Was women's suffrage a mistake?

I’m guessing you don’t mean MY opinion, Joseph.

(I’m a woman)

Yes. Women’s suffrage was a mistake. Women exist to be obedient to their husbands and have babies. Not to speak their minds or count as members of society. In fact, best not to mention them.

mw13, do you disagree that a woman’s place is in the home and that civilization for thousands of years, until roughly 100 years ago, always recognized and acted as such. And are you unfamiliar that our seforim hakedoshim state that a man’s place is to go out in the world and engage outside the home while a woman’s place is to remain in the home and run they family’s domestic affairs?

Do you think not only the American founding fathers got it wrong, but all of civilization from the beginning of time until Susan B. Anthony came along all got it wrong, including Chazal and our own chachomim?

So, based on that logic, let’s empty out all the yeshivos were masses learn every day, so that they can go to work and their wives can stay home. After all, the phenomenon of so many people learning is very new, in the post-Shoah world.

Do you think that all of Jewish history from the beginning of the settling of Eretz Yisroel until the Holocaust had it wrong, including Chazal?

The Wolf

We can see from this year’s election that it clearly was.

Without it we wouldn’t be this close to electing a volcanic tempered witch!

“do you disagree that a woman’s place is in the home and that civilization for thousands of years, until roughly 100 years ago, always recognized and acted as such”

Factually inaccurate. There were plenty of women who worked outside their homes, at least in European and American society. For example, in Europe, huge numbers of Christian women became nuns and some had significant influence. And in rural America, labor shortages meant that women had to participate very actively in farm work. An interesting example: Lyndon Johnson’s grandmother was a cowgirl! Women also worked in factories from the early days of the industrial revolution.

“ideally a wife should be home with the children and the husband be the breadwinner”

Obviously inconsistent with the Kollel system.

“having a husband/father in full-time Limud Torah HaKedosha is surely one of the exceptions”

Well at least you admit that the Kollel lifestyle is an exception and not ideal.

“Without it we wouldn’t be this close to electing a volcanic tempered witch!”

We can thank the women of America for it is likely that they will be the ones to save us from having Donald Trump as President. That alone proves that it wasn’t a mistake. White male voters are all set to elect someone who lies so often he is a full employment program for fact checkers, who promotes junk science, whose tax plan would give the country ten trillion dollars more debt, who slavingly follows Vladimir Putin in every foreign policy matter, who has a history of doing business with organized crime, who ran an illegal fradulent university, and who incites anti-Semitic hatred as no major party candidate in history has ever done.

PS I know I am doing something right when I have both Joseph and CharlieHall disagreeing with me. All in good fun. 🙂

“New Jersey allowed women to vote from the beginning, or at least since 1797.”

Women could not vote in New Jersey after 1807. Wyoming Territory would allow women to vote starting in 1869 followed by Utah in 1870.

“This was not intended as a lesson in American history.”

An argument was made from history. I was simply debunking it.

” I also note that many of the founders held more liberal views”

To be honest I think most of the Founders did not see a major problem with slavery. The number who became abolitionists was clearly a minority. It was a major blind spot that would lead to a horrible Civil War two generations later.

Joseph: Eh. It’s not crazy. Some even read the Rambam in the Moreh that way. Certainly the concept of Mitzvos/Halachos D’Oraisa being given as they were because Klal Yisrael at Mattan Torah was not in a position to accept otherwise is a serious opinion in the Rishonim (they say it by Korbanos, Goel HaDam, and some others). That doesn’t make it any less binding or mean it can ever change. It just explains why those Mitzvos were given as they were.

“The Modern Orthodox and Dati Leumi worlds never adopted the Kollel for Everyone system and are doing fine. They also aren’t requiring massive government subsidies for their survival.”

Dr. Hall forgot about the 350 billion shekels annually that supports the settlements. It’s actually even more than that, but some parts of the settlement budget are ‘concealed’ in other budget items. This is besides the budget for hesder yeshivas. The entire chareidi education system receives about 200 billion shekels, and that’s for elementary schools too. The married kollel students are budgeted at about 800 shekels (approx. $200) per student per month. Unmarried yeshiva bochurim are budgeted at about half of that.

All the arguments and explanations that you will use to justify the settlement budget, how necessary it is for the nation’s security, etc. can be applied to the chareidi kollel system as well.

As an aside, some Dati Leumi Roshei Yeshiva or Roshei Kollel in a moment of candor are sometimes willing to admit which system is producing greater Talmidei Chachamim.

“the response is namecalling. What I said is truth and you know it.”

Continue deluding yourself. It wasn’t worth the effort to go through to disprove your nonsense on a one by one basis.

Bringing in Avi Weiss was just to show how deluded you are.

Funny I just saw something about women in Saudi Arabia fighting for the right to drive, no it was not a mistake women are people too, you were born in the wrong century Joseph.

The Queen is most anxious to enlist everyone in checking this mad, wicked folly of ‘Women’s Rights’. It is a subject which makes the Queen so furious that she cannot contain herself.

Queen Victoria

The founding fathers were for a Republic.

They were against democracy

Today ,they would ruefully remark they were prescient indeed.

ironic,some of the radicals such as Jefferson did believe in a greater element of democracy . but he was more strongly opposed than many of the others to any inclusion of women, blacks, and .. big cities which he termed “ulcers on the body politic”.

Charlie quoting me:

“This was not intended as a lesson in American history.”

Charlie: An argument was made from history. I was simply debunking it.

Charlie quoting me: “when I have both Joseph and CharlieHall disagreeing with me.”

Charlie: The question was a yes or no question. You have to agree with Joseph or you have to agree with me. Or withdraw from the debate.

Charlie quoting me: ” I also note that many of the founders held more liberal views”

Charlie: To be honest I think most of the Founders did not see a major problem with slavery. The number who became abolitionists was clearly a minority. It was a major blind spot that would lead to a horrible Civil War two generations later.

Response: First of all, there is a difference between the question in this thread (should women be able to vote) and all of the other stuff discussed. On the issue in this thread, I am quite sure we agree, and frankly, I am quite sure that 80% or more (I would hope more) of the people posting agree that women should be allowed to vote in the US. Indeed, I really do believe Joseph was just having fun with the topic/question, which is silly.

Second, you changed your position on the founders in this thread. My position has not changed on them.

Like most humans before the last 20 years when all of a sudden everyone polarized with a clarity of vision unseen in the past (religion too…almost on every issue), they were probably complicated and conflicted people. They were also a group and held conflicting opinions.

Again, the point of my comment was the founders were not perfect, so even if they did not agree with women’s suffrage (which is not a sure thing, while it did not get done until later, its not clear that at least some did not agree with the idea), it does not matter because they could be wrong.

Joseph–your quote is immediately above and too long to quote.

Based on my quick research, you appear to be correct. However, the gist of what he says would appear to apply to America, but he was saying it for Israel. R’ Uziel took the opposite position and R’ Kook appears to be in the minority.

In any case, I acknowledge that I was wrong. I figured voting was too modern for their to be any real binding halachic authority on it, and that whatever people may think on various issues, it would seem they would allow the vote. Which appears to be the majority opinion, but not the only one.

Miami,

R’Uziel was out of the respected consensus on this ,as he was on other things

Very few were pro suffrage, and even those who tolerated it, ’twas more out of Bsha’as ha’dchak

R’Uziel was out of the respected consensus on this ,as he was on other things

Miami,et al,

Does it need to be zero sum?

Women [ with men] could vote for the House, while

men vote for the Senate

It would be

‘Progress’ [for those who need to have]

over the late 19th century,

when men voted for the House, and

Legislatures voted for the Senate

Time for Truth: Miami,et al,

Does it need to be zero sum?

Women [ with men] could vote for the House, while

men vote for the Senate

It would be ‘Progress’ [for those who need to have]

ME: I am not sure if this is an attempt to demonstrate that the moderate position does not always make sense. If that is the point of that comment, I agree, it does not always. But more often than not, in my view, it is more logical then the extremes because most arguments taken to extremes produce absurd results.

However, here, to me, there is only one possible answer that women’s suffrage was not a mistake. I understand that is influenced by my world view that A) it is not inconsistent to say that women and men are not exactly alike and might be better off in different roles, but B) they are equally as intelligent and there is no reason to prevent them from what I consider to be such a basic right.

Also, I have already acknowledged that my prediction about this halachic issue (which was due to my incorrect assumption that women voting was too new to really have been dealt with) was incorrect.

I do not for whatever it is worth (and I realize, that is not much), think that R’ Kook’s arguments were very convincing. He clearly stated he felt women were not as smart, and it seems all of his other views were consistent with his conclusion that women were not only not as smart as men, but did not have the same neshamah as men etc….

And Indeed, all of his other reasons appear to be in support of that main conclusion, which I have to assume is not normative halacha.

The rest of his reasons: Marital strife? So does that mean single women can vote? Modesty? Anything a women does that you feel is a man’s purview can lead to that argument.

Anyway, I admit, my prediction on this one was incorrect. But again, while perhaps not in the charedi world which believes in absolute daas torah, one has to distinguish between a rabbi’s views that are based in halacha vs ones that really are not and are on non-halachic issues.

It would not surprise me if at the time, he was in the majority on the voting issue because that is where the world’s mind was at. Indeed, that was yet another one of his arguments, that Israel should not be among the first to do it. But that does not mean these were halachic opinions as evidenced by the fact that there are religious women in the Kinneset today.

I doubt his answer would have been the same if the question was about an issue that he believed had a clear halachic answer.

Again, just my .02.