miamilawyer

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 50 posts - 1 through 50 (of 97 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: What if I don't want to buy back the chometz from the goy? #1258413

    miamilawyer
    Participant

    First of all, I am not going to pretend to know the halacha, but a goy is obviously not bound by halacha. In Florida, and I suspect NY as well, a contract that says Person A will pay person B “fair market value” is not enforceable, unless it permits someone (besides a judge, for example an arbitrator) to set that value if the parties do not agree because price is a material term that cannot be left to a judge/jury to fill in. So even if the contract says that, you cannot enforce it. Perhaps the Goy can because maybe halacha recognizes such a deal, and the Jew is bound by halacha, but at least in Florida, it cannot be enforced.

    So the practical answer to Joseph’s question (at least in Florida) is that even if the contract said that, and a Jew had to comply with Halacha and honor such an election by the Goy, it is unenforceable in a Fl court.

    I do not know how rabbis structure these deals, but the common sense way would be similar to what is referenced above (ie a mortgage). You sell the Goy your chametz for 100,000 but he only makes monthly payments, and the first payment is due in 10 days (or 8). Upon failure to make the payment after pesach, there is a default, and the property goes back immediately to the Jew. The end. In that scenario, the jew cannot insist the Goy pay anything, as the contract provides that the sole remedy on default is a return of the property (collateral). On the other hand, the Goy has the right to pay and keep the property.

    There are many real loans that are handled in this way, so to say its a mockery because the jews only remedy is the collateral is not accurate.

    in reply to: What if I don't want to buy back the chometz from the goy? #1258415

    miamilawyer
    Participant

    PS It used to be that you could see what you wrote and edit it prior to the comment being posted. Is this no longer possible?

    in reply to: This will save you from a safek issur d’oraysa #1254343

    miamilawyer
    Participant

    Also, to add another esoteric clarification, yom tov sheni is itself a derabanan, so this only applies (at least the clarification of a safek issur deoraysa) to ben hashmashot on the first day (leading into the second).

    in reply to: 7 letter word game (3rd letter) #1228170

    miamilawyer
    Participant

    Indian

    Debacle

    in reply to: Driving on Shabbos #1212484

    miamilawyer
    Participant

    In case it wasn’t clear, my comment about modesty was an example (and frankly a euphemism). If t was not a good one, so be it. The ester example was to make a famous point. That even yeherag val Yavor stuff maybe has an exception if the entire nation is in jeopardy. Shabbos is a much easier example. After all, you can break Shabbos to save a single life, and frankly, as others have noted, you might even be able to get the violation down to a rabbinic violation.

    Anti-semitism is unfortunately increasing in America. On both sides of the aisle. Israel is increasingly at risk. Those two places contain 80 percent of the worlds jews. Whatever you may think of trumps policies, the man is not stable. Nor does he like intervention in the world. Nor is he inclined to help anyone outside our borders. His original comment is that us should be neutral in the Israel Palestinian dispute. Make no mistake that Kashner changed his mind.

    And as we saw, he is really obsessed with crowd size and who attended his inauguration. he would not have been happy if kushner and his daughter did not attend. And that as the most powerful man in the world, that would have affected Jewish lives through his Israel policy Is almost a certainty.

    I suspect if you wanted, you could find other instances where kushner bends Jewish law. One might argue that simply makes him human. Regardless, this may very well not be one of them.

    in reply to: Foods Rashi never ate #1216201

    miamilawyer
    Participant

    Pork. :). To the extent you intended a list of kosher food unknown to rashi, corn and quinoa and basically all of the new kitniyot.

    in reply to: Driving on Shabbos #1212459

    miamilawyer
    Participant

    Ok, you enticed me to post with a discussion of politics, one of my favorite subjects.

    @joseph, huh? My memory on these issues is certainly fading, but doesnt Rambam say that a jew can be converted by learning a few hard halachas and a few easy ones and once he is converted, even if he goes back to worshiping idols, he is still a jew? Isnt that quoted in the shulchan aruch? So if you assume that she is converted properly, what difference does it make whether she is a ger or not?

    Second, isnt everyone missing the obvious? Kushner is adviser to the president of the US, whose actions affect jews in Israel and here (basically, almost all of the world’s jews). Doesnt that alone justify certain heterim? I am assuming that Queen Ester did not dress modestly. In fact, one opinion in the Talmud had her married to Mordechai.

    Anyway, Kushner cares enough about the issue to leak that he got a heter. Whether he did or not, that is pretty impressive.

    in reply to: what is your definition of? #1164046

    miamilawyer
    Participant

    @joseph. My comment was also making a point (and a poor attempt at humor since I realized you did not mean it literally). My point is that people who know and reject are largely strawmen. Sure, there are people who know and outright reject, but these people are the very small minority. Most don’t know.

    in reply to: 20 QuestionsRound 2! #1165580

    miamilawyer
    Participant

    Does it move?

    in reply to: what is your definition of? #1164042

    miamilawyer
    Participant

    1) Joseph, when you find the person who keeps 612 (including the ones re sacrifices and slavery), let me know.

    2) There are really very true adherents to conservative and reform “ideology.” The last generation had more “religious conservative” people, and sure, Boca Raton, Fl has a conservative community and even a conservative day school, as does NY, but these are the exceptions. NY has more jews than anywhere in the US, and Boca has more Jews per capita then NY (and pretty much anywhere besides Israel save for a few small towns with a higher percentage). Most of those who are part of these synagogues know almost nothing to deny.

    in reply to: Raw milk #1163039

    miamilawyer
    Participant

    @Abba. You are responding to a comment I made in another thread. I also do not think so. I think today, even those who smoke (mostly) would admit it is not good for you. They do it for the same reason I have that extra snack at night even though I know I should not.

    in reply to: "frum" boys who smoke #1178952

    miamilawyer
    Participant

    @mik, I should have been clear. I agree with your point too and was not meaning to ignore the obvious point that smoking kills and that is obviously not permitted. But the fact that someone may have an issue with one mitzvah or struggles with one issue, does not make them OTD. Full compliance cannot be the test as no one is perfect (and indeed, on yom kippur half the day is spent repenting for sins far worse than I am sure most have ever committed).

    But again, the larger point is valid. Smoking is outrageous and it seems there is a lax attitude in many religious communities towards it. (See joseph’s response). Just because some gedolim who may not have known better did it in the past, does not make it ok. There is far more resistance/disagreement on this obvious issue then there should be.

    in reply to: "frum" boys who smoke #1178947

    miamilawyer
    Participant

    Can we all agree that comparing smoking to being OTD was probably not meant literally and probably was a poor choice of words?

    The larger point however is valid. Obviously, smoking is not a good habit and it is certainly reasonable to say it is a strike against a person, and for some people, it may be a deal breaker, but everyone has their own deal breakers.

    I also note that as with many things, times have changed, so any reference to people who grew up in the past and struggled with smoking when it was more common is not relevant (except to the point about it being like OTD, which I don’t think the poster really meant). I went to Hebrew Academy and the rabbi who served us the kosher food and his wife smoked (not while serving, but there was a stench). It bothered some then, it would be unheard of now.

    And today, I think an inference can be drawn that someone who smokes is more of a rebel than in the past, when it was quite common. Of course, like anything else, there are exceptions, but it is a fair generalization if not an absolute rule.

    in reply to: The role of the woman in yiddishkeit #1162889

    miamilawyer
    Participant

    Just when I thought we had run out of subjects for new threads that all discuss the same thing….

    You can add to the topics joseph cites above also the threads on driving, getting car rides, voting and many more.

    in reply to: Raw milk #1163036

    miamilawyer
    Participant

    Raw milk is legal in parts of the US. Here in Fl it is only legal in pet food, but I have had it elsewhere direct from the farm (while on a farm). I would not trust it anywhere else (and even on the farm I was nervous, but my kids wanted to try milk direct from the cow, so I successfully risked it).

    As with all western issues (ie vaccination), there will always be dissenters, but for the vast majority of the public, raw milk is not safe, which is why it is illegal in all of Canada and many parts of the US.

    in reply to: Giving women car rides #1171422

    miamilawyer
    Participant

    @sparkly. my world view, whether it be politics, religion, anything is that generally, both extremes are wrong and somewhere in the middle is reasonable. Obviously, this cannot be applied to everything. Some things are black and white.

    Anyway, of course you can always be more strict than your rabbi permits. No one disputes that just because something might be ok according to your rabbi means you have to do it.

    in reply to: Bahamas Vacation advice #1162850

    miamilawyer
    Participant

    @lesheim To the extent my post can be read as advising you not to go or giving you advice you did not ask for, I apologize. As with most things in the CR, the responses tend to veer far from the posts.

    That said, I was once in my 20s also so no judgment, but if you did not know there was gambling in the Bahamas, you should (at least) google before you go to decide if you actually want to go.

    The problem with the Bahamas is that the nice areas are not a bargain, and the ones that are, you have to carefully investigate their safety etc… Leaving halacha out of it, there are some spots anyone from the US (much less a female) would be wise not to go. This is true of many places, though you are generally (though of course, not always) safer in the US.

    Anyway, as someone who lives 200 miles from Nassau, and does go there from time to time when I want a short vacation close by, I am not telling you not to go, but investigate before you do. If I had information on the bargain places I would tell you, but I really do not.

    in reply to: Women Driving #1162001

    miamilawyer
    Participant

    @zahavasdad

    For sure. All people do on South Beach sometimes is cruise in their cars and nothing else. That said, I think we can safely assume that is not why frum women are driving.

    in reply to: Bahamas Vacation advice #1162837

    miamilawyer
    Participant

    Alright, I have to say, I almost agree with Joseph on this one from Halachas standpoint. There really is no reason to go to the Bahamas except A) a public or hotel beach, or B) gambling.

    As CT lawyer points out, there are expensive ways to do it on the private islands (ie eleuthera) to simply have a pretty beach without the public, but the original poster was asking for a bargain, and the bargains involve A or B above and somewhere in Nassau or Paradise Island.

    edited

    From my recollection, Halacha and the gemamra frowns on gambling either considering it stealing (though not all do), or that it is immoral anyway because the loser did not expect to lose, or its just not what a jew should be doing.

    edited

    Frankly, it is hard for me to see the difference between the stock market and a skilled game in the casino.

    Anyway, joseph, I concede, almost all authorities are not happy with the idea of gambling, but you could apply much of what they say to the stock market or any investment.

    in reply to: Women Driving #1161963

    miamilawyer
    Participant

    @joseph

    As I said in the car rides post (these threads should all be consolidated since they are all about the same thing), Chazal also are clear that (with very few exceptions–the quotes are in the car ride post), that all men should learn a trade, and that torah without work leads to bitul torah too.

    I can only assume Charedim in kollel have sources that interpret around this, just as non-charedim interpret around some of what you cite. Or, the charedim argue what you do about the 50s, that was bedieved, but now there are ways to learn in kollel without working.

    Again, R’ Sperber makes a good point in his speech which is online that a good argument can be made that charedim are to the right of where most of chazal was.

    Frankly, my own personal view (for whatever its worth, which probably is not much) is that since no one can truly recreate the times of the Rambam, much less Chazal, every group has done their best to create the closest facsimile within their own viewpoints.

    in reply to: Trump is a democrat party plant #1190744

    miamilawyer
    Participant

    Joseph:Ross Perot is the single-handed reason why Bill Clinton became President.

    That clearly is not true. Clinton led all the polls even when perot dropped out (before re-entering). That is the bush family line, but it is not true. And even if it is, the favor was returned when son bush got elected only because of ralph nader.

    As to trump, I agree that he cooked this whole thing up with Hillary. While fox news has been strategizing for 8 years how to take her down, she has had the same time to do that to the republican party. One thing is for sure, either she will win or she will bring the republicans down with her.

    in reply to: Giving women car rides #1171415

    miamilawyer
    Participant

    @joseph, not necessarily according to certain of Chazal

    “Whoever does not teach his son a trade… it is as though he has taught him to steal.” (Kiddushin 29a)

    “Any Torah that is not accompanied by work, will end in neglect [of Torah] and will lead to sin.” (Avos 2:2)

    in reply to: should trolls be allowed to study gemara? #1161509

    miamilawyer
    Participant

    @midwesterner and @sam: Ok, I change my opinion a little. See below.

    In a nutshell, many places chazal says that do something for the wrong reason, it will eventually turn into the right reason, or as long as you keep connection to torah, there is hope, but they also clearly did not want reshaim learning and poisoning the well.

    The baalei haTosfos tried to synthesize all these ideas with various quotes (including the one you cite) which are summarized by an article I found and quoted below

    Article is written by Dr. Benzion Sorotzkin, Psyd. discussing educational rewards and cites to many of the different places that the concept of lshmo vs lo lshmo are discussed.

    So despite my initial doubt that tosfos could be relevant to trolling on an anonymous internet board, (and I still note that someone who trolls an internet board could still learn lshmo), I suppose I can see the argument that no one should learn who is doing it to mess with others (tosfot) and I agree that if someone is learning to be able to troll on an internet board, I suppose that might fall within the citations.

    in reply to: should trolls be allowed to study gemara? #1161506

    miamilawyer
    Participant

    @sam2. Just out of curiosity, what tosfos are you referring to since I am quite sure that Tosfos did not discuss the internet and the term “troll” refers to the internet.

    Indeed, the definition posted above starts “is a person who sows discord on the Internet”

    To the extent you are equating the word troll with rasha or apikores or a word of similar ilk, they are not exactly the same.

    As I (to some extent jokingly said above), the whole question is a little silly because much of the charedi community assurs the internet in its entirety, and presumably (even Joseph) those posting here do not hold this, and the more modern communities are more liberal with who they will teach (example, me).

    in reply to: Women Driving #1161929

    miamilawyer
    Participant

    Joseph: I love your shtick, I do, but that comment about arguing with X rabbi or Y rabbi is silly. There are many who obviously permit women driving. You should argue with them. :-).

    in reply to: Should third party candidates debate? #1161252

    miamilawyer
    Participant

    @charlie: There were others besides Bernie and Hillary. They all stayed away because everyone just conceded it to Hillary. Heck, kaine would have been a better presidential pick by far. Or Biden. Or Warren. Or just about anybody.

    Whatever your politics are, the fact is that Hillary is an AWFUL candidate. She has no chance of winning against ANYONE, except of course the one person she is running against who is worse, trump.

    in reply to: Should third party candidates debate? #1161248

    miamilawyer
    Participant

    One other nuance. The senate picks the VP, so you could have VP kaine as dems may take control of senate.

    Going even further into the abyss, the dems could actually force some of their “faithless” electors to vote for say, Bernie sanders, and overtake the republican second choice meaning the house would be left with choosing from two democrats and trump. (They must choose from the top three electoral votes, so there is a maximum of three options, 2 of which will be Trump and Clinton).

    Its all pretty unreal, and very unlikely to happen, but I like thinking about it.

    in reply to: Should third party candidates debate? #1161247

    miamilawyer
    Participant

    @joseph. That is what I said, except for one irrelevant point. I believe it is the incoming congress, but it does not matter, that will be republican too.

    But in every other year that this might happen except this one, it would be a near certainty that the congress would pick the party nominee. Some are saying that if this happened, the repubs would pick Johnson (who was a repub governor) and not Trump. They are limited to picking the top three (electoral) vote receivers, which means Johnson would have to win at least one state.

    It gets even more interesting if he does not win any states, as anyone (including Johnson) could receive a vote from a faithless elector, and thus we could have president Paul Ryan or whoever

    in reply to: Should third party candidates debate? #1161243

    miamilawyer
    Participant

    No. It is a two person race (well, sort of). As someone who thinks Clinton is the lesser of evils, I hope they let Gary Johnson in, but it would not really be fair.

    That said, there is an extremely remote chance GJ could actually be president. He is polling between 9-12 percent and Mitt Romney and others are considering endorsing him. If he gets a single state, and some say he could get a few, he could deprive either candidate of the 270 needed to win.

    It really is crazy (and interesting) that each party picked their absolutely worst candidate, because normally (to the extent this would ever be normal), if no one gets 270, the president is picked by the house, who likely would pick their candidate.

    But some say that if the republicans remain in control of the house, they would not pick trump if he did not get the 270, they might pick Gary Johnson. Stay tuned….

    in reply to: Women Driving #1161910

    miamilawyer
    Participant

    @joseph. Ok, so say that. That has largely been my point. There are multiple threads essentially about the same thing. Should women leave the home? These are not really halachic issues unless you agree that women should not leave the home, in which case the answer to all the questions is the same.

    And also, that system does not make sense in a kollel system where the wife needs to earn the money. Rambam was a doctor, but yes, he had a traditional view.

    Still, while we are on the topic, (I am being careful as this is a PG site) unlike some, Rambam was very liberal FOR HIS TIME on certain issues relating to women.

    They had a certain tafkid because of the garden of eden. That was his view. But who knows what his view would have been had he lived today, because for his time, while he had a very conservative view of their role, he insisted that men not take advantage of that role.

    in reply to: Women Driving #1161907

    miamilawyer
    Participant

    Lol. First off, as I said previously in a poor attempt at humor, if she cannot drive, she should walk to the polls.

    In all seriousness, if a woman cannot be picked up, cannot drive, cannot (without R’ Moshe’s heter) be touched on public transportation, how can she leave the home?

    Which perhaps is the point. But that is not really a halachic issue unless you take the chatam soffer to places he never meant to go.

    From a website quoting R’ Sperber:

    in reply to: should trolls be allowed to study gemara? #1161499

    miamilawyer
    Participant

    Lol. Trolls is an internet term, so clearly according to those who hold any use of the internet is assur, probably not.

    To the extent this post is a reference to me, I have gone thru my story before in the OTD thread. I can assure you my intention is not to troll.

    I enjoy the discussion and I read law briefs not just on cases I work on, but major issues just for fun. To this day, I learn if I can because I enjoy it and also because I feel spiritual when I do.

    They really did not know what to do with me at Hebrew academy because I come from a background where my parents know nothing, but wanted a private school. I learned Gemara better than many of their orthodox students and was I think the only one in the advanced gemara class who was not from a religious family.

    They allowed it because most of the Rabbis there concluded that I had good neshama, and that there was a chance I would become orthodox. I ended up marrying a Young Israel girl, but for a host of reasons never became fully religious.

    In any case, my intention here is not to troll.

    in reply to: Does a reform rabbi do anything other than attend funerals? #1161037

    miamilawyer
    Participant

    Brisker: For them, it’s just being a nice person, and they will jump to do chesed with goyim, toeva-people, and anyone else – even animals.

    Me: The torah requires chasing the mother bird away and kindness to animals too. And there is nothing wrong with doing something to be nice. Indeed, R’ Yisroel Salanter’s mussar movement may not have taken a larger hold in the charedi community, but that is unfortunate.

    And taking Rashi to his logical end, you should not return something lost EVER to a jew who has given up hope, because the torah no longer requires it. (To be clear, I do not believe Rashi said this, but if the reason is as has been attributed to him, then it would apply just the same to a jew who has given up hope)

    needless, to say, others disagree.

    in reply to: landlords to tenants #1160985

    miamilawyer
    Participant

    @mashiach. There are services that do international checks for landlords usually around 300-400 in Florida, a place where such persons are common.

    in reply to: Giving women car rides #1171397

    miamilawyer
    Participant

    Ok, I cannot resist. I should have said bli neder.

    @iacisrmma: To answer your question, it has nothing to do with the car ride question, but it was joseph’s example, that when you say something (he chose eruv), you don’t always say “some hold.”

    After initially getting cranky about the point myself, I think I actually agree with Joseph on this (stop the presses). It is an internet board. It is not always necessary to qualify a post.

    That said, if someone is saying something is assur (ie internet is assur), it is probably more fair to say “some hold..”

    And to answer your earlier question about what a woman drowning had to do with it, arguably (perhaps a weak one), a woman out in a dangerous storm is also in safety jeopardy, which would justify her being picked up, just as the gemara approved saving a naked drowning woman (who otherwise, you obviously could not look at much less touch).

    in reply to: Giving women car rides #1171395

    miamilawyer
    Participant

    Sparkly: “miami lawyer – touching is wrong no matter how it is”

    Me: That is your opinion. R’ Moshe and others (perhaps even the rambam depending on how your interpet his words)disagree.

    But I acknowledge that some agree with you.

    I think this new post summarizes all of the above so this conversation will continue without me as I think I am out of things to say, which almost never happens. Don’t celebrate too loudly that I am out of this one. 🙂


    miamilawyer
    Participant

    Well, (assuming it is available through nook or ebooks, etc..) you got them at least one customer. It will probably be a month or so before I bump the thread and provide my own review, but I eventually will. I am sure you cannot wait. 🙂

    in reply to: Giving women car rides #1171393

    miamilawyer
    Participant

    @brisker:

    Just to be clear. I understand that tzinuys is important and certain things it is intended to protect against are yeherag val yaavor. However, that is the fundamental question. What falls under the tzniyus umbrella (or as the discussion has veered, the niddah umbrella).

    Remember, this thread is actually about giving women car rides, not mixed dancing, and presumably it is possible to do that without touching.

    In any case, I do not agree with your absolute statements, but you are entitled to them.

    Socializing as you point out is completely different, but yet originally you lumped them together in your post.

    According to ramban and others, even hugging and kissing is assur only derabanan. So again, an issur derabanan can hardly be said to be the defining trait of judaism. Rambam says differently, but even rambam is generally understood to be talking about intimate touching.

    As (almost) everyone in the US my age with any knowledge of torah knows, R’ Moshe said subway touching is ok, but handshakes he was uncomfortable with. But even R’ Moshe acknowledged that touching that is deemed by society as not to be affectionate might be ok, the question is what falls into that category, and many other issues. And I have already gone on too long.

    Anyway, my point (and its a point others have made in other contexts) is that halacha has many viewpoints, so to come on here and make absolute statements, it would be preferable if you said “my opinion.”

    That said, maybe I am being ridiculous. It is an internet board after all, so perhaps that it is your opinion is implied.

    in reply to: what is your definition of? #1164011

    miamilawyer
    Participant

    @brisker. As you concede in your statement, the reform of the past (which was notably anti-torah and anti Israel) is dead. This should be celebrated.

    The current movement has quite a nuanced view, which can be summarized (very loosely) as follows: kol hakavod if you keep torah, and you should keep the most you can, but its your personal interpretation, you are not bound by the past mesorah, and we interpret around the passages we find problematic.

    I am not defending this view, its way outside even my pale, but it is not the view that was fought against so vigorously. No doubt it is not orthodoxy by any means, but it is not the anti-orthodoxy of the past. It has completely changed. It is like when coke changed its formula, you may not like either, but they are different. I also don’t think most know that nuance, so I wanted to clarify. (Heck, I suspect most reform jews don’t even know what the platform is).

    I also (but more importantly the entire chabad movement and others) also think your statement is outrageous that it is meaningless for a reform jew to perform a mitzvah. Its this all or nothing that has pushed people away. I know there are sources for it. There are also sources for the value of someone performing even one mitzvah.

    And they don’t believe that torah changes, what they believe is that similar to how liberals interpret the US constitution, the meaning changes over time, which is what makes it a timeless document. Again, this is much better than the view of the original reform, and is a step in the right direction.

    Anyway, we are to some degree arguing nuance, but the larger point is that the absolute world view you have certainly is not productive to kiruv and that there are many middle ground positions between the two extreme positions (reform is correct) and your position that when they do mitzvoth, it is worthless.

    Also, they do not encourage intermarriage. That is just not correct. They accept it bedieved. And in any case, I don’t think its helpful or correct to hold that their doing of mitvos because of a torah they respect is worthless.

    in reply to: what is your definition of? #1164004

    miamilawyer
    Participant

    @brisker: What you write does not conform with what Reform Judaism writes about themselves. As I was told many years ago, yesterday’s reshaim are todays tinokim shenishba.

    From the reformjudaism.org website:

    In addition to our belief that Judaism must change and adapt to the needs of the day to survive and our firm commitment to tikkun olam, the following principles distinguish Reform Jews from other streams of Judaism in North America.

    in reply to: Giving women car rides #1171386

    miamilawyer
    Participant

    Brisker: Tznius is not the sort of thing you want to find kulos in – it is the defining characteristic of klal yisroel

    and Brisker: Many people on this forum would approve of outright socialization with women; something that actually is assur..Many people from the previous generation grew up in houses where their parents met at mixed dances at Young Israel shuls….

    Me: Is there an inherent contradiction saying that something the prior generation was not so machmir on is “the defining characteristic of klal yisroel”?

    in reply to: Giving women car rides #1171384

    miamilawyer
    Participant

    @zahavasdad

    I forgot about that story in the gemara. It also goes to R’ Sperbers point about how the charedim have moved to the right of Chazal. The gemara talks about how absurd it is for someone not to save a drowning naked woman, something that arguably concerns yeherag val yaavor, but yet charedi rabbis today assur volunteering in Magen Dovid even on a work day.

    in reply to: Giving women car rides #1171359

    miamilawyer
    Participant

    @joseph. Lol. They should then walk to the polls.

    Also, if they cannot get rides, and they cannot drive, how are they supposed to do anything while their husband is learning all day in kolel?

    in reply to: what is your definition of? #1163977

    miamilawyer
    Participant

    @subtitle. The difference is that Joseph said it is not permissible to enter a church or a reform temple, but he concedes there are different reasons.

    You said a church and a reform temple has the same halachic status as a church. I believe Joseph agrees that is not correct, although he agrees you should not go into either and he stated that is what you really meant.

    Ok, no big deal. Moving on.

    in reply to: Does a reform rabbi do anything other than attend funerals? #1161006

    miamilawyer
    Participant

    DY: ML, true. 🙁 I should have said they perform certain marriages which used to not be recognized

    Me: I only realized what you meant after I posted, and as you note, today, even those marriages are recognized everywhere in the US

    in reply to: what is your definition of? #1163972

    miamilawyer
    Participant

    @joseph. That is actually not what he stated. Its right above. I quoted what he stated. His words were “A reform temple has the same halachic status as a church,…” This is not accurate.

    A reform synagogue may be just fine if they are considered tinokim shenishba. You want to agree with those who argue that a reform synagogue is heresy, (many of which were penned at a time when it contained rebels as opposed to today’s population of people who do not know) you are entitled, but it still does NOT have the “same halachic status as a church” according to the majority opinion (which I suspect you agree with) that a church is avoda zarah.

    in reply to: Does a reform rabbi do anything other than attend funerals? #1161001

    miamilawyer
    Participant

    @DY What? Perhaps not in the state of Israel, but if by “state” you mean the US, they are valid everywhere.

    The funny thing is that I am often asked by my reform friends what Orthodox rabbis do as everyone in an orthodox temple knows how to daven etc…

    Everyone has their own perspective.

    in reply to: what is your definition of? #1163969

    miamilawyer
    Participant

    Subtitle please: A reform temple has the same halachic status as a church, as a matter of fact one may sooner enter a mosque than a reform temple. Contrary to what you think this has nothing to do with hatred or intolerance.

    Me: Only according to those prone to hyperbole. A church according to many is avoda zara. A reform temple is clearly not. And while at its origin, it was filled with heretics, today it is filled with tinokim shenishba who don’t know anything about halacha etc…

    The only reason I know what I know is because my parents wanted us to go to a private school and the Hebrew Academy fit that bill. I married someone from an MO family, but most of my parents friends know nothing. So to call them heretics is silly.

    in reply to: what is your definition of? #1163959

    miamilawyer
    Participant

    The standard at my MO high school to be considered frum was Shabbos, Kashrus and Taharat hamishpacha. Now obviously, Shabbos and Kashrus have wide variances in observance, but basically, if your intent was to observe, you were considered in.

    Conservative is basically its own halachic movement that uses halacha as a guide, and claims to adhere to it, but they accept every lenience and make their own if they feel like it (driving to shul on Shabbos ok).

    The chatam soffers reform is NOT the reform of today. The reform of today believes that halacha is valuable, and you should do as much of it as you can, but its an individual choice. This is much different than the views of the past that many of the laws were ridiculous, etc… Todays reform recognizes the value of all halacha, they just “pasken” that its not mandatory (but it is still aspirational) and they also change things to be egalitarian.

    in reply to: Giving women car rides #1171340

    miamilawyer
    Participant

    From what I remember, whether yichud applies to a car is not settled and some even make distinctions between heavily trafficked areas and not.

    And even if yichud does apply, there are those who hold that there is an exception for a place with a continuous video surveillance. Fortunately, except in the charedi world perhaps, most phones have that capability.

    In short, the answer to the question depends heavily on which LOR you ask.

Viewing 50 posts - 1 through 50 (of 97 total)


Trending