Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
HAHAHA
thanks for sharing!Is the the same fellow who critizices “Open Orthodox” right and left?
Pot, meet kettle
“Very Modern Orthodox of you”
I’m also surprised, youre arguing on “Daas Torah” Since they have support from Rav Chaim Kanievsky, Rav Shteinman among others
2scents
the question is do they have a right to a personal preference
“everyone has their own personal preference. Some people prefer not to go to the hospital at all, or to call a cab. ”I agree completely! that is precisely my point. and those who want a women only group should have that option too.
Granted this group should know their limitations, and perhaps may need to revamped. But in theroy at least, if soem women want a women only group for soem situations they shoudl have that.
Now some may say that even those who want a woman only group shouldnt have one. The reason for why they shoudlnt have one is a side issue tznius, women shouldnt be visible, women shouldnt be accomodated, women arent as good, we already have hatzola, it would be confusing and lead to mistakes, some of these may be valid concerns . but the bottom line is a simple question :
“should Women have the option of calling a women only group in some situations?
Period. yes or no?”My question is not what YOU would prefer if you were a woman in such a situation. It is do you feel SOME WOMEN (not all) should have the opportunity (NOT BE FORCED) to call a woman only group
2scents
“Your asking a question that has an opinionized response to it, It’s to each and their own to answer this.”Yes obviously. That’s why I asked it.
“We as a community need to stop being so gullible and stop believing random stories posted on the internet swiped from chat groups.”
+1!
thank you achdus for opening an account especially to share your fascinating, definitely true since it is online story“Besides, an argument can easily be made that the patient would be uncomfortable with the same gender provider who is their acquaintance, not their husbands shull buddy, being involved in ANY of their emergencies.”
Ok, so those people can cal hatzalah. Nobody is arguing that hatzalah should be disbanded.
It boils down to the following simple question:
should Women have the option of calling a women only group in some situations?
Period. yes or no?Most other points are distracting from the above simple question
Are there cases that most (all?) women woudlnt care? sure
If there are no woman available would most (all?) women settle for a male even one who eats cholent with their husbands? sure
Should we keep the much more advanced and established well networked hatzalah for most (all?) life threatening emergencies? Again, of coursebut none of these facts change the simple fact that their are some situations that some women feel more comfortable having a female attend to them.
“Studies here in NYC have repeatedly shown that Hatzaloh responds faster than NYC EMS.”
Can you cite any such study?
(im not disputing your conclusion it is probably true, I just wasnt aware of any such study done, let alone “repeatedly” done)
What I do wonder is if patients brought in by hatzalah have a higher survival rate than those brought in by say FDNY. Again I doubt any such study was done. Though this time, I doubt there is a difference.
Ive spoken to several Hatzalah bigwigs, most said the primary benefit from hatzalah is one of comfort, ie many in our community feel more comfortable having unzereh take care of them.(Of course htis is the exact same argument made by Ezras Nashim)
Joseph
I’m not sure what you are getting at. Are you really saying that There arent a significant numebr of frum women that prefer female OB/gyn’s ?
(Let’s leave aside poskim who say it is required for a woman ot see a female OB/Gyn is she is as competent as her colleagues)“Btw, I’m willing to take on running them.”
Great! theyve been scanning the CR eagerly awaiting someone to finally step up (accordign to my sources, if everyone else has sources, I figured I should too)
Ashrecha!“Do women only go to women doctors?”
a. Many do
b. Even those who dont, often do for “sensitive” areas
c. Even if not insistent many prefer women doctors especially for “sensitive areas”“It isn’t tznius for a woman to be doing male activities”
nu nu so women should act as primarty breadwinners , that is a separate discussion though I am surprised you take that view. This discussion is about providing women more comfort or preserving tznius when they are most vulnerable/exposed.
Not a heart attack per se.
But related to “Women’s issues” some are.
Though admittedly there are not many examples that fall into that category.I would ask though even if she is not “less likely” to call a male. if she feels more comfortable with a female, why shouldnt she have that option? Especially in a community that prides itself on tznius separate seating at weddings, buses., waiting rooms, all of a sudden when a women is at her most exposed we say no to sending a woman? (OF course if their is no woman available thats another story)
“Can anyone offer any insight?”
Yes I can! I found it hilarious. Im sure some might find this made up story in poor taste but I found it hilarious. Please keep it up
“So every covfefe typo must be archived?”
Ah but it wasnt a typo as dearest Sean Spicer said “The president and a small group of people know exactly what he meant”
Luckily I am one of that small group of people.“He said he’ll still move it but is only delaying the timing of the move”
ah, but he also said hed move it “on day one”
“Hair clippers are specialized implements used to cut human head hair. They work on the same principle as scissors (wikipedia)”
Im not sure if that was a response to me.
I do not know how they work and did not comment way way or the other regarding what they are considered ie scissors vs razor. I have no idea. I assume wikipedia is probabaly correct.
I was just commenting that “since EVERYONE uses it for hair-cutting. I figure its got to be kosher to cut your beard with it” Isnt accurate. although your conclusion may be correct
“Even a ben sorer umoreh?”
Never happened and never will happen (Lo hayah velo asid liyos)
Though let me guess you daven that you should be zoche to have the first to be mekayem this mitzva r”l?“since EVERYONE uses it for hair-cutting.
I figure its got to be kosher to cut your beard with it.”I believe that assumption is mistaken. There is no issur to shave your head other than the peios.
In other words you can use a razor blade “for hair-cutting” but not for beard/peios. Just because it is used for hair-cutting doesnt mean you can cut a beard with it“Obviously, no one should posken based on this. Especially since it may be a minority opinion or it may not be a valid opinion at all.”
Lol, and not because it is an article that you: think you read around 30 years ago that you vaguely remember, in which you think there were opinions that allow
That isnt the preffered way to posken?
Seriously though R’ Moshe allows yichud with children adopted at young age http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=14678&st=&pgnum=122
As DoesThe Tzitz Eliezer, And I believe R’ Ovadia as well” personally believe that it is a strange practice to mix languages in one sentence, as one would not speak that way to a king.”
I’m not sure why you feel that way .We pepper our languages with foreign words all the time. Some have been accepted as standard english I can give several bona fide examples, ad nauseum but I think this may be a fait accompli. And even words that are not commonly used in English if the King understands it I wouldnt hesitate to use a foreign word.
DY
Ive read it in context, in the original Hebrew more than once.DaMoshe
Yes. This isnt the first time Gedolim viewed other Gedolim as heretics.As My Rebbeim say, a theology that views The Holocaust as the work of the Ribono Shel Olam but the six day war as the work of the Satan makes me very uncomfortable.
what I find most perplexing is this view: “It was simply a natural occurrence” A group that usually believes strongly in hashgacha pratis regarding every blade of grass, to suddenly view the salvation of millions of yidden as “It was simply a natural occurrence” is quite telling.
Agreed my point regarding Obama was silly.
The Clinton one stands thoughDearest Health
“His actions prior to becoming president is a reason not to vote for him. Now that he is president, he has done nothing so far that can be considered impeachable offenses!”
So why is Obama being born in Kenya relevant, it was before he became President ?
DY
“when there’s a very real issue here, that some of today’s technology posts a real threat to people’s ruchniyus”that isnt what the OP is discussing. See here:
“Again, I am not worried about content- that is B”H not my taayva. It would not be for the kids to use, and anyway, a filter is easy enough to install. I am fine with using technoogy in a kosher manner, but I am worried about technology taking over. I will use it for work. And then take it with me when I travel so I can have waze, and then use it to take and send pictures, etc etc.”
S/he seems not to like technology becaue it is new. Perhaps this is has spread from the real concern you raise to being opposed to Waze and taking pictures, but this leads to rightfully pointing out that it is hard to understand why Waze should be avoided but not say the coffee room.
Again you raise real concerns, and I get the slippery slope argument. But this is not the argument the OP is making. S/he seems confident that taayva isnt a struggle, will have a filter, etc and while these may not be foolproof and some kids can get around filters etc etc this is not the concern being raised.
The concern seems to be technology in of itself.“My Rabbanim have taught me not to go to one Rav for everything. There is almost no one today who is an expert in every area.”
As the mishna says “Aseh lecha Rebeim”?
Not every question needs “an expert” If your Rav doesnt know which questions are above his pay grade, then you need a new Rav
“I think that when he wrote that it’s a “silly sheilah”, he meant it in a self- deprecating way, ”
Um, yes obviously.
” and I get the impression from things posters have written at times that there are too many people going to LOR’s when they should be going to Gedolim”
disagree completely, In fact I think we have the opposite problem. There is a whole genre of books now of silly questions people ask Gedolim such as R’ Chamim Kanievsky. Every time anybody asks a question here the repsonse is ask your LOR. You dont need your LOR to tell you what beracha to make on an apple and you dont need a gadol hador to answer a simple yoreh deah sheila (OF course we can both be right)
Sorry no advice.
But out of curiosity why do you need so many different opinions?
“with my silly shaila…”
Obviously Idont know the shailah. but if it is “silly” (or yo ususpect that there is a chance it is) why does it need a gadol hadar? Ask your Rav and if he doesnt know he should direct you in the direction of someone who can helpFirst I thought You were talking baout Trump “3 year Olds either win their games legally or they just mess up the gaim and claim the other side cheated. Waaa I’m not playing anymore.”
Weve all heard of “sore losers” they are babies but sadly somewhat expected. Trump is the very first sore winner I have ever encountered. He won, and still claims th other side cheated and cant get over the fact that he lsot the (legally insignificant) popular vote.
Anyway
“emoluments specifically exempts the president. ”
Is simply incorrect. IT doesnt “specificly” exempt anybody
here it is verbatim:
“No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State” (in article 1)now some may say it doesnt apply to the PResident. (I guess he isnt a “person holding any office”?) or that he doing business isnt a “gift” but to say he is “specifically exempted” is simply an alternative fact
“Is it just me or does this somehow compromise the security.”
It is just you.
Let me get this straight. You are concerned that there are people planning an attack that can hack Israeli helicopters from their computers , the only problem is thwey dont know wha tkind of helicopters they should be hacking so they are just waiting around for YWN to post pics of the helicopters being used so they know which ones to hack?* “or Bush for whitewater or Paula Jones ” Should read “or Clinton…”
Also I should note. the MLK bust removal wasnt reported by Time. IT was tweeted by a Time reporter and retracted. Of course that didnt stop Sean Spicer from using it as an example of Trump being “attacked” by “The media” Sadly people believed him as it was early in the presidency before the days that this administration’s love of “Alternative Facts” was obvious to (virtually) all
Health
I dont think you know what a hypocrite is. Nothing you mention in your post is hypocritical. On th eother hand if you criticise Obama for being “born in Kenya” or Bush for whitewater or Paula Jones you ARE being a hypocrite, since here you take the strange view that Once elected things done prior to being President arent relevant
Chochom
Im not sure what you mean by “The Democrats” One outlet (Time) reported that a bust of MLK was removed, a few hours later he apologized.
Regarding the suprem court, yes the Democrats acted like Babies, but can you blame them the seat was stolen. (I dont think anybody disptues this) You can argue that it is better for the country that it was stolen, if reveresed the Democrats wouldve stolen it to. But none of this changes the fact that the seat was Obama’s to fill. OF course the Democrats would act out “BEFORE THEY EVEN KNEW WHO THE PICK WAS” The rpublicans did the same with Gerland.“This just proves that the democrats don’t care about the country’s success. They just care that trump fails”
As Ct lawyer aptly pointed out. Trump was a failure at day one. His success is his brand/image nothing more. and his brand/image is not something most peope (even many of his supporters) want in the whitehouse let alone as the face of the countryyes
ive heard from other its still silly.
a chochom like yourself shouldnt repeat silly things‘”once you get a president you work with him”
Disgaree complely . Here the pilot comparison is apt. IF the pilot is drunk, doesnt know what hes doing
certainly if he announces “flying this plane is much more complicated than i realized”
you should never say well he is here already lets let him fly and see how he does. Have the copilot/vice principal/substitute teacher take over.chochom
“although you cant really compare the pilot of a plane to the president of the country,”
Agreed. Though you made the comparison. And it is a silly comparison. Hitler or not Hitler IF the President/pilot is ruining the country (intentionally or not) then you hope he fails.
Of course you might argue he isnt ruining the country, and that may be fair. but the pilot analogy is nonsense.
chochom
If your pilot was flying your plane (deliberately or due to sheer incompetence) into an abyss wouldn’t you hope he failed.
All the more so if he had a (more) qualified co-pilot ready to take over.
Saying, well he is the pilot I hope he is successful regardless of what he tries to do is not a logical position to take
LU as has been explained to you you have absolutely no way of knowing whether Joseph is a man or a lady.
My dearest Helath How I have missed you! How have you been?
“I love the conspiracy theories!”
I know you do, people who cite cases from SSCOTUS ( secret Supreme court of the United states, not to be confused with the very real SCOTUS) cases are usually big fans of conspiracy theories,
Luckily for you, your boy Trump too is a fan of conspiracy theories (did he ever share what his investigators turned up in Hawaii? and did he ever “Really” solve what happened to Scalia) Anyway as he told LEster Holt regarding why he fired Comey: “You know, this Russia thing with Trump and Russia is a made-up story”“If you think Comey was on to something with regards to Russia, why would firing him solve anything?!?”
He will appoint his own crony who wont look into it.“How come they aren’t investigating Clinton & company ”
who are “They” The FBI did investigate remember?“because the DemonCrats didn’t win the Executive branch of government?!?”
Im sorry, what?anyway question for you, if the reason for the firing was as Trump’s spokespeople and not he himself said (namely over hillary hahaha give me a second it is hard to even type that without cracking up) Why did he ait until now? and why did he repeatedly prise Comey initally
lesscumros
I havent seen the clip, but it sounds silly (if it was put together by Trumps’ staff wouldnt expect much more.).Yes months ago he should have been fired. However what changed now? Why was he fired ? > 3 months into presidency? what could he have been investigating that made Trump nervous when a short while ago he “Had full confidence in him”
Ill give you a hint it rhymes with prussia
Its unclear whether the few snags they have now are more or less than with their old system.
Maybe they are being more inclusive and including a few snags in their new system that they had shunned previouslyShould Director Comey have been fired?
Yes – but at the time that he did something wrong. Leaving him in place As recently as April he said “I have confidence in him.” So what changed?
What do you think Trump’s real motivations were in firing him?
Comey was investigating the the Russian connection, and not letting up
Will all of this help or hurt Trump?
His supporters dont care. As Trump said “I could shoot someone and not lose votes” (Im fairly certain he meant it as a compliment)
Oh no! I forgot to place the link the new way.
Maybe like this it will only block my post.
Im sorry all“And I have read through a lot of old threads. I see no reason to believe that he doesn’t mean it.”
Read through more
Make sure you find all his old (blocked) screennamesBeing dan lekaf zechs is only when there is a kaf zechus. And this isnt not being dan lekaf zechus. There is nothing in my view bad about sparking a lively discussion by posting something exciting that you dont actually believe.
Write this done on your computer, because you have a lot of trouble with it. dont believe everything you read on the internet.Its only bad when people take it seriously most people know not to
LU
“Ubiquitin, first of all, shkoyach on being able to admit you may be wrong. ”Not my first time.
“That is the fact that you misjudged Joseph and assumed that he didn’t really mean what he said.”
Lol. no of course Joeph doesn’t mean it. cmon I get that you are naive, but you think Joseph is on the level of Rabbi Akiva? you cant possibly be THAT naive.
and please please please spare me that hair splitting that is sure to come that he believes it bit doesnt really believe it. yes yes I know.
Stick around longer keep an open mind you will get more of a feel for how people work.
Also if you are bored read through old “Joseph” threads he has appeared under many names with his shtick (when I first met him he was Lior i think there are several threads of lists of his aliases) Admittedly he may raise good points like this interesting discussion. That doesn’t mean he believes them.and is that really the more important point?
youre late to the party that has been said already
and responded tooI dont have that source available
If in fact it says whay is claimed. then Joseph you are vindicated
(though I still disagree, Ill grant That youd take R’ Shlomo Wolbe’s opinion over mine. And certainly R’ Yonasson Eibeshitz Though again I havent seen it inside)Joseph
+1Im ok with meeting to work on things that are of mutual interest. Or that he can benefit.
WE appreciate that they no longer burn us , but we arent friends.DY
“Where did Joseph say that we daven dmfor it?”
Here: “If you want to die al Kiddush Hashem you should daven that when your time comes that that should happen.”
He did equate the two. My argument is against what he said.
Joseph
“ubiq, You need a Rashi on every Joseph. (Most other folks understand Joseph k’peshuto.)
DaasYochid is my Rashi.
Then I have kasha on Rashi since he says “Where did Joseph say that we daven dmfor it?
Can Rashi not be aware of a befeirsh Joseph
Yet Joseph says http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/coffeeroom/topic/how-did-rabbi-akiva-die#post-1270562LU
“You can be accepting and happy about a situation at the same time that you are davening to get out of it.”
Pshetlech aside, real people dont work that way. Wanting something and trying to avoid is a contradiction.
Perhaps that is where we disagree.What a terrible choice of song.
IF they had to sing (and I dont understnad why they would) they could’ve chosen a more appropriate song like vehi shemada, Zeidim halitzinu, Gam ki elech, OR Habeit
“But if we had a choice we would avoid being killed al Kiddush Hashem..
Right. Not a stirah, as I said.”
This IS a direct stirah to what Joseph said.
This is my point of Contention. He said “We all should hope that we, like Rabi Akiva wished for himself, when our time to leave this world arrives we should be killed al kiddush Hashem.”to which I say NO! if we had a choice we would avoid it we hope we are not killed al Kiddush Hashem.
I grant if given no choice we should accept it (that wasn ever the argument). But We hope NOT to be killed al kiddush Hashem.
In fact even when the killer is killing us. We STILL hope to get out of it afilu cherev munach al tzavarecha….
Again if no choice we accept it , Veahavta es Hashem ….bachol nafshecha afilu hu notel es nafshecha. (note: Not hallevai shehu notel es nafshecha r”l). But until faced with that position R”l we hope (and arguably daven) that it never comes.
Joseph said the exact opposite of the aboveDY
“He said he waited his entire life for the ability to demonstrate “b’chol nafsh’cho””Yes but he didint mean he wanted to be killed al kiddush Hashem, since he tried to avoid it. He meant if he couldnt avoid it he accepted it “Bchol nafsho”
Trying to avoid something is the textbook stirah to wanting something.“because that is why he gave us our lives, and at the same time, to yearn to to demonstrate that fact by giving up our lives should that be what He asks of us.”
Not a stirah, as I said. (in fact I said that almost verbatim)
The sole question is should we hope He asks it of us. (This is the discussion. Not what would our reaction be IF R’l it were asked.)
I see no source that says WE should hope he asks it, I see several sources that say we dont. And I dont find the source that says R’ Akiva did convincing .
There is a difference (As you know) between:
“yearn to to demonstrate that fact by giving up our lives should that be what He asks of us.” which I agree with and
“We all should hope that we, … should be killed al kiddush Hashem” which I don’t