Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
August 3, 2016 1:51 pm at 1:51 pm in reply to: An Israeli tries to understand life in America #1163808akupermaParticipant
The lines in America are less clear, and the further you move from New York, the fuzzier they get it. The smaller the Jewish community, the better different groups get along. America’s education system is more flexible, so someone can never study secular subjects in school and then sit down, study for and pass a test, and go to college – and college can be done online. America’s anti-discrimination laws and tradition of religious tolerance protect Hareidim, whereas the public policy of secular Israelis is to be “free” from religion. America banned conscription generations ago, so there is no need to decide on army service, unlike in Eretz Yisrael where that decision fixes ones place in society.
akupermaParticipantIf you paying for tutors (or together with other families, hiring a teacher), you are running an alternative school, not home schooling. You will also discover why schools are cost-effective, especially if both parents can work full time (bluntly tuition is much less than what one can earn working with the time that one is not home schooling).
If you are truely “out of town” and there is no acceptable school locally, you have to home school. The question is then whether the parents have the background to cover all subjects, including Torah subjects. While there are “canned” curriculum for secular subjects, they need to be adapted for use with frum kids, and there is no “canned” curriculum for Limudei kodesh.
akupermaParticipantHome schooling is legal in the United States. A factor in its favor is that to win in court, a state would have to show that the standard used to prevent home schooling was the same as the one under which they close down a public school for underachievement, so in effect, the American “social pass” makes it impossible to meaningfully regulate home school. Local bodies often resent home schoolers since it deprives them of revenue (lost since otherwise the student would go to public school, and bring in lots of money in aid), but a clearly hareidim parent won’t generate a problem.
The costs can be prohibitive. If the parents are college educated (degreed or not), with a strong yeshiva and seminary problem, then fine – but otherise they might end up hiring tutors. If the mother of the house wants to home school, and would otherwise be a housewife, the cost isn’t great, but if she is giving up $100K to stay home with the kids, its likely that schools are cheaper.
As Jews have an ancient tradition of parents learning with their children, home schooling should be easier for us (among goyim, the idea of parents teaching their children is considered weird).
akupermaParticipant1. Gary Johnson is polling well over 20% in some states.
2. Most Republicans reject Trump, and most Democrats reject Clinton. Given Johnson “Tea party” economics combined with the Libertarian policy of toleration on social issues, Johnson has a realistic chance of carrying some states.
3. Given the choices of Trump or Clinton, Johnson/Weld is the unanimous “second choice”. In a state in which Clinton or Trump has no chance, it will encourage their supporters to vote for Johnson in hope of stopping the one they hate.
4. If Johnson does get some electoral votes, and the election goes to the House of Representatives, they vote by state (i.e. New York gets one vote), and states in which the the Representatives are evenly divided will abstain, thus the result could be that Johnson would end up winning even if he came in third (since the hatred of Clinton and Trump precludes a compromise).
akupermaParticipantFinland was the only country allied (more of a co-belligerent rather than an ally) with Germany in which Jews served in the military in World War II. While several German allies refused to turn over Jews to the Germans, only Finland refused to persecute Jews (seriously annoying the Germans). This is especially interesting since Finnish Jewry had its origins in Jews exiled there during the Czarist period, so they weren’t even people with deep roots.
July 31, 2016 1:58 am at 1:58 am in reply to: Why the ashkenazi schools don't accept sefardi children #1164082akupermaParticipantFrom press accounts, the “all” Ashkenazi school do include some Sefardim. It appears that the issue is that some Sefardim wo are on the frum side of religious zionism value the higher quality education in the hareidi schools, even though their lifestyle is closer to the religious zionists. Needless to say, non-hareidi Ashkenazim are also included from such schools. The analogy to American racial biases is clearly without basis since intermarriage between Ashkenazi and Sefardi families is common. The men’s school tend to be more open to those with lower religious standards (perhaps feeling they can raise their standards) whereas it appears that girls’ school are more defensive (focused on avoiding less religious influences). It does appear that those critical of the schools in question tend to be opponents of the hareidi style education, and this ulterior motive i why their criticism should be taken “with a grain of salt.”
akupermaParticipantJews have held high office in the past. At least one served as what today would be a “prime minister” in the Arab’s empire (back we got along very well with the Arabs whereas the Christians were a serious pain), a Jew was “regent” of Poland (he was chief tax collector and they needed an acting-king while electing a new one), etc. While a Shomer Shabbos would be unusual in such a high position, it is hardly impossible, albeit quite unlikely. Assuming one holds by Dina Malchusa Dina, a Jewish head of state or head of government would still be nothing more than the “first servant” since under modern political theory the “people” are ultimate authority in the state and the leaders are their employees.
akupermaParticipantThe terms are all subjective and often depends on context.
akupermaParticipantCandidate Trump is still “playing” the character he developed for his TV show. He does the “lines” that seem best for his ratings. Whether he can easily change his script is another matter.
akupermaParticipantIn looking at the original posting again,it occurred to me that a liberal Democrat would like Trump better than Pence. Trump is basically middle of the road Democrat (i.e. a big government somewhat populist who supported Obama and Bill Clinton), whereas Pence is a main stream Republican (social conservative, small government, against corporate welfare as well the taxes to pay for it, for a strong national defense). Indeed, except for former governors Johnson and Weld, Pence is the only Republican running for national office this year.
akupermaParticipantEating fresh fruits and vegetables has been know since antiquity to promote health.
akupermaParticipantObama and Clinton had eight years and have made a gigantic mess.
Pence is a normal conservative. If you hold that secular liberalism (which is closer to socialism than “classic” liberalism which emphasized free markets and personal liberty) is a threat, opposing Clinton is a “no brainer”.
Johnson/Weld mighter be better, but if Pence turns Trump into a conservative that is good. So far Trump has been running “in character” from the character he did on his TV show, with a very center of the road platform (probably closer to the Democrats on most issues than to the traditional Republic conservative positions of the last 50 years).
akupermaParticipantIn the War against Terror, most of those who die fighting our Muslim enemimes are … Muslims. Most of the people killed by Islamic State/al Queda are …. Muslims.
Remember that during World War II, most of the people who died fighting the Nazis were Aryans.
July 13, 2016 1:02 pm at 1:02 pm in reply to: Within the next 10 years, Israel Will be mostly religious #1160929akupermaParticipantWhen the Israeli newspapers are full of stories about non-kosher restaurants and Shabbos entertainments going out of business due to lack of demand, I’ll believe it.
akupermaParticipantNatural means not assembled from chemicals. Things such as pig blood and ground up insect are natural since they were made from genuine pigs and genuine insects.
Anything with a flavor added is inherently in need of a hecksher to be kosher.
akupermaParticipantWhy would the UJA (also call the Jewish Federations, etc.) spend money on Torah education. The “raison d’etre” of those groups, and the motivation of their donors is to crush Torah and Yiddishkeit.
akupermaParticipantI did not say yeshivos spend twice as much as the goyim’s schools. I said the teach twice as many subjects. The number of subjects is a function of teaching a classical curriculum (Torah) and a modern scientific curriculum. When the goyim switched to a modern curriculum, they abandonned their “classical” curriculum, with the result that most goyim are secular ignoramouses about their own culture (with poor language skills, horrible work discipline, and poor midos). Given that most frum Jews are relatively poor, there is no way we could match the goyim’s financially. Given our educational goals, and lack of financially resources, we are doing quite well.
akupermaParticipantIf you can pronounce a “Ts” sound at the start of the word, it isn’t a problem. Semitic and slavic languages usually can, Anglo-phones have a problem and usually substitute something else (consider such words as Tsadaka, Zionist, Tsures or Tzvi).
July 11, 2016 4:57 pm at 4:57 pm in reply to: Within the next 10 years, Israel Will be mostly religious #1160915akupermaParticipantIf that were so, we would see, for example, increasing opposition to gay rights, marriage with non-Jews, or conversion in which the convert is not expected to become Shomer Shabbos. That isn’t happening. What we see is the ruling class is increasingly and militantly secular, which is why we see programs designed to surpress the frum community (banning non-rabbinut kashrus, conscripting yeshiva students, and attempts to close down schools that don’t support zionism). One would also expect, if Israeli is moving towards being more Jewish, that non-kosher food vendors would be going broke or becoming kosher – and that isn’t happening.
akupermaParticipantNote the Jewish communities run schools and libraries, and provide welfare services including emergency health service – all more effectively and cheaply than the government. Even without de jure autonomy (something we never had in America and lost in Europe of 200 years ago), the governance of our community is functional, and cost efficient relative to the the federal, state and city governments.
akupermaParticipantBy government are you referring to the network of frum institutions that dominate communal life, or the clowns in the city halls and capitol buildings?
akupermaParticipantPolice tend to beat up criminals regardless of race. Sometimes they beat up an innocent person. It is to the credit of the African American community that they complain, even though they are also the most likely to be victims of crime. When crime was a big problem among American Jews (in the era of the “horse poisoners guild”-they offered to protect your horse for a fee), we basically threw the Jewish criminal under the bus – when they got killed or executed they would have trouble getting a minyan for the funeral.
akupermaParticipantlesschmras:
The public schools originally taught a curriculum very similar to the yeshivos (albeit for their culture). The typical high school graduate could read several languages, was familiar with the arts and culture of western civilization, and was familiar with the classical literature of his culture, typically in the original language (Latin, Greek and Hebrew). They were weak on vocation education, but people managed to get vocational training outside of schools. THEN the goyim ditched the “classical” curriculm and traded it in for a “modern” curriculum focused on employment skills with lots of sports and other fun stuff thrown in. Their students grow up totally ignorant of their own heritage, which might in part explain the lower morale and low morality among our neighbors.
In our community, we still insist on learning the classicial Jewish curriculum, and in addition to it(not instead of it) we add on a “modern” vocational curriculum for the benefit of those who want to work with and for the goyim. Most public school students have at most five academic periods a day, and usually only five days a week. Our students typically are learning eight or nine subjects, six days a week (and our summer “camps” often have a half day of academic work, at the minimum). Our education largely works but it costs a fortune.
Very few yeshivos actually charge $24K per student (if the school as 200 students, that would mean have a budget of $4.8 million). Most yeshivos function on a small fraction of that, which is why they tend to have run down facilities and underpaid teachers – but they still are producing children who remain loyal to Torah and Mitsvos.
akupermaParticipantMost schools are reasonable. If you were to divide the budget by the number of students, one would find the “real” tuition is lower but that the higher rate means those who can pay end up subsidize those who can’t (same system used by colleges).
But also remember we are running am expensively complex school system (basically double of what the goyim spend) without endowments, without government subsidies and in spite of the fact that very frum Jews can hope for the hoigh incomes that our secular cousins earn.
akupermaParticipantIn addition one needs to remember the following: 1) Iran’s struggle with ISIS/al Queda is a matter of survival for the Iranians – if ISIS wins and establishes itself as the leader of the Muslim world it will be very bad for the Iranians and their fellow Shiites; 2) The Iranians are not kin to the Palestinians and belong to a rival faction of Islam; 3) “100K” missiles may not refer to ICBMs capable of mass destruction but merely to short range rockets that the Soviets developed as a “cheap” version of artillery (no need for a massive artillery piece, but the cost is higher than an artillery shell).
akupermaParticipantlesschumras: The changes were more than a few cursewords. It including “pairs” such as the Germanic cow for the live animal (cared for by Anglo-Saxons, and French beef for when the Normas ate it. Depending on the subject matter, English vocabulary is often half French. Whereas English in 1066 was close enough to German that a translator wasn’t needed, today it is totally foreign to German and probably closer to French. In addition, the whole process resulted in messed up spelling (English is written as it was pronounced when printing was introduced in Europe in the 15th century, and while the language was still forming) and much simpler grammar (minimal use of gender, almost no use of case, almost no use of the subjunctive – though still over a dozen tenses).
akupermaParticipantlesschumras: English is a mixture of French and German, relating to several centuries when the upper class spoke a dialect of French while the lower class spoke English (which at the beginning of the time was little more than a dialect of German, but by the end of the period was an entirely different language). BTW, Yiddish is also a “fusion” language with large amounts of German mixed with large amount of Hebrew and Aramaic (and some slavic mixed in to the eastern dialects, and recently a lot of English and zionist Ivrit thrown in for good measure). “Pure” languages like French, and German, and Arabic are far less interesting.
akupermaParticipantOf course they don’t. They do resemble each other (and to a lesser extent Arabic, Maltese and the Ethiopian languages). If you want to study a language similar English, try French, Spanish, German or Dutch.
akupermaParticipantNeturei Karta is a political movement. If you define “hareidi” as meaning non-zionist, you end up with many modern orthodox as being hareidi (consider Avraham Burg). If you define “hareidi” based on dress or halachic humras, then you have many fanatic religious zionists in the West Bank who are hareidi.
One could argue that “hareidi” is anyone that the Modern Orthodox consider to be “too frum”.
June 30, 2016 6:48 pm at 6:48 pm in reply to: WHY ARE DENIM JEANS CONSIDERED BY MANY AS CHUKAS HAGOY #1157662akupermaParticipantzahavasdad: Can you refer us to a picture of any of the above wearing jeans at an occasion where one is expected to be formally dressed? Jeans are a cheap but study undressy fabric. They are and were designed for doing physical work. It’s what you wear when you ride horse, not when you ride in a motorcade. It’s what you wear at Camp David when only family and staff are around – not what you wear to a state dinner in honor of foreign dignitaries.
Most frum Jews will dress semi-formally (respectfully) at all times, and denim is by definition and informal non-dress fabric.
June 30, 2016 6:24 pm at 6:24 pm in reply to: Why people become OTD (with the focus on the "why") #1164756akupermaParticipantSurveys can be very unreliable. The authors of a survey usually are looking for confirmation of their hypothesis, and people answering a survey tend to give the “right answer.”
Consider that based on scientific techniques one would exect that Britain overwhelmingly wants to stay in the EU, Netanyahu and Cameron were both voted out of office in the last election, and Jeb Bush has a lock on the Republican nomination for president.
P.S. Given the strong economic and social incentives to be “off the derekh”, one might want to study why anyone would willingly give up most of their economic prospects and agree to live in a marginalized ghetto just because Ha-Shem told them to 3000+ years ago.
akupermaParticipantA “movement” implies change, and being “Hareidi” means doing things the way we have always done them (more or less) and not changing — unlike the Modern Orthodox and Religious Zionists, who while staying basically shomer mitsvos make a point of deviating from past practices either for ideological reasons (desire to have a medinah) or laziness (“please can I eat kitniyous and wait only one hour after meat”) or greed (“I never could be a successful banker if I had a beard and pe’os”).
June 30, 2016 2:24 pm at 2:24 pm in reply to: WHY ARE DENIM JEANS CONSIDERED BY MANY AS CHUKAS HAGOY #1157652akupermaParticipantI never heard anyone say that “denim” is prohibited by “hukas goyim” but most frum Jews tend to dress in a reasonably formal clothes, but not too fancy since we don’t want to show off or embarass the poor – and denim is almost by definition a fabric for informal usage. If you work in construction you might wear denim, but not to go to shul. You might wear denim when building a sukkah, but not for sitting in it. But that is a matter of fashion. If one arrives at the point where goyim wear denim when dressed up (e.g. lawyers wear it to court, the president wears it to his inaguration, etc.), it will start being worn by more frum Jews.
akupermaParticipantBotanists say they are fruit. Consumers say they are veggies.
June 22, 2016 6:53 pm at 6:53 pm in reply to: Creating inclusive Orthodox communties for Orthodox Recalcitrant Husbands #1156850akupermaParticipantJoseph, As long as the husband is paying the wife’s bills (as per the general understanding of the kesubah), and if no Beis Din has been involved, and presumably there is civil divorce – why would anyone expect the husband to give a “get”. He’s still married and obligated to support the family.
Unless your “advocates” are a Beis Din, if the people are not divorced why would they expect him to give a “get”. If the man has abandonned his wife and started civil divorce procedures, the “advocates” go to the Beis Din which order the “get”.
June 22, 2016 1:38 pm at 1:38 pm in reply to: Creating inclusive Orthodox communties for Orthodox Recalcitrant Husbands #1156843akupermaParticipantThere is no justification for declining to give a “get” when ordered to by a Beis Din, or even refusing to give a “get” while refusing to support’s one’s wife and children. Perhaps the only reason to refuse is in the hope the wife will change her mind, in which case the husband should still be paying her bills, and in such situations once the Beis Din rules on the matter it is over and he has to give the “get”.
On the other hand, there was a tradion of having a “Theives’s shul” and some prisons are known to have regular minyans, so why not a shul for those who are refusing to give a “get”.
akupermaParticipantRE: “There isnt exactly anything as “proper yiddish” anymore”
1. Most languages do not have official institutes, and the one’s that do are usually ignored. For example, the French and Israeli language academies keep trying to invent local words to use rather than words based on English, and fail miserably. YIVO was set up by a bunch of secular fanatics to try to invent a standard Yiddish (taking vowels from one dialect and consonants from others) – they never were taken seriously be actual Yiddish speakers.
2. By “proper” in a language you mean spekaing the language the way someone spoke 300 years ago? Do speakers of proper English still use the 2nd person familiar (Thou) or the subjunctive (as in “I be”)? Dead language have “proper” rules, living languages evolve because people keep inventing new words without ever bothering to talk to professors or official language commissions.
3. Yiddish never developed a standard in part since Jews never used it for serious books (though some ultra-seculars tried in the pre-WWII era). Yiddish is/was for fun stuff, the popular press, children’s books and as an aid for those lacking the intellectual skills to read Hebrew. Serious literature was alwayws Yiddish speakers was written in Hebrew, a langauge all children learned and the language used for official documents by Jews (such as court records). To cite an example, the famous sefer by the Satmar Rebbe telling people to use Yiddish, is written in Hebrew.
akupermaParticipantCTLawyer: But most of the instruction in colleges and online resources will teach you Yiddish the way it was spoken before the holocaust. The war changed a lot. For starters, the “Litvaks” were close to a majority before the war, but only a small minority of Yiddish speakers afterwards. The increased influence of Hebrew and Yiddish seriously undermines a lot of Yiddish grammer (use of “case”, use of the “neuter”). Yiddish as a living language is undergoing rapid evolution, and the texts in most colleges are about as relevant as would an English class based on 16th century “Shakespearean” English.
akupermaParticipantSo was ancient Israel a monarchy? None of the leading kings, the ones we name our kids after, was the eldest son of a previous king?
It seems very clear that David appointed the next king – rather than hereditary sucession.
akupermaParticipant1. Most textbooks (even the one from a frum source) tend to reflect Yiddish as it was spoken before the holocaust. The language has significant evolved. Assuming you want the modern language (spoken primarily among Hasidim in places such as Williamsburg, Antwerp, Bnei Brak) you have a problem. On the bright side, living Yiddish is heavily influence by English and Hebrew (whereas pre-war Yiddish was influence primarily by German and secondarily by Slavic).
2. For other languages a good way to learn is through newspaper and mass media (TV, movies). While there are Yiddish online shiurim, newspapers and some videos, they are relatively limited. Considering get Yiddish children’s books (the one’s sold to Yiddish-speaking children, not the translations into pre-war literary Yiddish). Live in a place where Yiddish is spoken by the children on the street.
3. If you want pre-war Yiddish (e.g. you aspire to be a historian), there are newspapers, recorded radio shows and lots books and textbooks. Arguably Yiddish has three “periods”, an early one in which it was basically German with Hebrew words thrown in, a relatively modern one in which there is a large secular literature, and the post-holocaust “frum” Yiddish which appears to be holding its own (based on the number of children growing up in Yiddish-speaking households).
akupermaParticipantA good argument can be made is that Trump is a traditional Democrats in the mold of people such as John Kennedy, Lyndon Johnson and Franklin Roosevelt, whereas the Democrats have moved radically to the left and are now support positions that in the past would have been considered off-the wall radical. If we had proportional representation, we could accomodate more parties but we have a “winner takes all” system. Note that in periods where the Republicans were dominated by conservatives, Trump was a Democrat.
His nativism and his pungnacious campaign style really don’t reflect his ideological background or his substance. In terms of issues, he’s either a conservative Democrat or a liberal Republican.
akupermaParticipantDefine monarchy.
Was Israel a monarchy? David was not the son of the previous king. Shlomo was not the oldest living son of David. Does a monarchy include a system where the king appoints an heir? How about system where the President or Imperator picks an heir subject to confirmation? What about an election by the royal family? is it a monarchy when a person is elected for life and acts like a king (is the leader of the Catholic Church a monarchy or a republic? – they crown someone elected for life)? Consider modern Saudi Arabia? Early modern Poland with its elected king. What about the Holy Roman Empire (also “elected”)? Consider the Roman Empire?
akupermaParticipantDefine monarchy. Does it mean a strictly hereditary system, or perhaps one in which the leader is chosen from within a narrowly defined group. For example, the Brits has a strictly hereditary system meaning, other systems are more flexible (e.g. the Saudi monarchy, the Catholic Church, and the way the frum community chooses its leaders with gedolim emerging from a narrow somewhat hereditary class of persons).
The opposite of a monarchy is a republic. Republics, and Monarchies, can be based on democratic or non-democratic principles. Many Republics are dictatorships, and many monarchies are friendly and democratic.
From a Torah perspective what matters is what they do. We have had friends (and enemies) who were presidents, and others who were kings. Similarly we have had democratic friends (and enemies), as well as un-democratic ones.
akupermaParticipant1. Its not really Hareidi, but merely frummer than a normal unit.
2. While this is hard to believe in the Hareidi world, many religious zionists are very frum – meaning frum enough to have conflicts if they were in regular units. Since the army is legally and politically committee to including Orthodox Jews in all units, and can’t admit that it fails to do so, they put the more frum of the religious zionists in units that are called “hareidi”. To call the “frum zionists” would be to admit that the army overall is not accomodating the religious zionists.
akupermaParticipantIt depends on your goal. What do you want to accomplish with gun control. For example, the largest shooting incident in America (involving civilians being shot, and not part of a war) would not have been possible without gun control (several hundred recently disarmed civilians murdered at “Wounded Knee” just over a century ago – if they had guns the casulties would probably have been less). If your goal is to reduce crime and protect citizens, gun control serves no purpose since the bad guys will ignore it. However if your goal is to get rid of pesky minorities, that will be greatly facilitated with an effective gun control program.
akupermaParticipantWill these stores have a hecksher of some sort. Remember Starbucks also serves non-kosher products, so a treff restaurant adding Chalav yisrael is still treff.
akupermaParticipantOut of town Jews appear better off materially than New York City Jews since the cost of housing is radically cheaper. In Baltimore, probably the second largest kehillah on the east coast, a one family house, detached, with a yard, near the largest frum shuls, can be found for under $150K. The joke is a Boro Parker asks a Baltimore realtor about houses for sale in the frum community, hears the prices, and says “I’ll take two.” This is not a “frum” issue but reflects the overall housing market since New York is infamously expensive (due to high population, limited land not to mention laws that discourage building new housing). But it isn’t an issue of New Yorkers or “out of towners” being more into gashmius.
akupermaParticipantRemember that any frum Jew can double or triple his/her disposable income by going off the derekh, whether that means moving from a cramped apartment in the city to a large home in the suburbs, or from a nice home in a frum suburb to a nice mansion, etc. Even the frum Jews who think they are very much into gashmius, are giving up most of their parnasah by being frum.
June 5, 2016 5:43 am at 5:43 am in reply to: What percentage of conservative and reform are halachically jewish? #1154407akupermaParticipant1. It is unclear that OTD become Reform or Conservative, rather than simply non-religious assimilated Jews who children are not distinguished from goyim.
2. If a potential Baal Tseuvah can’t trace his/her ancestry back to when the family was frum (still possible for 20th century immigrants, a lot trickier from those whose families came before the Civil War), they are “safek” goyim. This may be a good thing since given the breakdown in “morality” during the second half of the 20th century, as well as divorce becoming common, they are also probably “safek mamzerim” as well, so it may be a good thing to start regarding potential baalei tseuvah as being “safek goy, safek mamzer” as that status (as became clear with the mass migration of Ethiopian Jews) is easy to resolve.
June 3, 2016 8:01 pm at 8:01 pm in reply to: What percentage of conservative and reform are halachically jewish? #1154395akupermaParticipantIt is a function of how long they have been off the derekh. In the case of the “classic” Reform Jews from Germany who went off the derekh in the early to mid-19th century, probably an overwhelming percentage, especially if they have a Jewish surname. In the case of East European Jews who came in the 20th century, the percentage will be less. I think at this point one car probably assume that a self-proclaimed Reform or Conservative Jew is a safek goy (meaning they are also a safek Yid). Depending on whether one holds that non-Orthodox Jewish weddings are valid, most would be safek mamzerim as well (cf. situation with Ethiopian Jews were were safek goy, safer mamzer).
-
AuthorPosts