Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
“Please explain why Obamacare is bad for the Jewish learning/working person”
Its not but its from Democrats so it has to be bad.
“the costs per individual are set to double and many companies are dropping out of the program”
Briefly:
Most Americans purchase insurance through their employers that hasnt changed. Among those (Relatively few) who purchase their own insurance many policies have gone up. This is primarily becasue insurance companies can no longer refuse to cover preexisting conditions. This means if say a person with malignancy wants insurance and coverage for chemo that would cost hundreds of thousands annualy, the insurance company cant say no, which is what they had done in the past. This obviosuly creates a problem for insurance companies since someone can wait until they are sick and show up paying one year premium and asking for coverage in the hundreds of thousands or even millions a year and they cant say no. To make up for that Obamacare mandated everybody have insurance this way if 1000 healthy young people all pay 1000 dollars and one person gets sick costing 500,000 the insuracne company covers it and still profits. The problem is that the fines are too small to force young health peope to buy in,many are opting to pay the fine, knowing if R”l they do get sick insurance company cant say no then to make up for that premiums go up
There are other problems too, but this is the biggest.
That being said. Obamacare is unlikely to go anywhere. IT will be hard to take away insurance from those previously deemed “uninsurable” and most dont think insurance companies should eb allowed to turn away those people.
But the only way for that to work is if young healthy people are forced to buy insurance.
They had already “mattir’d” swordfish,
http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=12060&st=&pgnum=19
“gelatin,”
See Achiezer
“altered the nusach”
hmmm where have I hard that? http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/coffeeroom/topic/nusach-sefard-1
DY
Lol
The Goq
In case you havent read many of my posts, Im a Democrat too. IT was a joke
joseph, arent you forgetting he is a democrat
#voteearlyvoteoften
“If you don’t vote today, your complaints after the election are not worth reading, you had your chance to make a difference.”
Cmon thats nonesense, and it surprises me when otherwise inteeligent people repeat that.
you very well know that as a New York Resident I dont “have a chance to make a diference” so much so, that the candidates never bothered campaigning in the largest city in the country
That said this time I did vote, so I can tell my kids if R”l The Donald gets elected and my kids asked me what I did to stop it I can tell them I tried.
“You’re simply eating non-kosher.”
Lol sometimes its easy to live life with things simple. and yu certainly avoid shailos that way. However reality is not simple.
Rocky Road ICe cream is probably not “simply non-kosher” of course the marshmallows are. The reality is that some the scoops are rinsed beween flavors. The concern that it wasnt rinsed well enough and a marshmallow got stuck in the vanilla ice cream and then isnt noticed is quite a stetch. That isnt to say that it isnt better to be machmir and avoid this whole issue in the first place. But lets stick to facts. and to say that eating Vanilla Baskin and Robbins is “simply eating non-kosher” is simply incorrect and frankly involves some stretching (though it can still occur and I would avoid it)
NC
Chas vesholem
For example I hope you believe references to Hashem’s hand, arm, feet, nose etc are all non literal
“WHere did prides of lions run among humans in either Bavel or Eretz Yisroel?”
2000 years ago Lions where found in both Bavel and Eretz Yisroel.
It is interesting to me that this is the opart that struck you as strabge and not the “two slabs of meat fell from heaven.”
Keep in mind knowing what to take literately depend on a lot of things including context and familiarity with culture. For example If I said “I have a frog in my throat” or “butterflies in my stomach” Presumably you know there isnt actually an amphibian in my pharynx nor an insect in my stomach (depending on the context of course). Someone not familiar with these Idioms even if fluent in English, may need some help knowing what to take literaly and what not. Understanding the language and meaning of the words isnt allways enough.
That isnt to say I am at fault for using ambiguous wording even though some English speakers (let alone non-english speakers )may not understand
I feel funny discussing Christian theology, but immaculate conception has nothing to do with being “born without a father” that is a sepperate belief.
Immaculate Conception refers to the Conception of MARY not yoshke. (Though many Christians misunderstand this too)
No reason to do to much gogling. Wikipedia imagines well.
LU, super quick aside
dash is right you dont know what immaculate conception means and neither does abba
He said “As to others practicing it the Christians believe JC was born by immaculate conception. If that isn’t crazy what is?”
This is incorrect. They believe Mary was born via immaculate conception. not that it really matters obviously. but if stating facts even if not our beliefs (to say the least) they should still be correct
Is this a joke?
The punchline IVe heard is:
first you check him for any imperfection, then you celebrate with him for seven days and show him off to your friends, and then you turn him into compote
“How likely do you think it is that there are people in the CR who are completely faking? “
It is 100% certain. That is the ABC’s of the internet.
As Abraham Lincoln famously said “Dont believe everything you read online”
that goes doubly true for forums such as this. It surprises me that people are still unclear about this.
“and yes schvartze is a pejorative.”
I am an exclusively Yiddish speaker. As may be no suprpirse to you I also a support “BLack lives matter” Until now I have been chanting “shvartze leben zenen vichtig”
is this pejorative?
I dont follow
There is nothing wrong with filing a suit. If Trump has legitimate concerns regarding the election he absolutely should file suit. that is his right and even duty. But as his word carries influence among many claiming it is rigged without any basis , while not the same as calling for revolt, is dangerous.
(“The Supreme Court needed to decide because Gore filed a suit.” not quite accurate, wasnt it Bush who took it to the supreme court after the FLa supreme court called for a stae wide recount hence “Bush v Gore” (Though Gore did go to court first)
At any rate. the bottom line is Gore did in fact concede the election in 2000
“So give him a month after the election to do that.”
a. I wouldnt hold my breath
b. Gore’s concession wasnt a month after the election was decided. There were legitimate questions regarding FLA which wasn’t decided until the Supreme court decided. Once they decided gore conceded the very next day. IF their are legitimate questions, Of course Trump shouldn’t concede. but the election being “rigged” is not a serious allegation.
“If he doesn’t, how exactly does that affect anyone?”
his supporters are often violent, many are armed. IF he calls for a revolution (I’m not saying he will) do you really not see a problem? while denying the fairness of an election isnt quite the same as calling for revolution, it certainly is close.
“I guess that depends on how you define “concede”. “
Gore on 12/13/00:
“Now the U.S. Supreme Court has spoken. Let there be no doubt, while I strongly disagree with the court’s decision, I accept it. I accept the finality of this outcome which will be ratified next Monday in the Electoral College. And tonight, for the sake of our unity as a people and the strength of our democracy, I offer my concession. I also accept my responsibility, which I will discharge unconditionally, to honor the new President-elect and do everything possible to help him bring Americans together”
That is pretty much how I define concede. If Trump makes a similar speech that would be fine.
did Gore not concede?
This question is silly
Obviously she does housework so that her husband and sons can learn
MA
Your question doesnt really make sense
A fruit, is by definition food. An Esrog isnt really edible, it certainly isnt eaten (if you need to soak in in sugar that deosnt count, a car tire would be edible if soaked in sugar) Thus it isnt a fruit.
Supermarkets dotn sell tose berries you see growing on bushes in abandoned lots, becasue they arent edible.
Of course a fruit is also the part of a plant that contains seeds, but there are many such fruit that arent sold
Actualy Joseph
The minhag of Siegelmans cake goes back to the time of the geonim (it was just never written down) their are many reasons given for this heilige minhag yisroel. Pleas dont tell me you are doubting a minhag yiseol just becasue it wasnt written
americanyerushalmi
“But, being a woman, she has not allowed herself to speak in quite the same manner as 2 guys”
Um that makes her “less spiritually degenerate” Even in the imaginary world where the two are “equally spiritually degenerate” that one can say wh ta he says makes him worse.
“Hilarious is no less spiritually degenerate than Donald”
B’seder so dont vote hillarious.
huju
very well put
Joseph
Yep thats my point. My father does as well, he in no way means it in a disrespectful manner to say the least
I am a bit confused by this discussion
“respect” and “disrespect” is to a certain extent subjective and to a larger extent depends on intention.
there is nothing inherently respectful or disrespectfu labout wearing a hat indoors yet in a church it is considered disrespectful and in a shul (levadil elef alfei havdalos) it is not.
As for names.
I refer to R’ Moshe Feinstein as “Reb Moshe” as I’m sure many of you do. I have cousin who, shall we say, is not part of the olam hayeshivos and he was very surprised that i would refer to the “Great Rabbi Feinstein” by his first name with a mere prefix of Reb given to any Reb Gimpel
I’m sure most (or all) of you agree that Referring to R’ Moshe in said manner is in no way disrespectful.
(note this isnt true for everybody If I refer to my Local shul rAv Rabbi Almoni as Reb Ploni arguably that is disrespectful since that is not the convention)
when it comes to some Taanaim and Amoraim we refer to some of them by their first names without any prefix (Hillel, Shamai, Shmuel, Abaye etc)
I’m sure you will agree these arent disrespectful
Their are many many Gedolim who we refer to by the titles of their Works again without any prefix (eg the chazon Ish, the Aruch hashulchan, chasam Sofer the lsit goes on and on)
The point is respect/disrespect is largely based on convention and intention.
there is no denying that The Rav referred to himself in his writings as “Rabbi J.B. Solovitchik” Furthermore many of his talmidim did and do refer to him as “JB” as a term of endearment (though not so much publicly). If the intent is not disrespectful given that it is somewhat accepted (Certainly ” Rabbi J.B. Solovitchik” and (I would argue “JB” as well) it is not automatically disrespectful.
Editors Note: Why YWN Will NOT Be Streaming The Presidential Debate Tonight
If the actions/personality/speech/attitude of a candidate is so offensive that as a result of said candidate, a presidential debate (!!!) is deemed to be unfit for a yeshiva-website (a position thta is hard to argue with)
I dont understand how anyone who describes themselves as belonging to said “Yeshiva world” can vote for such an individual.
Say what you will about Hilary, and I’m not disputing that she too is a bad person. But as bad as she is, nothing she said has precluded her from being featured on a yeshiva website.
“I always bring proof when I have to,”
Lol! “always”?
“It doesn’t,”
Fantastic, I love when we agree. Though Im not sure why you always have to argue with me.
” but it’s a pretty effective response”
Thats true, most Americans are pretty stupid
DY
I dotn follow, Trump’s not releasing his tax returns is pretty indicative that he is hiding something there, given that it is standard practice.
I dont get what Hillary’s emails have to do with it? Why does his doing what all candidiates have done hinge on her releasing an unrelated (albeit, perhaps important) item
DY
doesn’t she claim they were? (I dont believe her that isnt my point)
My question is, what does releasing tax returns which is standard practice for candidates have to do with releasing emails?
Yes she should release her emails as many that she has claimed were private turned out to be work-related. But what does that have to do with his tax returns?
I dont really get the connection releasing private emails isnt something candidates have done. (granted this situation is different)
However all candidates in the past few decades have released tax forms. What do the emails have to do with anything
there must be something really embarrassing hidden there
Got it
Lol
OOh good one!
Lets see if this carries through
some chassidim have that minhag (I believe Tzans and its derivatives bobov, klauzenberg) have this minhag.
Are you saying that they are wrong
“but it is a machria where there is a machlokes,”
Are you aware of any machlokes as to wther we dont do mitzvos due to lack of simcha?
“He very possibly would not have, but the point is that someone of authority did come to that conclusion,”
Great! that is my point. you sort of admit that what drove the Rema to say that we dont duchan because of lack of simcha. Is not necessarily that after going through hilchos nesias kapayim or hiclhos simcha he came to this pesak. Rther after noting our EXISTING practice he gave a reason for it( that he may very well have heard from his Rebbi)
Fair?
“If no justification were found, we might assume that the change was made without halachically valid grounds,”
Agreed. Though where we differ is, that I say by definition a minhag practiced by shomrei torah umitzvos has justification so if “no justification were found” it means we arent looking hard enough (even if it is as weak as not duchaning because its too cold for kohanim to go to mikva or a hekish of gedilim taseh lecha to ki yikach ish).
I believe this is our point of contention. however earlier you couldnt identify a minhag practiced by yirei Shomayim that couldnt be justified (with the possible exception of eating indoors on Shemnini Atzeres)
sparkly
“sorry cannot explain what resonance structures are especially since you havent even taken the gen chem basic classes required for organic! maybe someone else can explain it????”
force yourself to explain it. that is the best way to make sure you understand and remeber it. (Not necessarily here)
Feivel
I too thought it was an extremely funny joke
“What do you think would have been result if a Sports bar opened in Monsey proper, but not under a Hashgha and open Friday night somewhere along Route 59 near a shul.”
Obviously they wouldnt be allowed to boycott and would all be forced to eat there
what are you talking about, was there a protest of some sort?
what would you say in the following scenario:
In Lawrence they opened a new Neturei karta type hamburger place recently.
Self appointed Zionists went into the place to threaten the new owners
with a boycott unless the Palestinian flags were removed.
Are they allowed to boycott in that situation?
I have answered your question, though not spent time on it, as it is only tangentially related to my point.
I’ll elaborate.
The short answer is I don’t know. The longer answer is we don’t know it could be because of mikva it could be because of yichos it could be because of Simcha, it could be something else (the arch hashulchanha, gra and others don’t seem to like any of those). While definitely an interesting question it just can’t be answered with certainty. But more to the point, as long as it can be justified and/or has rabbinic backing,it doesn’t really matter lemaaseh.
Now your turn. Because whether the rema would have come to his severa without the minhag, I’d PRECISLY my point.
You are putting words in my mouth I never added ill intentions to anybody. I never said “lied” or “doesnt make sense”
Here is how I would phrase it:
holy members of klal yisroel stopped duchaning, we do not know exactly when or why, and later generations gave reasons to expalin the existing practice, even if the reasons given are a stretch.
Are you saying the Rema went through the sugya of mitzvos tzrichos simcha. Came to the conclusion that it was meakev (but only for Birchos kohanim) and paskened that therefore we shouldnt duchan in chutz learetz? (Ive asked variations of this question, Im not sure why you are having a hard time responding and instead are attacking me)
“You are saying that some am haaratzim decided not to duchan, the rabbonim didn’t stop them, and later generations lied and said there was a reason, but we can see right through them, because we know the reason they give doesn’t make sense..”
Even if that was what I was saying (though Id phrase it differently).
I’m still not sure we are arguing
Bottom line is There is no HALACHIC problem with duchaning today (do you argue on this point?).
Nonetheless, we dont duchan, because in spite of there not being a (good) reason not to duchan. We follow our minhag.
This is my point that a minhag can override halacha (within certain parameters of course) just like in the Magen Avraham YOU cited earlier
“I’m saying the minhag started from poskim deciding that for some legitimate reason”
Who? When? And why didnt they write it?
More to the point though (and this is my point you havent addressed) , what is that legitimate reason. does the Rema hold simcha is an actual halachic requirment for Birchas Kohanim? Is it a requirment for any other mitzvah? Do you know if he has a source for this?
I’m not sure you are trying to make me sound like a bad person.
I never said “lied”, I never said “it doesnt make sense” (dont you get mad when people put words in your mouth why are you doing it to me?)
The “we” you reference is the Aruch Hashulchan among others. I did not call not duchaning a “minhag garua” we arent seeing through anybody. The Aruch Hashlchan, Beis Yosef, the Gra (indirectly) all say there isnt a good reason not to duchan.
yet none of them (including the Gra) say to start duchaning
Im not sure if we are really arguing
You cited athe Magen Avraham earlier that discuses the parameters he of “minhag Oker halacha” he does not say there is no such thing.
As far as Duchaning. Do you understand the Remah, or any other Achronim that there is something halachicly wrong with duchaning? IS there even a daas yachid that holds birchas kohanim (more than any other mitzvah?) requires as n absolute prerequisite to be done besimcha and that according to those shitos, sefardim are making a beracha levatala?
Does anybody hold regarding birchas kohanim, halachos are:
1) need to be a kohein
2) need a minyan
3) needs to be be simcha.
Isnt it obvious that these reasons given are justifying an existing practice? (as to how the practice came about maybe it is one of those reasons, maybe another, that isnt really my point)
My point is there is no deah that actually requires simcha for birchas kohanim, in other words there is no deach that holds HALACHICLY we shouldnt duchan today. nonethless we dont duchan because that is the minhag
you had said
“since minhag does not trump halachah, held we should duchan.”
However the GRA then changed his mind and did not institute duchening. If he held it was halachicly required he would have. Which now that I think about it, arguably makes my case stronger. He held the reasons werent good or no longer applicable and nevertheless, did not re-institute Duchening.
A halcahic decesion doesnt get decided based on fires.
“You are being ????? ??”? ?? ????????, and at the same time “
“arguing on all of those you mentioned above who do justify it.”
i’m not at all arguing on those who justify it. I’m sorry if I wasnt clear.
As to being “????? ??”? ?? ????????” that I guess I was (though the hamon am, not the rabbonim) However I said it as a possibility. I dotn know why people stopped it. neither do any of the Acharonim many offer various possibilities none of which are convincing.
there are many practices which we no longer practice without a clear guideline as to when and why it was stopped. Parah Aduma is one that ahs been well written about. Techeiles is another. One of my own questions is Tzaraas. (Ive always wondered who the first person who got a white mark on his skin and decided he wasnt going to a kohein). We dont know why/when but due to our long galus there are many practices that have been changed abandoned or forgotten. When we can we justify them we do
“The reason the Gr”a tried to reinstitute it was because he disagreed with the reasons mentioned (or held the reason no longer applies), and since minhag does not trump halachah, held we should duchan.”
Ah but then he abandoned his project….
If a person told you he had a minhag not to wear tefilin. you told him there is no such minhag you need to wear tefilin. He accepts buys tefilin, and before can wear it they get destroyed r”l. Would you say oh I guess you shoudlnt wear tefilin. Halacha doesnt get decided by fires in heaven (the Gr”a of all people would agree)
“Why do you think the minhag became not to?”
I dont know.
The Agur says because they would go to the Mikva before Duchaning but was too cold.
The Remah says becasue lack of Simcha.
Others (I forgot offhand who) say becuase Kohanim arent muchzuk bizman hazeh
The real reason may very well be something else.
The bottom line is as the aruch Hashulchan says (and I am loosely translating (128:64) “Certainly there is no good reason to our minhag to be mevatel a mitzvas aseh of Birchos Kohanim during the year, they write it is a bad minhag “Minhag garua hu”… ”
“How did the minhag develop based on the justification? Until the change, there was no minhag to “trump” the halachah!”
thats a great kasha, (it is similar to your above kasha) Thr truth is I dont know.
I would venture to say that as the minhag started it was keneged halacha and they had no right to be mevatel a mitzvas aseh. With time, it became accepted for whatever reason and now we rely on minhag avoseinu with justification from Gedolei Acharonim to “trump” the mitzva of Birchos Kohanim. (and it seems this is possibly ratzon shomayim as seen in the Stories when the Gra and R’Chaim volozin tried to reinstitute it)
” why the need for halachic justification?”
to explain how the minhag developed.
On second thought, this is the best example so far. here we have a clear mitzvah deoraysa that most of klal yisroel doesnt practice today.
Not based on halachic concerns per se (I.e nobody holds Simcha is literally meakev, or that Mikva is meakev) rather because the minhag is not too
as to why we are noheg not to sure of course we justify the minhag.
Put another way:
suppose you bumped into the Remah and asked him, I’d like my shul to start duchaning during the week. do you think He’d say:
No that isnt our minhag
or
They cant since the kohanim arent besimcha
?
Ok I think I have a good example:
Birchos Kohanim. There is a mitzvah for Kohanim to duchan they make a beracha and eveything.
Yet among Ashkenazim the minhag in chutz learets is not to (aside from Yom Tov.
I am guessing based on this minhag the Kohanim in your shul didnt fulfill the mitzvah/halacha of birchos Kohanim today.
Is this a good example?
(Yes I know all the (weak – even according to those who give them)justifications for our minhag. that in no way changes my point)
Excellence
“It’s none of anyone’s business what a venue offers. If you don’t like it, don’t visit.”
i’m confused, isnt that what a boycott is?
I wouldn’t have abided by their boycott, but apaprently their arent enough liek me in Monsey. nu so be it.
but why dont they have the right to boycott a establishment for any reason they see fit? why do they need support of the Rabbanim?
On a related note I often wonder what is under the purview of hashgacha other than food.
For example goyish music, koli isha, music during sefira, acapella during sefira, music ever for that matter, dress of wait staff, TV, selling meat during nine days (sefardim can eat, some will be makign siyumim) etc etc… Is a hashgcha responsible for these things?
Obviously a hashgacha can institute whatever policy they want. But what do you think they are responsible for other than kashrus of the food.
titandata
Thats exactly like the Taliban! remeber when they threatened the US with a boycott if we dont get rid of TV’s ?
I dont understand the problem, people are required to buy hamburgers in a place that has a TV? They dont want the TV so they said they wont but there with a TV present. What could possibly be wrong?
Common sense’s friend
No argument, though what I was referring to is that my understanding is that Meds are dosed based on the cockfort-gault model. MDRD is used by most EMR’s so there can be differences and MDRD is more accurate.
It gets trickier in an acute setting where a rising CR say was 0.6 yesterday today is 1.6 today and pt is anuric. GFR is essentially 0. Yet appear to be in the 50’s if dont take the entire pt’s picture into account
Winnie
It has nothing to do with foreigners
Btw ” the boards for foreign-born students were harder than for US students” Isnt true. The boards are the same. Though since US schools/residences train for the boards US grads have an easier time passing, but it is the same test.
That said the Boards doesnt test dosing. Dosing doesnt depend opn how good you are there are practically infinite doses (ok not literally) when you consider all the meds available, some doses change based on age, kidney function, liver function, indication.
Of course every order should be checked before being entered but the reality is that this isnt practical. Especialy when you consider circumstnces chaneg in hospital setting (eEg Crcl is less than was a week ago, now dose needs to be changed)
So what Ironpenguin says is 100% true (again not that it should be that way) “PAs and doctors that they will sometimes rely on the pharmacist to “proofread” their orders.”
Of course this is further complicated by the fact that pharmacies rely on an out-dated measure of kidney function which is no longer considered accurate but when doses were studied they used that modality.
“I wasn’t talking about what is right, I was talking about the reality – why they didn’t help you!”
that sint the reality. Im so sorry to tell. You i’m not sure what made you this way. But in reality people do favors for their friends becasue they want to or just becasue that is waht friends do. Friends dont usually do favors only for money. I truly am sorry to think of what terrible experiences you must have had to make you feel this way.
I’d liek to be your friend, Absolutly no charge. Im happy to share my knowledge, wisdom, advice or just general support with you. Absolutly free of charge! You deserve it. Hang in there, it gets better.
“That was sarcasm! Do you know that word or not?”
I do.
“No, try some American law schools!””
Sure! What am I guessing exactly though?
“But you might be too afraid to show everyone here that you’ve been lying all the time!!!”
By listing law schools? Im confused by how this game works.
Im not sure what you mean by “everyone” I dont think too many people are still reading.
Of course the kicker is you can easily show everyone that Ive been lying by revealing the name of the case (Earlier you indicated you didnt mind If I knew)
DY
“There is indeed no reward for not committing an aveirah which you had no interest or desire to commit.”
Is that true?
Rashi in Re’eh seems to indicate that there is reward for not drinking blood even though everybody is disgusted by it