- This topic has 78 replies, 19 voices, and was last updated 8 years, 1 month ago by .
-
Posts
-
Here’s the latest narishkeit, adopted by majority vote of the neearim.
Sep 22, 2016 — Whereas our tradition celebrates married couples living together in peace and harmony, in love and devotion all of their lives; and,
Whereas the Torah recognizes that some marriages cannot be sustained and therefore provides procedures for the termination of those marriages; and,
Whereas in some unfortunate instances a husband or wife refuses to cooperate with the appropriate instructions of a beth din regarding the termination of their marriage with a get, thereby preventing their spouse from building a new family life; and,
Whereas the prenuptial agreement of the Beth Din of America (BDA) has obtained the approval of dozens of leading rabbinic authorities and remains, in the eyes of both activists and scholars, the single most effective solution to the agunah problem; and
Whereas even those members of the Rabbinical Council of America (RCA) who follow rabbinic authorities who rule differently than those of the BDA can use a different prenuptial agreement that meets the requirements of their rabbinic authorities
Therefore the Rabbinical Council of America declares that each of its members must utilize, in any wedding at which he is the officiant (mesader kiddushin), in addition to a ketubah, a rabbinically-sanctioned prenuptial agreement, where available, that aids in our community’s efforts to ensure the timely and unconditional issuance of a get.</blockequote>
Check out the bold. So basically, on majority vote, they decided to declare what the people who didn’t vote for the resolution think. And it’s false.
My personal opinion: I think the RCA is trying to kick out the frum members so only the left-wing will be left.
Any reason why you left out the opinion of Rabbi Willig who has suggested using these prenups for years?
The RCA caters to its customers. Note the very specific reference their press release makes regarding “activists” (and even lists them prior “scholars”).
They lick their finger and stick it into the air to see which way the wind of public opinion is blowing, and based on that they issue their resolutions to meet their clientele’s demands.
And what are you doing to prevent a Get being used as an evil tool in a way that Chazal (nearly certainly) did not foresee?
Any reason why you left out the opinion of Rabbi Willig who has suggested using these prenups for years?
He’s entitled to his opinion.
However, it seems that someone who doesn’t agree with any prenuptial agreement besides the kesuvah is not entitled to that opinion according to the RCA.
And what are you doing to prevent a Get being used as an evil tool in a way that Chazal (nearly certainly) did not foresee?
I advocate doing away with the anachronistic kiddushin ritual.
DY- that is unresponsive and sarcastic. What is your solution?
Kiddiushin and Get isnt the problem by itself. The problem is the Torah and Chazal put safe guards into the get that would have avoided using the get as a weapon. However in the US in 2016, these safeguards are not availble. Its against the law to beat someone up and even community pressure doesnt always work as in a case I heard of where the man civially divorced his wife and then married a non-jew (Meaning he doesnt consider himself part of the jewish community anymore, so community pressure is non-existant)
It was sarcastic, but it was very responsive.
I am saying that if pre-nups cause more damage than good, they should be rejected even if there is no solution.
More to the point of this thread, at the very least, the opinion of someone who feels that pre-nups do more harm than benefit should be respected
“The RCA caters to its customers. Note the very specific reference their press release makes regarding “activists” (and even lists them prior “scholars”).
They lick their finger and stick it into the air to see which way the wind of public opinion is blowing, and based on that they issue their resolutions to meet their clientele’s demands.”
Exactly. And that’s exactly what the Conservative movement did. Cater to the feminists and the lazy so that you’re left with the worst. Hopefully the RCA will go into rapid decline just like the Conservative movement now is. The saddest part is that the Zionists have forced geirus to be monopolized by the RCA in America. What will happen when the RCA finally REALLY flies the coup and the greater community completely swears them off as non-Orthodox?
Why would the RCA care about anything said hare?
See also http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/coffeeroom/topic/ou-kashrus-is-not-reliable
Shaychus?
Neville, to whom did Chazal cater when they instituted the ketuba, which is essentially a pre–nup?
Yeah, the RCA and the OU are Judaism’s “too big to fail” organizations, and they know it.
Let’s not staw man. The issue here isn’t on making any kind of agreement on anything pre-marriage. The issue is that of the compulsory get. Avi, Chazal abolished practices in their day that insured the get would always be given. I don’t see how anyone can even argue that there’s any ambiguity in the halachah here. Also, I wasn’t only talking about this when I spoke about catering to the feminists. There’s also the little fact that probably more than half of the women in RCA communities wear pants and the RCA remains continuously silent and let’s the problem get worse.
The RCA cannot force dress codes on their communities.
Neville- actually the issue is what to do about evil men who use halacha evilly to take advantage of other people. Since the times of Chazal until recently there were ways for Rabbis to socially control such behavior. Until recently there was not much economic incentive for such behavior.
Things have changed.
The question is how does halacha deal with this new situation?
The answer is that the Rabbis have a lot of discretion. Torah lo bashomayim hi.
ZD, if they so desired, they could do so just as much as they enforce prenuptial agreements.
Anyhow, the point NCB made wasn’t about forcing, it was about not keeping silent.
They cannot enforce anything, however the Rabbis who perform the weddings can tell the people that they will not perform the wedding without the pre-nuptuals. If the people seek a civil marriage or “living in Sin” there is nothing the Rabbi can do.
I do find it fascinting with the frequent news stories in the mainstream media of Get Refusal and the tremoundus Chilul hashem such articles cause, the more charedim, dont dont anything and dont seem to care
ZD, right-wing shuls don’t have any legal authority to enforce dress codes either, yet they don’t have the same problems. As DY pointed out, I didn’t say anything about enforcing. I DID, however, say something about people making straw man arguments… Perhaps you missed that.
however the Rabbis who perform the weddings can tell the people that they will not perform the wedding without the pre-nuptuals
They could also refuse membership to those who don’t keep halachah.
And saying chareidim don’t seem to care and that causes chillul Hashem seems backwards to me.
In fact, a huge chillul Hashem was caused not too long ago when a chareidi “beis din” was caught going TOO far to enforce giving gittin.
In general in more MO shuls, the board of directors controls the shul, not the Rabbi. He is an employee. Most charedi shul (NOT all) the shul is a shteibel type where its the rabbi’s shul and he has more control.
Honestly I dont think any charedi rabbi would refuse membership to someone who didnt keep halacha, unless they were blatant about it (Like driving to shul on shabbos and parking in front of the shul) If someone was known not to be as religious as others, outside the shul, but not blatantly, I think most charedi rabbis would let it go, or gently try to get them to keep more.
Beating up people for Gets, in the USA , Is a Chilul Hashem. Its one thing if its quiet and nobody knows about it, but when it goes to the mainstream press, it is a BIG problem
Why does protecting women from men who cruelly refuse to give them a get and leave them trapped for life ‘catering to feminists’?
There is a huge problem of agunos. And yes, it is imperative to find a solution for this problem.
Let’s look at what happened without prenups…
Too many women were left forcibly single for life.
A whole sting operation incriminated a Lakewood rabbi and his henchmen who would beat men viciously to obtain a get for their wives. They’re sitting in jail now, and the press had a field day. Massive chillul Hashem.
Two chassidic men were caught plotting to kidnap and murder a man who refused to give his wife a get. Massive chillul Hashem.
There’s a girl a year older than me who went to school with me. She is a talented beautiful young lady – and she is an aguna.
Her ‘husband’ has exhorted thousands of dollars from her family, and still has not given her a get. It is likely he never will. They were together for under six months, and she may be doomed to spend the rest of her life alone because of one cruel man’s achzarius.
A woman who lives a few blocks away from me has been an aguna for the past six years.
If you don’t like prenups, what solution do YOU have for these women?
Your rav may not agree with prenups. But clearly the rabbonim at RCA do. I think it is commendable that they are actively taking solutions to prevent so many future agunos.
Why can’t shuls enforce dress codes? Even places of public accommodation have dress codes such as no entrance to men who are not wearing ties. Offices and schools, even public schools, have dress codes. Shuls have even more authority as they are not only private bu religious organizations.
“Beating up people for Gets, in the USA , Is a Chilul Hashem.”
That we can absolutely agree upon.
And, you’re right about Charedi Rabbis not kicking people out. Nonetheless, the Charedi world does not have the same problems as the MO. I imagine if women started showing up in pants, the Rabbi would start working in lessons about hilchos tznius that would make them feel really uncomfortable and either leave or change.
Alternatively, you could say that the MO shuls pull the pants wearers and shul-talkers away so that they don’t end up at the Orthodox Orthodox shuls. That’s kind of a backwards way of looking at the MO optimistically.
And at the RCA every twenty-something year old member gets the same vote as Rabbi Willig. So a couple of twenty-something year old fresh members can outvote Rabbi Willig or any other rabbi on any matter or resolution.
And at the RCA every twenty-something year old member gets the same vote as Rabbi Willig.
When Bais Shammai and Bais Hillel voted on halacha, did everyone have an equal vote, or did “Rav X” have 2.37 votes and “Rav Y” have 1.38 votes and “Rav Z” have 1.82 votes?
The Wolf
In the words of R’ Jeremy Stern, the head of ORA on the RCA “imposing” a controversial halachik tool on all of its members (slightly edited for context):
This concern is precisely why we formulated the resolution not to require THE halachic prenup for the prevention of Get-refusal, but A halachic prenup for the prevention of Get-refusal. There is literally something for everyone. Really. There is NO posek who argues that a “Rav Moshe Prenup,” which is simply a binding arbitration agreement, creates a Get meuseh. Not one. So, we are not imposing a contentious halachic stance on anyone, since there is no contention with a Rav Moshe Prenup. Besides for that, if you’re a talmid of Rav Bleich (or Rav Bleich himself!), you can use Rav Bleich’s prenup! And if you don’t like that one either, you could use Rabbi David Mescheloff’s Marital Agreement to Mediate (google it to learn more), which he writes in several places has universal halachic acceptance, including from Rav Elyashiv.
In the times of the Gaonim there was a problem with women who weren’t receiving gittin and therefore went off the derech, got divorced in secular courts and married non-Jews. So the Gaonim made a takanah to force a get even in situations where the Gemara did not allow it so that it would be easier for women to get divorced.
Now, unfortunately, today there is no central place of halachic authority like there was in those times. But the RCA is to its members like the Gaonim were to Klal Yisroel at the time. No one is forced to be a member of the RCA. If you don’t like their takanah, then leave.
Part of a July 10, 2013 RCA resolution:
Curious about two things:
1.I’ve never been on a MO shul where women wore pants during davening
2. In the chareidi soldier thread, gedolim were excused for keeping silent . Why the double standard?
1. I have been in MO shuls where women were not dressed k’halachah.
2. It was answered a couple of times in that thread.
I thought you meant dressing not K’Halacha OUTSIDE of shul. Most of them dress more tzniut in shul. The few I know who dont do so at non davening events and are more on the fringe, and its a bit more difficult as you might push them away
I agree the Rabbi has more control over dressing in the shul
In fact, a huge chillul Hashem was caused not too long ago when a chareidi “beis din” was caught going TOO far to enforce giving gittin.
If they had acted more like a Beis Din and put more effort into doing due diligence rather than trying to get a big payout, they wouldn’t have been such an easy target.
DY, it wasn’t answered. The silence was justified for different reasons. The same way their long time silence on molestation has been defended
It was answered at least twice. It’s your prerogative to not accept the answer.
While there are problems in the MO community, there are certainly problems in the charedi community as well and one of them is the relationships with other people. Like it or not, the charedi community needs other groups to help with them.
Calling MO rabbis clowns or other things does not win you friends. You can see that in Israel where the Dati leumi many times get along better with the Chilonim than they do with Charedim even though there interests might be more similar.
To put it simply, If you have a house for sale and you get 2 similar bids. Who do you sell the house to. You likely sell it to the person you like and get along better.
You can also see this in Zoning laws here in the US. If you act with contempt with people and you need a zoning law changed and they refuse (Like building a 5 story school on a residential block) dont complain of anti-semitism when they refuse your zoning variance
Zahavasdad, why are you generalizing? There are Chareidim who get along very well with others and MOs who are intolerant. In fact, I was unfriended by an MO because I dared to ask for sources that there is supposedly no problem of kol isha. Of course, I was accused of intolerance,as is the way with leftists (kol ha posel b’mumo posel).
There are enough who dont get along and the ones who want to get along are many times shoved aside by the more extreme elements.
Do you really think most charedim belive you should spit on soliders? Of course not, but those who disagree are made to be kept quiet
PBA,
Is it the mainstream Yeshiva view that no prenuptial agreements are permitted (i.e. even those simply selecting a Bais Din in advance for arbitration with no monetary penalty)?
Avi K, I’d just like to point out the irony in your post:
…Why are you generalizing?
Of course, I was accused of intolerance,as is the way with leftists
I found it pretty funny.
benignuman, among other objections, it is certainly the mainstream Yeshiva view that no prenuptial agreements are hashkafically correct (especially for a young couple first getting married.)
Its funny about the generalizing comment, Someone claimed they saw a woman wearing pants at an MO shul and all of a sudden ALL MO women wear pants
Gofish, I do not see the irony. I did not comment on all Chareidim or MOs. “There are” only means that some are like that.
Popa, were your RY’s objections halachic (some claim that there is a problem of asmachta) or hashkafic (some say that one should not go into marriage thinking about divorce)?
Avi, there are very strong halachic objections to the BDA prenup, specifically, that can result in a future get me’usa. Search the previous threads in the CR where they were discussed in detail.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.