akuperma

1. If you are willing to allow normal marriages where the couple doesn’t intend to have children, or is incapable of having children, you lose one of the principal secular arguments against gay marriage. While there have been cultures where child-free marriages were banned (which would probably mean the woman has to get pregnant before the wedding), no modern western culture treats it that way (halacha certainly doesn’t). Once you have redefined marriage as an expression of “couplehood” rather than an economic framework for raising children, the secular objection to “gay marriage” disappears.

2. Same-sex couples do sometimes raise children, and indeed, some children are raised by other than their natural parents for a variety of reasons. One probably should allow parental rights to such couples (whether or not the couple is “involved” with each other). At present, only marriage does that.

3. Based on halacha, the objection to “gay marriage” is really an objection to male homosexuality, which is a religious based objection. Marriage is just a legal and economic framework. There really isn’t a secular reason to prefer one form of perversion (e.g. non-marital sexual intimacy) over another.

If you think the goyim were a bunch of chaste tsadikim until recently, you are quite mistaken. It’s not like this is the first time they gone “off the derekh” (for a Ben Noach) – they’ve been off for a long time. Even when they had moral laws, they tended to ignore them.

Our laws prohibit us from dealing with their courts, and the recent developments might help be creating broader support for allowing people to sign pre-maritial contracts (a kesubah is, BTW, a pre-maritial contact) agreeing to binding arbitration. Now, a considerable part of the country will be annoyed with the government’s domestic relations laws, and will be seeking alternatives.

We might be happier moving away from our hopelessly lost secular cousins. The growth of Yiddishkeit in “red” states is to be encouraged.

Joseph:

The concern of OU, and many others, is that the Gay Rights groups will move to ban religious groups that don’t accept the doctrine of gay marriage, i.e. no tax exemption for shuls and yeshivos, not recognizing frum marriages, and perhaps banning members of those religions from public life and professional licenses. It is there position that opposition to homosexuality is similar to racism, and needs to be surpressed. You will note how in the Episcopal Church, the left wing groups are seizing churches from the congregations that built them. They are actively supporting persecution of anyone who doesn’t agree with them.

The OU is trying to make a point without being too provocative. In part since we are used to being a persecuted minority, there is no “hiddush”, but for Christians with no experience in being persecuted for their faith, this is a radically new environment they are facing.

CT Lawyer who wrote ‘Jews, Women, Blacks and non-property owners were not allowed the vote in the past. Goyische prayer was forced upon Jewish children in public schools. The Court has interpreted the Constitution to right these injustices.”

Not true. Pertaining to voting rights. The Supreme Court never objected to limiting the right to vote. Jews were given the right to vote by statute. The same for non-property owners. Blacks were given the vote by constitutional amendment (though some states had allowed at least some Blacks to vote previously – by statute).

P.S. Given the unspoken fact in allowing same sex marriage was the rejection of the common law definiton derived from canon law, that probably will lead to banning the prohibtion on marrying cousins (which is largely ignored and easy to evade since many states don’t have such a rule) and the legalization of polygamy (also to those asking about cousin marriages – what does “inbreeding” have to do with anyting since two males can’t produce a child, if equal protection would require treating hetereosexual couples the same – the “have mina” of the decision is that marriage no longer has anything to do with having children).

Jews don’t hold by American law in such matters – so it doesn’t affect us. By halacha, our law, one is no more allowed to marry a person of the same gender than is one allowed to marry a non-Jews (BTW, Anglo-American law has allowed Jews to marry goyim since the late 1700s).

By decriminalizing various of forms of non-marital intimacy, the goyim did a lot more violence to the concept of marriage than in allowing people who by definition are incapable of bearing children to marry. And those changes occured in the early 20th century, or earlier.

The only danger is that as marriage is increasingly defined a a couple, rather than a couple with children including a usually dependent spouse, the many laws that benefits families will no longer be justifiable (e.g. the tax break for families with one spouse earning much less than the other, which also works as a penalty for spouses with equal incomes).

No one ever thought that yarmulkes were particularly Jewish until the goyim stopped wearing them. Same goes for fedoras (which are coming back in style among goyim, so maybe the frum crowd will have to switch to some other type of hat, e.g. homburgs). Remember that the fedora is originally a work hat, popular among cowboys, American military in the 19th century, etc., though we made it into a formal dress hat (among the goyim it was always what you wore when not fully dressed up).

1, They lost.

2. The ONLY issue in the war was slavery. They offered to stay in the union if the constitution was amended to protect slavery. When facing certain defeat they were offered the opportunity to surrender, reenter the union (with everything forgiven) if only they would agree to abolish slavery – the turned down the offer. States rights wasn’t an issue (in fact it was the northern states who were screaming “states rights” which they were using to declare any Black found in their territory to be free in accordance with the state law that all persons are free – a law based on English common law). Also, most southerners favored the union and more southerners wore blue rather than grey (though admitedly the pro-sucession did have a majority of soutern whites – if they had one man one vote they would have been no civil war).

3. Just as we object to the Nazi flag, as do almost all patriotic Americans, the objections by African Americans, and a a great many patriotic Americans of other ethnic groups, to the former rebel banner is quite justified.

zahavasdad: There were enough Jews that whether to give Jews full rights was a hot political issue. If the Jacksonians did not prevail, meaning that franchise was restricted to Christians, and Jews continued to be banned from holding office, it is unlikely there would have been massive immigration to the United States.

Also, with the democratization (small “d’) of the Jacksonian, the extension of franchise would have not taken place. Consider that if only rich people could vote, would have extending the franchise to blacks, women, etc., have been such a priority. The movement towards universal suffrage would have stopped.

Jackson’s theft of Indian lands was disgraceful (and wildly popular with the voters). Grant was okay (the one anti-semitic incident may not have been his fault), but he tolerated amazing corruption (e.g. cornering markets), and while he tried to protect Blacks and Indians he was totally incompetent. What Jack Lew picked on Hamilton is beyond me.

On the other hand, discussion the virtues of Hamilton, Jackson and Grant in terms of who should be on American currency – that’s interesting (Washington, Lincoln, Jefferson and Franklin seem to be less controversial)

1. Hamilton was also an elitest who felt that typical citizen couldn’t be trusted with full political rights, and government was best left in the hands of the educated upper class.

2. Jackson was a great advocate of allowing all men (as then defined, excluding most non-whites) to particpiate in government. The Jacksonian era was the era that led to Jews gaining full civil rights and allowing the “common man” (again, limited to whites) to have full political rights. Had the Jacksonian movement failed, its unlikely the US would have gone on to granting full civil rights to non-whites. Instead you would have ended up with an upper-class led oligarchy rather than a democracy.

3. Whether a centralized banking system controlled by a Wall Street elite is a good idea (Hamilton thought so, so does the current elite in America), or a bad idea (as Jackson believed, as do all the people who think the “Great recession” was caused by evil bankers), is still a hot topic.

4. Grant on the $50 is also debateable, as we was notoriously incompetent (if well intended).

Re: Involuntary homeschooling

I suggest determining who is the posek (or poskim) of the people running the school. One can make an argument that by halacha the Jewish child is entitled to a Jewish education, and that one can ask a Beis Din to order the school (which in practice means appealing to the gedolim who serve as the poskim of the principle/board/etc.).

coffee addict: If the last Lubavitcher Rebbe was a zionist, why did he live in Brooklyn? Why did he struggle to build up Jewish communities in golus? Why did he not encourage his talmidim to serve in the army (the most he did was tell those in Eretz Yisrael who weren’t learning full time to allow themselves to be conscripted – a zionist would have told the ones in golus and in yeshivos to volunteer)?

You can find summaries of the legal requirements online(which do not include having a teaching license – if that were the law then all the private schools in New York would be in trouble for using unlicensed teachers since under “equal protection” they can’t demand something of home schoolers that they don’t demand of the elite private schools, not to mention the hasidic yeshivos). I suggest the website of the Home School Legal Defense Association. While New York has a reputation for disliking home schoolers, if one doesn’t try to rub it in their face one probably won’t have problems. Other options include establishing a “school” which is de facto what many home schooling “groups” evolve into. — There are many organizations that can help with the legal aspects, though only a few Jewish-oriented ones (Limudei kodesh can be a big problem, especially for home schooling boys, since virtually no women can teach gemara meaning you need a largely unemployed husband to teach the boys).

They should be in any public library (but they may only have the more common exams, and older editions which may, or may not, still be current)

The study guides are cheap, so it might be worth buying one. They are often available used.

Check the website to make sure the exams haven’t changed recently.

1. Remember you have to buy the board games first.

2. You will have to be constantly spending money on upkeep (replacing lost pieces).

3. If a game goes out of style, you are stuck with unsellable inventory.

4. Many board games are available on Ebay (and equivalent markets) at deep discounts. There is a good chance your “rental” price would be similar to the “used” price.

If you plan on having the career in Israel, a professional degree in Israel is highly preferable. It is often hard to transfer credentials between countries and all your professional connections will be derived from where you went to school.

In many language, adjectives can and sometimes usually preceed the noun they refer to. “Third” is the adjective. What is pronounced as “Shalosh Seudos” is Yiddish, even though the words are of Hebrew derivation. While this sounds weird to a Hebrew speaker who anticipates Semitic syntax (with the noun prceeding the adjective), it sounds quite reasonable to native speakers of Yiddish and English. (whose adjectives come first).

This is an interesting linguistic topic with no deep halachic or phiosophical meaning.

A “lawyer” would never be a shailoh. All a lawyer is, be definition, is someone with expertise in how a legal system (or systems) work who gives people advice on dealing with the legal system. Given that one often deals with legal systems, that is a useful skill. If you are inclinced to help evil people do more evil, it is a great opportunity to make money by going off the derekh. However knowing about the legal systems we deal with is not an issue. A “judge”, especially in Medinat Yisrael, would be a serious shailoh, especially if one holds the medinah to have any halachic status since if you hold that Medinat Yisrael is a Jewish state (as opposed to a goyish state with many Jews living there), there is a problem since its legal system is totally not based on Jewish law and on most matters works contrary to halacha. One should also remember that have a just legal system is one of the mitsvos of the Bnei Noach.

If you think going to a law school is a meal ticket to great riches you should stay in yeshiva until you become cleverer and more mature. Even under ideal conditions, a degree from a top law school (in New York City, that would be NYU and Columbia) didn’t guarantee you anything. Remember that the better law schools are much more expensive that the rest. Also if one plans to do something other than “big law” (such as hang out a shingle in a frum community, helping your neighbors with their legal issues) going to a name law school isn’t worth the extra cost. If you want to be a lawyer, go to law school. If you want to get rich, review the halachic definition of who is rich (its in Pirke Avos).

ENOUGH WITH THE JOKES. The Supreme Court rules on same-sex marriage in the near future, and if they support it that suggests the ban on polygamy will also fail. The “professoriate” (law school professors) are already writing books on the subject. It is quite possible that in the near future the law in the United States will allow polygamy, so we need to think how this impacts on us.

In response to “Since the Zionist have opened up Eretz Yisroel to all Jews” but they closed it to hareidim. Under the British and the Turks Jews were exempt from conscription (except for one year, when the Turkish Empire was collapsing and they tried to draft Jews and Arabs, neither of whom were at all cooperative). While the zionists have exempted most hareidim under the pretense they were learning full time (a legal fiction in many cases, but one that avoided a confrontation), that is now ending.

Frum Jews don’t have an “accredited” anything. We don’t hold that way.

Artscroll is the leading publisher of English materials.

Few of the Rishonim (on gemara) have been translated.

Any translations should be taken with a grain of salt.

sam2 who said ” Real veal (and at a meal this fancy it will be real veal) is made from specially-fattened calf that have only ever been fed Tarfus, which is Assur to eat according to the Rama.”

The is not what “veal” is defined as in the United States. You can check any of the standard dictionaries, not to meantion the meat section in your local kosher market. Real veal means meat of a young member of the cattle family (often the males produced by dairy cattle – their sisters are used for milk production and then low grade beef).

Whatever you are referring to, there may not be an English word for. In American practice, the calves that are being turned into veal are fed milk and or grain, There is almost nothing a cow can digest that is treff unless you are using the banned animal feeds made from rendering other animals and are very rare now since they cause a fatal brain disease in humans – cows stomachs are not designed to digest meat.

Of course Shabbos is easy. Look at all the stuff you don’t have to do all day. No driving around, no need to check the internet to make sure the world hasn’t ended or your retirement accounts hasn’t tanked. No worry what messes Obama and the Israelis have gotten themselves into this time. No cooking. No cleaning. No bosses. It’s like you’ve slipped into a parallel universe and left all your troubles behind.

With timers and dubious “gramma”-hetered contraptions you can manage to make yourself miserable, but why bother. Do you really feel a need to turn on lights and watch television shows. Who wants a heter to be miserable? You have six days a week to suffer, and you want more?

1. There are rich kosher Jews in America. That they consider this “elegant” rather than “normal” suggests haven’t quite made it but are “wannabees”.

2. Why is veal a problem? It’s just a young cow/bull. A cooked “calf” becomes “veal”.

3. This is part of some fancy fund raising event?

Rats have always had an excellent reputation for intelligence. That’s why they are frequently used as lab animals. Humans dislike them since they steal food, sometimes bite people and spread disease (from a rat’s perspective, they are havesting food, driving off predators, and have no reason to worry about human’s public healthy and hygiene).