ujm

Being meikel for the reason that it’s easier to be meikel, is inherently worse.

In Eretz Yisroel, before the medina came around, yiddishe shochtim used to schecht animals for the Arabs and sell them the meat. In order for it to be “Halal” (the Muslim version of kosher) the butcher had to say the words “Allah Akubar” before each shechita, which the yiddishe shochtim did in order that it should be sellable to the Arabs.

Avira, as far as the aveira is concerned, I would think that Eishes Ish and mishkav zochor are on the same level.

Sponsor a new building for a Shul and make sure your name is prominently printed in big bold words on front of the building.

A coffee room is an even better idea.

Dr. Pepper, thank you for sharing your thoughts on this.

Dr. Pepper, why wouldn’t you add to your house or upgrade your flight seating?

Regarding the annuity versus lump sum, what would be your choice?

In the postwar era, America had more than other countries until, approximately, the petira of Rav Moshe, Rav Yaakov and the Satmar Rebbe. Afterwards Eretz Yisroel had more.

In the pre-inquisition era, the Sephardic lands had the great Gedolei HaTorah. Ever since the Spanish expulsion, the great Gedolei HaTorah have by and large been in the Ashkenazic places.

Dr. Pepper, yes. Thank you.

But one advantage to taking the lump sum, I think, is that it gives the winner the extra flexibility to choose to utilize more of the money earlier (hopefully in a wise manner.)

And even if he wouldn’t use it earlier, their might be a (psychological or actual) benefit to at least having control over all of it immediately, rather than having to wait for an additional 19 annual payments.

After your above analysis, I can’t think of any tangible benefit to requesting the annuity (again assuming proper discipline.)

Dr. Pepper, if the winner is disciplined, is their any advantage to him one way or the other?

Sounds like a Yeshiva for special children.

There’s the story with the Chofetz Chaim, when there was a very large lotto jackpot his Rebbetzin purchased a ticket. He was upset (I forgot the reason why; I’m sure someone will remember this famous story and fill it in) and said if we win the entire winnings goes to Tzedaka.

DaMoshe: Pedophilia is a sexual orientation just as homosexuality is. Do you call people who have a taaivas for children a pedophile even if they never in their life touched a child?

Yes or No, DaMoshe?

(As an aside, there are more men of the pedophilic orientation than their are men with the homosexual orientation.)

Reseller accounts and prepaid accounts are more likely to have their speeds throttled during high data usage periods.

ymribriat: How about we throw you into the gas chamber, rather than your vile suggestion of throwing the Jews you hate into the gas chamber, that you’ve identified in your last comment. Of course anyone who committed a crime committed a chilul Hashem (though just because someone was convicted by a corrupt secular court system and jailed in no way leave a presumption of guilt). But such a chilul Hashem does not reduce one iota the far greater chilul Hashem of anyone identifying themselves as a homosexual. As IITFT correctly pointed out, just because someone has taaivas (he doesn’t act upon) for the same gender, does not make them a homosexual, any more than someone who has taaivas for married women (that he doesn’t act upon), it does not make him an adulterer. The choice of self-identifying, especially in public, as a homosexual, is a truly vile chilul Hashem.

Furthermore, your go-to ad hominem of declaring anyone with the common sense of disagreeing with your wrongful “opinions” as having consumed too much talk radio or too little thought, is burnt out already with your absurd reasonings and lack of Torah values.

No; no one does anymore.

Ubiq: I’m discussing exclusively homosexual for a reason. If someone is bisexual that indicates he can be attracted to both genders. As such, in regards to our discussion of helping Jews who have no other outlet for their taaivos other than their same gender, that point isn’t relevant to those who are bisexual, since they can find a shidduch of the opposite gender. Studies have consistently shown that a majority of people who say they experience homosexual taaivos, also say that they are attracted to the opposite gender as well, thereby those taaivos are non-exclusive. So for the purposes of this discussion, it is correct to focus on those with exclusive taaivos only.

The Gallup poll is an outlier and inconsistent. According to Gallup, if you take them at their word per the polling results, the percentage of the US population that identifies as homosexual has DOUBLED between 2012 and 2022. Do you credibly believe there was a doubling of this population in literally ten years? Public opinion issue pollsters such as Gallup, Harris, Marist, etc. have long been known to produce desired results for a left-wing audience. They consistently cater their results to comply with the left’s expectations. Also note that Gallup’s poll makes a cholent of combining transsexual, bisexual and homosexual all in that one figure that you quoted.

Other, more academic, research have shown significantly lower figures. The General Social Survey in 2017 reports it is 2.4%. ( sda dot berkeley dot edu/sdaweb/analysis/?dataset=gss16 ) in the US. Internationally, the Psychological Science in the Public Interest reports that less than 2% of the overall population identify as exclusively homosexual ( www dot researchgate dot net/publication/301639075 ).

With a larger percent of the population being attracted to children than to the same gender, it is clear the problem of pedophilia should be addressed with at least greater priority than the problem of homosexuality. Even if we were to accept the Gallup figure of 7% (which in reality, as explained above, is an unrealistic figure and combines the number with transsexual, bisexual, etc.), even that is within the same ballpark as the 5% of the population that is attracted to children. As such, you still cannot deny that the aveira of pedophilia (which also severely victimizes innocent children) should be addressed with at least the same alarcity as that of the aveira of homosexuality.

AAQ: Your point is absolutely correct. See my citations above.

ymribriat: If you accept YU’s solution to the homosexual problem is to create a YU Homosexual Support Club, then by logical extension you must insist that YU similarly create a YU Pedophilic Support Club for the pedophile problem.

DaMoshe: Your point is irrelevant. YU is claiming their university sponsored Homosexual Club is designed to help YU homosexuals overcome their homosexual taaivas. As such, by logical extension YU must similarly create a YU Pedophilic Club to help YU pedophiles overcome their pedophilic taaivas.

ubiq: According to research, approximately 1.7% of the population is of exclusive homosexual orientation. Whereas somewhat under 5% of the male population is of the pedophilic orientation. It is very clear that men attracted to children is notably more prevalent than men attracted to their same gender.

See the article entitled “Pedophilia” in Psychology Today.

Ubiq: Why are you accepting at face value that homosexuality is a more prevalent problem than pedophilia? The research is readily and easily available. But you admit above that you do not know the comparative figures. As such, you should have the humility to not deny the problem of pedophilia.

Rather than defend Y.U. on the basis you have, you should be questioning the lack of a Y.U. Pedophilia Support Club.

The oaths were between us and Hashem, and between the nations and Hashem. The fact that the goyim broke theirs does not mean we can break ours as well. To compare – if your neighbor is mechallel shabbos, does that mean you can be mechallel shabbos as well?

First, The Oaths are quoted L’Halachah in numerous sources, including but not limited to: Piskei Riaz (Kesuvos 111), Responsa Rivash #110, Responsa Rashbash #2, Megilas Esther on Sefer HaMitzvos of Rambam Ramban (Maamar HaGeulah #1 regarding why all Jews outside of Bavel – the majority of Jews at the time – did not go to Eretz Yisroel at Coresh’s call), Rambam (Igeres Taimon – warning peple not to violate the Oaths or else face grave danger), Maharal (Netzach Yisroel 24) writes that even if the Goyim try to force us to take Eretz Yisroel for ourselves during Golus, we must allow ourselves to be killed rather than take violate the Oaths, as well as other places.

Second, Rabbeinu Tam writes that you DO pasken from Agadita unless it is against Halachah.

Third, the Oaths are NOT Agada. By definition, Halachah means when the Gemora tells you it is forbidden to do something, which this does. In fact, it says You may nto do this, and if you do, you will die. That makes it Halachah. Thats the definition of Halachah. (Similarly, the Oath of Naaseh V’Nishmah is also used by Chazal as Halachah, as in Shevuah chal al Sehvuah etc.)

Fourth, even if it is not Halachah, it still represents the Ratzon Hashem, meaning, negation of Halachah would merely relinquish us of any obligations in regard to making a State. But the Gemora clearly says that doing so will cause the deaths of Jews, like animals in the field. Even if that does not create any Halachic obligations, it surely tells us that the State is against the will of Hashem and that its existence causes deaths of Jews.

The Oath that G-d gave us not to rebel against the Goyim was NOT for the sake of the Goyim, but for our OWN sake, that we dont end Golus early. It says this in every single interpretation in the commentaries about the Oath. It was not for the sake of the Goyim but for us. So just because the Goyim violated their Oath and hurt us does nto mean we can violate another one and hurt ourselves more! Shevet Efraim left Egypt in violation of the Oaths. Egypt surely violated their Oath when they tortured Jews for centuries. Yet Ephraim, Chazal say, were all hunted down and killed in the desert for violating their Oath by leaving Egypt early.

The Oaths are brought down l’halachah in Rishonim and Achronim as viable and very real. This, despite the fact that the Goyim have been violating their Oath for thousands of years.

The Rambam in Igeres Taimon warns the Jews not to violate the Oaths, or else. He writes there that the Jews are suffering an evil, persecuting government that commits atrocities and wars against the Jews, and therefore the Jews should watch out not to violate the Oath by rebelling against them. It’s clear that even though the Goyim violate their Oath we cannot violate ours.

The Medrash Aichah says clearly that the Romans violated their Oath, yet the generation of Bar Kochba was punished Chazal say because they violated the Oaths.

The Maharal writes that even if the Goyim force us with torturous death to violate the Oath, we should rather submit to torturous death than violate them.

And the Gemora itself disproves the idea, since the Gemora says that the reason Chazal commanded us not to go from Bavel to Eretz Yisroel is due to the Oaths, even though Bavel violated their Oath for sure with the atrocities they committed during the Churban (The Shulchan Aruch writes that the Brachah of Vlamalshinim was enacted to praise Hashem for destroying the evil kingdom of Bavel).

The Gemora then asks on R. Zaira who says that the Oaths only include not taking Eretz Yisroel forcefully, but the Oath not to rebel against the nations is nto included. The Gemora could easily have answered that Bavel violated their Oath and therefore our Oath of rebelling against them is null. But the Gemora says no such thing.

R. Avrohom Galanti (Zechus Avos) brings a story of the people of Portugal who wanted to defend themselves against the government by making a rebellion. The government then was making forced Shmad and all sorts of persecutions. They asked the “shem hameforash” and were told not to do it because it would violate the Oaths.

And besides all this, the second Oath, nshelo yaalu b’chomah has nothing to do with the Goyim, and woud not be dependent on the Goyim’s Oath anyway. The Maharal and R. Yonason Eyebushitz write that even if the Goyim give us permission to take Eretz Yisroel we are not allowed to do it. Better we should die than take Eretz Yisroel, the Maharal says.

Anyone who learns about the Oaths is immediately confronted with the reality that they Goyim violated theirs but we still cannot violate ours.

“If there was a need I’d feel terrible if they DIDN’T create such a group
It sounds dangerous not to!”

ubiq: So why aren’t you denouncing Y.U. for NOT creating the Y.U. Pedophilic Support Club, just like they’re creating the Homosexual Club? Are you in denial that pedophilia is a real, serious and consistent problem in our community, MORE so than even homosexuality? I’m sure you’ve heard all the many stories in the Orthodox community over the last 20 years of pedophiles being arrested.

Or do you simply think pedophilia is a less serious problem than homosexuality? If so, be advised that you are grossly in error.

To answer the title, YU is officially a treif institution.