Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Also, I never meant that approved is not good, just that certified is better.
Don’t backtrack here; you were doing better before. Now you are back to my previous problem that since the hashgacha relies on itself, you have no way of being confident that your certified product does not contain approved products.
You are correct; I didn’t understand. I thought you were arguing that we should eat things which are certified but not which are approved. You are actually arguing we should not trust hechsherim which approve things without certification.
Ok, if you insist. I don’t agree; I trust them, and if they say it doesn’t need hashgacha, then it doesn’t.
I mean, it loses some of its best and some of its worst and some in the middle along a normal distribution. I don’t get the impression that it is more the “best minds” who are leaving yeshiva than staying.
I make money from them. So I say they are good.
(shkoiach squeak!)
I don’t think that is responsive to my point. My point is that when you buy ice cream which is certified, you would have no way of knowing if one of the ingredients is Drambuie which under goldersgreen’s bubbe maisa would only be approved.
To make this more likely, imagine the approved thing was cookies, and the certified ice cream was cookies n’ cream.
There are no learner/earner guys. Don’t waste your time looking for them or preening your pedigree for them.
I would compare it to the young couple, who fell in love, but neither knew how to speak, so they both learned how to speak so that they could communicate. But the man learned french and the woman learned russian, so they still could not speak.
So too here.
I have been trolling you all week.
FTFY
whoooooooooooooohooooooooooooooooooooooooo!
???? ???!!!!!!
That would be, oinkhay.
It wasn’t English pig latin, it was klingon pig latin. You can speak pig latin from any language.
i do realize that this is/would have been nekama. i got over my pain & am ready to offer sheva brochas.
No, you haven’t gotten over you pain. One does not get over pain by realizing that it is nekama.
You should do it because you want to have a relationship with your sister even if she hurt you.
Then, you should think back and rationalize from her perspective why she may not have made sheva brachos even though she does love you and care about you. And if you can’t get past it, you should ask her (in a few months, not now).
So you do respond to mosholim…… :-Q
It is like a King who has a law that he does not speak pig latin in his court. But, the King has a retarded advisor who can only speak pig latin. So he speaks pig latin to him.
Are you maskim to me that there’s a maaleh in certified over approved?
No, because I assume they use approved components in the certified plants.
This topic is spam. Please unsubscribe me.
I like the example from ?? ????? ????? ??? ????.
You might have argued that the Torah is using the term ahava loosely, and is not referring to an intense emotion of ahava. But then it uses the previous ahava to show how strong his hatred was.
shkoiach!
Sorry, folks, I’m still not responding to mesholim.
I thought this would be over after I showed that it is “certified” and that their website doesn’t reference a two tier system, but if you must, I will respond.
If I understand correctly, your point is that if the hashgacha offers “certification” and “approval”, it is possible that one is being machmir if one eats only the “certified” stuff, since it seems more verified.
My initial strong response to this was based on the fact that golders did not simply refer to it as a chumrah, but instead stated that “meaning that they have the level nichnas veyoitzei required by shulchan oruch”–thereby implying that the approved list was against halacha. Without getting into why you are wrong on halacha, it is obviously libelous to say that the LBD is approving things contrary to halacha.
My reply to your argument of chumrah, being advocated by Shoe Sales, is that since the same hashgacha holds of both methods, and presumably relies on its approved lists when certifying foods that have components on the approved list, as is also commonly done in the US, there is no chumrah since there is no way of knowing that the certified stuff does not contain approved stuff.
SS responded to that by claiming that they would not use any of the “complicated” approved stuff. Since the discussion had become speculation then, I didn’t reply. Especially since replying would have required a technical understanding of blood pressure medication (since I presumably would need to respond to the moshol from within it) which I do not have.
Now tell me: Didn’t I present the arguments far better than any moshol could?
This is similar to a King who had a son who had sinned against him, but the son did not understand why. So the King called in his son, and he explained to him how his feelings were hurt when the son did such and such, and how it is inappropriate to hurt your father the King’s feelings. The son understood, and refrained from sinning again.
MR: I don’t think I’m criticizing this from a legal perspective. The reason we give judges discretion is that different situations call for different things. And it is clear from this video that the judge was way out of line. He shouldn’t have called her back the first time, and he shouldn’t have baited her by calling out “adios” at her. And he definitely shouldn’t have put her in jail.
I suppose I can’t convince you all, but I think this issue goes straight back to just about everything we discuss here about kids and chinuch. It is bizarre that this little kid is going to jail for doing no harm, and all the reaction society has is “look at that funny video; I bet she learned her lesson good.”
As if chinuch is about getting revenge for all the bad things kids do. Shloimie wasn’t paying attention in school; I bet he’ll learn his lesson if I embarrass him in front of his class. Rivki was chutzpadik at home; I bet she’ll learn her lesson if I punish her.
Next time we discuss why kids go off the derech, I’m pointing right back to this thread. Kids perceive Hashem to be like their parents; and who would want to be part of religion where G-d acts like you are suggesting.
Bad idea.
To check a boy, you just check him…
But there is no exception for religious observance.
Toi, Curiosity,
I simply don’t believe that the judge acted out of anything other than personal insult.
Make up a funny story for us.
I am so angered by this video that I would have wanted to give her the death penalty, which is why I would never be a judge.
See, that is intellectual honesty. And that is why this person also should not be a judge.
For the record, I don’t know what narishkeit you are inventing, but Drambuie is listed on the KLBD website as “certified”. http://www.klbdkosher.org/certified_companies/?doCompanySearch=1&resultsPage=&query=drambuie&categoryId=17&searchButton.x=35&searchButton.y=10
And there is no designation on their website of any two tier hashgacha system.
Are you kidding us? Of course you should offer to make sheva brachos you would like to.
Or, you could just never talk to your sibling again. That would also work.
she finally realized this is not a joke! and she has to pay for her actions.
Oh, you showed her it wasn’t a joke. Nice one.
Since when is thinking something is a joke punishable by prison?
That is federal law. It is not state law. The states have the power to prohibit more than that, and they have.
Why does a judge have to put up with some druggy/who-knows-what stupid girl.
No, the question is why does he have to put her in jail for doing something that was innocuous to anyone, but insulted him personally.
Her appearance in court clearly showed she had zero respect for where she was, the way she answered some questions might lead you to believe she thought the whole thing was a joke
Certainly. I also think it is a joke. But thinking it is a joke should not be punishable by jail time.
Seriously folks, the judge punished her because it was insulting to him personally. That behavior is far worse than hers.
Yes, congress passed the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. But that Act itself has been rules unconstitutional as applied to the states.
Sorry, but if you are going to take the hard line here, it means no wine at the chuppa either. Or in church.
This law would not be unconstitutional, since it is of general applicability and is for a good societal purpose. It is governed by the case with Peyote that you reference, where the court said that the states could make it illegal (or deny unemployment benefits, as the case was).
You can read the case on page 872 of volume 494 of the United States Reporter.
Wine Under the Chuppa would probably fall under the same category as sacraments in church especially if given by the Rabbi
Find that exception and we’ll talk about it. I don’t believe it exists.
I don’t think that chutzpah should have criminal consequences. If the judge has such a self esteem problem, he should just yell at his wife and kids instead of putting real people in jail.
A priest can administer the sacraments in church which include drinking some wine, so the law is probably similar in shul.
I’ve been searching for such an exception, and not finding it. I think everyone just knows that the law is stupid and overinclusive, and so everyone just knows to ignore it.
I have read every work of Mark Twain which I could get hold of. I even have a collection of his letters, and they are quite amazing.
One of my favorites is the essay where he makes fun of Fenimore Cooper. I actually read Deerslayer after that to see what he was making fun of, and of course I couldn’t enjoy it anymore.
oomis: So then if your son has friends from yeshiva for shabbos, will you not give them a little cup of kiddush wine?
Or suppose your son is married to a woman who is 20, will he not give her a little bit of kiddush wine? How about under the chuppah? How about at sheva brachos?
Here’s some caselaw (from 2010) about hosting parties where minors have access to alcohol and drink it.
In this case, they hosted a party for their daughter, where a bunch of kids were drinking, and they were aware the kids were drinking.
If the Legislature wishes to criminalize the knowing passive hosting of parties at which alcohol is served to minors, it certainly may and probably ought to do so.”
People v. Heil, 28 Misc. 3d 215, 224, 900 N.Y.S.2d 624, 631 (City Ct. 2010)
This accords with a NYS appellate court from 2006 which stated that “t is thus clear that any offense contemplated under section 65 is directed against commercial vendors and distributors of intoxicants and not against individuals in their own homes”. People v. Taxin, 11 Misc. 3d 45, 46, 812 N.Y.S.2d 224, 225 (App. Term 2006). But see People v. Himmel 252 A.D.2d 273 (App. Term 1999) (defendant was liable for providing alcohol to minor in his own home, where he also raped her afterward).
The girl is right. The judge is abusing his discretion.
In the state of NY it is assur to serve alcohol to a minor. Kiddush is an exception and it is a small amount, plus no one is driving after making kiddush.
Really? Is there an exception for kiddush?
There is an exception if you are the parent or guardian–then you are allowed to give whatever you want.
There is also an exception if it is for instructional purposes in a school as part of a curriculum–I’m not sure purim in yeshiva counts, but I’d sure argue it.
A person is guilty of unlawfully dealing with a child in the first degree when: […]
2. He gives or sells or causes to be given or sold any alcoholic beverage, as defined by section three of the alcoholic beverage control law, to a person less than twenty-one years old; except that this subdivision does not apply to the parent or guardian of such a person or to a person who gives or causes to be given any such alcoholic beverage to a person under the age of twenty-one years, who is a student in a curriculum licensed or registered by the state education department, where the tasting or imbibing of alcoholic beverages is required in courses that are part of the required curriculum, provided such alcoholic beverages are given only for instructional purposes during classes conducted pursuant to such curriculum.It is no defense to a prosecution pursuant to subdivision two of this section that the child acted as the agent or representative of another person or that the defendant dealt with the child as such.
sorry popa,i actually think your comparison is like comparing two blood pressure pills without knowing whether they are supposed to raise or lower the pressure.
http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/coffeeroom/topic/popa-figures-out-more-stuff