Los Angeles city council members have introduced a proposal banning the sale of fur clothing, Fox News reported.
If the measure passes, LA would be the largest American metropolis to bar the sale and production of the controversial product.
On August 1, over a dozen animal welfare activists met with Councilman Paul Koretz at City Hall to discuss the issue, the L.A. Times reports. If the proposal, written by Koertz and fellow council member Bob Blumenfield, were to pass, L.A. would join West Hollywood, Berkeley and San Francisco in instating such policies.
“The bottom line is that humans do not need to wear the fur of another animal. Not in Los Angeles, not in any other city… To continue to allow the sale of fur is to condone violence,” Brian Ruppenkamp a member of an activist group called Los Angeles Animal Save, said at the Wednesday meeting.
As of now, the proposal would ban the manufacturing of new fur products and the sale of fur apparel, handbags and accessories, with the exception of “used goods.”
Moving forward, Koretz requested that staffers research and report back possible conflicts that the new rules could pose, such as the legal ramifications regarding the fur hats often worn by Hasidic Jewish men.
READ MORE: FOX NEWS
Join the official YWN WhatsApp status
15 Responses
No where in halacha does it mention that a shtreimel from fur must be worn . Its all lies. Synthetic works just as good and its way way cheaper
Its time to put a stop to shtramels in NYC
ot because of the animal activists just because the human pain caused to the parents who have to pay over $6000 for a sons shtramel. It is inhumane
“Another animal”…
An litvish hats from rabbit fur…?
Two points: 1) Shtreimels have been worn by yidden, and not just the chassidishe oilam, for hundreds of years. Yerushalmi yidden came from the Talmidei HaGR”A and they wear it too. There’s a Jewish history with them.
2) Animals were put into this world for us to use- their meat and offspring (i.e.- eggs) are no more or less permitted for us than their fur.
Let them go back to Poland to wear their fur vestments. I was there this past winter, and believe me:- It is frigid bone cold there in Poland in winter.
but the bigger issue is government telling people what they can or can’t wear.
Takes2-2tango, Rebyossel I agree with what you are saying BUT….. it’s not up to me or you to determine what another should spend their money on. I absolutely think fur is ridiculously expensive and unnecessary for completing a daily wardrobe, but that’s up to them to decide. Should I say it’s inhumane and un-halachic to spend tens of thousands of dollars on Pesach hotel programs, luxury cars, a $1000 esrog, exquisite Italian furniture for the home too?
Its a bit of a stretch for a city to make such a law, especially as the fur hats are not produced, or necessarily sold, in Los Angeles. It should be noted that the climate in souther California is not well suited for fur hats, and also that the law does not target Orthodox Jews (which would raise discrimination grounds).
Whether people should spend lots of money on a streimel is a different matter. It’s a way of showing off to the goyim and the frei Jews that in spite of their hopes and dreams of ridding the world of fumkeit, we’re still here. It is a classic “in your face” that truely annoys those who wish we weren’t around any more. It’s a stretch to argue that halacha prohibits such “showing off”, though there a cheaper ways to do so.
$6000 for a hat? Are we crazy? The shtreimlach are getting bigger and bigger, with the fur swept up higher and higher, to the point where they look cartoonish, kind of the way yeshivish hats were getting until recently. If the money can’t be used to pay for wedding expenses or an apartment, then let it be given to tzedakah. We have become assimilated to non-Jewish values to the point where we don’t even realize it.
I hope they don’t ban streimel cookies.
What is next?
Banning leather shoes?
Meat? Fish?
These Leftist of San FraSicko are really living in a diff planet. Democracy Leftist style.
“The bottom line is that humans do not need to wear the fur of another animal.”
That is true (in CA, not in cold regions) but beside the point. Nobody needs to do lots of things, but many like to do them, and that is sufficient reason. No government has the authority to ban something merely because it’s not needed.
Ice cream is absolutely unnecessary, and if it were to be banned not a single person would die or be in worse health, and yet it would be unconstitutional and unthinkable for any government to ban it. We eat ice cream because we want to, and in this week’s parsha we learn that we eat meat for the same reason: כי תאוה נפשך, and that this is right and proper. The same applies to fur, lace, jewelry, or anything else.
Millhouse, to add on the above, we do NOT say a Shechiyanu on clothing like shoes and anything that requires an animal to be killed, despite that the Torah does not forbid it..
What is forgotten in this discussion is that real fur is a natural, long-lasting and biodegradable material that is now produced in a responsible and sustainable fashion. Fake fur (and most other synthetics), by contrast, are usually made from petroleum, a non-renewable, polluting, and non-biodegradable resource. And these synthetics are leaching micro-particles of plastic into the environment every time they are washed — which is not good for nature or animals. No one is forced to wear fur or leather, or to eat meat or dairy, but that doesn’t give animal-rights extremists the right to impose their beliefs on everyone. To learn about the ethical and environmental advantages of natural fur, visit TruthAboutFur.