Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
“Here I’m going to sound a lot like ubiquitin: ”
thats a good thing!
And I’m glad we got to the crux of our disagreement
“By abortion, the risk of an optional but halachically allowed abortion being stayed (which I think would be quite rare, but ubiquitin disagrees) does not outweigh the benefit of protecting the unborn babies.”
Well said, though
I think there is room for disagreement in that sentence as far as which way to err (though not regarding the metzius) .Thanks for sticking around this far into the discussion I found it enlightening
“Why can’t I use watermelon as karpas?”
You can
Avram
“so there can be way more nuance than the allow everything or allow nothing but death ”
Ok so that’s where we disagree, that and .“And the potential for outright murder in cases where the abortion fails and life is taken outside of the womb.”
On that we agree completely. but I’m not a big slippery slope person.
“And, per Rav Moshe ZT”L, it isn’t clear that the abortions we are discussing are allowed.”
According to R’ Moshe its clear these would not be allowed , as IV’e said. the first of all was just to get it out of the way, pretend its last or even in parenthesis)Avram
“I can give you the reasons,”
Yes so can I. Its because the doctor gains nothing by saying its ok to fast. and opens himself to theoretical liability by saying fast and then 5 years later the kid is slower than his friends and they sue him because he said fasting is ok.
More to the point though. sure some doctors will say it is dangerous to fast (or not to have an abortion) how would we make sure Frum women only see those doctors and not the “the out-of-sight colleagues of a person on the Internet” ?“Ergo enforcing or allowing for religion, as you perceive it.”
nope as explained many times the government should not regulate abortions. period. (in our non-ideal society)
Frum woman will ask their rav, those deemed permissible will get it
non-frum women, not my (primary) concern“But neighborhoods and towns can set zoning laws intended to preserve a certain look and feel that happen to infringe on where and how an eruv can be constructed.”
Yes and I oppose that 100% if it would prevent an eruv. (don’t you?) I’m not sure why on earth you’d think I felt otherwise.
“It’s easy to get behind a theoretical ideal that you know has no chance of passing in our current legal system”
Exactly! and that’s even with the lawyer’s “big bucks and long hours”Avram
I love your point regarding recalcitrant husbands.
I’m not sure my response is as good as your question.Though before we get to it. I’d like to be clear on your position since our discussion has shifted a lot.
In a nutshell my position is thus:
There are instances where halacha would allow an abortion that is not strictly speaking, medically necessary (in the sense that not having it would result in the mother’s death). These woman should be allowed to have an abortion. Since there is no way to legislate that a Rabbi would approve every abortion, in order to accommodate those cases we should allow (almost?) all abortions. (I say almost because I have never encountered any such case late in pregnancy)
Is your argument that:
a. No such cases exist
b. That is not enough to allow all abortions. So we should ban abortions (except where life threatening) and even those women who get a heter should be forced to carry to term
c. something elseAs for recalcitrant husbands.
first of all, it isn’t clear that hitting is allowed. Even if it is, we need to weigh the benefits vs risks.
what is the benefit to allowing hitting ? – it probably works faster than other forms of pressure that are still available
What is the risk of not “having laws forbidding assault and battery” – complete chaoswhat is the benefit to allowing abortions? Not forcing woman in terrible situations undue psychological (and physical) burden – though not death since on that we agree and are NOT discussing here. (also It will keep them safe (illegal abortions don’t usually lead to less abortions but to unsafe abortions), the cases I’m referring to would probably have had abortions even if illegal) )
what is the risk of allowing abortions? geheniom for people who practice without Rabbinic approval.so in weighing the risks and benefits of both: on abortion the Government should stay out, and on battery make it illegal
Again obviously if there was an option for the Government to outlaw battery unless received Rabbinic approval I’d be for that.
I grant this isn’t the best distinction, and If you choose option B above I think reasonable people can disagree on that, as I told NC.
Avram
“nope, not my response at all.” It certainly was here.”
ah but in “anticipating” my response you ignored my actual response:
My response is did they say there was a medical risk? Or legal?
and if medical risk, risk of what ?BTW to answer your question
“so how can we really see the impacts of 26 hours sans food and water when the weaker pregnant women are fasting in measures?”The answer is in Israel.
Other than an uptick in births on and after Y”K there is no uptick in bad outcomes.
although many would get a heter if asked a Rav, many don’t ask and fastavram
“I’m not a doctor.”This was YOUR quote : “have never heard any doctor say that it’s ok for a pregnant woman to go 26 hours without water”
you said that in response to my comment “for a healthy woman with a normal pregnancy there is (generally) no medical reason not to fast , worst case she goes into pre-term labor. no big deal”
”
“nope, not my response at all.” It certainly was here.”“No, I’m not confusing anything.”
you are. My position is quite simple. The government should not enforce religion, at the same time they should allow woman who have a heter to have an abortion.I really don’t get how that is an “an artificial distinction ” or a “double standard”
I gave my response in the very next sentence. See above .your last paragraph is confusing. IF there was a law banning eruvim I would oppose it, I’m not sure wh yyou think otherwise.
“Laws impact our religious observance all the time, and inasmuch as they foster public welfare, don’t create undue burdens, and aren’t unfairly targeting religious groups”
that’s a lot of ifs.“Yet suddenly you get all bothered by this when it comes to abortion”
I’m not bothered at all. I said from the get go, if a law could be passed that a woman who felt she needed an abortion had to have rabbinic approval I could get behind that. This was in my very first (or early) posts on the subject.
your one good point was regarding recalcitrant husbands.
That’s a good one it deserves its own response.Avi
1. Agreed its a real problem of mine, in my zeal to share my wisdom coupled by my poor typing skills many (all?) of my posts are full of awful typos. Thanks for being able to look past them and focus on substance. I will try to be more careful.
2. a. Lol 1896?! and b. just because they do, doesn’t mean they SHOULD. and c. Ganulin proves the opposite: “the Christmas holiday has become largely secularized” In other words they argued that it was NOT religious. (Blue laws have been upheld for the same reason see eg McGowan v Maryland 1961)
3. I’ll throw it right back at you. Whose religion should be legislated? Aztec? Fundamentalist Islam ? Lehavdil Judaism? and if Judaism which “form” Satmar’s interpretation? Avi Weiss’s? Or whatever your interpretation happens to be?
Who should decide which religion is correct and have its tennets become law, and which of those tennets?NC
“If you believe that, in an ideal world, the “Rabbinate” would decide policy, then why would you not support individual policies that are supported by the halachah?”From one of my first posts on this topic:
“In theory I would support making abortion purely in the hands of the rabbinate. In practice in the US (aside for that being impractical) would set a bad precedent and thus I support the next best thing
namely allowing the woman to choose”“As for your side argument, it seems like you had it with Avram”
Nope I had it with you, and it is my main argument. Remember you said ““The case of the halachah “allowing” abortion is something you’ve invented. This is pikuach nefesh, the proper lashon is “require.” ”
To which I responded with: “So this is where you are 100% absolutely completely no room to agree to disagree wrong. Obviously this isnt publicly discussed. Ask your local ob.” Later on I provided several mareh mekomos of allowed (not required) abortions (Tzitz Eliezer, R’ Shlomo Zalman Aurbach, Mishpetei Uziel)
(Do you really not remember our discussion?)THAT is our ONLY point of disagreement, as far as I can tell. Whether these cases exist both in halacha, and in reality.
NC
“but if that’s how you view all religion, including your own”
Lol nice try, I’m not sure why you have resorted to putting words in my mouth in your past few posts.
Early in this thread (and repeatedly therafter) I said in a perfect world the legal system would be (and will be) in the hands of the Rabbinate. Abortions will be allowed (though obviously rarely) Tzedaka would be enforced etc etc Do you really not remember my saying so early in this thread?
We don’t live in a perfect world. And the legal system will not be built around “my own” religion. I was responding to a specfici comment “then what should have a bearing on law? … it has to be some other religion or quasi-religion.” This argument falls apart after a quick perusal of world religions both past and present“Yikes, this just stopped being a political discussion in my eyes”
It stopped being a political discussion a while ago. I think our main point of disagreement at this time is simply one of metzius, namely if there are halachicly sanctioned abortions that are not strictly speaking life threatening from a strict medical perspective.
A side argument that we haven’t gotten to, though which I thought we would , and about which reasonable people can disagree (note: not the above as mentioned earlier there is no room for disagreement on our main point of contention, as you are simply unaware of the facts) Is whether those rare cases are reason enough to allow (support?) all abortions. I think so, but as I said reasonable people can disagree in this second point .
“I think adultery should be illegal: not everything is for the criminal courts.”
Agreed, I assume though you will agree with me that it is immoral. My point is just because something is immoral isn’t necessarily a reason to legislate it.“and have never heard any doctor say that it’s ok for a pregnant woman to go 26 hours without water”
Define “ok”
” I’ll just save time and anticipate your response: ”
nope, not my response at all. My response is did they say there was a medical risk? Or legal?
and if medical risk, risk of what ?“Yet you are declaring religion (not wanting to impinge on the supposed rabbi-patient relationship) as your reasoning for supporting unlimited abortion on demand? Seems like cognitive dissonance.”
Hardly
you are confusing two aspects.
to illustrate: I would oppose The government regulating wear and when eruv can be built, which shita can be followed , should we require actual mechitzos etc etc. The Government should not be legislating religion.At the same time, I would oppose an ordinance banning conectign any say PVC pipe to a phone pole for any reason . Why? It would prevent many from making an eruv.
We can come up with dozens of such examples. I would oppose the government forcing everybody to take a relgious day of rest off from work (actually on second thought…)
At the same time I would oppose the government forcing everybody to work on Shabbos
I have no idea why you think these are contradictary.
The government should not enforce religion, nor should it prevent people from practicing Ayin firts amendment (to be clear I’m not sayign abortion is practicing religion per se (though it can be at rare times))
“Ubiquitin, then what should have a bearing on law? Whatever the spirit of the time says?”
I don’t have the full answer to that one. but definitely not religion!
The Aztec religion called for human sacrifice, did that make it moral?
Now I know I know that was an exception and ancient history. Surely the larger modern Religions like Christianity and Islam would never ever kill without it being morally justifiable
“You mean you don’t think chokim (stuff like kashrus) should have any bearing on law.”
Not quite, I mean Religion should have no bearing on law. we can quibble on your definition of “chok” kashrus is not necessarily a chok. Furthermore even things that are not a chok, I’m not sure I (and you?) would support all of it being legislating. Kibud Av (and related mitzvos) isnt a chok, would you support the death penalty for hitting a father?
The bottom line is, if youre argument as to why something should be allowed/forbidden falls back onto “well that is what the Torah/ -levadil elef alfei hevdalim- /bible/Koran / gospel of the FSM says” then that is not a reason laws should be made” Obviously you don’t really think theft and murder should be legal (even though it seems like you basically said so a couple of posts later”
I’m not sure what post you are referring to I explicitly said so: “Those should be laws because as a society we are better off if we all don’t steal and kill. .that is why stealing should be illegal and punished not because Judaism or lehavdil any religion says so.”
” Almost all frum yidden do NOT consider the issur on abortion to be a chok. ”
No its certainly not. I’m not sure what youre point is . And as as an aside, I mentioned I personally am completely opposed to abortion once the fetus is viable. I am STRICTER than halacha I know of a case where I would have forbidden an abortion that a Rav allowed , but the bottom line is if halacha allows it I think she should have access.“As to why you do have that perception, I reiterate what I said earlier, you’ve been adversely influenced by socially liberal friends.”
what perception?
while you said that earlier you are wrong then and now . My friends are all socially conservative (you may even be one of them!) Regarding this issue I am influenced by frum women whose cases I know of.
You dont seem to realize that this cases really exist you have this mistaken notion that things fall neatly into required or forbidden. Life threatening and non-life threatening. Until I became familiar with actual cases, (and the medical field) I too thought the same.
your opinion on this subject is strictly driven by ignorance as to both the medical and halachic realities (To give you the benefit of the doubt)your last paragraph was very interesting. Though not related to the issue at hand
do you think adultery should be ilegal?The large kedem bottles 1.5 L are typically non-mevushal (though should be noted that they follow the Tzeilemer Rav’s pesak that mevushal is at 190 degrees, I’m not sure if these are non-mevushal according To R’ Moshe who hold wine becomes mevushal at lower temp)
some of their low alcohol wines include matuk and matuk kal
IITFT
“Who said so”
The Federal government , by which I mean the lawmakers if they didint feel we would be better off making murder illegal then it wouldn’t be illegal (though of course it would still be immoral)If you view the idea of ““as a society we are better off if we all don’t steal and kill.” as Propaganda. Then go ahead start your society, see how well it functions. Your comment doesnt really make much sense, There seems to be some confusion, I’m not saying my opinion on the government not legislating morality is universally held.
Avi
“Ubiquitin, you also have foreign ideas. “Tzedaka” is not equivalent to “charity”. ”
I’m sorry I’m not sure what you are referring to
charity is not strictly defined as giving money and even if it is I’m not sure if you are arguing with something I said OR just sharing a interesting factoid.could you please elaborate?
“I did not find who says that government should not legislate morality ”
I said it a few times, thats my view. I should clarify though, what I mean by “morality” is really religious based morality.“but in fact almost all laws involve legislating morality. Laws that punish theft, fraud, etc. all legislate morality”
Those should be laws because as a society we are better off if we all don’t steal and kill. .that is why stealing should be illegal and punished not because Judaism or lehavdil any religion says so.I believe adultery is immoral, I dont think many here (besides Joseph) believes the US government should legislate adultery (even though that certainly is one of the Sheva mitzvos, while abortion is debatable) while a terrible act and which Ibeleive they will be punished forI dont think the government should be in charge of that
NC
It is a serious thing, but more importantly it is real. It isn’t abstract. I’m familiar with several such cases and am aware of much more.
Kids are taught things simply black and white. If it is pikuach nefesh you eat on yom Kippur otherwise you fast.
The reality is much grayer. A doctor cant predict if X fasts on Yom Kippur he will die. It just doesn’t work that way.Rabbonim’s job (with medical guidance if needed) is to figure out where people fall can they fast? must they fast ? if they should break their fast is it with shiurim or just eat ? If they can eat should they at leat attempt to fast and see how it goes? a few hours or attempt the whole day ?
not everybody falls into a must fast vs must eat categoryfurthermore, at times Rabbonim are more “lenient ” Particularly when it comes to pregnant woman as I explained above.
As for the topic at hand. Take Anencephaly there, is generally no MEDICAL (as opposed to psychological) reason to abort. while of course tragic and the fetus won’t survive there is no medical reason to terminate. Of course psychological stressors is obviously much greyer. If she were to develop a nervous breakdown and be at risk for suicide, r”l again that is a reltivly easy psak. but as you may realize that is not really how psychiatry generally works. what if her mental/emotional/physical health is at risk but not quite her life?
R’ Moshe did not allow abortions in such cases. the Tzitz Eliezer was very meikel. R”shlomo Zalman allowed it as well (though stricter than Tzitz Eleizer) Modern Poskim (especially chasidish ones) tend to allow it though not late into pregnancy .
This is but one specific example
R’ Ben Zion Uziel allowed abortion even late into pregnancy to prevent deafness (not death ) of a mother.
In all these cases it obviously wasn’t REQUIRED.Nc
We aren’t debating.
You are clearly not aware of the metzius.Though I’m not sure why my comment made you “so happy” I am talking about frum women who are struggling with such a difficult situation /decision. How on earth can that make you happy, let alone “so happy”?
Nc
“It still doesn’t seem like you understand Avram’s “rare case.” He was talking about ”I do. I already said those are rare.
“The case of the halachah “allowing” abortion is something you’ve invented. This is pikuach nefesh, the proper lashon is “require.” ”
So this is where you are 100% absolutly completly no room to agree to disagree wrong. Obviously t6his isnt publicly duscussed. Ask your local ob.
“Torah’s view and have likely been adversely influenced by secular, socially liberal colleagues.”
Nope, i shared with one the halacha that a condemned woman is put to death even if pregnant, even in the 9th month.
They we’re horrified, but i havent changed my view (not that i understand it). I dont have to understand it thats what halacha says then so be it.
I would never allow abortion onve the fetus is viable, but if a rav allows it so be itJoseph
“I’m sure you’re not a hypocrite and you similarly believe ”You misunderstood.
There are 2 conversarions going on.
The government should not legislate “morality”
If According to the flying spaghetti monster having citizens without health insurance is immoral, thst isn’t an arguement for the governmemt to force health insurance. (In my view)
At no point did i argue the us govt should be in charge of tzedaka because in a torah state they would be.DY
I’m not completely sure what tzedaka you are reffering to, i’ll assume you mean things like govt subsidized healthcare or welfare. Different measures are judged by different benchmarksOtherwise I could say I don’t get it you claim you want limited government people should be free to own guns, but all of a sudden you wont the government to control what goes on in people’s bodies, and then you have the nerve to call yourself “pro-life” ?!. (This is directed to strawman conservative not you per se, and i’m not actually asking that question I can come up with differences)
I’ll explain my approach I believe in the government intervening to make all our lives better. This means individuals have to give up certain rights at times for the benefit of society* Otherwise If there is no impediment placed on others, people should be free to do as they please**
as a caveat to the above, my main concern is my community
Thus tzedaka, (ie healthcare welfare etc ) I believe society as a whole is better off if we provide a safety net to those in need. I believe we will all be better off if we spend less and get better healthcare than we currently do (whether single payer healthcare would actually provide that isnt really my point right now). This is especially true in my community where many rely on this tzedaka
As for abortion, goyim are my secondary concern, they may be doing something immoral that is for the Ribono she olam to figure out. see ** below
that said if there was a legal way to have Rabbonim evaluate each case that would be my ideal. however, this isnt doable. and a “medical exemption” wouldnt cut it. Thus keep government out of it let woman decide, on their own (ie with their rav) are some going to make the wrong decision ? without doubt but the benefits of letting thr individual decide outweigh those wrong choices*(this isnt as controversial as it sounds, I assume most of us agree that we should all stop at a red light even if you pinky swear that you are an excellent driver and can time your way through an intersection safely
** This doesn’t necessarily make the person’s action correct. there are acts that I think are immoral but if all parties involved agree, the government has no business intervening
ujm
“If halacha allows but doesn’t require abortion (which I agree with Avram is a very rare case), ”SO that isnt what Avram said was a very rare case . (though he may agree, he said ” extremely unlikely scenario where expert medical opinion would hold that an abortion is unnecessary whereas halacha holds that it is necessary”)
He is right about that, as I acknowledged, but sadly you are wrong.
Unless you define “very rare” differently
how often would you say is “very rare”Avram
“If the law had a medical exemption, then it would still be the rabbi (for frum Jews) and doctor involved in the decision, no?”so it depends on how that exemtion was written. If it was black and white ie Mothers life is at risk then halacha is Faaaaaar more “lenient” than halacha. I face this often when patients ask if they should fast yom kippur, I tell them if you want a heter you are better off talking to a Rav. Especially pregnant patients (though I’m not an OB ) for a healthy woman with a normal pregnancy there is (generally) no medical reason not to fast , worst case she goes into pre-term labor. no big deal. Yet halacha views that differently. It would be bad if there was a law passed all pregnant woman have to fast unless her life is at risk. Although h technically that is the halachic stance. , halacha and medicine define that differently. And since constitutionally the law cant reflect the Rabbi’s interpretation it would be a big probelm if it was striclty defined based on “medical risk”
This is even more true for abortion, where halacha considers psychological factors that arguably aren’t medicalJersey
“Giving tzedoka is a PRIVATE thing and NOT a govt thing.”I’m not sure if you are new to Judaism, or if our galus has been so long that you have adopted foreing ideas.
In Judiam there is no such distiction. When moshiach comes and Jeish leadership iis reestablished the government will force you to pay maaser, with force if neccesary (kofin al mitzvas asei) they will force you to leave your field fallow every 7th year .See if you learn Navi you would know this, (for example Yosheyahu sent soldiers to ensure that avoda Zara was eradicated)
NC
” I don’t think any significant portion of the goyish world views that issue the same way we do.”
100% correct and this gets lost on many in our circles making these conversations strange.
for example IITFT’s response.We and secular culture are coming from two opposite starting positions.
One the hallmarks of modern society, and medical ethics in particular is autonomy, specifically to allow patients to make decisions about themselves, or people to make decisions about themselves.“Pulling the plug” isn’t controversial in secular society, as long as that is what the patient (or their family if the patient’s wishes aren’t known) wants. The only time those situations get controversial is if their are conflicting opinions as what patients would want, as in Terri Sciavo’s case.
Abortion is a bit dicier because there the Patient (ie the woman’s) decision affects another (ie the fetus). So in that case it depends on when life begins if it begins at birth, the mother is free to due with her limb (in Talmudic parlance “yerech imo” ) as she pleases . If life begins at conception then her autonomy is challenged by the fetus’s and abortion would not be ok ( proponets of this position are often “stuck” with what to do in extraordinary cases where most of society would support abortion, why in those cases taking a life is ok, very few are consistent and say ALL abortions are forbidden )
Halacha lehavdil takes a very different starting point.
People are NOT autonomous. We do not have baylus over our bodies. A person cannot just “pull the plug” because he has had enough. A person can’t tatoo their body, A person can’t wound themselves, they cant cut of their limb nor abort their fetus. This is why our exceptions are broader than societies . cutting yourself (ie surgery) is allowed in certain cases, is Plastic surgery allowed, thats between you an your Rav. abortion too is allowed in certain (obviously fewer) cases, what are those cases? that is between a woman and her Rav.
Relying on Secular ethists or medical practitioners wont work, becasue the whole starting point is different and incompatible.(note: for bnei noach the last paragraph isn’t completly right, (ie for them a fetus might be a life ) but our number one concern should be klal yisorel)
Avram
“which is a tangent that is probably not a good idea for us to get into,”I’m sorry but you lost me a little bit. what tangent? thats what I am (and I thought we are) discussing. Who should decide if a Frum woman wants (or needs) an abortion: The government or her/her Rabbi and her Dr.
.
If halacha would allow (but not require) an abortion, do you support the government stopping them ?“What would these colleagues of yours say about the number of times halacha would require an abortion, but the medical establishment deems it unnecessary?”
Probably zero, though I didint ask because I’m not sure why we are differentiating “require” vs “allow”As you may know halacha isnt always black and white. Even in more straight forward relatively less consequential decisions like kashrus questions there are many factors that come in shaas hadchak hefsed meruba etc there are times where eating food (or discarding it) is allowed but not required.
With these abortion issues it is far more complex. for example carrying an anencephalic child to term . there is a lot of haalchic literature on this. the Tziiz Eleiver allowed abortion (not in 3rd trimester IIRC) R’ Moshe argued.
nobody “REQUIRES” it.
how hard is it for a woman to go through with such a pregnancy. I dont know, and luckily I dont have to decide whether they should be forced to even if it will be difficult .
But if halacha allows it , let them decide with their RavLet the Rav decide what effect it will have on her mental health
Avram
( I posted a more detailed reply that might not make it through the mods)
“I’m not referring to pregnancy complications where the medical establishment would advise abortion, R”L.”Me neither, those are straight forward and not even really controversial, sure the talking heads stir the pot once in a while, even catholic hospitals perform those under a pseudonym (not an “abortion” but an “extraction” or something or encourage the patient to go somewhere that will, it is hard to imagine that changing
” I’m referring to an intersectional case where Torah authorities would require abortion,… ”
So I’m not talking about where they would “require” per se, but rather where they would ALLOW
” That specific scenario, which is the linchpin of your pro-choice is consistent with Torah argument, seems incredibly unlikely to me.”
It might seem that way but I know of several, and colleagues who deal with this say it is “routine” (of course routine is relative a colleague estimates 1 in 2-3 weeks (that he encounters) .
The bottom line is who should decide in those cases? the Government or the individual (with consultation w/ her Dr(s) and Rabbi)
Avi
great news!
Ifound itAnother glorious nonsensical back and forth between Health and Ubiquitin
the lis t we came up with includes:
hasagas gvul
ribbis
Onaas maamon
undoing land sales at yovelWe can add Shemtia
Avi
“2. Shmittah is not anti-capitalist. It is simply taking a year off to recharge one’s spiritual batteries”Love it! A law reqiring taking a year off of work isnt anticapitalist
” As for the gifts to the poor (I assume those are the rest of your long list),”
nope those were some I can’t find the thread that we came up with but off the top of my head :
ribbis is assur
Hassagas gvul (unfettered competition) is assur
Land can’t be sold permanently
Loans are cancelled at maximum seven years.
(there were more I’ll look for the thread)sure there are some “workarounds” for some of these, but that doesnt change the fact that the Torah abhors pure market capitalism
CA
“He asked me “do we know for sure that there is an afterlife?”
I answered “if there wasn’t what is the point of life“”So what is the point of the Afterlife ?
bk613
“Why is the next best thing allowing a woman to snuff out a life?, What about carrying to term and giving the baby up for adoption?”1. Nobody will adopt an anecephalic baby
2. If thats what her Rav tells her to do, thats wha tshe should doAvram
“because we are concerned about an extremely unlikely scenario where expert medical opinion would hold that an abortion is unnecessary whereas halacha holds that it is necessary seems like a cop-out. ”Extremely unlikely???? It isn’t my field but I know of several such cases. I have spoken to those who are directly in the field and they say “extremely likely” is an understatement. “routine” is a better descriptor
(though granted if you meant late in pregnancy then I do not know of such a case and it is in fact very unlikely, I personally oppose abortions once a fetus is viable outside the womb, but again although I do not understand it if a competent Rav where to allow it I am mevatel my daas. )
“I am much more concerned about the opposite: families being strongly pressured to abort their babies due to expert medical opinion that is contrary to halachic guidelines.”
That is concerning. Though I have to tell you ,not only , havent I heard of that before, I never even heard of that argument before, thus I am skeptical that it is ” already commonplace”
” the greater concern is the prospect for laws that require abortion in these cases R”L”
That would be very concerning, which yet another reason to support the mother’s right to choose. Keep the government out of it they shouldn’t force people to carry nor to abort .Keep it between a woman and her doctor (and ideally her Rabbi)
joseph
“On that token you should be advocating for the legalization of homicide since, to borrow your argument, Halacha and lehavdil secular law have very different approaches to determine what is self-defense”
you made that foolish argument before.
Is this a problem in frum communities, do you know of anyone who was prevented from protecting himself in self defense due to this “very different approach” ?
“Do you support making illegal abortion for purely economic, non-medically necessary, reasons?”
no. In theory I would support making abortion purely in the hands of the rabbinate. In practice in the US (aside for that being impractical) would set a bad precedent and thus I support the next best thing
namely allowing the woman to choose
alos note, I dont support abortion that late in a pregnancy. However I am mevatel my daas to the Torah and if halacha allows it then although I dont understand it, who am I to argue.TLIK
“Maaser Oni was only the third and sixth year of the Shmittah cycle”
Lol! of the what cycle?
can you elaborate what this Shmittah is ? I bet it was every conservative’s dream come trueAvi, we can add shemita to the long list we came up with of Torah economic policies that are clearly anti-capitalist
Bk613
Very well put.
The problem is the only way to achieve “In the frum world a Rav should be involved as well.” Is to allow the woman to choose.
Halacha and lehavdil secular law have very different approaches to determine “when the mothers life is in danger”bk613
“I agree that when the mothers life is in danger you must perform an abortion, the baby is considered a rodef.”who do you want to make that determination?
ACS
I love this game!conservative: כאן סר טיב, here good is removed
(though I’m a bit surprised that you referred to Ilan Omar as the tree of knowledge, I’m not so sure ou thought that one through)
why is a a middle school math problem a riddle?
At least Meno’s is a riddle
the “best way” is probably to hire someone (depending how you define “best”)
A great starting point is Jewishgen .com
I was able to put together a family tree going back 8 generations. However, Ihave an unusual last name which made it easier since it limited the number of hits to sift through. If you have a name like Stern you will need more starting information, as obviously the number of Sterns you will uncover will be overwhelming
Just the opposite
Our Neviim tell us explicity to vote for the liberal eg:
פְּתַח־פִּ֥יךָ לְאִלֵּ֑ם אֶל־דִּ֝֗ין כָּל־בְּנֵ֥י חֲלֽוֹף׃
פְּתַח־פִּ֥יךָ שְׁפָט־צֶ֑דֶק וְ֝דִ֗ין עָנִ֥י וְאֶבְיֽוֹן׃
Mishlei 31:8-9Compare the number of timses caring for the poor , the downtroden the yosam and almanah is mentioned in Tanach vs how many time abortion is mentioned and you will have your answer
See this is what happens when you don’t learn Tanach
TC
I’m glad !Lernt
“Again, please quote a source for that…”Found one!
I saw this online “Even the Stmar Rebbe only said Yiddish is holy because…”
granted its online so we need to take it with a grain of salt, but hopefully you’ll find the source trustworthyJoseph
yep, thats what I saidtalmidchochom
“Sounds like a no-brainer to me that yiddish is no different than French.”Ah, but if you did have a brain,…
kidding I already explained why they are differentCaptain
they are wrong.tiawd
“Do you all realize that no one here has defined the meaning of “holy”,”
I defined it .
Though I agree completely with you point , and in fact said the same (though much wordier)ZD
true
I saw a youtube interview with some yiddishist who notes how she tried her yiddish in williamsuburg, and was told her Yiddish sounded funny.
She asked for an example of her “funny” yiddish and was told she said “Farmach di fenster” nobody says that we say “farmach di vindeh (window)”(Although I’m not sure I agree with that example, the overall point holds )
Avi
“said that a language is a dialect with an army and navy.”sooooooo… theyre not the same.
and again are you trying to convey some sort of point?” In Europe it was called Jargon.”
what was?
and again are you trying to convey some sort of point?“Rabbanim wrote to each other in Hebrew interspersed with Aramaic”
Are you starting a new thread?“It was a sign of a ben Torah that he also wrote his business correspondence in Hebrew.”
Interesting, not sure he relevence.
and also source please?You’ve really lost me I have no idea what you are trying to convey.
Learnin,
did you read Joseph”s comment? OR just copied it and repeated yourself?“that is not merely alien to our traditions, but contrary to halacha.”
YESSS!
I love it
Lol good one
Freilichen Adar“Yiddish is one of them. It is no more a separate language than Yeshivish.”
1) I am familiar with all four, and let me assure you that English is closer to yeshivish than Yiddish is to German. (are you really arguing this point?)
2) yiddish is recognized as a language by many bodies, it has a regulating agency It is a bit absurd to try to argue it isnt a language
3) Even if it isnt an “official” language (whatever that means) I still don’t understand your point .Joseph
Very well put.
I don’t understand how this is a argument .
As I explained in this post :https://www.theyeshivaworld.com/coffeeroom/topic/is-yiddish-holy-2/page/4/#post-1562938
Though Joseph’s post is shorter and sweeter.
Can someone explain this to me
“To me, it looks like a sign of immaturity; perhaps trying to live a life through their kids that they weren’t allowed to.”
I dont understand that thought process, is there one there?
So dont pay, whats the problem?
” Who says going in a limo is a Jewish thing?”
simchos chasan vekallah is a Jewish thingthough you probably should stop giving to cursed funds
Avi
“the Germans say the same things about Swiss German”
Of course they would. I’m not sure what you are trying to say.Avi
why is “mutually intelligible” a contradiction to “separation “?
And as you may know, some geographers are saying that Europe is bigger than Switzerland, so even if Yiddish is “mutually intelligible” in Switzerland. It obviously isnt (and wasn’t) in the rest of Europe including Czechoslovakia and Poland.
I dont want to argue with the authority of your esteemed friend’s wife., and I havent spoke to many Swiss,, so it is possible that in some areas of Switzerland they do speek a more “yidishized” German, but I have spoken to several Germans and while they marveled and the similarity of some words they did not understand yiddish, and the too are not “mutually intelligible”talmud
“I feel sorry for you. Honestly.”
don’t. I’m not the one who can’t remember having commented on a thread a few months ago.
I’m also not the one who thinks it takes all afternoon to count to 4.(BTW the thread “not worthy of comment by a Talmidchochom” now has 7 )
“Over how long a period of time?”
the first 3 where over a day and a half or so 7/23-24
The 4th (and 5th) were today
“I cannot imagine a productive person doing nothing this afternoon ”
That was my morning activity, I spent this afternoon counting your 5th one, and trying to figure out the time span