Canadian Gazette Editorial: Court Erred Badly In Divorce Ruling

50

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

court hammer.jpgAt a time when our increasingly multicultural country is having to pick its way through a minefield of conflicting secular and religious rights, the Supreme Court took a very wrong step last month.

In a 7-2 decision Dec. 13, the high court ruled that courts have both the power and the obligation to adjudicate religious disputes.

This melding of religious and civil law is not the direction in which Canada should be headed, however objectionable the behaviour of a litigant. The decision (as reported here on YW) – which awarded damages to a Jewish woman whose husband refused for 15 years to grant her a get, – could provide the basis for all manner of religious-based cases.

Where Canadian and Quebec family law uphold the equality of spouses, many religions do not. In this case, a religious divorce was the husband’s to grant. Jewish religious law provides no sanction for his failure to abide by his promise. But that, unfortunately for the wife, should not be up to secular courts to remedy.

Women who feel their religion discriminates against them should be seeking redress from religious authorities. Nothing is to be gained – and much lost – by trying to turn the secular court system into a weapon against religious dogma. As soon as the Supreme Court has a chance to revisit this issue, it should.

(Appeared In Canadian Gazette – Editorial)

50 COMMENTS

  1. I like this as it may forces husbands to give gets which, IMHO, should not be used as bargaining tools. While I agree that Courts, generally, should stay out of religious issues, this offers protection to those men who won’t provide a get b/c they are simply mean spirited.

  2. What do we exepct these women to do? Rabbis are generally afraid to get involved in these issues, gedolei haposkim, for various reasons some good others not so good, have failed to resolve the problem of the recalcitrant husband for decades now. And all the while these women (and there are far fewer than actually claimed) sit and wait, powerless to gain their freedom. Let’s not forget that as a matter of law divorce has always been an action in equity, not law. Thus judges must do that which is equitable to both sides. While I’m not sure about the case at hand, I’ve seen very prescient arguement made that since a husband, by withholding s Get, denies the wife the benefit of remarriage, and the concomitant support whe would recieve from a new spouse, the current husband should be required to provide that support. Justice Garson did precisely that about seven years ago in the Gindi case. Guess what happened? The husband gave a Get immediately.

  3. How about in cases which the religious leaders (Rabbonim) would like to force the husband to give a Get (which I think most of these cases are), now they can direct the woman to get the courts help, which till now they couldn’t.

  4. Baki,
    While I do not profess to be a talmud chochom of any sorts, I thought that we accept a forced get, as the the Batei Dinnin of Talmudic times would force a get to be given through physical means (beatings) if need be.

    Anyone care to comment as to the halacha here?

  5. As the mother of a eishes chayil who just went through the heartbreak of a divorce I have plenty to say on this subject but alas not enough time to say it all. I have been frum from birth, and am by no means a “raging feminist” but rather I relish and cherish my role as a Jewish wife and mother and an akeres habayis; I have always and will always believe that Hashem only does good and right. So I wondered how Hashem could have created such a situation where the men hold all the power re the Get, and how the recurrent advice that we received was “get the Get and run”, or how the financial obligations undertaken by husband in the Ketubah are today considered as merely an exercise in tradition almost entirely ignored and excused by virtually every beth din, and in the worse case scenario having been referred to at an actual beth din as “shtuyot”! The unfortunate and tragic (and only) conclusion that I as a bas yisroel could come to is that Hashem never envisioned that his am ha’kadosh would be comprised of men who would pervert the Torah to such an extent. The Torah is perfect, it is man who is so imperfect, and who must be such a resounding dissappointment to Hakadosh Boruch hu! I know and believe that Hashem in his infinite chesed created the rephua before the machala, it is incumbent upon all Torah Jews, and most specifically upon the G-d fearing rabbis to redouble their efforts so that the Get process is not the nightmare that it has become for so many Jewish women. The reason why the Kohen Gadol was relegated to the Ir Miklat together with the rotzeach b’shogeg is precisely because there was a lacking in his leadership. How can we not say that there is a lacking in leadership today (and who knows how many of society’s current ills, spiritual, physical, financial, etc., are directly attributable to this) that can allow such a situation where the wife’s freedom is held hostage to the power to withold the Get?

    The fact that we would prefer not to involve secular courts in religious matter may or may not be irrelevant to the Canadian matter. The Ketubah is the original pre-nup! It is a legal contract. A husband voluntarly undertakes certain legal oblications when he invites a woman to be his wife. To compensate a woman for things she was legally entiled to must enforced by someone. If the Beth Din is unwilling or worse, impotent to do so, after having been given ample opportunity, if the Batay Din themselves are “misarev” to exercise the responsibility divinely placed upon their shoulders then woman are certainly within their biblical RIGHTS to seek help from the secular courts. It should be further noted that finacially compensating a wife for money she is rightfully owed either for support or for her damages, should not be confused with “forcing” a Get.

    I might add as well that in my daughter’s case, it was the husband that was represented by the “frum” attorney, whereas we were represented by a baal chesed who is affiliated with the Reform movement, and to whom I am eternally indebted. It was the “frum” attorney who stated “don’t even bring up the Ketubah, it is off the table” as well as “we will only grant the Get simultaneously with the signing of the civil agreement”. Because he is “frum” he knew how to play the game. Boruch Hashem, our attorney knew how to negotiate and had the fortitude not cave. But the “frum” attorney’s actions were a true chilul Hashem not only to us but to our righteous Beth Din as well. How he can split his Torah teachings and obligations from his professional representation is anathma and reprehensible.

  6. #8 is absolutely correct – a number of my friends were told to be “moichel” the kesuba!!!! in some cases the woman had to pay to in order to receive the get! its OUTRAGEOUS that this is allowed to go on! why does a woman need a kesuba if its meaningless anyway??? its a contract – a legal contract according to halacha but is disregarded in a majority of cases AND THE WOMAN HAS NO CHOICE BUT TO GO ALONG WITH IT JUST SO THAT SHE CAN RECEIVE HER GET & MOVE ON WITH LIFE!

    anyone who has not had personal experience(oneself or close family member/friend) with the get process has NO clue what its like & are quick to mouth off!

    the TORAH is PERFECT – its just the way its ignored by so many in the issue of gitten is very sad!

  7. ACTUALLY ONE FRIEND WAS TOLD BY A PROMINENT ROV INVOLVED IN GITTEN THAT THE KESUBA MONEY IS NOT REALLY ‘NOGEAH’ TODAY!!!????!!!???

  8. ok, get meusah (forced get) done by jews is kosher, by non-jews is not kosher. there are ways for bais din to use non-jews as the agents of force. having a secular court force a get of its own volition is a very serious matter. there was an issue in New York state a while ago where this became an issue. Leave plumbing to the plumbers, electricity to electricians, AND leave HALACHA to the RABBIS!

  9. #6: If the forcing is done by a Beis Din (kofin oso ad sheyomar rotzeh ani – see Rambam Hilchos Geirushin, Perek 2), the Get is valid.

    If it is done by a secular court, it is invalid.

  10. Get me’use al yedei akum is possul. If the get is forced by the influence of a goyishe court, it is possul. And Cantoresq, (#4) that is far worse than no get at all. Her subsequent children will never get shiduchim, due to their (at best questionable) status as mamzeirim. And she herself will be over the issur of eishes ish, which carries an onesh of kares, on a regular basis.

    And Mr. Lawman, (#6) those are done under direct supervision of competent dayanim.

    Bottom line, Kol sh’eino yodea b’tiv gittin v’kiddushin, lo yehei lo esek imahen.

  11. Shazam:

    I am precisely suggesting that many women will accept a Get of questionable validity and all that it means than sit with nothing. After all, in our days, any Get is subject to challenge and rejection by some segment of the community. It’s simply a matter of degree.

  12. my mohter, a war survivor, told me over 40 years ago to never go to beis din,,bec. her friend while being horrendously abused finally got her get–and even tho she begged for custody the beis din..surprise!!- gve them to her husband–1 killed himself, the other is not evenremotely frum and the last is in a mental institution. thsi to my moher was the final straw–and after that we all learned what besi din is all about. BALONEY. that is the entire description.
    being it is run by men, what else do women expect other than to be governed by them? of course they will bea gainst secualr court–they stand to lost their power.
    no, i am the first to say my husband is number 1 in my life as are my children–but he has ocnceded numerous times that the corruption of beis din and too many rabbonim is rampant. and unfortuantely too many women get hurt horrendously.will it come to the point that these women will go completely off the derech?along with their children. what are their kids learning and seeing? is that what needs to happen before these so-called men in power step up to the plate?
    i say thank you to the canadian court. and to all you men who disagree- why don’t you walk in these women’s shoes for a good 10 miles.then we’ll see how you feel.

  13. LegalFemale wrote a classic essay.
    I wonder: during the 15 years this woman waited for a get and even now was only “awarded damages” — what were the Rabbanim doing with her case.
    FIFTEEN YEARS!!!!!!!!!!!

  14. Cantoresq: Regardless of your legal experience, you are lacking in halachic experience to make the statements about the acceptance of a questionable get. Whatever may happen, a truly observant Jewish woman should never bargain or aim for a questionable get because she’ll be worse off than with no get at all: the husband will say “I gave the get” while the woman is really still in “no man’s land” (pun intended). As an attorney with so much experience, you should recognize the flaw in your argument and also realize that it is unwise to give opinions where you are unqualified.

    As to the passionate plea by LegalFemale, I think you are right about everything you say. Still, I think another part of this picture is left out: there is gamesmanship in terms of divorce and gittin by both genders. Undoubtedly, men start off with the presumptive superiority because they hold the power of giving the get. But I have also observed that women can and do play the game as well, sometimes refusing to accept the get or to appear in Bais Din when the husband issues a hazmana, because they would like the best of both worlds: they want to have the husband give the get immediately and then run to the civil court to get alimony, child support and equitable distribution determined by the secular system. They are probably correct to assume the civil court is a better forum for them economically, but, if you are really a Torah-true Jew, you can’t have it both ways.

    Let no one mistake this post: husbands who withhold gittin solely out of malice or to extort that which they are not entitled to in Halacha are the scum of the earth. But when a husband is willing to go to Bais Din for a din Torah on all issues, including the get, the wife can’t play games either.

  15. #3 is almost correct. If the husband feels coerced into giving the Get, many rabbonim feel the get is worthless.

    This would mean that the woman has a worthless get, they both get remarried chas v’sholom, etc.,

    The government needs to stay out of religion.

    Then do mean well, but they can be destroying the validity of innocent people’s gittin.

    This ruling may result in some people choosing to go out of Canada to give the get and the divorce. Some people are already changing states to avoid divorce and get in any state with a Get law.

  16. #14. Gittin are NOT routinely challenged. There is a cherem from Rabbeinu Tam against those who challenge Gittin. That is (one of the reasons) why we cut (pasel) a get right after it is given, so that if there are ir’urim on it, one can be toleh all complaints in the rei’usa of the Get having become posul, l’achar maase. Competent Batei din, who routinely challenge each other on a whole host of issues, don’t challenge established gittin.
    A large part of the chareidi olam dumped the Jewish Press over its support of the NY Get law in the late 1980s, because of exactly this issue. (It helped that around that time there was a new alternative, Yated Neeman just starting up.)
    Women must be educated (most already are) not to accept such a get, becasue it is useless.

    Once again, Kol sh’eino yodea b’tiv gittin v’kiddushin, lo yehei lo esek imahen.

  17. cantoresq, I truly pity anyone you counsel to accept a halachically invalid get, resulting in her new children being mazeirm. A get acceptable according to all is the only way forward.

    And those speaking ill regarding beis din, are in violation of all the issurim of loshon ora and motzei shem ra.

    A beis din should direct the entire gitten process al pi halacha. Beis Din should settle all monetary, custody, and legal matters without the imposition of any secular court. Once Beis Din decides the way forward, they should authorize the parties to formalize it legally with all the conditions and stipulations decided by the Beis Din.

  18. Cantoresq: Regardless of your legal experience, you are lacking in halachic experience to make the statements about the acceptance of a questionable get. Whatever may happen, a truly observant Jewish woman should never bargain or aim for a questionable get because she’ll be worse off than with no get at all: the husband will say “I gave the get” while the woman is really still in “no man’s land” (pun intended). As an attorney with so much experience, you should recognize the flaw in your argument and also realize that it is unwise to give opinions where you are unqualified.

    R E P L Y

    #17, you make assumptions about both my education and experience. Moreover, you didn’t read what I wrote carefully. I simply stated that women in this situation will accept a questionable Get rather than have no Get at all. I did not offer my views nor did I state what I advise in such a situation. It would behoove you to read things more carefully before opining on people’s expertise. I did however state that in our days, it seems that some segments of our society are prepared to challange the validity of a Get, in violation of R. Tam’s cherem on doing so. Therefore the willingness of these women to accept such a questionable Get is more readilly understood.

    As to the greater question, I can think of no insitution or judicial body with greater potential to be a positive force in the community than Beth Din. Sadly, I can also think of no institution or judicial body that is, as a general matter, more corrupt and riddeled with profound systemic problems than Beth Din. With the way things are now, no G-d fearing Jew should ever go to a Beth Din. The more chareidi the tribunal, the greater the problems it has.

  19. #21 I never advised anyone to accept a posul Get. All I said is that the women involved are willing to accept such a get rather than have nothing. The “line around the corner” at the now defunct Rackman Beth Din demonstraed that. Rabbanim from all walks of Orthodoxy decired Rackamn’s idea as wrong and unacceptable. Yet desperate women came by the bus load for R. Rackman’s annulment. Think about why.

    As to Beth Din adjudicating all aspects of a divorce, currently they cannot. The law in New York, based on the Glauber case, is that custody and visitation is not subject to arbitration. More fundamentally Beth Din, as an institution, has absolutely no respect in the secular courts. The judges see the dayanim as corrupt buffoons more concerned with their kavod and fees than about the best interst of the children and the equities of the case. Sadly, they have good reason to view the dayanim as such.

  20. cantoresq,

    Rackman’s was condemned for causing possible violations of Eishes Ish and mamzeirim.

    The secular courts are far more corrupt than any real Beis Din ever was. How frequently do we hear of secular Judges busted for bribery and corruption? Frequently enough. And those are just the ones who were caught. Their entire system is a corrupt stack of cards. AND THEY SHOULD DECIDE ON YIDDISHE NESHOMOS?

    And your loshon hora about Butei Dinim, is just that. And motzei shem ra as well. Complete nonsense, falsehoods, and unrealistic. They are far more fair and decent than any secular court.

    And they follow the Torah, not laws written by drunk legislators.

  21. “women in this situation will accept a questionable Get rather than have no Get at all.”

    That’s the whole problem, Cantor. A woman will accept a “questionable” get and remarry and produce mamzeirim.

    Please, knock it off already.

  22. There are several misconceptions here by people with a little knowledge, but it is said “a little knowledge is dangerous.” Firstly, one should not knock the batei dinim because many of these Rabbanim work very hard and spend many unpaid hours trying to persuade a recalcitrant husband to give a get.

    secondly there must be not a psak “chiyev l’garesh” but a psak of “koifen l’garesh” or Kefiah al yedai yisrael is also not valid. Many battim dinim are reluctant to issue such a psak because after the guy gets out of the hospital after six weeks he either files criminal charges against the bais din or sues the bais din in civil court.

    Lastly and most importantly, there is a serious void in the chinuch of these men that trangress dozens of lavim every day that they withhold a get. They seek to cause heartache and aggravation to their spouses and their families and gain some sort of satisfaction from that. Ahavas Yisroel, the cornerstone of Yiddeshkeit goes in the trash, yiras shamayim is nowhere to be found, getting “even”, or extorting money is the main thing in these peoples minds. Where are their parents? Ahavas Yisroel applies to a divorced spouse. There is something seriously wrong with the chinuch of these people. Do not blame the bais din.

    Additionally, the shtar birurin signed by the couple, if in the proper format, is recognized by the courts (at least in NY state) as a legal arbitration agreement, and is enforceable by the court. That is in regards to property division and, if the bais din adheres to state mandated minimums, to child support, and visitation as well.

  23. A point some of the above commentators are forgetting, is that a wife is not automatically entitled to a get ”just cause she wants one.” That is precisely why the TORAH requires the husband to WILLINGLY give one. If a Beis Din determines based on the circumstances of the individual case that a get is required, then the husband is OBLIGATED to give it. Otherwise he is not, the wifes demands notwithstanding.

    cantoresq, the custody should be determined by a Beis Din, and whatever the Beis Din decides based upon a halacha should be brought to the court as a voluntary agreement between the spouses to be implemented.

    The ONLY role any secular court (with their corrupt judges deciding things based on laws written by drunken legislators) should have, is to formalize what the Beis Din already decided (with both parties acquiesing to it.)

  24. #27, in the past fifteen years two judges have been convicted of taking bribes in New York City; a horribly high number. In the same fifteen years however, I’ve come to see literally dozens of dayanim acting in a manner the Torah defines as corrupt. I’ve encountered ba’alei din writing checks to mosdos controlled by a dayan. I’ve seen batei din involve themselves in the criminal enterprises of the ba’alei din. I seen ba’alei din appeal to the major lay supporters of an institutional Beth Din in order to sway the direction of a Din Torah. And let’s please not forget that the Torah defines a ba’al din holding open a door for a dayan as corruption. So please, spare me your racist platitudes about drunk legislators and corrupt judges.

  25. “women in this situation will accept a questionable Get rather than have no Get at all.”

    That’s the whole problem, Cantor. A woman will accept a “questionable” get and remarry and produce mamzeirim.

    Please, knock it off already.

    Comment by Yatzmich — January 2, 2008 @ 11:05 pm
    R E P L Y

    Ever bother to consider why they are willing to accept such a Get? I didn’t say they want such a Get, but they are willing to take it, if that’s all that’s available to them. Better something that willbe accepted in some places, than nothing. #24 was quick to remind us all the R. Rackman’s Beth Din created possible problems with mamzeirut and eiseht ish. But he failed to answer my question. Again, why is it that despite near universal Orthoodx condemnation of the R. Rackman Beth Din, did desperate women flock to him seeking his annulments of their marriages? Someone, a respected rav preferably, please answer that question, and klal Yisrael will be well on its way to resolving the problem of the recalcitrant husband

  26. cantoresq,

    You’re high exaggeration of corrupt Butei Dinim, pales in comparison to the known and obvious corruption, ineptitude, and malice openly committed by secular courts who don’t even rule based on the man-made law they are supposed to.

    Your clear loshon hora and motzei shem ra about Batei Dinim in general does not take away one iota of the sweat and love these holy men put into Klal Yisroel, ruling with love and based exclusively on the timeless TORAH as given to us by Hakodesh Boruch Hu at Har Sinai.

    What is preferable, having some shiegitz decide the fates of precious Jewish children or having it decided by Rabbonim and Talmidei Chachomim?
    What is preferable, deciding the fates of precious Jewish children based on the laws as written by some legislators in the Great State of Louisiana (or whichever your State of preference may be) or based upon Halachas Moshe MiSinai as ruled by our Chachomim?

  27. Joseph, I don’t know who you are nor do I know your experience in courts or in Batei Din. You are free to dismiss what I write about the corruption that abides in batei din as just so much loshon hara. But doing so, will not erase the problem. Nor will it help klal Yisrael. Moreover, based upon your post you don’t seem to know all that much about how batei din operate today. You claim that batei din rule based upon Halacha. Actually, if you read the shtarei birurin used by the “busy” batei din, you’ll see that in fact p’shara and not din is applied. Moreover virtually all batei din will decline to adjudicate a dispute if one or both sides insist on a din Torah based upon klalei halacha with a heichan dantuni authoried by the dayanim. The dayanim simply do what they want, or what they are paid to do.

  28. I know a woman who’s waiting for a get now for several years, from an abusive husband, & when asked why he refuses to give one, he asnwers w/ absolute malice, “if I won’t gain anything from it why in the world should I grant her a get”?? (he is very overweight so he knows that he won’t remarry again so fast)
    or, “she can bang her head against the wall…”
    Let me mention that this man is supposedly a big talmid chuchem, & has many admirers because he does like to preserve his public image. But if anyone even tries getting involved he reveals his darkest side…
    I’m posting this just to make some people aware of what’s going on even in the most heimishe circles.

  29. Cantoresq:

    Here’s what you wrote in your reply post #22:

    “#17, you make assumptions about both my education and experience.”

    Here’s what you wrote in your post #4

    “My extensive experience indicates that a women with nothing will accept a Get of “questionable validity” than remain with nothing.”

    To paraphrase the famous saying: anyone who has cantoresq for a lawyer is represented by a fool.

    Putting it more succinctly, you go on and on on this thread bragging about all the cases you’ve seen in Bais Din and Civil court, cloaking yourself with this air of authority, throwing around legal and halachic expressions and then you tell me I’m making assumptions about your education and experience!! Chamor Nosei Sforim fits nicely as a description of your education and experience.

    I don’t think anyone reading your broadsides against Batei Din and the desperate situation they tend to leave women in as a matter of course (as you characterize it) can possibly mistake the tenor of your comment about women accepting questionable gittin in any other way than I did. As did 3, 7, 13, 21 and 25. Oh, yeah, we’re all crazy and you’re normal, I forgot.

  30. #19: I really don’t feel qualified to anwer your question about forcing a woman to accept a get. What I have heard about is Heter Meah Rabbonim, a somewhat complicated halachic method for giving the husband the halachic status of being permitted to marry. Since that is the point of your question, it would seem to be the solution to the problem, if done correctly.

    Maybe someone else can explain it and also explain where it leaves the wife afterwards: ie: can she remarry based on a Heter Meah Rabbonim.

  31. Cantoresq at it again from #22:

    “Sadly, I can also think of no institution or judicial body that is, as a general matter, more corrupt and riddeled with profound systemic problems than Beth Din. With the way things are now, no G-d fearing Jew should ever go to a Beth Din. The more chareidi the tribunal, the greater the problems it has.”

    What a vicious slander! You can’t think of ANY institution more corrupt than Bais Din?! “No G-d fearing Jew should EVER go to a Beth Din?! WOW!! You really are beyond the pale.

  32. Cantoresq –
    Why is a questionable get better than no get? Is it like dessert at your favorite resturant. “Well, if they don’t have the pecan pie, apple pie will do?”
    A get can not be “questionable!” If it’s good, fine. If it’s not good then it’s worth nothing because it will not allow her to remarry.

    What don’t you understand?

  33. TownShrier from the strong ad hominum attacks you’ve leveled at me, it’s fairly obvious that I hit an exposed nerve. What gives chabibi? Are you a dayan? Or perchance do you know I’m right, but you can’t reconcile that knowledge with your other religious training and beliefs?

  34. Yatzmich: A get today is well on the way to being treated like a chicken. Depending on who shechts and under what hashgocho, various Jews will accept it as kosher or reject it as unkosher. The same is becoming true of Gittin, and in certain cases is already true. Recently, in the past 5-7 years numerous poskim, R. Dovid Feinstein, R. Elyashiv and others have begun raising questions about a Get given under the shadow of what they have labeled an umdenah d’muchach. It’s a cute way of getting out of the ban on giving a get with an attached t’nai. These poskim hold that if the umdenah is not fulfilled, then there is a question as to whether or not the husband gave the get with gemirat da’at, and while not ourightly declaring the Get given posul, they recomend that a second Get be given just to be safe. Other poskim find this line of reasoning to be nonsense and uphold the first Get. Thus the first Get is questionable. Similar disputes abide when a Get is given under the rubric of a New York Supreme Court Judge stating his/her intention to apply DRL §236(b)(5)(h) (the Get Law). It is my experience that most women when faced with the choice of accepting such a Get or having nothing, will take the Get since they know that certain poskim will uphold its validity even though others might not.

  35. Town Shrier: Heter Meah Rabbonim is a vehicle which allows one to override Cherem d’Rabbeinu Gershom. Sometimes it works to allow a man to take 2 wives, sometimes it allows a man to be megaresh an isha Ba’al Korchah. When it allows the 2 wives, it usually includes being mafkid the Get by a shalish, usually a Beis Din, to be collected by the wife when she is available, willing, or able, depending on the circumstance.
    It can NEVER override the issur of a women taking two husbands, as that is d’oraisa and a chiyuv Kares. Hence, w/o a get, the heter meah rabonim will do nothing for her, it will NOT allow her to remarry.

  36. I could be wrong, but I believe in this case, the secular courts did NOT force the husband to give a get. He gave it on his own 1 years ago.

    These are the facts as I have read them elsewhere:

    The husband had signed a prenuptial agreement stating that he would go before a Montreal rabbinical court immediately upon issuance of a provisional decree of civil divorce, the latter of shich he gave in 1981 when his wife was 31 years old.

    Despite his responsibility, he did not give the get until 1995 when she was 47 years old.

    She sued him for damages due to the fact that by the time he complied and gave the get, she was too old to have kids.

    In September 2005, the Quebec Court of Appeal overturned a lower court’s decision which had ordered the ex-husband him to pay his ex-wife damages of $47,500 plus interest going back to 1995.

    The current decision reinstated the damages.

    No forced get involved anywhere.

    Hwere

  37. Hate to say it, but I’m still waiting for my rabonnim to ENFORCE the get (and money) that I was supposed to get from my ex-husband. Unfortunately, rabonnim are looked at with about as much respect as law enforcement officers, teachers, and trash pick up men(women) these days. Sometimes they deserve that, most times not. Like I said, I’m still waiting… it’s ten years later, I do not know that I will ever see one bloody penny of the fifteen thousand that the rabonnim ordered him to pay me, AND, I wish that I had gone to the legal court, to get my ex to pay. Good for her!

  38. Cantoresq:

    Nice try:

    You probably meant, with your pathetic pretense of latin: argumentum ad hominem (Latin: “argument to the man”, “argument against the man”) This is defined as:

    replying to an argument or factual claim by attacking or appealing to a characteristic or belief of the person making the argument or claim, rather than by addressing the substance of the argument or producing evidence against the claim. The process of proving or disproving the claim is thereby subverted, and the argumentum ad hominem works to change the subject.

    Now since I responded to the substance of your argument and demonstrated why you deserve to be called a Chamor Nosei Sforim, it is not ad hominem, but simply a statement of fact.

    I am neither a dayan nor someone so pathetically devoid of reason as to recognize any truth in your diatribes against dayanim and batei din. Ironically, your sophomoric suggestion that my argument is “ad hominum” conveniently overlooks the fact that you insult and defame the whole world of Batei Din and Chareidim in every post you made on this thread: the ultimate ad hominem argumentum. Ergo (this means I have proven the proposition), you are a hypocritical Chamor Nosei Sforim as well as a poor pretender to intellect.

  39. In today’s world many of the Batei Din do not have power to enfocre anything that they do and many (not all) are corrupt and favor Rabbi’s and the like. As for secular courts getting involved, many people are now telling women to get a pre-nup in which if the husband refused to give a get he will pay her money to support herslef and their kids. In the olden days people used to add in conditions into the ketubah but since that is not recognized by our civil system u need to have both. Now if the husband wants to give a get so that he does not have to pay her the money I am not so sure how that is forced b/c that clause could have been in the ketubah so I am not sure what the difference is besides for the fact that few people want to actually change the ketubah and as number 41 noted rabbanim cannot go after her husband to get her money (by the way secular courts can be gone to enforce the beit dins ruling so i guess there is still time.) I think women need to play both sides b/c otherwise they have nothing, and not to offend anyone but I do not think that bais din is a place to resolve anything, obviously you need them to handle the get but everything else should not be resolved there as secular court have a much harder time getting away with bribery b/c once it is found out there will be a public outcry that is not the same from beit din.

  40. TownShrier (Kishmo kein hu): Thank you very much for pointing out my spelling error. How I curse the day that spelling became standardized. Now that you had your little fun at my expense, please address the substance of my assertions. If my comments on Beth Din are percieved as ad hominem, so be it. It is well deserved. As Freud once famously said “Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.” Indeed I do intend to speak pejoratively about Beth Din as a general matter. I do so becuase the overwhelming majority of datanim I have encountered, while very intelligent and well learned, are either corrupt, lazy, unwilling to deal with the issues at hand peferring to ignore inconvinient truths, cynical, arrogant and more concerned with the appearance of doing the right thing than about actually doing the right thing. Usually they present themselves with combinations of the above characteristics. A very prominent dayan once very sanguinely told me that chareidim need to engage in benefits fraud since without it, how would they own houses. The idea of chareidim actually doing honest work in order to afford houses, or not owning houses, didn’t even register with him. This is a manhig b’Yisreal? A moreh Hora’ah? You can deride me all you want. Feel free to write me out of Orthodoxy (I’m on the slow track out anyway). But please do not be so foolish as to ignore the problems in our midst that I describe.

  41. 46: Cantoresq: “But please do not be so foolish as to ignore the problems in our midst that I describe.”

    I am neither foolish nor ignorant. I also do not have a problem with identify serious issues facing the Jewish world and talking candidly. My objection to your posts is that you take a startlingly cavlalier attitude to halachos of gittin, mamzeirus and lashon harah, while at the same time committing one egregious rhetorical and substantive blunder after another. For example, you are a serial generalizer: everyone is corrupt, all Bais Dins are bad, the more Chareidi the worse, the “overwhelming majority”, etc., etc.

    You would find a much more receptive audience if you did not speak with these outrageous sweeping generalizations. Also, comments like the Freud reference are vulgar to those who understand them and inappropriate for this kind of website.

    Are there problems in the Bais Din system (if it can be called that)? Absolutely. Does your rhetoric advance solutions. Absolutely not, while being abhorrent to halachic standards of behavior and speech.

    We should care for every Jew, so I’ll leave on a conciliatory note, in the spirit of “hocheach tocheach es amisecha”: with your present attitude, no one needs to write you out of Orthodoxy nor are you on your way out on a slow track. You’re gone. If you reconsider the stridency of your attitude and judge your fellow Jews favorably as well as look for solutions, rather than just raging against the whole Bais Din world.

  42. We should care for every Jew, so I’ll leave on a conciliatory note, in the spirit of “hocheach tocheach es amisecha”: with your present attitude, no one needs to write you out of Orthodoxy nor are you on your way out on a slow track. You’re gone.

    R E P L Y
    Good bye then. Save your concerns for someone who will respond to them.

  43. “We should care for every Jew, so I’ll leave on a conciliatory note, in the spirit of “hocheach tocheach es amisecha”: with your present attitude, no one needs to write you out of Orthodoxy nor are you on your way out on a slow track. You’re gone.

    R E P L Y
    Good bye then. Save your concerns for someone who will respond to them.

    Comment by cantoresq — January 4, 2008 @ 1:19 pm ”

    We can only hope you mean it.
    Good riddance.

  44. TownShrier:

    You misunderstood. My “”goodbye” is directed at you; not this site. Given your truculence and given your arrogance in assuming the roles of both jusge and jury vis-a-vis my religiosity, I have no desire to interact with YOU. I will however continue to post on this site. I will however totally ignore anything you post.