Joseph

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 0 posts
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: CR records #1212813
    Joseph
    Participant
    in reply to: CR records #1212812
    Joseph
    Participant
    in reply to: Hilarious School Pranks #1229086
    Joseph
    Participant

    Any new pranks that developed recently?

    in reply to: Robo Calls violate Dinah da Malchuscha Dina #1141737
    Joseph
    Participant

    That’s how landlines work on a POTS to POTS call.

    in reply to: If Trump becomes president, I'm moving to Canada… #1190551
    Joseph
    Participant

    Toronto or Montreal? (If the latter, you may one day end up in the Republic of Quebec.)

    in reply to: CR records #1212810
    Joseph
    Participant
    in reply to: age for marriage #1141636
    Joseph
    Participant

    Florida’s legislature had a bill introduced in 2014 to prohibit marriages under age 16, but the bill never became law.

    in reply to: NYC and Lakewood Taxation #1141650
    Joseph
    Participant

    Actually de Blasio has significantly loosened up and NYC has become significantly more agreeable and accommodating to third-party (non-BOE) providers for special ed services over the last year or two and they’ve been approving non-public school providers.

    in reply to: NYC and Lakewood Taxation #1141640
    Joseph
    Participant

    Why are you so cynical on just about every topic you post to, apy?

    in reply to: Robo Calls violate Dinah da Malchuscha Dina #1141728
    Joseph
    Participant

    We’ve had this discussion several times here. The law exempts non-profits, religious organizations and political callers from the do not call list. Those types of calls can legally be made to people on the DNC list.

    in reply to: videos #1141723
    Joseph
    Participant

    No and no.

    in reply to: Teeth Falling Out #1215531
    Joseph
    Participant
    in reply to: Did Romney have any good points against Trump? #1142014
    Joseph
    Participant

    Because Trump will win all the delegates in the winner-take-all States by simply winning a plurality against multiple candidates. The only way to defeat Trump in the winner-take-all States is to have only one candidate opposing Trump. Multiple other candidates in the race will let Trump win the States even though Trump can’t hit 50% of the popular vote.

    in reply to: Did Romney have any good points against Trump? #1142013
    Joseph
    Participant

    My primary point is that this race must turn into a one-on-one in order to defeat Trump. I also am saying this has to happen prior to the upcoming Super Tuesday. Now it doesn’t have to be Cruz who stays in and Rubio and Kasich who withdraws. Any one of the three can stay in as long as the other two withdraw. Any one of the three can defeat Trump if it becomes a one-on-one. The reason I suggest Cruz must stay and the others withdraw is because Cruz is consistently winning some (and getting stronger) while the other two are losing all or almost all (and continuously getting weaker). Though if they agree amongst themselves that either Rubio or Kasich should remain in, that would work too. But it is highly improbable Cruz would agree to withdraw considering he is significantly doing better than Rubio and Kasich (and winning multiple States).

    Personally, I would prefer Cruz to be President over the other candidates, but nevertheless prefer Rubio to be the Republican nominee since he is stronger than Cruz in the general election. But what I am commenting here on is the political realities, not my personal preferences. Trump will almost certainly lost the general election. And he is a bad person to be President.

    There is a serious likelihood that Rubio will lose his homestate of Florida and/or Kasich will lose his homestate of Ohio. Both to Trump. And since they’re both winner-take-all, Trump winning both will make him instantly the almost absolute certain nominee after this Tuesday. So if all three anti-Trump’s remain in the race this Tuesday there is a strong possibility, and even likelihood, Trump will have effectively wrapped up his victory with his wins in Florida and Ohio.

    in reply to: Did Romney have any good points against Trump? #1142010
    Joseph
    Participant

    It appears obvious that Rubio and Kasich have no chance of winning the nomination. Their failure to withdraw, effectively, only serves to guarantee a Trump nomination — as the only way to defeat Trump is to have a one-on-one contest against him. It could theoretically be any one, but only Cruz is strong enough at this point. And the one-on-one needs to happen before Tuesday’s upcoming primaries in Florida and Ohio.

    Since it is apparent that Rubio and Kasich will be putting their own political interests over that of the party and nation by remaining in the race and thus insuring a Trump nomination and Clinton presidency, the results of the rest of election calendar through November is mostly predictable.

    in reply to: Teeth Falling Out #1215524
    Joseph
    Participant

    That you like tooth fairies?

    A quarter under the pillow for you!

    in reply to: It’s time to add more chumras #1141487
    Joseph
    Participant

    apy: Wouldn’t the chumros in taharas hamishpachah which women accepted upon themselves, that DY earlier referred to, meet the criteria you’re asking for?

    in reply to: age for marriage #1141626
    Joseph
    Participant

    What is the rent for the lowest cost basement studio apartment in a frum neighborhood?

    in reply to: age for marriage #1141624
    Joseph
    Participant

    Halacha doesn’t make an exception to permit delaying marriage for financial reasons. Additionally, the standard of livelihood required is bare minimum. “Kach hi darkah shel Torah – pas b’melach tochal…” – bread, salt and water. If you have that, you have parnasah.

    in reply to: age for marriage #1141621
    Joseph
    Participant

    ZD: Why do you post things, on just about every thread you post to, that are widely inaccurate. First I post accurate information and you contradict it. I correct you and you again parrot the inaccurate information you already posted. Then you contradict yourself in the same post from one sentence to another. This is your modus operendi on every thread.

    Not only can minors under the age of 16 get married in the State of New York (as well as the various other States) but it actually happens every year. Between 2000 and 2010 3,853 minors were married in New York State. In 2011 alone New York judges approved the marriages of a 14-year-old, a 15-year-old, another 15-year-old and another 15-year-old. In New Jersey between 1995 and 2012 178 marriages between ages 10 and 15 were approved by judges out of the 3,499 New Jersey marriages of those under 18.

    in reply to: Merit Scholarships for High School #1141493
    Joseph
    Participant

    If it exists it is probably pretty rare. How common is such a concept in non-religious private high schools?

    in reply to: age for marriage #1141618
    Joseph
    Participant

    New York has provisions to legally get married at age 14. Massachusetts has a legal minimum age of 14 for males and 12 for females. And California has provisions for minors to get married without any minimum age set by law.

    in reply to: Looks in shidduchim #1141891
    Joseph
    Participant

    He said he’s been dating for years and in all the years of dating he’s only found “one or two” of the girls attractive.

    That’s a serious problem of his.

    in reply to: It’s time to add more chumras #1141464
    Joseph
    Participant

    Away from doing aveiras.

    in reply to: Educational Needs #1141379
    Joseph
    Participant
    in reply to: age for marriage #1141611
    Joseph
    Participant

    Sam: I already said folks need to start preparing themselves (and their children) for marriage at earlier ages than is currently popular, in order to comply with our halachic obligations.

    If the S”A says it is not only a halachic obligation but we actually beat the person if he doesn’t comply (granting the Rema disagrees about the beating), that is a pretty good indicator that this has strong halachic force. And the Rambam also paskens the Gemora as halacha.

    in reply to: Looks in shidduchim #1141886
    Joseph
    Participant

    ocho sinco: Do you watch movies?

    in reply to: age for marriage #1141606
    Joseph
    Participant

    ZD: New York State’s current marriage laws have provisions for getting married from age 14. (That’s the youngest.)

    in reply to: Pink and white/ Blue and white/ Yellow and white cookies #1141371
    Joseph
    Participant

    Lunch’s on me!

    in reply to: age for marriage #1141603
    Joseph
    Participant

    That’s all I found so far. Three other posters above claimed the Chofetz Chaim, Rav Ahron Kotler and Rav Chaim Pinchus Scheinberg as purportedly permitting one to get married up to one’s 24th birthday if they’re learning Torah full-time. I hadn’t seen any authoritative sources from those rabbonim though.

    in reply to: age for marriage #1141600
    Joseph
    Participant

    The Ben Ish Chai held that in consideration of the fact that girls today are not as strong as they once were (when they got married at 11 or 12), girls should be at least 13 years old before marrying. [Sh”ut Rav Pe’alim II, Besod Yesharim 1, p. 119, col. 2]

    in reply to: age for marriage #1141599
    Joseph
    Participant

    The Maharshal in Yam Shel Shlomo, Kiddushin 1:57 and the Chida in Birchei Yosef, EH 1:9.

    in reply to: Pink and white/ Blue and white/ Yellow and white cookies #1141367
    Joseph
    Participant

    Are you kidding? The white is by far the better half.

    Say, for now on why don’t we split the B&W cookies, with you taking the black and I the white.

    in reply to: age for marriage #1141596
    Joseph
    Participant

    Sam: Since you are halachicly obligated to get married by age 20 according to the Shulchan Aruch (or according to some shittos by 24 if learning Torah full time) then you can’t start getting into the shidduch parsha for the first time at 19.5 and six months later say, hey, I tried. Obviously you need to give yourself enough time prior to the halachic deadline age to be married by so you can comply with that halachic obligation of yours. If it is reasonable to expect to find a shidduch within one year of starting to look, you need to look at least one year before you’re required to be married by. If, as more likely, you can reasonably expect the search might take longer than a year, then you need to start looking at least that much earlier.

    in reply to: "Distance Your Path from It" The Dangers of Academic Study #1141296
    Joseph
    Participant
    in reply to: dor yeshurim reconfirmation #1141424
    Joseph
    Participant

    Sounds sketchy to indicate compatibility but advising to check again at a later date for reconfirmation. You need to clarify with them what that means. There may have been a misunderstanding between you and them.

    in reply to: Educational Needs #1141376
    Joseph
    Participant

    Any Spanish speaker in America servicing Americans is expected to know English. When you call a car service the customer is not expected to know Spanish or French in order to get where he’s going.

    in reply to: Educational Needs #1141374
    Joseph
    Participant

    Spanish isn’t popular in the frum community.

    Not now and not seven years ago.

    in reply to: Honest Tzedakah #1141407
    Joseph
    Participant

    TY, DY.

    in reply to: age for marriage #1141593
    Joseph
    Participant

    Getting married is not like picking up a loaf of bread. It can take a while to make a shidduch.

    That means one must start looking and be ready at an early enough age to be able to married by the halachicly necessary age. If starting at 23 means there is a good chance one wont be married by 24, obviously folks need to start earlier by however many years necessary to be compliant with the Shulchan Aruch or the latter shittos if engaged in full time Torah study.

    in reply to: Honest Tzedakah #1141402
    Joseph
    Participant

    I think many people give more when they’re reminded with calls, letters, visits, etc. Even advertising (with its associated costs) gets people to donate when they otherwise probably would not have. That’s the reality. In prewar Europe the Roshei Yeshivos and Rebbes also traveled within Europe and beyond (America, etc.) to raise funds for the Yeshiva. The travelling back then cost them money too.

    Of course your point what percent of the raised funds go towards fundraising costs is a very relevant and pertinent question about whether it is reasonable. 10% most people might agree is reasonable. 50% most people probably agree is unreasonable and too much.

    I recall a story from prewar Europe where one of the major Rosh Yeshivas went fundraising. He came to a gvir’s home to solicit tzedakah for the yeshiva. The gvir said how do I know my donation won’t go towards the costs of your travelling rather than towards paying for the Limud Torah. The Rosh Yeshiva gave him a good answer, though I forgot what it was (as well as which RY it was.)

    in reply to: Looks in shidduchim #1141876
    Joseph
    Participant

    Was it my Giorgio Armani that gave it away?

    in reply to: Honest Tzedakah #1141395
    Joseph
    Participant

    When you give Mir a donation, why wouldn’t you think a percent goes to cover the expenses of their fundraisers costs (travel, telephone calls, etc.)?

    in reply to: An Open Letter to Donald J. Trump #1141109
    Joseph
    Participant

    Also, Dor Yeshorim does not seek, encourage or expect to prevent any person from procreating. In fact, they expect their clientele to indeed procreate. Eugenics proponents, at its core, seeks to prevent certain individuals from procreating.

    in reply to: age for marriage #1141590
    Joseph
    Participant

    For those pointing out shittas that you can wait to get married up to age 24 if you’re learning Torah full-time, okay. But what excuse is there for a) those who stopped being in full-time Limud Torah before 24 and b) those waiting past their 24th birthday even if learning?

    in reply to: age for marriage #1141584
    Joseph
    Participant

    MA: Then we, too, should raise our children to be mature and ready at that age. Halacha asks for no less.

    in reply to: CR records #1212804
    Joseph
    Participant

    Dash: Where are you getting those stats for number of users?

    in reply to: age for marriage #1141579
    Joseph
    Participant

    Unfortunately observance of this halacha has become lax.

    in reply to: To people who shidduch dated someone and broke up after 10+ times #1140582
    Joseph
    Participant

    Sam: Many today have the tenaim months before the wedding. It traditionally was the default minhag among the majority of Ashkenazim.

    in reply to: To people who shidduch dated someone and broke up after 10+ times #1140578
    Joseph
    Participant

    flatbusher: Do you realize what “tenaim” means?

Viewing 0 posts