Forum Replies Created
December 12, 2012 9:31 pm at 9:31 pm in reply to: Yasher Koach to Rabbi Horowitz of Project Yes, for protecting and not punishing #912590
BSD: 1) Actually she was found to have made inconsistent statements on the stand that differed from her police statement. 2) As a Jew, you are required to provide him the benefit of the doubt and the presumption of innocence. Dan lkaf zchus. (A non-Jewish court verdict does not change that fact.)
myis: so why do you think you wouldn’t fit in with the Lakewood crowd?
The same self-hating Jews today who get excited seeing this innocent yid imprisoned, their great grandpas were likely the same erev rav cheering the Maharam M’Rottenberg’s life in prison sentence. They were yelling dina d’malchusa then required goyim to have a court system that imprisons a Jew for life after finding the Maharam “guilty” (and similarly Rabbeinu Gershom, the Baal HaTanya, Pollard, Ostreicher, Rubashkin, Japan bochorim, etc. all determined “guilty” and we must allow their imprisonment by the goyishe courts).
NASI has been saying that over the last 5 years, due to their efforts, the situation has improved and the problem has lessened. If they claim the rate is 10% today, are they saying it was something like 15% of girls were never able to get married until 5 years ago?
The decription you give denotes an Avi Weiss type rabbi gave you that response, jmh.
So the extra Chasidish boys can marry the extra Litvish girls.
Ananas: So that others are aware of this bum’s public aveiros and aren’t c’v nichshol by listening or watching him.
Look through Jewish history and you will find countless stories of great men who were imprisoned falsely by the goyish government after a trumped up show trial just as this case was. Whether it was the Maharam MiRottenberg who was jailed for life, just as c’v this case may be, or Rabbeinu Gershom, who was jailed on a family pretext. Or in more recent times the Baal HaTanya, the Rebbe Rayatz or even the hamon hoam such as Rubashkin, Pollard, the three bochorim in Japan, Yidden in Iran, Ostreicher in Bolivia (who we are still working on releasing), etc. They and Klal Yisroel still persevered.
With all due respect, I must raise strong objection to refer to animals as “family members”.December 11, 2012 6:14 pm at 6:14 pm in reply to: Yasher Koach to Rabbi Horowitz of Project Yes, for protecting and not punishing #912566
chalila: 1) Engelman’s word has no value. 2) Mr. W never had yichud with anyone.
So lie and claim he admitted to things which he never in fact admitted to or anything close to. Perhaps it’ll fan the flames in your gehenim.
But that does not change the fact that he admitted to nothing the shakrins above claim he admitted. Or the fact that he is completely innocent.
There was absolutely zero evidence. Period. He admitted to no such things. He never had yichud. The doors were never locked. He never took her on a trip alone (his wife was with the girl at all times and no one from the girl or prosecution has even denied this fact.) And he testified on the stand that someone else made the purchase at the womens clothing store and that it was not him. The prosecution didn’t even attempt to rebut that.
MRA or Echo.
I saw a (controversial) lighting contraption that has some rabbis allegedly permitting it to be used on Shabbos to turn lights on and off.
I read a study of divorces which said something like over 50% of divorces mention Facebook as one of the reasons for getting divorced.
There is a problem. The issue is their overstatement and gross over-estimization.
Passaic or Clifton?
akuperma is 100% correct. Both the prosecution and verdict are a result of anti-semitism. There is zero evidence. And they used a former Orthodox Jew to prosecute him, but that is standard fare.December 11, 2012 1:45 pm at 1:45 pm in reply to: Yasher Koach to Rabbi Horowitz of Project Yes, for protecting and not punishing #912558
Horowitz has been wrong several times in the past with his knee-jerk reaction of believing every allegation against frum people.
The reason YW didn’t report on this case is because Weberman is innocent. YW isn’t in the habit of publishing false allegations. (Even if they result in a false convcition.)
old man: Just as you read agout Lipa, the gang video and the Shabbos issues in the coffeeroom, you read about Weberman here too.
I think they are using a false scare tactic to try to raise awareness of what the age gap is all about. I do not believe the numbers are anywhere close to 1 in 10. They know it. And they have absolutely zero evidence that it is 1 in 10. They are making a gross overestimization based on faulty numbers. (Granting that there is a certain percent. But much less than 10%.)
AZ will be here eventually to defend the 1 in 10 number and he will use fuzzy math that has no basis in reality.
Apparently some people here disagree with a bfeirush posek in the Torah and psak halacha brought in Shulchan Aruch that corporal punishment should be used with children.December 10, 2012 11:14 pm at 11:14 pm in reply to: Yasher Koach to Rabbi Horowitz of Project Yes, for protecting and not punishing #912539
She has been a highly immoral person since at least 15 yeats old, before she ever met him. Her word is as good as Pinnocio’s.
You can disregard virtually every Rov and virtually every Sefer with your dismissive attititude of he isn’t the sole arbiter and there are others who disagree.
1) Yes, you may say l”h about someone frei.
2) In the other case, it was untrue accusations, despite the false guilty verdicts.
When the Gedolim shlit”a banned him last time, it forced him to cancel the event. We need more such decisive action.December 10, 2012 8:31 pm at 8:31 pm in reply to: Yasher Koach to Rabbi Horowitz of Project Yes, for protecting and not punishing #912532
As said, false guilty verdict.
The regulation you cited specifically states that its application is limited to “approved” or “registered” private schools. Parochial schools are not required to be approved or registered by the State in order to operate a religious school.
Unless a specific parochial school chose to register, it is not subject to the regulation you cited.
Yankdownunder: You can change your YW password to something you pick and set yourself, that is easier to remember than the long string of random characters generated as a password when you first opened your account. This way you can remember it without looking it up every time you log in.
Can someone here be kind enough to explain to yankdownunder how to change his password? I cannot do write the explanation here.
(One problem this website hasn’t fixed in a long time is that the site is forcing you to re-login every time you switch back and forth between posting on the main site to and from the coffee room. It used to automatically keep you logged into both simultaneously.)
As far as why you never received an email to reset your password when you requested that, my guess is you mayh still have an old email address set in your YW account. You may wish to check that and update it if necessary. (It is in the same settings area as where you change your password.)
You only cited a non-statue executive civil regulation that 1) does not carry the force of law and 2) is not subject to any private school that is not regulated by the government of the State of New York. (The second point being even stronger than the first.) And parochiol schools are NOT regulated by any governmental entity due to the seperation of Church and State.December 10, 2012 6:40 pm at 6:40 pm in reply to: Yasher Koach to Rabbi Horowitz of Project Yes, for protecting and not punishing #912527
Wolf: She has made no allegation of their being any actual maisa.
Distributing pritzus and being machshil Jewish children (and adults) is a terrible aveira.
Because some Jews who are Orthodox violate certain mitzvos and yet remain full Jews, does not in any way shape or form detract from the fact that a prospective convert who from the outset intends to not keep some of the same mitzvos that some Orthodox Jews fail to keep is and always remains a gentile as his conversion was never effective.December 10, 2012 5:36 pm at 5:36 pm in reply to: Yasher Koach to Rabbi Horowitz of Project Yes, for protecting and not punishing #912523
Wolf: Even if the allegations in this case had been true, it is not a capital case. The penalty prescribed by halacha for this is within the jurisdiction and competence of a contemporary Bais Din.
There are numerous legal citations freely available online clearly indicating that corporal punishment is legal in private schools in 48 out of 50 States, with only two States (neither of which is NY) disallowing corporal punishment.
There is also recent Congressional testimony stating this as well.December 10, 2012 4:14 am at 4:14 am in reply to: Yasher Koach to Rabbi Horowitz of Project Yes, for protecting and not punishing #912515
zd: His wife went on the trip with the girl. This fact was never even disputed by the prosecution.
Based on basic research I conducted. For starters, check out the Wikipedia entry on “School corporal punishment” and see the reference for ‘private schools’ under the United States section.December 10, 2012 3:45 am at 3:45 am in reply to: Yasher Koach to Rabbi Horowitz of Project Yes, for protecting and not punishing #912511
A Bais Din is capable of convening and ruling on the matter on hand (under discussion) today and imposing the halachicly prescribed penalties if guilty.December 10, 2012 3:15 am at 3:15 am in reply to: Yasher Koach to Rabbi Horowitz of Project Yes, for protecting and not punishing #912507
A fair conviction can only come from a duly constituted Bais Din organized under Halacha utilizing Torah Law and standards of evidence.
(My previous comment was in response to Wolf.)
Matan1: We never debated the Christians out of our own volition. It was forced upon us.
I take exception to that interpertation and stand by my previously stated position that it is entirely legal.
Divorced parents using their children as pawns to fight their ex-spouse is so very much worse.
And the fact that they made up and are now still happily married is indeed proof against divorce.
Lipa has been previously censored by the gedolim.
Some are with the gedolei yisroel while others throw their lot with Lipa.
Morah, certainly was better that your parents remained married. And the fact their marriage is good now is the proof! Had they divorced, using the children as pawn’s against each other would have been far far worse.
Also, 147 is correct about halacha granting custody of a non-infant son to the father.
The Torah tells father’s and rebbeim to use corporal punishment. The Torah says to not use it means you hate the child.
Obviously it must be used appropriately.
Double digit hour dates is a bad idea regardless.
ZK: Very well stated.
Which is why Judaism eschews the frei attempts of histroical revisionism in portraying Chanuka as primarily some sort of military holiday. The reason Chazal instituted the yom tov celebrating the miracle of eight days, and made it an eight day yom tolv rather than something celebrating military achievments, is precisely because of the spiritual not physical.
Divorce is, was and should be discouraged. It used to be extraordinarily rare, for thousands of years, as it should be. We should strive to return to that ideal.