court would likely extend the exception on the grounds of necessity for free exercise purposes.December 9, 2008 9:24 pm at 9:24 pm #633112
1. The religious exemption is NOT limited to sacramental wine.
2. You only need one good faith religious requirement to demonstrate qualification for the exemption. The many mainstream mekors above are more than sufficient. No court will go near analyzing conflicting religious opinions, nor will attempt to force a religious man who says he holds his Rabbi’s shitta to drink ad dloi yoda is binding.December 9, 2008 9:35 pm at 9:35 pm #633113
Per Illinois law:
“…the possession and dispensation of wine by an authorized representative of any church for the purpose of conducting any bona fide rite or religious ceremony conducted by such church shall not be prohibited by this Act.”
Purim is not a rite or ceremony, and even if it were, any such liquor would have to come from an authorized representative. Provide liquor to minors on purim at your own risk.
Additionally, even if you CAN fit it into an exemption, if that child does something c”v, you will most likely be liable. Think about that before you start pouring.December 9, 2008 9:48 pm at 9:48 pm #633114
Thanks for clarifying my points better than I could myself. To elaborate on your point (2) above, social host laws hold adults liable if they serve alcohol to a minor (that is, someone under the legal drinking age of 21) who injures himself or someone else as a result. These laws exist in some communities in NY and NJ.
To my knowledge social host laws contain no exemption for alcohol consumed for religious purposes. It seems to me that social host laws wouldn’t affect consumption of alcohol for kiddush, since a minimal amount of alcohol is comsumed. However, if one serves a minor sufficient alcohol so that he is “drunk and falling asleep from drunkenness” then if any injury results c”v social host laws would likely apply.December 9, 2008 10:02 pm at 10:02 pm #633115
You didn’t provide the context for that Illinois law. I don’t know what it prohibits in the first place. I did check New York and New Jersey law, and Purim is fully covered.
Additionally, in case of conflict between Shulchan Aruch (including YOUR Rabbi’s interpretation thereof – not necessarily every conflicting shitta) and secular law, Shulchan Aruch triumphs.December 9, 2008 10:19 pm at 10:19 pm #633116
It would seem that under Illinois law at least, there is no religious exemption in the home, it applies only within the four walls of a religious institution. It is possible that the law has been interpreted to cover Kiddush at home (though it’s equally possible that since Kiddush is often made at shul, it doesn’t). You are correct that there is NO EXCEPTIONS to social host liability for liquor consumed under religious exemptions.
Additionally, social host liability is imposed via case law or statute, so it is a state-level, not community-level issue. Both NY and NJ DO IMPOSE social host liability.
Finally, not all states have religious exception laws. In fact, so far as I can tell, neither NY nor NJ have religious consumption exceptions. I could be wrong on that, and would be glad if someone could point to a source if it exists.December 9, 2008 11:11 pm at 11:11 pm #633117
Please do not be so dogmatic. The laws are changing so that many municipalities prohibit SERVING, not just Purchasing. See the story below from the Aug 6, 2007 edition of Newsday
Mother arrested for serving alcohol to minorsBY JENNIFER BARRIOS | [email protected]
11:18 PM EDT, August 6, 2007
xxxxx xxxxx whipped off her sunglasses to reveal puffy, swollen eyes. She had to use her right hand, though — her left arm hung in a sling.
“Do I look like I would serve alcohol to a minor?” she asked. “On my dead father, I would never serve alcohol to a minor.”
On Sunday night, xxxxx, 45, became the first parent in Nassau County charged with violating the county’s new social-host law, which targets adults who permit minors to drink in their homes.
Police said xxxxxx, who was celebrating her birthday in the backyard of her West Hempstead home, allowed her 18-year-old son and his friends to drink alcohol at the party. A fight broke out, leading neighbors to call police at 10 p.m.December 9, 2008 11:18 pm at 11:18 pm #633118
See my previous comment. NY & NJ, as nearly all States, DO have religious exemptions. And it does cover Purim. This exemption is all encompassing.December 9, 2008 11:20 pm at 11:20 pm #633119
Can you point me to the NY/NJ statute? I question your self-proclaimed legal expertise to determine that the statute definitively covers Purim. In the unlikely event that the statutes expressly mentions Purim, I will stand corrected – but I am certain this won’t be the case.
Furthermore, I’m pointing out the risks. You aren’t going to get off on a wrongful death lawsuit for millions of dollars because you had a conflict with the Shulchan Aruch. There are opinions which say you do not have to drink to satisfy the requirement. Proceed at your own risk, is what I am saying; do not complain when you must accept consequences, when you’ve been warned.December 9, 2008 11:21 pm at 11:21 pm #633120
Also, Joseph, social host laws do not recognize religious exemptions one way or the other. You may still be criminally or civilly liable for anything your underage guests do when they leave your home.December 9, 2008 11:30 pm at 11:30 pm #633121Bais Yaakov maydelParticipant
bklyn19: ive pretty much made it clear that i dont condone any of the behavior diplayed by boys/men on Purim. if youll go back to the post you commented on, youll realize that i was merely attempting to clarify what squeak said, because my INITIAL reaction to anon’s “isnt it illegal…” was the same as squeak’s.
i hope this clarifies things for you and restores your “expectations” of me.
btw, im not familiar with “dina dimalchusa dina”…where is it quoted?December 9, 2008 11:32 pm at 11:32 pm #633122
Bottom line is you are mistaken. It doesn’t mention any religions specific holiday by name, but it clearly covers Purim. It isn’t even a legal debate.
Additionally, I believe there have been NO prosecutions in the State of New York in the past 60 years of a Frum underage drinker on Purim, that did not involve an automobile. And I assure there has been much Frum underage drinking, as per halacha, EVERY one of the last 60 years in the Great State of New York. AND I can assure you it will continue unabated, up to the point of ad dloi yoda. (Remember, I exclude anything involving an automobile.)December 9, 2008 11:45 pm at 11:45 pm #633123
really not sure, BYM. but i’ve heard it since i’m in kindergarden. someone help me out? joseph? (i can always rely on you for a source…)December 9, 2008 11:47 pm at 11:47 pm #633124
As I said, please provide a source or citation – you say you looked it up so it shouldn’t be that difficult (unless you really didn’t). I’m not taking your word for that one.
Also, as I said, drinking laws notwithstanding, you’re still open to civil and criminal liability for ANYTHING a child does while intoxicated after you provide them with alcohol.December 9, 2008 11:47 pm at 11:47 pm #633125
What about up to the point of ad she haim throw up? That’s when my friends, Chaim Berlin parents, put a stop to it. The sight of their 15-year old son coming home from celebrating with his fellow bchorim throwing up violently and sick to his stomach made them realize that teen agers had no clue where the line of ad dlo yoda was. Over the next few yearts he stayed home, under their supervision as to how much he could drink.December 9, 2008 11:55 pm at 11:55 pm #633126
You were absolutely positive, until 20 minutes ago, that social host laws didn’t exist. How can you still maintain with absolute certainty that Purim is covered? Wanting doesn’t make it so. The woman in the article would not have been arreste with the call to the police. How do you know the same thing wouldn’t happen if police are called to a yeshiva Purim celebration and found significant amounts of alcohol being served to minors?December 10, 2008 12:11 am at 12:11 am #633127
In summation, I’d like to offer everyone a large
L’CHAIM!!!!!December 10, 2008 12:21 am at 12:21 am #633128
Changing the subject is certainly one way to avoid admitting mistake…December 10, 2008 12:28 am at 12:28 am #633129
i’ll let you know when i’m engaged. don’t rush me!December 10, 2008 12:33 am at 12:33 am #633130JAPPMember
I hope you raise this coffe room discussion in your mesivta. Good LuckDecember 10, 2008 12:41 am at 12:41 am #633131
Take it easy illini, with all your errors. As you well now see, the singles are picking up the cue…December 10, 2008 1:14 am at 1:14 am #633132
Thanks for reiterating that social host laws have no religious exemption.
Regarding laws allowing minors to consume alcohol for religious purposes, I believe they were originally written to allow consumption of alcohol during church religious ceremonies. These ceremonies involve consumption of _small_ quantities of wine. So it seems to me that the spirit of the law was never intended to allow consumption of the quantities required to inebriate someone.
Also, in addition to social host laws, some municipalities are starting to pass teen party laws. These laws lower the threshold for prosecution, in that adults can be held liable even if no one is injured as a result of the drinking. I didn’t mention these before because it seems that these laws are relatively new and not common. But they do signal a new awareness of the dangers of serving alcohol to minors and a willingness to prosecute this.December 10, 2008 1:37 am at 1:37 am #633133
Anon, you’re right about the teen party laws. I’m not sure, but I believe that part of their origins may be in New York.
Everything I have said is verifiable, and I will provide citations if asked. You, on the other hand, make assertions which not only have no support which you are able to provide, but have also been disproved. See, e.g., Social Host laws.
Saying that I’ve made errors does not make it so. Your thinly-veiled attempts to brush off the clear repudiation of your assertions will not fool anyone with half a brain. See, e.g., anon for this.December 10, 2008 1:57 am at 1:57 am #633134
Just to clarify, anon, I am quite sure you have a *fully* functional brain 😉December 10, 2008 2:18 am at 2:18 am #633136oomisParticipant
Several years ago my local UPS delivery guy who often dropped off my neighbors’ packages by me if they were not home, stopped by my house on Purim day, to tell me his truck has just been hit by a drunk teenage driver. The kid was so drunk, he didn’t even realize he was bleeding. He had run a light. The UPS guy knew I am Orthodox, and he wanted to know if this was a Jewish thing for kids to get drunk. he realized it was a Jewish holiday, seeing all the kids in costumes in the street, etc. He didn’t want to call the police, but he did take the kids keys away and took him home and told the parents what the kid did. I don’t know how the story played out, as the UPS guy’s route was changed, but I can tell you one thing. The chillul Hashem this dumb kid and EVERY dumb kid like him who gets plastered and tries to use the excuse that it’s Purim (or a chasunah, or Simchas Torah, or it’s medicinal), is beyond the pale. These are kids whose parents need to wake up and smell the Slivovitz.December 10, 2008 2:24 am at 2:24 am #633137Chuck SchwabParticipant
As a former defense attorney (now retired) I wanted to share with you some pertinent facts. The religious exemption being debated here, as long as claimed legitimately, is rather solid and generally no prosecutor will file a case. This is irregardless of any social host laws previously mentioned.
On top of that, the “Free Exercise Clause” (and to an extent the “Establishment Clause”) of the U.S. Constitution protect member of a religion (in this case Jews, including underage), from engaging in alcohol (in this case on Purim) as prescribed by their religious authorities. In the unlikely event an overzealous prosecutor did file a case, it would almost certainly be thrown out of court without trial.December 10, 2008 2:43 am at 2:43 am #633138
As a former defense attorney, you should probably be aware that “irregardless” is not a word 😉
First, I’d again like to see the NY or NJ statute, which Joseph claims to have read and assured everyone that it covers Purim. Your constitutional conclusion, while on its face seems reasonable, might not hold up. There is no exemption in the marijuana laws, for example, for consumption on religious grounds. As I’m sure you’re aware, the government can infringe on your religious liberties so long as there is a statute which is narrowly tailored to address a compelling state interest. Controlling underage drinking is most certainly a compelling state interest, and depending on how the statute is written, could be narrowly tailored even if it excludes Purim from the exemption. For example, someone who serves a child to the point where they need to go to the hospital would probably be ill-placed to claim religious exemption. It would all depend on the circumstances.
And again, there is potentially MASSIVE liability under social host law. Potential criminal liability, and even more likely civil liability (i.e., staggering verdicts). No jury will be sympathetic to the fact that “it was a religious holiday” when there’s a kid killed by a drunk driver who was served at your house. Beware.December 10, 2008 3:13 am at 3:13 am #633139yankdownunderMember
I like the non alcoholic beverage policy of Young Israel of Woodmere, I think this includes consumption on Shabbbos, Purim, and Simchat Torah. My concern is when a teenager is able to consume Moshka to his hearts content (on Purim), and then drives a vehicle in an inebriated state. How sharp are his judgment and reflexes when driving the car? As I said in an earlier post select a designated driver (who is sober) to drive the car home. Make the selection before imbibing.December 10, 2008 3:29 am at 3:29 am #633140
Thank you Chuck Schwab.
illini, for the umpteenth time, everyone is excluding the combination of alcohol with driving.December 10, 2008 3:41 am at 3:41 am #633141
First off, drunk driving is the preeminent problem. Don’t see how you can ignore it.
Second, it doesn’t have to be connected with driving. If the kid gets into a fistfight and hurts someone, or damages property, or anything else – you can be liable. Even worse, if c”v the kid walks into the street in a drunken haze and gets hit, you’re going to be liable. There are infinite liability possibilities, even without a car.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.