Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Shidduchim cause bleeding.
Shidduchim cause children, which in turn causes them to need vaccines which cause bleeding.
Uh huh…
And NASA and the government are keeping it a secret from everybody.
Bring over the 18 extra chinese boys from the above statistic and shidduch crisis solved! (But make sure theyve got all their vaccinations first)
feivel
Perhaps the two theories are related.
As we know from basic chemistry heat makes the molecules of an object move faster. So the earth has “heated up” and caused everyone to move faster resulting in lower incidence of disease.
sam2
“This is the most terrifying and amusing thing I’ve read all day. The stupidity of this post is astounding. Like, people moving faster sheds the diseases inside them? Can a sprinter cure himself of the plague by running? It’s a good thing that germs can’t move fast enough to keep up with everyone in the enclosed cabin of an airplane.”
You clearly misunderstood me. I was only talking about getting the disease. Once someone’s caught it, no amount of moving fast will help.
Joseph
adocs’ satire was a knock against the pro-vaxxers’ argument that it is a given that vacs’ are responsible for all the reductions in diseases over the last X decades/centuries by virtue of the fact that both occurred over the same rough time periods.
or maybe….
adocs’ satire was a knock against the anti-vaxxers’ argument that it is a given that vacs’ are not responsible for all the reductions in diseases over the last X decades/centuries by virtue of the fact that both occurred over the same rough time periods.
I believe that disease rates plummeted with the introduction of the automobile and generally faster means of transportation. You see, as people began to move faster, the various diseases couldn’t keep up with them. The diseases were too slow to infect people. Especially with airplanes and faster trains, disease rates dropped further.
Now, of course you’ll say ‘but people who have travelled in these faster means of transportation have also contracted (insert name of disease here)’. That’s because some individual strains of the disease mutated to be able to move faster. But by and large, people in developed countries are moving at a speed too fast for most versions of the disease to catch.
In third world countries, where there’s much less developed means of travel, disease rates are much higher.
are ha’eitz
Spending too much time in the CR telling everybody else what they’re doing wrong.
Not sure what the problem is.
If women aren’t Jewish then why does it matter if they’re frum?
1. Is what not “yiddish”? giving her the ride? or not giving her the ride?
2. perhaps keeping conversation to a minimum (or none at all)
3. Why would you need to quit your job because you’re not giving her a ride? as you said “The frumkeit at work is proper”
4. not sure of the relevance. either it’s OK to give her the ride or it’s not.
the answers to these questions would likely vary widely depending on the community you live in, and to some extent your personal hashkafos (and also to some extent your wife’s opinion – which you stated)
this should be discussed with your own personal rav or rosh yeshiva who knows you.
by asking here, you will not get any clarity. you will be castigated as a parutz by some for even considering giving her the ride. And you will be ridiculed by others for using frumkeit to not help another jew.
mik5 “What I meant that it is forbidden to shake hands with any woman, regardless of her Jewishness or lack thereof.”
You obviously did not read my comment/question correctly. (Regarding who this is addressed to.)
This question is only for those who follow the opinion of rabbonim who hold that shaking hands may be mutar in limited circumstances. For those who say it’s always assur it is irrelevant.
It seems this entire discussion has focused on a Jewish man shaking the hand of a non-Jewish woman. Does the heter apply as well to a Jewish woman shaking the hand of a non-Jewish man?
newbee
“Is there anything halachically wrong with it? If so it should be muttar wihtout question. Everything that is not assur on a strict halachic basis should be allowed.”
That’s quite a different position than the one you took in the halachic dinner thread.
OK. I’ll bite.
If you go in one direction , where will you end up ?
you wrote
“Chabad in some cases is willing to accept it…..while some groups such as lubavitch and the haradeim would not accept it.”
please clarify, as that is a bit of a contradiction
markbilk:
“And if you say it is only a small number of children, would you like your own child to be one of those statistics?”
and would you like YOUR child to be one of those to get a disease for which there is a vaccine?
not sure what to make of this, but when I first clicked on this to read it, the newsmax link right above poppas opening salvo read
“3 Early Signs of Dementia”
to all who have responded so critically regarding the rebbeim in the column:
who here has bothered to actually read the column?
I finally took a look and scanned through (No, I did not read every word) and while some rebbeim seemed to be saying that it would be OK, they ALSO qualified their answers (conveniently it seems that this has not been mentioned by anyone here) such as –
“it should be very low on the list and utilized only in the most extreme cases”
“it is generally not acceptable to send a child down to a younger grade”
“we will resort to this type of discipline when necessary” (resort to – now there’s someone who’s just itching to embarrass the kids)
“not as a first option”
these are actual quotes from 4 different “yes” responders.
If I wanted to quote from all “eight” I would not be able to, as only six of them said some form of yes. That’s right. 4 of the 10 said no.
I am not giving my opinion one way or the other on this, but please base your criticism on actual facts and don’t change the facts to give yourself a soapbox to bash rebbeim for whatever your reasons are.
Logician-
you wrote “I think that’s a bit callous. Are there not agunos in pain ? Did the original version claim to be the only sad scenario out there ?”
without taking sides on this issue, just looking at the original version, it DOES strongly assume one sad scenario – namely that it’s the mother who is suffering – “their only wish is to Provide for their children a wholesome home where they can celebrate Shabbos With a loving mother (as opposed to a loving father) and step-father (not stepmother) together at the same table But, alas, it is impossible; these women (not men) must sit at a Shabbos or Yom Tov table with an endless hole in their hearts”
if one wants to be honest and not hypocritical then make the prayer gender neutral i.e. substitute the word ‘parent’ instead of writing ‘father’ or ‘mother’
if, on the other hand, one wants to ignore the fact that both parents are at times capable of this type of bad behavior, and instead always assume that it’s the father who’s wrong and that the mother can do no wrong, well then the original version should work just fine.
147 – every? that’s a bit strong. while there are definitely women who fit that description, for you to paint all of them in such a light does a dis-service to any party in such a situation who needs help – mother or father.
this is mainly directed at oomis and aries, but I welcome comments from anybody.
lets switch things around a bit.
a man wants to divorce his wife. She being a good bas yisroel has decided that she will not muddy things by going to secular court and will deal through bais din. Meanwhile, he has started spreading false rumors that she’s crazy and abuses the kids. unfortunately he is believed. For the “safety of the kids” he’s trying to get full custody. He throws in a few “facts” about how he was verbally abused for all these years. She stands to get almost nothing financially. (they rent an apartment so there’s no real assets to speak of)
This gem of a guy has already found someone else to marry. Only thing stopping him is the wife’s reluctance to accept the get. She knows that once she accepts it she is left with nothing and loses her kids.
Does she stand her ground, knowing it’s the only leverage she has to see her kids again? or does she accept the get and let him “move on” because you never ever ever play games with a get once the marriage is over?
RABBAIM said “Just as one cannot say a bracha when wearing a bathing suit unless he covers himself up because of “erva”…..”
by definition if one (a male) is wearing a bathing suit there is no issue of “erva”
also see orach chaim 74:6
on the ball:
orach chaim 220 discusses what to do for a bad dream. You probably meant 240
klach- “who is YW Editor”
That’s right.
am yisrael chai—-
did you read the prayer?
…My own “father” is so far away from me
And I see “him” so few times
That I feel so sad and so alone without “him”
“He” is never able to make Kiddush for me or read me a story to put me to bed
how can you say that it’s not assuming the father?
are people here actually suggesting that this situation is one where the so-called moser (not even sure the label of moser applies here) is subject to being killed justifiably? for calling a cop about a car alarm? has anyone here actually asked a rav about this particular type of situation, and been told that this even qualifies as mesira?
silent one –
very nice, but the prayer automatically assumes that it’s the father that is not there. not always the case.
popa – so what? test tube babies still have a biological father.