Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
baishatal: You’re comment is factually incorrect. You could lead to the same faulty conclusion, in the opposite direction, by pointing out that non-Ashkenazim are the only Jews who have dark colored skin. That is meaningless and environmental, which alone can change physical attributes without any other reasons by living in a geographic area for many centuries; the same point of which applies to fair hair color. Your interpretation of DNA results is similarly faulty and incorrect.
See the Wikipedia (among other articles) called “Ashkenazi Jewish intelligence.”
The prosecutor did not ask for a bail amount that was above any purported legal or discretionary limit the judge was able to set it at. The amount requested by the prosecutor was within the discretionary ability of Freier to have set.
Indeed, as mentioned by others here the judge even has the discretionary ability to set bail at a figure *higher* than the prosecutor requests, as an example given above demonstrates.
laskern: Yes they are.
Mammele: Was exercising and mental health concerns non-issues from the time of Sarah Imainu through Chazal and the Mechaber of S”A that all cited this restriction, and they only became relevant for the first time in history in recent years? Your caveat is much more exclusive than the Halacha records.
laskern: You don’t think any of them ever goes out or has gone out in public for a not valid or good reason or just (as you put it) “for the fun of it”?
Whereas guys might do the same with no justifiable reason, they don’t have a specific halacha or aveira against going out.
laskern: Do you agree that it is wrong for them to be out, such as שפּאַצירן or cavorting, when there’s really no justifiable reason to do so?
Even one is a waste of money.
Ruchy Freier absolutely had the discretion in this case to have ordered a significantly higher bail.
She declined to use her discretion to do so.
laskern: Neither Siman 75 (AH”S, Mordechia, etc.) nor the Halacha regarding mechitzas dispute or change anything I cited or said.
If you feel otherwise please specifically quote what I said or specifically quote what I cited that you feel is disputed or changed by what’s brought by the AH”S, Mechaber, Mordechai, etc. But please specifically quote my post that you are disputing and how your maare mekomos dispute my maare mekomos.
Chabadshlucha: Which Rav?
OP: It sells papers. (Or, in this case, clicks.)
Toi: She does not know criminal law. She’s barely gotten her feet wet. She was a civil lawyer and she was elected to a civil judgeship. Her being assigned to criminal court was only after the fact, when they were short criminal judges.
DY: TY. Mesdames is the plural of Mrs.
Please provide actual quotes from today’s poskim on what they allow and encourage in order to better answer than question. I don’t think anything I cited differs from anything today’s poskim actually ruled.
Avi, CS, Philosopher: If Israel annexes Judea, Samaria and Gaza, should the Arabs living there be granted Israeli citizenship and voting rights?
No one said otherwise, DY.
Here are some “Muslim” practices, according to your definition, that not a single posek in the history of Torah Judaism has ever disagreed with. Not any Chasidish Litvish or Sephardic:
Shulchan Aruch (EH 73:1): A man must give his wife clothing like women normally wear outside. A woman should not go outside much. The beauty of a woman is to stay inside – “Kol Kevudah…”
Kesef Mishneh: A wife must give straw to her husband’s animals, but she need not give water. This is because normally one leaves the house to go to the river or spring for this, and “Kol Kevudah…” (a woman should not go out…)
Rosh (Shevu’os 4:2): The Ri ha’Levi learns from our Gemara that we do not disgrace an honorable woman to go to Beis Din, due to “Kol Kevudah.” Rather, we send a Shali’ach of Beis Din to hear her claims. The Aruch and R. Chananel agree. The Ramban and Teshuvos of the Rif and Rav Sadya Gaon do not allow this. The Rif allows only that Beis Din send scribes to record her claim.
Teshuvos Maimoniyos (Mishpatim 5): The Gemara (Nazir 12a) says that women are Kevu’os due to “Kol Kevudah.”
Gemara: Mo’avim are forbidden “Because they did not go out to greet you with bread and water.” This does not apply to women. It is normal for men to go out to greet, but not for women.
Objection (Do’eg): The men should have gone out to greet the men, and the women to greet the women!
Question: How can we answer?
Answer #1 (Chachamim of Bavel): “Kol Kevudah Vas Melech Penimah” (it is dishonorable for women to go outside, even to greet women).
Answer #2 (Chachamim of Eretz Yisrael): We learn this from ” … Where is your wife Sarah?” (It is praiseworthy that she stayed in the tent.)
R. Shimon says, “Because they did not go out …” – it is the way of a man …This week’s parsha:
וַיֹּאמְרוּ אֵלָיו אַיֵּה שָׂרָה אִשְׁתֶּךָ וַיֹּאמֶר הִנֵּה בָאֹהֶל
רבי מאיר משמיה דרבי מאיר (בראשית יח, ט) ויאמרו אליו איה שרה אשתך ויאמר הנה באהל להודיע ששרה אמנו “צנועה” היתה
Bail was set at less than half of what the prosecutor requested, according to the article.
Neville, just FTR, I considered your point but don’t agree with it. I appreciated your concern. But the thread would’ve been historical already if not for the tangential OT sub-discussion. Only because of that has this thread remained active. You or anyone are still always able to bring it back on topic, should anyone so care; indeed, the fact that the thread is still active makes that more likely to occur than if it had already been buried and remained deep down and unseen.
CS & laskern, you’re entirely incorrect. I have the Torah, Chazal and literally all the poskim on my side (as demonstrated and cited) whereas you only have your boich svaras on why things are or should be different and changed today than all of Jewish history from Avrohom Avinu until relatively very recently.
New York Times, April 4, 1966
Promiscuity has certainly increased since the time of the Mechaber, most unfortunately. This is certainly a bad thing. Historical kidnapping of women has nothing to do with anything mentioned. But anyone paying attention to the news even just over the last 11 months regarding contemporary mistreatment of women, knows that society in 2018 is extremely horrible in this regard. This is a direct result of the mixing of the genders at work, at school (even New York City public schools were gender segregated to some extent at one point) and in the street. Yes, women remaining at home like Sarah Imainu and as paskened by everyone before and after Chazal through Shulchan Aruch and later were absolutely 100% Torah correct and humanely correct based on normal and proper gender segregation norms. What we have today is a travesty, not better than the past, and far from the ideal. The ideal is what the Torah, Chazal and the poskim rule, as I earlier cited.
The Aruch Hashulchan decries the phenomenon with women you described. He writes that since it became so bad, therefore it is permissible to say Shema in their presence.
Neville, ChabadShlucha, laskern: Are you saying that we don’t follow the Halacha from the aforementioned Shulchan Aruch? That’s how we’ve practiced life since Avrohom Avinu, when Sarah stayed in the tent when the visitors came, through Chazal through the Mechaber and beyond. If things are different now they became so only relatively recently and are only a b’dieved bshas hahchak, unfortunately due to yeridos hadoros. Ideally we should all return to the way things were and should be.
CTL: If your family net worth became $350,000 tomorrow (with your then living in a lower middle class home) and your family annual income became $75,000, and it remained so for an indefinite period of time, would you be happy and appreciate what you have without being upset you didn’t have more?
That’ll create fraudulent ad-clicking by users looking for compensation, not caring about the ads but mass clicking on them anyways.
laskern: Please see Rambam Hilchos Ishus 13:11 and Shulchan Aruch EH 73:1.
In retrospect, the Zionists should never have established a state in the first place. Once you create a mamzer you cannot simply destroy it.
RY23, are you under the impression that normal men are not attracted to women who aren’t dressed as models?
Going OTD can simply be due to taaiva and rishus.
Which do you think is worse — hacking an innocent person’s arm off or injecting someone with blood contaminated by a potentially fatal disease?
No, RY23; something would be wrong with him if he was not distracted by her.
+1
CS – Aba Chilkiya’s wife stayed home the whole day. (The Gemorah mentions this when explaining why she gave more tzedaka than her husband.) Which, not so incidentally, aligns with the psak in both Shulchan Aruch and Rambam that a wife should not leave her home too much. Rambam specifies a specific limit on the number of times per month her husband should let her out whereas the Shulchan Aruch doesn’t put an actual number other than to pasken not to go out much.
KotonHadorah: When you’re incapacitated in a burning building hopefully you’ll remember that when a female fireman tries lifting your 285 lb. frame to shlep you out. Or when you’re in a foxhole with a female soldier and are distracted by that from paying attention to enemy fire.
Sechel: You also think it’s okay for an eishes ish to dress “beautifully” when going out of the home in the public or elsewhere?
I do not agree that it makes no sense to have a law forbidding weapons.
What akuperman and, I believe, Shopping613 are saying (and correctly so) is that in a hypothetical scenario where a non-Jewish government would govern Eretz Yisroel and allow Yidden to fully practice Torah Judaism in safety (no fears of attacks) and with freedom of movement, the frum community (Chareidim) would find that to be a much preferable situation (or at least an acceptable arrangement) than the current arrangement of the land being governed by Zionist Jews.
CS – Beautifying oneself must be limited to when within the contours of the privacy of one’s home, only for their spouse. Not for when in public or outside of one’s own home.
RSo: I take exception to your first paragraph but agree with the point made in your last paragraph.
Women should not be police, firefighters or soldiers in the first place.
You said you were falsely beaten by a cop due to mistaken identity. You not only don’t choose which cop falsely and crookedly beats or arrests you, like you said you can be touched by a cop even if you’re completely innocent. Like yourself.
Randomex: Actually it often will be since it will show close blood relatives with the biological father or his relatives who also took the ancestry test.
He does, Milhouse. I skimmed the comment too quickly. TY
Sechel: You didn’t address Edy’s point. He made a point about the peyos (in comparison to the beard.)
How do Lubavitcher do their peyos? Hidden behind the ear? Cutoff short? Long down their cheeks?
laskern: What if it is a sizzling hot summer day and you’re davening as a guest in another shul, which isn’t your usual one? (Either because you’re unexpectedly late to your regular shul or you have a simcha at a faraway shul.)
DY: If Rabbi Z, a legitimate posek, paskens that playing football is assur, until such time as another posek formally rules otherwise do you maintain all Jews must stop playing football?
Eat fruits and vegetables.
If you don’t wear a Tallis in the street on Shabbos, and you don’t have a Tallis in shul beforehand, how will you wear a Tallis for Shabbos Shachris?
ashkifard: When’s your bar mitzvah?
Higher minimum wages causes job losses.
cherrybim: My point exactly was that the vast majority of frum people who have a frum line of yichus have no such things to worry about. This is an aveira that is very far from Jews, in general.