I’m not interested in getting sucked into a debate that will become increasingly mindless, so I will reply once and will let readers decide for themselves whether my challenges to NASI’s propaganda are better than the responses.
“1. Proponents of this theory inevitably believe in the concept of a bashert and that God created a soul-mate for every person born. So how do they explain from a theological perspective how God could possibly be responsible for a demographic imbalance, as only He could be?
You’re making an incorrect assumption. I am a proponent of age gap but don’t believe every single person born has an inevitable soul-mate. That’s not what Chazal said, and even the gemara about the bas kol is explained by the meforshim as not necessarily applying in all situations.”
False. Bashert is very well-documented, and even if there are different ways of interpreting it, numerous people in YOUR society, including numerous Gedolim, do believe in a straightforward interpretation. What you’re doing is deligitimizing my point simply because you can find an opinion that would not be bothered by the question. So you define my question out of existence. Yet, in an astonishing display of hypocrisy you immediately write the following:
“Also, Chazal say shemoneh esreh l’chupah. Don’t blame G-d for a man made crisis caused by not following Chazal.”
Oh….as if there are no meforshim on THAT statement, and it is meant to be taken literally by all men at all times?
By the way, those same Chazal said a man has an obligation to support his wife, and in fact that it is proper for a man to start a business and build a house BEFORE even getting married (so if you want to do that by 18, better hurry). Ah, but you don’t like that Chazal, so you define it out of existence, and the statements of Chazal you do like you take literally and hit people over the head with. That’s called dishonesty and propaganda. And your fallback position when backed into a corner like this is inevitable “Emunas Chachamim”, which means we just have to stop thinking and do what other people tell us. You only play that card when you run out of bad arguments, and it’s designed to intimidate people into thinking that they will be branded as “not really frum” if they don’t shut up right now and do what they are told.
2. How is it moral and ethical for a shadchan to suggest anything other than the most suitable match for her client, and instead let a presumed demographic issue factor into her matchmaking?
“Agreed. However, in the past, many boys would not have considered an otherwise suitable girl, simply because of age. That is b”H changing. Also, there are often equally suitable (to the shadchan’s eye) matches, so proposing one which would benefit society would not be unethical.”
Right, now boys consider a girl mainly on how much money her parents bring to the table, as well as looks and yichus. I’ve never understood how a society that claims it is the least materiaslistic is in fact the most base and shallow when it comes to shidduchim. You’ll need to find me another Chazal to explain that one.
Furthermore, NASI’s proposal is exactly what I states, to encourage and even pay shadchanim to push shidduchim based on age. Sounds like a great recipe for more shalom bayis issues and divorce, as if we don’t have enough of that already. How about pushing marriage based strictly on essential criteria for having an ideal marriage, insted of playing games with ages and statistics?
“Also, proposing shidduchim to younger boys if they and their parents and rebbeim feel they are ready doesn’t involve this issue.”
Are you willing to publicly state that all the rabbis who pushed “The Freezer” have been proven wrong, now that suddenly boys should date younger?
“3. How is it moral and ethical for a shadchan to hide from singles that they are influenced by outside factors?
I’m not sure what you mean by that, but any broker (halachah views a shadchan as a type of broker) is influenced by factors that aren’t necessarily to the benefit of his clients, and has to know the halachos of what he must and what he need not disclose.”
Very simple what I mean by that. The shadchan’s job, and only job, is to present the best available match for the human beings they deal with, and not to worry about some presumed demographic problem. And if they are being influenced by that, they have a moral and ethical responsibility to tell that to their clients up front, that they will not consider matches of a certain age even if they may be more suitable otherwise. I’m sure people won’t mind one bit, since, after all, the main thing is getting dates for the older women first.
“4. If it is true that women are at such a terrible disadvantage, why are women so quick to turn down suitors, often for the most trivial reasons? That is hardly the behavior one would expect from people who are supposedly competing for a mate from an endangered species. Did single women fail to get this memo?
Whether or not women turn down men for trivial reasons (men do the same, BTW) has nothing to do with the number disparity. They obviously don’t think their reasons are trivial, and would usually say they wouldn’t marry the guy if he was the last man on Earth. Anyway, he’s not.”
Again, you ignored my question. In fact, you didn’t answe any of my questions to the point. You essentially either said they are not really questions or that it doesn’t matter. Bad job.
By the way, NASI now put out a propaganda video on YouTube that is directed specifically at Lakewood people and their ilk, and has already received almost 14,000 views. I thought YouTube was assur. Which gedolim endorsed creating a propaganda video and putting it up on YouTube, and why have so many people who claim to be so deeply concerned with Emunas Chachamim watched it?
You people need to get real. I can’t take you any more seriously than the climate change people, the human rights groups, or others of that sort who engage in exactly the same sort of hypocrisy and proaganda to push their dogma.