adlc

@AviraDeArah, I’m curious if you are familiar with R’ Lichtenstein׳s writings (and even though you don’t agree with him, he earned his “R” Aharon so a bissel kavod). You wrote that “Unlike rav hirsch, who said that everything is subservient to Torah, people like aharon Lichtenstein believe in Christian “natural law” that Hashem put in our heads to know right and wrong.” You can bring your issue up with the Rishonim who explain the Taanos on Dor HaMabul using that idea. You continue “What he won’t admit is that halacha demands that we suppress even our good midos when necessary (mechias amalek) and demands that we bend our minds to fit halacha, not fake into account what we personally “feel” based on “intuition”.” Your argument isn’t logical; you can believe that we have an intuition that is given by HaShem and has value, and still believe that we are commanded at times to disregard it.

True enough

to Joseph:

The criminal justice system does not use significantly lower thresholds of evidence. The evidentiary standard for any criminal offense is “beyond a reasonable doubt.” And we are not talking here about neemanus of ladies or single witnesses; this is about documents that prove income and documents that prove welfare applications. Criminal intent is not an element of the offense here, so it doesn’t matter if the accused knew that what they were doing was illegal. , The crime is simply whenever someone:
1. Made “x” amount of money per year, and
2. Was on welfare because said that income was “y”

Of course, they may have evidence to defend themselves; that is what a court proceeding will determine. But it is awfully silly to think that the gov’t would waste their time ad money going after people that they don’t have a good chance of convicting.