- This topic has 102 replies, 28 voices, and was last updated 7 years, 7 months ago by .
-
Posts
-
In Monsey they opened a new sports bar type hamburger place recently.
Self appointed Taliban went into theplace to threaten the new owners
with a boycott unless the TVs were removed.
I was curious about this from a halachic perspective.
But not curious from a hashkafic perspective?
BTW, we are more stringent than the Taliban. They eat kosher, but we don’t eat halal.
its halachacilly NOT permissible to go and destroy something thats not yours. but if its a tv and its at a resteraunt and you dont feel comfortable eating at a resteraunt with a tv then DONT go.
Certainly people and communities are entitled to eat or mot eat at places based on the things they will be exposed to there.
It was very nice of the people who don’t plan to eat there to go in and explain why, so that the owners can change it if they want those people’s business. Otherwise the guy might lose tons of money.
titandata
Thats exactly like the Taliban! remeber when they threatened the US with a boycott if we dont get rid of TV’s ?
I dont understand the problem, people are required to buy hamburgers in a place that has a TV? They dont want the TV so they said they wont but there with a TV present. What could possibly be wrong?
The problem is that titandata wants his sports bar.
Yirei Shamayim are correct to boycott an establishment that offers treif influences such as television.
On a related note I often wonder what is under the purview of hashgacha other than food.
For example goyish music, koli isha, music during sefira, acapella during sefira, music ever for that matter, dress of wait staff, TV, selling meat during nine days (sefardim can eat, some will be makign siyumim) etc etc… Is a hashgcha responsible for these things?
Obviously a hashgacha can institute whatever policy they want. But what do you think they are responsible for other than kashrus of the food.
There was a big issue made by the usual anti-religious MKs when the rabbanut in Israel threatened to remove hashgachas from hotels that had new year’s parties- so yes, at least in Israel hashgacha includes more than just the food, and obviously, being closed on shabbos.
If the local kashrus agency is happy with certifying a sports bar (most wouldn’t), it is there problem. Very few frum Jews would go into a sports bar (“bar” is the problem, these are places for socializing rather than eating).
Who is making the threats?
Is it the Kashruth agency or just some Kanoim?
The Kashruth agency might have a point, the Kanoim should be arrested for tresspassing and harassment
“take the internet out of your kosher jewish home or your children will not be accepting into any jewish schools in this town”
ever heard that before?
Walking into a public restaurant isn’t trespassing. Advising the owner that the community will organize an economic boycott of the food establishment isn’t harassment. It is constitutionally protected free speech and right to choose who you do not patronize.
There is no constitutional rights to free speech on private property, otherwise someone could walk into a shul and preach that if you dont accept “Him” you are “going somewhere” and claim free speech
Until such time as the owner asks the person to leave, the person has the right to enter the public restaurant based on the owner’s public invitation to enter. Furthermore, the owner could be advised of the pending economic boycott by phone call, letter or in shul without needing to enter the restaurant.
i heard more about this on shabbos. there are better ways to deal with this rather than boycotting.
The people who are “Boycotting” likely wouldnt go to this place in the first place
So why were the owners so worried that they agreed to the requested change to remove the TumahVisions?
Without the TV’s it’s no longer a sports bar. A sports bar/restaurant in the five Towns has been open for several months with no controversy
I dont know the exact store or the story, Only what was posted here
But most likely it was the Hasghcha who told them to take them out
In some languages that can be translated as “Welcome to Monsey!”. Amol, Touro College attempted to open shop in Monsey (above the bank on the corner of 59 and College next to the 7-11). In about a week, someone paid Pirsum to put signs all over the place declaring (falsely) how R’ Moshe ZT”L, R’ Yaakov ZT”L and any number of late gedolim opposed Touro on the grounds that they teach apikorsus. Next week their windows were smashed, their HVAC unit was broken, and someone broke in to the offices at night and vandalized the place. They left soon after.
Yseribus: Speech from Rav Elya Svei:
It says further, in Targum Yonoson, that one should not be a false witness. I want to stop here. In public life here in Brooklyn, there is false testimony. We have merited, through blood and sweat and with the Almighty’s help, to establish large Yeshivos for the boys and Bais Yaakovs for the girls. And these schools produced students of whom all can be proud. But then someone comes and says that they are still incomplete. When the boys go out of the Yeshiva, they are still not finished — they still need more studies: they still have to go to “Touro College” to be well-rounded. That is the biggest false testimony against the Torah. The boys do not need such “completeness”.
One is not allowed to be friends with them! One is not allowed to be partners with them! What will be with our children? From where will our great Torah leaders come? From Touro College they will not come! And mothers of Gedolei Torah will also not come from Touro College, because the Gemorrah says that to merit children who will become Gedolei Yisroel, one has to have modesty. And modesty cannot be acquired in Touro College!
Sports is from the yevanim. Basically, you want to sit around get drunk and be part of yavan.
It seems that the people who think this is okay don’t realize that frum people are not immune from alcoholism.
Lesschumras, I find it hard to believe that there weren’t fights about it at least behind the scenes.
If the owner was smart he would change the name to Harras Atlantic city and keep a stack of baseball caps near the door.
DaasYochid – alcoholism is DIFFERENT than watching TV!
DY, from the OP it seems that the controversy is about the TVs, not the alcohol. Lots of kosher restaurants have bars. I suspect very few Jewish alcoholics frequent bars — there are plenty of opportunities to obtain alcohol in shuls and at simchas.
It’s one thing to have a drink with your meal, quite another to have a dedicated TV room for people to drink while they watch a ballgame.
The hashgacha has the legal right to demand whatever they want. You have the right to not go to such places with televisions. These places aren’t intended for the very frum.
Joseph: So you’re justifying the nezek that happened to Touro? Not to mention the motzei shem ra? And sheker (as the quotes by R’ Moshe were fabrications)?
Look I’m glad that you, despite your obvious misgivings, have chosen a life of kollel. But for the vast majority of people, we cannot all live on tzedaka. And making a parnoso in most cases means some form of post-high school education.
R’ Elya was never against colleges. He was merely opposed to Touro as he felt it was trying to make college into an Yiddishe thing. R’ Shach also had very complex opinions on college that in no way can be summed up with a vague quote from one of his seforim about “YU type institutions” (of which Touro is a completely different zach). He was talking about Ma’arava in Eretz Yisroel and he privately encouraged people to attend even though for political reason he opposed it.
Yseribus, why are your stating sheker and putting words in my mouth. I merely disproved your false assertion that there was no “any number of late gedolim opposed Touro.”
And Rav Shach specifically mentioned Touro; that wasn’t an extrapolation. And it is one thing for you to put words in my mouth; but to falsely accuse Rav Shach by insinuating that c’v “for political reason he opposed it” is quite something else. His opposition was principled based on Torah principles, as everything else he said and did. Not “for political reason.”
Ah bissel derech eretz; he is the godol hador, not a political hack. And his Torah based positions were always principles based, not political statements.
Oh please – much ado about nothing. The fact that some people in monsey will boycott a sports bar should not be shocking to anybody. Comparisons to thugs and (of all things) the Taliban are simply ridiculous. Methinks these comparisons are far more indicative of the hate of those making them.
Any thoughts on the “halachic perspective” of comparing frum Jews you disagree with to murderous terrorists?
A few years ago Mendy’s opened a Sports bar on the upper west side. It didnt last very long and it wasnt because of Kanoim, the business obviously wasnt there.
I suspect if nobody had said anything about the one in Monsey , it likely would have closed too. People do not go to sports bars on Tuesday night, they go on Friday NIghts and Satudays when there are sports events going on and the Kosher sports bars wouldnt be open.
Jews also tend not to drink alot, even if they drink, they might have 1 beer and at most 2. Many people who go to sports bars might drink 5 or 6 beers
Jews also tend not to drink alot
Please, let’s keep it that way.
Ive been to Europe a number of times and I saw there that many of the Kosher restaurants serve Alchohol much more than they do here. It was a little shocking to see people having a beer with their meal at a restaurant , something I rarely if ever see here.
Even Wine I saw much more common there than here (Wine or Beer depended on country. The Netherlands served Beer, Italy served Wine)
Ultimately it will be market that will decide if this place should be there or not, not some Kanoim, and likely the market will decide there just isnt enough business. However when Kanoim get involved they make the business more sympathtic and actually hurt their own cause.
Better say nothing and let the business shut by itself, it likely will not re-open , however if Kanoim “close it” someone else might try
Joseph, a person entering the restaurant/bar does not have the right to stay until asked to leave. The CT Supreme Court defined a “Public Invitee”
“A public invitee is someone invited to enter or remain on land as a member of the public for a purpose for which the land is held open to the public.”
Thus the owners invitation to the public is to enter for the purposes of dining/drinking. The public is not holding an invitation to enter and try to convince the proprietor to change his business model.
You are correct that the owner should be contacted via phone or letter.
The expression shikur vi ah goy came about for good reason.
Ive been to Europe a number of times and I saw there that many of the Kosher restaurants serve Alchohol
I think drinking during a meal is very different than drinking while watching a ballgame.
The Kosher stands at the ballparks sell Beer
I stand by my statement, if you dont like the establishment, dont go. It will likely close anyway due to the business model not working
“I was curious about this from a halachic perspective.”
What does the Choshen Mishpat have to say about entering a business’s premises when you have no intention of transacting business there?
If the establishment offends community sensibilities, the community is within its rights to organize a boycott.
A Boycott is a serious undertaking. To do so, you must first get permission from The Recognized Bais Din of that community. Such Bais Din will also issue strict guidelines on how to promulgate such a Boycott.
The question here isn’t about a boycott but about intimidation. Some of us appreciate an option between Kosher Castle and Fireside, even if it comes with TVs and a bar area. Those who are not interested in such an establishment are welcome to not frequent BH, but they have no right to impose their beliefs on the rest of us.
Josh, the recognized beis din of the community is who determined to organize the boycott should the establishment not agree to the change.
B’H they agreed to the change.
Joseph – who is “the recognized beis din of the community”? The greater Monsey area includes many distinct fine frum kehillos and the beis din of one does not speak for all of us.
That doesn’t preclude from taking necessary action when a case such as this occurs where a negative influence is publicly established. The action was taken under the auspices of some of the chashuve rabbonim and dayanim of the community.
The action was taken under the auspices of some of the chashuve rabbonim and dayanim of the community.
Who?
The Wolf
The owner knows. The case has been B’H resolved and there is no need for the public to be privy to the information.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.