Forum Replies Created
minyan – He should have told her to take a taxi home.
Ron – that’s what I had said.
He probably grew up.
Many Chareidim don’t have internet, so even a site like this gets more comments from MO and left wing viewpoints than is representative in the frum community.
Doesn’t everyone vote twice? Once in the primary and once in the general.November 4, 2010 8:37 pm at 8:37 pm in reply to: Should There Be An Indication For Gender Under Peoples Names? #711957
Bezalel – it is a more modest form of speech, despite any technical limitations a linguist may note.November 4, 2010 8:12 pm at 8:12 pm in reply to: Should There Be An Indication For Gender Under Peoples Names? #711951
Or who not to talk to.
There have been suggestions previously to have separate CR’s; one for each gender only.November 4, 2010 8:07 pm at 8:07 pm in reply to: Yated, Hamodia, Jewish Press? What Is Your Choice? #707632
apy: They’d also lose business and “get a lot of bad press” if they advocated for abortion on demand. They dont need to advocate it and it is not worth the money they will spend trying to get back customers or battle bad press by the pro-life.
Regarding your “bigger problem”, if you don’t like seeing a picture of Rav Belsky, skip the page or the paper.
The day I literally bumped into squeak at a restaurant…
smartcookie – I wanted it to really count.
WIY – It isn’t illegal to have someone assist you in voting.
I would take it from them.
I voted twice.
I liked the old system better.
My name does have an O in it.
chesed – if you were the CEO you wouldn’t be having those questions… you’d have the answers.
LAer – I’m an askan. Does that help?
LAer – Lakewood, married for a while already to hubby who is talmid of big Rosh and a chaverim volunteer.November 4, 2010 5:20 pm at 5:20 pm in reply to: Molesters: Why Do Some In Our Community Cover For Them? #711831
gavra: Precautions, yes. But that doesn’t mean masering to police based on unsubstantiated suspicions.
LAer – I tried posting your name, but it wasn’t approved.
Experience and demonstrated ability to lead.
gavra: How did it feel being outed for the first time?
LAer – I figured you out; but you said you’re gonna deny it anyhow, so why bother?
The Rambam (Machalos Asuros 11) writes that the Christians are plain avoda zora worshippers.
The Noda B’Yehuda writes (YD 148) that it is a common mistake to think that Goyim are not commanded against schituf. The reality is they are. The error, he says, comes from a Rama that says you are allowed to cause a non-Jew to swear to his god, since he is not swearing to an idol but just adding his idol to Hashem, meaning schituf.
But the NB”Y points out that all this means is that the Goy does NOT declare the idol to be a deity in the oath, but the belief itself that a deity shares power with G-d is really idolatry. Only the oath is permitted, since it does not express his real belief.
Other poskim concur with the Noda Beyehuda.
And although there are some poskim who do hold that Goyim are not commanded against schituf, but it doesn’t make a difference anyway, because that only means that the Goyim are not sinning for being idol worshipers, which is between them and Hashem, but as far as we are concerned, we are commanded against schituf, and that makes them idol worshippers to us (Responsa Binyan Tzion I:63).
Christianity is Avoda Zora because they worship a god who impregnates women, and other characteristics such as a trinity that constitutes idolatry as opposed to worshiping the real G-d.
To better understand the issue you may want to distinguish between Christianity as a religion and medieval Gentiles who professed Christianity.
Christianity as a religion was just as much Avoda Zara to the Baalei Tosafos as it was to the Rambam. A simple proof of this is found in Avoda Zara 14b, d”h hatzav, where it is stated that it is forbidden to sell wax to the Goyim (for fear they will make votive candles). The issur is based on the verse “Lifnei Iver lo titen mikhshol” which is understood to mean that a Jew is not permitted to cause another (Jew or Gentile) to sin. We see from this that lighting a votive candle is a sin , i.e. avoda zara, even for a Gentile.
That the Baalei Tosafos allowed business with Goyim on religious
holidays, despite the Mishna to the contrary (2a, d”h asur), does not contradict the above. Rather, they held that Goyim do not take their own (idolatrous) religion seriously enough to offer thanksgiving for the profit they make from such commerce. That is, they made a distinction between the religion as such and its devotees. Because of this many rishonim (Rashi, Rabbenu Tam, etc.) ruled that Gentile wine is not forbidden in benefit (not assur behana’ah)– Goyim today are mostly not priests and do not carry out the mass.
The “proof” that the Baalei Tosafos did not hold that Christianity is avoda zara comes from the statement that Goyim are not commanded to avoid “shituf.” However the commentators from the world of Torah (i.e. Chazon Ish, etc.) [and even from the academic world (like David Berger, etc.)] have proved that this discussion (in Sanhedrin) is relevant only to oath taking (i.e. swearing to Hashem but having somebody else in mind as well), which is the usual meaning of “shituf shem shamayim im davar aher” in the Talmud. Christian worship as carried out in the medieval Catholic Church was regarded as avoda zora, period, for Jew and Gentile alike.November 4, 2010 4:21 am at 4:21 am in reply to: Molesters: Why Do Some In Our Community Cover For Them? #711816
Perhaps the should be hung, drawn, and quartered. But not until after they are lynched. And given over to a mob for a good beating. And if they survive that they should perhaps be seated in one of the “Confession Chairs” used during the Inquisition. If a confession is not forthcoming forthwith, they should immediately be waterboarded until an admission is made. Then hung, drawn, and quartered.
oomis: It was originally done just about like you suggest, but it didn’t quite work out too well in the 1796 and 1800 elections. So the Twelfth Amendment was adapted in 1804 ushering in the current system.November 3, 2010 7:49 pm at 7:49 pm in reply to: Whats the difference between voting republican and voting Conservative? #706120
It looks like the Conservative Party is poised to have gotten enough votes to move up in terms of ballot position, to “Row C,” right next to the GOP line. The ballot placement is a major issue with the minor parties. If the Conservatives take Row C, they’ll be displacing the Independence Party, the current occupant of that space.November 3, 2010 7:41 pm at 7:41 pm in reply to: Whats the difference between voting republican and voting Conservative? #706119
In your selective misinterpertations, you utterly disregarded the following quotes from Rav Hirsch zt”l:
But this very vocation obliges us, until G-d shall call us back to the Holy Land, to live and to work as patriots wherever He has placed us, to collect all the physical, material and spiritual forces and all that is noble in Israel to further the weal of the nations which have given us shelter.
But it forbids us to strive for the reunion or possession of the land by any but spiritual means.
“Land and soil were never Israel’s bond of union…”
yitayningwut – what first point?
RSRH- perhaps you think Rabbiner Hirsch was not aware of Zionism?
He was. Did he declare austritt?
Rav Samson Raphael Hirsch wrote:
“We mourn over the sin which brought about that downfall (the Temple destruction — author), we take to heart the harshness which we have encountered in our years of wandering as the chastisement of a father, imposed on us for our improvement, and we mourn the lack of observance of the Torah which that ruin has brought about. Not in order to shine as a nation among nations do we raise our prayers and hopes for a reunion in our land, but in order to find a soil for the better fulfillment of our spiritual vocation in that reunion and in that land which was promised, and given, and again promised for our observance of the Torah. But this very vocation obliges us, until G-d shall call us back to the Holy Land, to live and to work as patriots wherever He has placed us, to collect all the physical, material and spiritual forces and all that is noble in Israel to further the weal of the nations which have given us shelter. It obliges us, further, to allow our longing for the far-off land to express itself only in mourning, in wishing and hoping; and only through the honest fulfillment of all Jewish duties to await the realization of this hope. But it forbids us to strive for the reunion or possession of the land by any but spiritual means. Our Sages say G-d imposed three vows when he sent Israel into the wilderness: (1) that the children of Israel shall never seek to reestablish their nation by themselves; (2) that they never be disloyal to the nations which have given them shelter; (3) that these nations shall not oppress them excessively (Kesubos 111a).”
And, again, in his commentary on the Siddur, Rav Hirsch writes:
“During the reign of Hadrian when the uprising led by Bar Kochba proved a disastrous error, it became essential that the Jewish people be reminded for all times of an important, essential fact, namely that (the people of) Israel must never again attempt to restore its national independence by its own power; it was to entrust its future as a nation solely to Divine Providence.”
The contradiction between loyalty to the lands in which the Jewish people dwell in their exile and Zionism, was also explained by Rav Hirsch:
“This close connection with states everywhere is not at all in contradiction to the spirit of Judaism, for the independent national life of Israel was never the essence or purpose of our existence as a nation but a means of fulfilling our spiritual mission.”
“Land and soil were never Israel’s bond of union…”
“For this (Messianic — author) future which is promised to us in the glorious predictions of the inspired prophets as a goal of the Galus (exile — author), we hope and pray, but actively to accelerate its coming is prohibited to us.”
Moq: The Noda B’Yehuda says shituf is pure Avoda Zora for goyim.
The US Constitution says that each state must have a Republican form of government.
Now that’s a provision I like! 🙂
how much suffering I’m going to be due in the afterlife
On a scale of 1 to 10, I couldn’t rate it.November 3, 2010 3:36 pm at 3:36 pm in reply to: Whats the difference between voting republican and voting Conservative? #706117
Did he get 50,000 votes? Last I heard, he was at about 1% of the total.
They could also appoint themselves, and the Governor, to lifetime positions as legislators and abolish elections for state office. Whilst that is true, state constitution permitting, it isn’t practical and hasn’t happened in hundreds of years.November 3, 2010 11:04 am at 11:04 am in reply to: Whats the difference between voting republican and voting Conservative? #706114
The party must receive at least 50,000 votes in the gubernatorial race to have a guaranteed party slot for the next 4 years.
And btw, the Dem/Rep do not get the A & B slots if a “third party” receives more votes than them. (Almost happened 4 years ago.)November 3, 2010 10:14 am at 10:14 am in reply to: Yated, Hamodia, Jewish Press? What Is Your Choice? #707625
anon: Traditionally when mentioning a woman’s name other than one’s wife (or non-immediate relative), a frum person would refer to her as Mrs. Smith or something of that sort; never by first name.
[Even in America they used to call John’s wife “Mrs. John Doe”.]
WIY: Yes. Constitutionally an elector can vote for anyone. (A small number of states have a law that requires them to vote for whom they are pledged to; but even in those states if they differentiate from whom they are pledged, their vote will count for whomever they voted for.)
Look at your presidential ballot closely. You are not voting for President.
All my predictions were correct to the “tea”!!
Our dear friend d a,
You’ve never voted for President in your life. You’ve only voted for people to be on the electoral college. THEY vote for President and VP. Not you.
Each elector can cast one vote for President and one vote for Vice President.
Additionally, most states (unlike New York) do not allow a candidate to run on more than one party line. So your scenario is unrealistic.November 2, 2010 3:24 am at 3:24 am in reply to: Molesters: Why Do Some In Our Community Cover For Them? #711771
WIY: Rav Menashe Klein shlit”a doesn’t fit in any of your categories, even though opposed to going to the authorities.
Rav Eliashev shlit”a said its assur to go to the police, unless the proof is “certain”.
My final predictions:
U.S. Senate: Republicans will have 48 seats. [From 41]
U.S. House: Republicans will win notable majority. [From minority]
Governors: Republican will control majority. [From minority]
State Senate: Republican majority [from Democrats]
U.S. Senate: Republican [3-way race]
U.S. Senate: Republican [1 of the 2 Republicans will defeat the Democrat]
U.S. Senate: Democrat
U.S. Senate: Democrat [Majority Leader Harry Reid will win]
U.S. Senate: DemocratNovember 1, 2010 11:12 pm at 11:12 pm in reply to: Molesters: Why Do Some In Our Community Cover For Them? #711758
Mr. Pasik: 100% proven IS the standard of proof per Torah law. And that IS what Rav Eliashev insists in his psak. And Rav Eliashev’s psak (as the one below) WAS regarding an actual case.
Here is another relevant psak.
Rav Menashe Klein (Mishneh Halachos 16:58):November 1, 2010 10:20 pm at 10:20 pm in reply to: Molesters: Why Do Some In Our Community Cover For Them? #711746
Mr. Pasik: You wouldn’t know what percent were false claims; only what percent were later proven false. Those false that resulted in a false conviction, your stats will still show as true.
Furthermore, the psak from Rav Eliashev is that it is ONLY permissible to report to the secular authorities after it has been 100% ascertained as factual.November 1, 2010 9:25 pm at 9:25 pm in reply to: Molesters: Why Do Some In Our Community Cover For Them? #711740
Rav Eliashev gave the reason why it is prohibited to call the police under the circumstances. It is, quote:
“That is because it is possible that allegations are being made solely because of some bitterness the student has against his teacher or because of some unfounded fantasy.”
That is equally applicable in Haifa as in Paris.November 1, 2010 9:09 pm at 9:09 pm in reply to: Molesters: Why Do Some In Our Community Cover For Them? #711736
Since RAV ELIASHEV’s PSAK is being discussed, here it is:
Kovetz Teshuvos 3:231: