Curiosity

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 50 posts - 1 through 50 (of 917 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Stop being weak pathetic losers #1936523
    Curiosity
    Participant

    Yaakov only opposed ShImon and Levi’s action because it almost got them in trouble with local populous, he didn’t object to them in principle. Chushim ben Dan was commended for his actions by Chazal… certainly not reprimanded or criticized.

    in reply to: Stop being weak pathetic losers #1934846
    Curiosity
    Participant

    Whaddya mean Country Yossi was wrong? Didn’t Chushim ben Dan lop Eisav’s off for dissing his grandfather? Didn’t Shimon and Levi massacre an entire city for messing with their sister?

    in reply to: Stop being weak pathetic losers #1934270
    Curiosity
    Participant

    ZR1. You’re making 2 fundamental mistakes.

    #1 – you’re applying the well known (and often misunderstood) halacha for when the whole klal should fight in a national war to an individual private person who is being attacked by a random thug. This is not the same thing, and nobody here is talking about starting an organized paramilitary force. The gemara also says you should teach your children to swim so that they won’t drown. According to your view, they should just do teshuva instead of learning to swim because the water is only doing Hashem’s bidding after all.

    And #2 – you’re imagining that everyone is Rav Shimon bar Yochai who has zero room in his world view for hishtadlus.

    in reply to: Stop being weak pathetic losers #1934123
    Curiosity
    Participant

    Ujm we are in golus – which is exactly why we have to circle the wagons and have each other’s backs. To survive golus we need to provide a united front, and not just timidly sot there with your hands up like a little sheepie while your Jewish neighbor gets his skull bashed in by a thug.

    in reply to: Summarize Donald Trump #1933740
    Curiosity
    Participant

    He brought to light the biggest pandemic in history – millions of undiagnosed cases of the severe mental and spiritual degenerative disease known as Leftism.

    in reply to: NON CORONA TOPIC: Why would anyone voted Biden #1905146
    Curiosity
    Participant

    Rabbi of Crawley. You’re 100% correct. No reason to vote for Joe the creepy geezer. Anyone telling you otherwise is wacked out on leftist koolaid.

    in reply to: Leftest are reshoem? #1899515
    Curiosity
    Participant

    As one who has personally observed a few leftists in their natural habitat, I’ve documented two distinct types.

    The first, a naturally insulated genotype, whether by circumstance or by result of intentional intellectual self-segregation, exhibiting an infantile insecurity in their own belief system, which manifests as an abrasive and oft hostile xenophobic tendency towards other-minded individuals, is typically atheistic out of pure ignorance of all theism. They do not bother themselves with socially acceptable norms for “morality”, as they have no regard for social acceptance outside of their insular social puddle of amorality.

    The second, typically a former centrist, right leaning, or apolitical breed, too distract by their own virtue signaling to focus on morality and reality, do everything in their power to fit in with their newly found leftist circles, lest they be perceived as a centrist/right leaning thinker and be cannibalized by their new peers. Driven by a bitter resentment towards anything associated with their former philosophical belief system, they self-ostracized from their prior social circles either fully or partially (the reason for their partial withdrawal typically being due to a subconscious nagging guilt, or to not lose their financial dependence on said prior social circle). Despite having no logical connection to the cause of the trauma inflicted within the prior circle, any philosophical agreement is a painful association, in a PTSD sort of manifestation, and must be dissociated from fully. This breed is concerned with morals, but is willing to live with the cognitive dissonance to support their self-ostracization, viewing it as a justifiable means to an end. Traditional definitions of right and wrong and morality at large are not viewed with the widely accepted centrality-to-life, but as an auxiliary factor that must be sacrificed for the subject’s own mental health, as they are simply doing what they can to survive their own past emotional trauma.

    It is standard for both of these categories to lash out at anyone seeking to define them as unoriginal or fitting into a mold, despite them being unoriginal, and fitting into a mold better than a bunt pan pound cake, sans frosting. It is also expected for them to refuse all logical arguments regarding theism and to lash out emotionally when confronted with logic. Somehow they self define as spiritual but not religious, and not believing in any known God, despite not typically spending any serious amount of time studying Theology with any serious level of breadth and depth. They take their lattes with soy, and pumps of various chemically processed foreign flavoring agents.

    in reply to: Defunding Police #1869585
    Curiosity
    Participant

    There hasn’t been any indication that the left wing politicians are simply pandering or speaking in hyperbole, to the extent that everyone is conjecturing and guessing. Nobody seems to confidently know what they mean, but a lot of people seem to be self-appointed official spokespersons for the hoards of proponents for this abolish/defund/restructure police idea.

    in reply to: Empirical data: Does systemic racism exist? #1869206
    Curiosity
    Participant

    Don’t confuse systemic and systematic. It is blatantly clear that there are no systematically racist policies against black. If anything, policies lean against whites (racial quotas, affirmative action, etc.). Systemic racism in policing is debatable, but all the statistics show no evidence of this. Anecdotes are for making a sale, not for drafting a policy.

    in reply to: Empirical data: Does systemic racism exist? #1869197
    Curiosity
    Participant

    Dear N0mesorah,
    Just stating the facts I’ve observed. Clearly, your feelings trump these facts, in your opinion – providing further anecdotal evidence to my point.

    in reply to: Empirical data: Does systemic racism exist? #1869132
    Curiosity
    Participant

    It should be abundantly clear that only feelings matter. If that weren’t true, looting of innocent people wouldn’t be condoned, there would be no senseless calls to abolish police departments, #BLM would focus on black-on-black violence which accounts for the vast majority of violence-related deaths in the black community, and people would stop pretending that a drug addicted violent criminal is some sort of saint to be idolized.

    in reply to: Suppression of Looters and Rioters #1866217
    Curiosity
    Participant

    Unless they have really good insurance policies, store owners should stand in front of their stores bearing arms. These looters are opportunists. They won’t lay down their lives to steal a flat screen.

    in reply to: Refund For Seminaries Due To COVID-19 #1855793
    Curiosity
    Participant

    The Jewish school administrators and staff have to understand that it’s not just their institutions that are suffering – many of the parents and benefactors who used to pay them tuition and donations have also lost their jobs or huge percentages of their finances. It’s sad that this has happened, but private schools are not entitled to money for services not granted just like the parents are not entitled to salaries from the employers that furloughed them. Why shouldn’t teachers and administrators file for unemployment just like everyone else? They should offer refunds to families who request them, as those families also have to put food on the table.

    in reply to: We need a plan for the covid19 virus #1839731
    Curiosity
    Participant

    I can’t believe that even through all of this, some sick-in-the-head people are still so obsessed and demented that they’re putting so much of their time and focus into weaponizing this against the President. This has nothing to do with him. Pull your head out of the sand and go seek professional help.

    in reply to: New York State is Denying Access to Education to Anti-Vaxer Students #1765933
    Curiosity
    Participant

    There is no such thing an anti-vax child. Only anti-vax parents.

    in reply to: Kaliv vs other chassidus #1722618
    Curiosity
    Participant

    I think malchus is different – first of all because of yichus, which isn’t shayach here since the new Rebbe was adopted, from what people are saying. And second because you can’t really compare a 13 year old from the days of Tanach to a 13 year old today.

    As to other chasidus promoting a 13 or 16 year old – How did people react to such an appointment? It’s incredibly hard to people actually came to a 13 year old for personal advice and with serious shaylas about life events? Were they just figureheads?

    in reply to: Waiter’s finger was in my my soup! #1713526
    Curiosity
    Participant

    If your unwashed finger touches a boiling hot soup before you eat it, is it kosher? If a human tongue touches your boiling hot soup before you eat it, is it kosher?

    in reply to: Whats Baltimore like nowadays.Still OOT or suitable for intown fam #1705804
    Curiosity
    Participant

    What makes a community “suitable for in-town family”?

    in reply to: Halachically okay to be liberal? #1698989
    Curiosity
    Participant

    The Catholic pope is viewed as a liberal.

    in reply to: Halachically okay to be liberal? #1698771
    Curiosity
    Participant

    CTL, Neville,
    You guys can play lawyer and wiggle and squirm regarding what your personal definition of “liberal” is and how you take personal exception to the generally accepted definition of the term, but you are just playing semantics. When the OP used the word “liberal,” he/she didn’t specify exclusions to specific platform ideals. Therefore, it is only fair to assume he means “liberal” in the publicly used colloquial sense, which is being far left of center on everything, not in your personal sphere of influence’s highly unusual definition.

    in reply to: Halachically okay to be liberal? #1697584
    Curiosity
    Participant

    Many liberal ideals (toeiva “marriage”, abortion, etc…) run against halacha. If you believe these ideals are valid and good despite being against halacha then you are kofer against the Torah, against Chazal, and against the omniscience of God to be the arbiter of what is truly valid and good. Being a kofer is against halacha – thus being a liberal, as defined colloquially, is against halacha.

    in reply to: GAN DY: Should beis medresh bocherim have dorm counselors? #1696850
    Curiosity
    Participant

    “should they have dorm counselors who can be not much older then them, and sometimes VERY immature and baybyish.”

    No. They should have mature, responsible, dorm counselors instead.

    in reply to: Answers for the tuition crisis #1687651
    Curiosity
    Participant

    DY. The idea is that schools give out vouchers to school employees for things like food, clothing, gas, etc that are paid for with whatever tuition money is gathered. Then the school employee takes that voucher to do their shopping at the jewish owned venue. The Jewish owned vendor then gives heavy discounts to these school employees when they pay with a voucher.

    So, for example, a voucher “worth” $2.00 costs the school $1.50. The teacher takes the $2.00 voucher to Pomegranate and buys a $2 loaf of bread that costs Pomegranate $1.00. So: Pomegranate makes a $0.50 profit (from the $1.50 actual value of the voucher minus their $1.00 cost), but makes it up in volume from all the school employees who now have to shop there. The teachers are paid in cash-value instead of cash for things they will otherwise spend cash on anyway. And the schools can lower tuition costs because they can save on employee overhead. It’s a win-win-win. Except the minor inconvenience of teachers having to get paid in vouchers instead of cash. But if you make it in the form of a flexible spending card, instead of paper vouchers it would be more secure and less inconvenient. You could also make it only part of their payment instead of all of it, because having cash is important for things like mortgages which cant be paid by card. You could also let teachers control how much they get paid in vouchers and create an incentive by inflating the fictional worth of the voucher to $2.10 instead of $2. Even though it’s actually only worth $1.50 in real money, but that would be dependent on negotiation between the vendors and the schools…

    in reply to: Answers for the tuition crisis #1687534
    Curiosity
    Participant

    Why don’t we institute some sort of voucher system where teachers and school employees get vouchers to free or heavily discounted goods and services from Jewish owned vendors and venues. This additional compensation substitute will reduce the income requirements for families of school employees, thereby reducing their need for financial compensation. Then the schools can pay them less and lower tuition for everyone. It’s kind of like communism, but for a good cause and not gov’t controlled.

    in reply to: Guns #1685601
    Curiosity
    Participant

    Ubiq, come back and talk to us about your virtue-signaling, righteous high-horse, brain-dead liberal mishugas once masked thugs kick your door in at 3AM with your wife and
    young kids at home. Until then, you’re entitled to wear whatever rose-colored glasses you want, but just realize that to those of us who understand the need for gun ownership, the opinion you preach from that omniscient throne of yours is complacent, brainless, and outright dangerous. Please leave my right for self perseveration alone. Thank you.

    Curiosity
    Participant

    The classic answer has been provided by “Heargod”, above, but it doesn’t address why frum Jews of many circles avoid contemporary styles for what is considered respectable and nice, and rather stick to a homogeneous and outdated style. Also, there are plenty of ways to dress nicely without looking exactly the same as everyone else. But there are other reasons for this, including refusal to conform/blend with a non-Jewish society, and purposefully avoiding creating an environment where people feel like they need to “keep up with the Shwartzes”.

    in reply to: Guns #1682705
    Curiosity
    Participant

    Ubiq., please show me where I said guns should not be well regulated? This is your assertion which you slyly attribute to me – not my opinion…. Dishonest debate tactic #1.

    Calling an argument a “talking point” without directly addressing its content is dishonest debate tactic #2.

    Linking someone’s original opinions to a famous figure who may not be viewed as a fair, unbiased person by others (Hannity) is dishonest tactic #3. I do not listen to his show.

    Regardless of how much you think you know about me or my position, you clearly know very little, since you have to rely on manipulative tactics and baseless assertions to get your viewpoint across. This is why debating with you is highly unpleasant.

    in reply to: Guns #1682624
    Curiosity
    Participant

    Ubiq. I hope you don’t prescribe cocaine and heroin to your patients. I clearly wasn’t talking about the useful drugs you mentioned. Additionally, getting high and addicted to drugs is not a use that is beneficial to society or to individuals. If you believe otherwise, you should consider giving back whatever medical license you have. Your usage of intellectually dishonest debate tactics make conversing with you highly unpleasant. Good night.

    in reply to: Guns #1681788
    Curiosity
    Participant

    Ubiq – You totally missed the point of the explosives conversation. Your 1st question is irrelevant to my conversation with M.

    Also, M was talking about legalizing already illegal recreational drugs, not about pharmaceuticals. You missed the point there, too. Before you pluck half a sentence of what I wrote out of context and start attacking me for “dodging,” please try to follow the logic of the conversation.

    Let me try to connect the dots for you:
    Step #1) It is already illegal to be in possession of a firearm during a crime, to smuggle guns across the border, to carry guns in certain locations, and for felons to purchase guns. Making ownership of guns illegal for everyone doesn’t take guns out of the hands of people who already illegally own and traffic them, but it will prevent law-abiding citizens from owning them and using them for legal uses such as self-defense, hunting, sport, and security.

    Step #2) Many potentially harmful drugs are currently illegal to own for anyone other than medical entities. Making them legal means anyone can now buy cocaine and meth at his/her local Wal-Mart. Yes, those who deal drugs illegally will do so despite the current law, but the law-abiding part of society who isn’t currently interested or addicted to drugs would be severely harmed by having free access to legal temptations which can destroy lives. There is no benefit to society since there is no productive use for these things OUTSIDE of the medical realm, in which it is already legal. Therefore, this is a poor comparison to guns.

    in reply to: Guns #1681516
    Curiosity
    Participant

    M – the obvious fallacy in your comparison is that there are perfectly legitimate and productive uses for legally purchased firearms, but there are no legitimate, productive uses for heroin and cocaine.

    in reply to: Guns #1681294
    Curiosity
    Participant

    M – to answer your question, I personally believe there are auxiliary psychosocial issues in American culture not directly related to firearms which contribute towards a culture that tends towards violence. This includes things like substance abuse, fatherlessness, and the glorification of gratuitous violence. I think if you study the trends of these factors you will find a correlation with violence. If you curb these trends you will also curb all forms of violence, including violence involving guns.

    I don’t think an obligatory psychological evaluation for firearm purchases will prevent gun violence. This is because in order to prevent an individual psychologist from violating the rights of others, the test will have to be standardized and not subjective. Once it’s standardized, people can just learn to answer the questions correctly. Also, psychologists aren’t mind readers.

    One thing you might find interesting is that license-to-carry holders in Texas are extremely less likely to commit a violent crime than those who are not licensed, and psychological evaluations are not a prerequisite for licensure here.

    in reply to: Guns #1681280
    Curiosity
    Participant

    Correction to my first post:
    “Would you similarly suggest that violence *including* suicide bombings is high in some Muslim countries because fertilizer and other explosive components are prevalent and easily accessible?”
    My point is that there would be violence in these places whether or not explosive components are accessible.

    in reply to: Guns #1681211
    Curiosity
    Participant

    Luna.. You do realize that “larger guns” and “smaller guns” legally available to the public both shoot at the exact same rate right? No offense to you, but it’s hilarious how people with admittedly zero knowledge of firearms think they can and should provide an opinion on which firearms should and shouldn’t be legal.

    in reply to: Guns #1681191
    Curiosity
    Participant

    Statistically speaking, guns are used in more crime prevention incidents per year than in committing of a crime. This is a fact according to the majority of studies except a single statistical outlier study that is frequently quoted by anti-gun groups.

    Classifying violence based on the instrument of choice used by perpetrators of a violent act rather than based on the psychosocial factors that cause high levels of violence is nonsensical. Would you similarly suggest that violence in the form of suicide bombings is high in some Muslim countries because fertilizer and other explosive components are prevalent and easily accessible? I would hope not.

    in reply to: Darchei Binah Sem Girls Coming For Shabbos #1660024
    Curiosity
    Participant

    Not only will they wash all your dishes, they’ll also be dropping off all the food at your house on Friday afternoon. You don’t even need to prepare!

    in reply to: Voting Democrat #1644511
    Curiosity
    Participant

    Jackk,
    Not sure why you are quoting something someone else wrote in response to me, but to respond to you:

    The fallacy that Democratic politicians are anything other than a Hivemind that defaults to the most extreme left wing voice among them that is still publicly palatable is clearly evident. As Exhibit A , just look at how they vote in unified blocks on things that any rationally thinking group of moderate individuals would expectedly have differing opinions on. The Kavanaugh hearing is the most recent example to come to mind.

    I think Democratic voters are diverse in thought, but unfortunately the politicians don’t represent them. Just look at how your party’s sweetheart, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s rhetoric shifted once she got into office. Before the elections she promised she would move mountains and revolutionize the Dem party towards Marxism, and now she says her main priority is to support the establishment Democrats.

    in reply to: Voting Democrat #1644502
    Curiosity
    Participant

    Ubiquitin,
    Your response is nonsensical.
    “But that isnt what the op replied , he doubled down.”

    No. Actually the OP wrote:

    “Democrats might *claim* that they support Israel’s right to exist, but…”

    “The democrat *rhetoric* is not that. That is not the real position …”

    “If they wanted affordable housing, they wouldn’t punish us with high property taxes…”

    Everything the that the OP wrote indicated that he/she was specifically addressing the anti-Torah values of the Dem’s verbal rhetoric, political action, and de facto policy, not their written platform. Your argument that they *claim* to support our causes in their written platform, even though they clearly and persistently act against our interests actually counts against them because not only do they actively vote for policies antithetical to the Torah, but they also publicly lie about.

    Hannity is a shill. Please don’t assert that I can’t form my own opinion.

    in reply to: Voting Democrat #1643955
    Curiosity
    Participant

    Ubiquitin – you seem caught up with your hyperliteral interpretation of the words “party platform” in the OP. Everyone else here had enough reading comprehension skills to realize that the OP didn’t literally refer to the Democratic party’s published platform on their website. The PR material they publish is completely separate to their actual agenda and the de facto policies they pursue through political action. I guess simply writing that they are for Israel or for middle class is enough to convince voters like you, and that is why they do it. No offense.

    Curiosity
    Participant

    Honestly, let’s stop pretending that anyone but those with a personal connection care when a retired politician dies. Why does everything need to be blown up into being such a big deal?

    in reply to: Why Are Torah Observant Jews Overwhelmingly Republican/Conservative? #1634464
    Curiosity
    Participant

    CTLawyer –
    My mistake for mixing up the seifa d’seifa with the seifa d’reisha. What I meant to type was: ‘You lost me at, “victim of a husband who committed adultery.”‘ The point of my statement (which you didn’t address) is sustained.

    Here’s a life tip for you: I know certain arguments fly in the courtroom like claiming evidence obtained illegally is inadmissible, or minor misquotes can invalidate the content of an argument. But when you’re debating outside the courtroom with rational people, harping on technicalities is not going to convince anyone that your point of view is valid and will only make you appear dishonest. In the CR, you’re talking to a jury not to a judge.

    Good luck with your court case.

    in reply to: Why Are Torah Observant Jews Overwhelmingly Republican/Conservative? #1631190
    Curiosity
    Participant

    CTLawyer
    You lost me at “victim of serial adulterer.” By all accounts (except her own) she was an enabler and complicit in these acts you claim to despise, and even worse acts that the MSM isn’t reporting on. Only insidious Democrat operatives have the audacity to still defend that machsheifa.

    Orthodox Jews lean right because the left is consistently wrong on every single issue. Unlike most other groups we vote based on Torah values, not based on greed, lust or populism. Not to say the Republicans fully represent Torah values, but they are by far more in line with them than the anti-Semitic, socialist party of Toeva and government handouts.

    in reply to: Agudah Says to Vote, But Doesn’t Remind Us Who #1618328
    Curiosity
    Participant

    Regardless of your personal considerations regarding your taxes, your concern for your fellow brothers and sisters living in Eretz Yisrael should be the issue that drives you to vote. You, as a Jew living in the most powerful country in the world, and being endowed with the opportunity and responsibility to vote, which we all so shortsightedly take for granted, have the added responsibility of kol Yisrael areivim ze lazeh. It is crystal clear which party supports the Jews in EY and which party supports the Yishmaelim that are biting at the bit to slaughter Jews.

    When you go to shamayim and they ask you why you voted for rulers that detest God and support immorality and Anti-Semitic terrorist nations, I hope “Trump’s tax cuts made my taxes go up” isn’t your choice response.

    in reply to: Which is Worse Publically Converting or Publically OTD? #1606477
    Curiosity
    Participant

    Otd cases are nebech. Converting cases are also nebech, but the nebechkiet is overpowered by the stupidkiet.

    in reply to: Cracking knuckles during davening – The New Mishugas!! #1592578
    Curiosity
    Participant

    Avi K,
    My point is not that the knuckle cracker is patur. He isn’t. My point is that it’s a nisayon from Hashem. And just like most other nisyonot, passing rarely consists of getting the whole world to accommodate you, but rather to do your best in an imperfect world.

    in reply to: Cracking knuckles during davening – The New Mishugas!! #1592513
    Curiosity
    Participant

    Do you think Hashem accepts your tefilla less because someone sneezes and interrupts your concentration? Who do you think put that sneezer or knuckle cracker into your life? Maybe Hashem would rather see you a little distracted but more accepting and tolerant of other Jews, rather than a little distracted and angry and spiteful at them?

    There’s a story about a particular gadol who had a talmid that wanted to get the gadol to daven for a choleh. So one day the talmid wrote the Hebrew name of the choleh in the margin of the gadol’s siddur by refainu. When the talmid realized how disrespectful this was he went to the gadol and profusely apologized for writing in his siddur. The gadol had no idea what he was talking about. He said, ‘when I daven from my siddur, I am looking at the words of the tefilla, not at the margin.’ He didn’t even see the writing.

    The idea is that if we have real focus in our tefilla, it isn’t broken by mundane things in our surroundings. If we’re distracted, it’s because of our own shortcomings, not because of sneezes, knuckles cracking or floorboards creaking.

    in reply to: Tahara at Risk in Lakewood City of Torah #1577042
    Curiosity
    Participant

    “dont let your kids live in a place like this.”
    Any parents that feel they are entitled to “let” or “not let” their adult married children live somewhere based on the parents’ opinions of a community have some serious boundary-overstepping issues they need to work out.

    Curiosity
    Participant

    Beisyosef – Isn’t the Ramban simply giving the taam for the issur klayim? If so, genetic modifications would be assur in the “spirit of the law” but not in the “letter of the law.” And once it’s only the spirit of the law it becomes easier to come up with svaras over why making a treif animal kosher is different, in spirit, than doing klayim.

    in reply to: Shuls in Boca Raton or Hollywood, FL #1574621
    Curiosity
    Participant

    Avram in MD, Still trying to figure that one out.

    in reply to: Shuls in Boca Raton or Hollywood, FL #1574193
    Curiosity
    Participant

    Thanks everyone who contributed information. GoDaven lists nusach, not hashkafa.

    in reply to: Suicide #1571841
    Curiosity
    Participant

    WolfishMusings! I grew up on your posts! Great that you’re still here.
    Wouldn’t “long drop” hangings allow for regret during the drop?

Viewing 50 posts - 1 through 50 (of 917 total)