Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
RebYidd123,
We are talking about in a form that is consumable.
Rebyidd23,
You can say the same exact thing, virtually word for word about Marijuana / THC (the chemical that occurs in marijauna that makes you high)
The little I know,
I would say the same thing to support my position. Google Marijauna vs alcohol to get started.
As an aside can you find me a single recorded case of someone dying from ingesting to much weed?
Which drug tends to make people more violent?
Which drug will render its user incoherent quicker?
Which drug is more addictive?
Interjection,
The high from a bit of marijauna is whole lot less mind altering then the high from alcohol.
The little I know,
Weed is not more damaging to the body then alcohol. Used in moderation weed is healthier especially if it is not smoked (edibles). Alcohol is whole lot more damaging and addictive then weed. That’s the facts. It’s just that in 21st century America one is socially acceptable while one is not.
The little I know,
Would you say those same things about alcohol? Alcohol is a far worse drug then marijauna.
Whatever you may say about Marijuana, the facts are that Alcohol is a whole lot more dangerous. Alcohol is much more addictive, and is more damaging to the mind and body of those that use it then Marijuana. There are countless deaths every year that are caused directly by alcohol while there are non caused by weed.
It is ridiculous that Alcohol is legal while Marijuana is not.
Experience has shown that banning alcohol was not worth it, and that instead of spending billions on enforcing laws that the public don’t want the government can actually make money by taxing the stuff. Why this lesson is not applied to marijuana is beyond me
LAB,
That indicates two things
1.)Woman are culturally conditioned to make believe that these things interest them less then they do or risk being called and thought of as all sorts of nasty things.
2.)Your statement is only somewhat true when it comes to the “video” aspect of the Adult industry. There is the “Toy” aspect that is more female dominated.
Interjection,
That may or may not be the case. I am not a big enough Talmud Chachom to have much of an opinion on that. My point was simply that it is funny how many Frum people seem to think that woman are these innocent emotional creatures with very different desires in these areas then men, and that it is baffling to me how many married frum men are of this opinion as well.
Just reading this thread I find it funny how many Frum people have this weird idea that women don’t have Hirhurim and that it’s all emotional to them. Women have the same desires as men albeit different parts of different acts may be more important to woman then they are to men.
I find it even funnier (and maybe even sad) that even many married frum men still have this misconception. THAT baffles me
There are, in my opinion a couple of things that I would imagine contribute to what the Op wrote (assuming that it is the case- I really don’t believe it is)
1.) People will always sympathize with the person who no longer wishes to be married. Forcing someone to remain married to someone who they do not wish to be married too will (justifiably) leave a bad taste in most people’s mouths.
2.) Women tend to be viewed as the underdog in most fights they have with men (although this is not necessarily the case and indeed these days when woman have equal rights they are in many cases on equal footing-this was however not the case even 100 years ago in both frum and secular society)Most people are inclined to support the Underdog.
3.)According to Halacha A man getting his needs taken care of by other unmarried woman if his wife refuses a divorce is at most transgressing a La”av and is at most chayiv malkos mdirobonnon while a woman doing the same exact thing is considered on par with a murderer and would according to Halacha in an ideal world be executed.
Although it sounds nice to say “withholding a get is never justified” bad divorces can be REALLY bad and if a woman is withholding a man’s children or otherwise abusing him I would not judge the man for using whatever leverage he has to get her to stop; up to and including withholding a Get
Correction to my comment above. I meant to write “if his assertions that the historicity of many of the Torahs stories cannot be reconciled with reality is the truth then what he is saying is the truth” etc
Sam2,
What he says cannot be Apikorsis if he is correct. If his assertions that the historicity of many of the stories in the Torah cannot be reconciled with reality then what he’s saying is the truth. If the Torah is true in any sense then the truth cannot- by definition be Apikorsis.
Ben Levi,
Despite what you keep saying about having “no understanding of what happened during Maaseh Bereishis” you are insisting that the beginning of Bereishis be read literally and that you know for a fact that all life was created in the same literal week less then 6000 years ago. The problem is that this Hypothesis has been proven wrong. Things do not look as they should if this is what happened, and they look as they should if common descent is true.
If there is a minority opinion that Bereishis be read not literally that minority opinion has been proven right by the Metzius. It doesn’t matter how much of a minority he may be or who may have said that he didn’t really mean what he wrote, because he has been proven right practically. The Metzius is that he was right.
Sheepyaf,
So you would Rape a woman before you would Flip a lightswitch on a Saturday? You probably also say that Religion makes people be more moral. Twisted
MDD,
Why??? It’s that kind of statement.
What does leaving over an inheritance have to do with anything? That’s what R Meir seems to be talking about.
What kind of situation could make a person have to choose between Hashem or their children? (Unless i guess their child is trying to force his parents to be not frum- and when was the last time that happened…) I really don’t get the whole statement It seems like its just a nasty self rightous thing to say with no real world application.
Ben Levi,
You did provide a theory. You said that every form of life was created in the span of one week less then 6000 years ago. You also said that the sizes of animals changed about 4200 years ago (Mabul).
Evolution is a theory that species descend from one another and all life on earth has descended from earlier life forms over billions of years going all the way back to a primitive common ancestor.
The question is which theory is better supported by what we now know about the earth and life.
The fossil record clearly supports the second theory. So does a nested hierarchy, so does genetics, so does the distribution of species etc etc.
It’s that simple.
On parenting? I am sure most would agree that the example you gave is bad parenting. Could be there was context there that would justify it but as a general rule if that’s how he parented I think most people experts or otherwise would agree with me on this one.
Commonsart,
Can’t speak for Poppa but if he said that then nope I don’t think he was a very good parent. Doesn’t detract from his greatness in other areas though
Ben Levi,
You said,
“Much of the evidence simply state’s that if this Theory is true then xyz makes sense. a Talmudist would state simply “So what?” and if Theory abc that I dream up would work it could also make sense in fact all you have to say is G-d created things to look this way and you lose all proof.”
The Point is the evolution makes clear predictions about how things will look. To falsify evolution all that would have to happen is for one of those predictions not to pan out.
Lets take the fossil record as an example.
If evolution (common descent) happened the fossil record should show species coming onto the scene after other species and it should reflect that there where times when certain species alive today had not yet appeared. This is what is found WITHOUT EXCEPTION. A mammal fossil has NEVER been found in Cambrian rock. Never. Not once. If one was found that would disprove evolution.
Now it is possible Hashem made it that way but saying that Hashem created all animal life in two literal days does not make that prediction. It is the same with a nested hierarchy and genetics.
Now of course you can answer “because Hashem made it look that way” to anything, if you want you can say the world was created yesterday and Hashem just planted memories and evreything else that indicates otherwise as well. No one can prove you wrong, right? The point is that any claim makes predictions and has to be falsifiable in order to have a discussion about it or for it to be a scientific belief.
Ben Levi,
1.) According to your “big animal before the Mabul” theory there should still be “Pre Cambrian rabbits” (maybe bigger ones- but they should still be there). According to your theory the fossil record still shouldn’t show many many generations of animals existing in completely seperate eras with some not coming onto the scene until much later then others it should show two groups only: one big and one small. This is all besides the points that there were plenty of small Dinos and other creatures in those eras, and the fossils are millions of years old.
2.) Similarities in body structure between people and animals may be discussed by some Torah sources a nested hierarchy isn’t.
Torah Rocks,
1.) Read some books on the subject. You can get them in library. I explained what I meant a few comments ago.
2.) I don’t understand why you think it follows that animals will migrate to every place they can get to.
3.) Evolution makes plenty of predictions that match with what we find. I gave some examples above in my earlier comments.
4.) No Dinosaur fossil less then millions of years old has ever been found. The “squishy stuff” found in a couple of fossils does not contradict this fact. Read about it a bit, again take some books out of the library.
Sam2,
How life started has nothing to do with common descent or evolution other then it had to happen first.
All evolution explains is the diversity and complexity of life (beyond the replicating molecule stage).
Ben Levi,
1.) As I pointed out earlier there are plenty of fossils that are apparently “in flux” even to one who is not familiar with evolution or fossils.
2.)The fossil record shows generations of animals living and dying in completely separate eras. According to what you say there should still be “Precambrian Rabbits” mixed in with the dinosaurs etc. according to evolution there should not be. There isn’t any just as evolution predicts.
3.)There could be some deep Kabalistic reason the world appears as if evolution happened even though it didn’t. That is a belief you are entitled too however it is different then saying that there is no proof to evolution.
Torah Rocks,
1.) As I pointed out to Ben Levi it is not just “similarities” in structure. There is a nested hierarchy in nature that is predicted by common descent. I elaborated more a couple of comments earlier.
2.) Why does it follow that animals will automatically migrate to evrey place on earth where they can live? Why wouldn’t oceans and mountain ranges etc. stop this from happening?
3.) When there is enough evidence to support something and enough things can be accurately predicted by it that is a reason to believe it happened.
Ben Levi,
1.) There are plenty of fossils that show “in between” stages between ancient ancestors of modern species and their modern descendants. Although virtually evrey fossil can be classified as “transitional” there are plenty that are clearly so even to one unfamiliar with fossils and evolution.
2.)Before Darwin it was believed that all animals were created on the same day. So if you would ask someone how they would predict the fossil record would look they would predict that all animals would be found together in the different strata ( there should be plenty of “pre Cambrian rabbits”) Evolution predicts that different species lived at different times with new species appearing only in certain eras and not being around before. The fossil record confirms evolution’s predictions.
4.) I don’t think you fully understood what I meant by a nested hierarchy. It is more then “similarities” I explained it more at length in my above comments.
One more addition to my above comment:
It is also undisputed that Natrual Selection and Mutation play a large role in the descent of species. The questions and discussions among scientists are how much of a role and what other things may play a role as well.
Ben Levi,
1.) The point is that you find the species where they would be expected to be if Evolution happened. As was mentioned earlier all you would have to find to disprove evolution is a fossil rabbit in Precambrian rock. That’s all. The fossil record also clearly shows that the different species lived in different eras as is predicted by evolution. A simple understanding of the pre Darwin ideas on species would lead most to believe all animals that were ever created lived together on earth at one point.
2.) There are fossils of animals that are apparent as “transitional” between species. There are a number of “transitional” wing fossils.(I only mention this because you brought it as an example).
3.)The point with genetics is that special creation does not predict that apes would be more genetically similar to people then say horses or that all mammals will be more similar to eachother then they are to lizards. It doesn’t predict that you will never find a mammal with feathers etc. Common descent does predict this. There is a nested hierarchy in nature that is clearly predicted by evolution.
4.)You can never prove that Hashem didn’t just make the world look as if evolution happened even though it didn’t. The question is if this is the logical conclusion to come too.
Ben Levi,
My point was simply that the vast vast majority of those qoutes about the fossil record are simply advocating one theory of the details of how species evolved from one another over another. They are not saying that the fossil record does not indicate evolution at all. They all agree that the fossil record does show the evolution of species
Sam2,
All punctuated equilibrium suggests is that instead of the gradualist approach that species are always in flux; most species tend to stay stable until subjected to various pressures at which point they start evolving at a “fast” (hundreds of thousands of years plus as opposed to tens of millions plus). It is not as radically different from the classical Darwinian approach as people seem to think and is not nearly universally accepted in either case and plenty of scientists say there is no need for it.
Ben Levi,
1.) There are multiple strings of evidence that point to common descent.
2.) It is not the “skeletal similarities” that are used in of themselves. There is a clear nested hierarchy that is not predicted by special creation.
3.) When Scientists question if the fossil record supports “Darwinian evolution” they are not questioning the fossil record’s support of common descent. They don’t question that because the fossil record does support common descent. There ARE transitional fossils found in the strata where they would be if common descent is true. The discussions among scientists are what theory as to exactly what mechanisms caused it and causes it fit best with the amount of transitional fossils found.
Like was pointed out above this is a distinction that most people who have not actually studied evolution fail to grasp and it applies to the vast vast majority of quotes thrown around claiming to show that scientists do not believe in evolution.
I happen (oddly enough) to agree with smart cookie. Being open minded doesn’t mean that you look down at anyone who is “less progressive” then you. Allot of MO that I meet are only open minded one way- that is to the more progressive
If Beshow works for people in a certain culture that is great and nobody can say that they are wrong for doing things that way. Just don’t pretend that the couple knows each other before they get married in such a case-they do not. It is an arranged marriage (doesn’t mean its wrong, but let’s call a spade a spade)
Also saying silly unproven statements like Chasidishe/or Dating marriages are better or happier is stupid there are too many variables involved in marriage and divorce to make statements like that without doing an extremely comprehensive and thorough scientific study and to the best of my knowledge this has not been (and due to the private nature of such things it probably cannot be) done
Sam2
Your thinking of the Shomronim or Samaritans.
They have “Sifrei Torah” that they write in Ksav Ivri that are basically the same as ours except for a few differences, a big one being that there is a commandment in theirs to build a ‘Beis hamikdash” on Har Grizim.
They also do not except what we call the Torah Shbaal Peh because they were separate from Klal Yisrael already in the times of Tanach WAY before the times of the Tannaim and Ammoraim.
The Karaites are similar to what was known in the times of the second beis hamikdash as the “Tzidukim” who were mainly Cohanim and rejected the teachings of Chazal and the notion of Olam Habbah as well. After the Churban the Tzdukim disapeared and did not leave over any known writings as their version of Judaism revolved only around serving in the Beis Hamikdash whereas the Perushim (followrs of Chazal- Pharisees) still believed in learning Torah and an afterlife even after the Churban and still had what to hold on to.
There were other sects of Judaism that disappeared after the churban as well such as the Essenes who wrote the Dead Sea Scrolls.
Sam2
Your thinking of the Shomronim or Samaritans.
They have “Sifrei Torah” that they write in Ksav Ivri that are basically the same as ours except for a few differences, a big one being that there is a commandment in theirs to build a ‘Beis hamikdash” on Har Grizim.
They also do not except what we call the Torah Shbaal Peh because they were separate from Klal Yisrael already in the times of Tanach WAY before the times of the Tannaim and Ammoraim.
The Karaites are similar to what was known in the times of the second beis hamikdash as the “Tzidukim” who were mainly Cohanim and rejected the teachings of Chazal and the notion of Olam Habbah as well. After the Churban the Tzdukim disapeared and did not leave over any known writings as their version of Judaism revolved only around serving in the Beis Hamikdash whereas the Perushim (followrs of Chazal- Pharisees) still believed in learning Torah and an afterlife even after the Churban and still had what to hold on to.
There were other sects of Judaism that disappeared after the churban as well such as the Essenes who wrote the Dead Sea Scrolls.
Naysburg,
You said,
“Well, as more than one poster has clearly and amply enumerated, she is much worse than an abuser. We don’t determine this, Hashem did.”
This is (whether people here want to admit it in a public forum or not) what most Yeshivish people and their Rabbonim think is true. They honestly beleive that someone writing a book that denigrates their way of life is worse then a Child Molester and probably even a Murderer.
I would venture to say the fact that many Rabbonim are willing to speak out about the denier of women’s stockings, Concerts and same gender marriage while staying silent in the face of things that actually cause immense damage and pain to the people they are supposed to be leading shows that they have a similarly warped sense of morality.
…..I said what I had to say and now Im outta here!! not gonna have a whole discussion about this here!!!
Health,
I am B”H happily married to an awesome woman! I have friends who are divorced that were hurt by Batei Din and I have lost money to and been threatened by unscrupulous Dayanim.
You said,
“I don’t know how much you know about law, esp. in the family arena, but for an appeal to be successful you need either the Judge broke some law or a change of circumstance.”
There is a Law that can be broken in secular court. Not so in a B”D. When you sign that Shtar Berurin you literally give the Dayanim the right to do whatever they want. They do not even have to explain their decision to anyone! It is crazy to expect-let alone demand-that people give anyone that right when it comes to anything of theirs,let alone children.
Now In the event that you have proof of Judicial misconduct from a B”D and move to have the Award vacated in secular court, you will get threatened, your children get threatened, rumors will be spread about you and the B”D will do whatever they possibly can to stop you. This I have experienced.
For the record I sent the text below in an e-mail to B”D Maysharim of Lakewood (although I know what they do I just wanted to get it in writing for this thread):
“Does the B”D typically request that the parties submit to arbitration for custody and assets by the Dayanim on the B”D before facilitating a Get?”
They answered
“Typically, but it’s up to the Dayanim’s determination based on the specific variables.”
Make of it what you will.
I will send out this question to other Batei Din as well although I can predict with near certainty that their response will be the same.
I also find it interesting that I am arguing with two people in this thread; one who says they do not see a moral issue with a B”D demanding that the parties submit to binding arbitration on custody and Assets in order to recieve a get (“Health”) and one who says that Batei Din do not typically make this demand (“the little i know”).
I am not sure what this indicates but it is intresting.
Health,
O.K.
I believe that Facilitating a Get and Binding custody and asset arbitration are separate services, you do not. I won’t convince you and you will not convince me.
That being said, I am truly sorry for insinuating that you didn’t go through a system that you apparently did go through, I should not have made assumptions about you. That was arrogant of me, and I apologize.
I know what I know from my and my friends personal experiences with Batei Din. Maybe I am unlucky and it just happens that I only get to see the “problem” Batei din or maybe you are lucky and got to deal with a good one.
I do however feel very strongly that using the threat of not Facilitating a Get unless someone submits to Binding custody and asset arbitration in a system with no oversight or recourse for those who are wronged, is very very immoral and a disgrace.
Let’s just agree to disagree. I do believe it or not really hate offending people’s sensibilities.
As an aside (and feel free to tell me it is non of my business) was there Children involved in your situation?
The little i know,
I must admit it is a pleasure to deal with someone who at least admits that a B”D extorting someone who comes to them to facilitate a get to submit to arbitration for custody and assets is wrong.
I guess your expereince with Batei Din has been diffrent then mine…
In your mind though, if Rabbonim agree with you that this extortion is wrong why isn’t there public notices signed by them naming and warning people not to sign Shtarei Berurin with Batei Din and Dayanim that do this?
The pain inflicted by such Batei Din and Dayanim is enormous not to mention a Chilul Hashem
Isn’t it more of a danger to the public then many other things they issue public proclomations about?
Health,
The point here is simple.
I believe that using the fact that you can refuse to sell a service that someone else needs (facilitating a get), in order to get them to buy additional services from you (arbitration of custody etc.), is wrong. Especially if the person is willing to pay you well for the service they are asking for. You disagree. Again if you don’t see how this is wrong I really cannot explain it to you any clearer!
You said,
“When’s the last time you were in court? They will never tell you go for arbitration that’s not under their auspices.”
I never said they would! If you show them that you both want to Arbitrate and ask to do so they will say fine!
You said,
“But the fact remains if one doesn’t want to get divorced -they will be forced by the court to get divorced.
Acc. to your train of thought that one party should never be forced to do anything when it comes to divorce and it’s immoral -where is your outcry on this law???? And don’t tell me B’D forcing the woman who asked for Get is different because we are talking about $ & custody; because the one party is also being forced to talk about $ & custody, even though he/she doesn’t want to get divorced.”
If that’s what you think I am saying I must not have been clear. I apologize, and please allow me to explain.
I do not have a problem forcing someone to talk about custody or assets the same way I don’t have a problem with anyone suing someone else for money that they believe is theirs and forcing them to talk about it.
I have a problem with using the fact that someone in your community needs a service that only you offer, to coerce them into buying more services from you. Especially when the service you are coercing them to buy does not have everything any reasonable person would expect for that service (i.e oversight, right to appeal etc.)
That being said we are going in circles here and apparently I am offending everyone. Maybe we can agree to disagree…. and I just pray you never have to go through this system?
The little I know,
I am sorry you are offended.
Everything I said is fact. You know it, I know it, and anyone who has been through this system knows it.
I know that our Rabbonim are all we have and that is why it is so disillusioning when they refuse to publicly do anything about the disgrace that is the current B”D system, among other problems.
Should I name the Rabbonim I have personally seen threaten to harm children over business matters of their parents, or to get people to do something they feel is correct??
I could give case studies from respected Batei Din to back up every assertion I made…. (although anyone who has real knowledge of the system knows it is true…)
I could you know.. it’s only residual feelings of respect that stops me.
That being said I honestly have no wish to offend anyone and if the truth is to disgusting for some of you to bear I can fully understand that. In fact that’s how I felt for many years as well.
Health,
You said
“The fact that once she asks for a Get that they have the right to oversee the whole divorce process isn’t called forcing.”
Please explain why you say this being that she needs the Get.
You said,
“Why don’t you try this in civil court -tell the Judge he can only judge up about the divorce and not the custody or money aspects of the divorce “
Actually a Judge would say fine, go submit to Binding Arbitration for custody and assets if you want. In fact that is what happens in most Frum Divorces.
You said,
” Last year NY removed themselves from requiring a fault only divorce. This means no where in this country do you need both parties to agree to divorce. If one party wants a divorce -they get it.”
Who here is being forced? why should any partner in a marriage be have to stay married if they no longer wish to?
Dash,
That is really good to know and people going through a Divorce should be aware of it. I also believe that in the case the OP of this thread was referring to, the women’s defense is based along these lines.
The only problem is that the Batei Din will use literally anything they can get their hands on to intimidate and stop someone from taking such action, the pressure and intimidation a B”D (or the individual Dayanim) is capable of bringing on someone in the Frum community can be very painful.
It is the same with monetary issues. Even if legally you have grounds to have the B”D award vacated in secular court due to Judicial misconduct etc. a B”D (or the individual Dayanim who sat on the case) will use all sorts intimidation tactics ( including threatening to harm the person’s children socially by removing them from school etc. etc.) to force the person to stop such action.
Sushe,
You said,
“Well, that’s a big if, 646. If they deem that a right they’ll facilitate it. But in all likelihood they won’t deem that right unless she agrees to follow the halachic process for the entire process.”
Ok so what you are saying is that the B”D will tell her knowing she cannot receive a get without them:
“We will only decide you have a right to ask for a divorce if you agree to Arbitrate custody and assets with us.”
Do you really do not see how that is forcing (or coercing if that word makes you feel better) her to agree?
If she is entitled to a divorce it has nothing to do with were she will arbitrate custody etc.!
I am not sure what part of this I am not being clear about..
Sushe,
You said
“A Ptur is not a Get. The Get can be done without a BD.”
Yeah, and B”D will not give it to her unless her get was done in front of a recognized B”D.
The point is simply that she cannot remarry without receiving a Get that is facilitated by a B”D.
B”D offers at a premium cost the service of facilitating a Get.
If somone wants to take advantage of this service, which happens to be their only choice if they ever want to get remarried they should not be forced to buy Arbitration services especially since when Arbitrating things like monetary issues and Custody of children it is very reasonable to want some oversight and recourse in case of Judicial misconduct.
It’s really simple, I am not sure what some of you have a hard time understanding….
Sushe,
Another point,
If the B”D agrees she has a right to demand a Get, they do not have the right to demand that the only way they will help her receive it (of course this help is a very expensive service- it is not free or even cheap) is if she buys their Arbitration services for custody and assets.
Why is this so difficult for some to understand
Sushe,
You need a Ptur from a B”D in order to remarry.
Health,
If you will not accept the fact that telling someone “either arbitrate with us or we will make it impossible for you to remarry, issue public notices calling you a zonah,and we will make your future children mamzerim” is forcing I guess I won’t be able to convince you that there is force involved here.
I honestly do not understand your thought process though.