Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
The protest is against violations of actual halacha, not chumra.
If you wish to discuss the halachic aspect than you need to acknowledge that the protest themselves are protesting a breach in halacha.
Shouting insults is protected by secular law. As far as halacha, dressing in a manner that is not considered tznius according to halacha is, well, against halacha.
And if, in fact, some people are dressing in a manner that is not considered tznius according to halacha (despite their insistence that it is), and are coming in that manner in public view in their neighborhoods and boys schools, and do not change this practice despite requests to, should not they at least have the right to peacefully protest?
Whats-in-a-name: And YOU will tell us when the greatest men of our generation are making a “mistake”? All of them collectively, no less?! YOU are less mistake-prone than the greatest gedolim??
From today’s news: Rav Eliashiv bans Mishpacha Magazine
??
Rav Elyashev, Rav Kanievsky, the Chasidic Rebbes and the other Gedolim are many degrees smarter than any of us and don’t need our instructions as to whether or not they should condemn anyone. If they decided not to, then we know by virtue of them being far wiser and greater than any of us, that that is the correct decision.
When Al Sharpton demonstrated in front of a Jewish business in the Bronx riling up the black masses about “white interlopers” and Jewish “diamond merchants”, he was charged with no crime. And that was despite the fact that his demagogery resulted with his mobs burning down that Jewish store and killing a person inside! The arsonist was arrested and charged while Sharpton was protected by free speech. This in no way justifies Sharpton ym’s, but does clearly demonstrate the legal rights of protesting and speech as recognized by the courts and the law.
The right to protest is a basic staple of any democracy. Even Putin in Russia recognizes this, as much as he doesn’t like the fact. And, yes, the fact that police have been at the site of daily protests in Beit Shemesh every day for months without arresting anyone for simply being there and calling the mothers prutzas, very much demonstrates its legality. The chilonim need little excuse to arrest chareidim, given even the slightest chance. Their police wouldn’t stand there every day witnessing something illegal for months and months and not arrest. They would love nothing more than to arrest chareidim if they could.
Such an instance of free speech is clearly not prosecutable and clearly is protected speech. This is clearly demonstrated by the mere fact that the protests have been occurring there every single day since September. Yet no one in nearly four months of five days a week protests has been arrested for merely being there protesting and calling them prutzas. That is because that is not an arrestable offense. It is protected speech and democratic protest. The chilonim would have loved nothing more than to arrest frum Jews otherwise. There is no law against it though. It’s called Democracy.
(The point about defamation being a civil, and not a criminal, matter was relevant to your mistaken notion that one can be arrested for defamation or libel. Parenthetically, in most democracies other than the U.K., the burden of proof to a claim of defamation lies with the allegedly defamed party and not with the accused.)
The right to protest is the hallmark of any democracy. Hinder that, and you have an undemocratic state. Defamation is a civil matter between private parties and not a direct governmental concern. IOW, if someone is called a prutza, they have a right to sue the party and prove in court they aren’t a prutza. The government has no right or ability to preemptively prevent speech, even if potentially defamatory.
Any physical altercations should be duly penalized. But standing and verbally protesting is protected speech. (Except in dictatorships that do not have freedom of speech.)
I think uneeq’s point was that Yabia Omer is very good as an index of other sources. Even if you do not follow Chacham Ovadia’s position.
As far as numbers, many sources’ seforim were lost over the centuries and others were never written down in the first place, so counting a majority is basically impossible and almost pointless (unless there was an overwhelming consensus.)
mdd: +1
As long as Freedom of Speech remains a democratic right, anyone has the right to go in front of any school and protest using vile (prutza, etc.) language. The ACLU defending the KKK’s right to march in a predominantly Jewish suburb of Chicago in their white hoods. The courts upheld that as a right to free speech, whether we liked it or not.
There has been only one alleged physical action – the spitting. Fine the guy or give him community service or whatever the prescribed penalty for the misdemeanor of spitting is under the law. The “uproar” is entirely manafactured by the religious hating media and their enablers.
One guy spitting someone is very wrong, but not terror. There is no excuse to spit, but it is a rare occurance. It happens more frequently in Tel Aviv than in Beit Shemesh. Don’t overreact or overdescribe.
In the U.S. and Israel spitting someone is generally a civil matter, not criminal. And if it is a crime, it is a misdemeanor that carries something akin to a fine or a number of hours of community service.