Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Mammele,
“yet water usage is part of a cycle as well, which still doesn’t prevent these wise environmentalists from warning us not to consume too much water even in places with ample water supply.”
Is there a big push in the NYC metro area to conserve water? If so, is the reason based on supply/environmental factors, or economic/infrastructure considerations?
Health,
“The purpose of EN is to provide a female presence in the case of childbirth. Most cases of childbirth are not life threatening, No matter how the posters demand that they are. So the creation of EN makes sense.”
I understand, and agree with you. Thank you for this explanation. To go a step further, if EN could field a team of certified nurse midwives to provide in-home prenatal care and attend planned homebirths, that would seem to be a fantastic potential resource for the frum community.
Joseph,
“What’s climate change, or even societal population growth as a general matter, have to do how much population growth a particular city experiences?”
Hashem created Earth as a place for humans to live, and gave us dominion over it – i.e., we can change it and shape it to suit our needs. Building cities and farms, utilizing its resources, etc. By cities, we can clearly recognize the need for planning and smart usage of resources (space) in order to provide benefit for as many people as possible. I’m contending that we should view the Earth as a whole in the same way. Thus, using that moshol, excessive carbon released into the atmosphere is equivalent to congested traffic.
The philosophical distinction as I see it is this: the secular environmentalists see Earth itself as more important than humanity, thus if carbon emissions are changing things, humans are a problem and must be stopped. In contrast to this, I believe that Hashem gave humans the privilege to use Earth for sustenance, enjoyment, and for increase. Therefore, carbon emissions are a bad thing only if they can cause a negative impact for humanity. Both philosophies are capable of addressing climate science, but the ideas and policies that could potential flow from them are very different.
Mammele,
“One of the problems we Frum Yidden have – or should have – with environmentalism is their logical conclusion against population growth. If one believes carbon dioxide is bad for the environment, there’s no way to escape this conflict. We can’t simultaneously believe that we need to reduce our carbon footprint yet actively increase our numbers.”
This is a good point about the current state of policy debate with respect to our response to climate – and an example of why I feel it’s important to make distinctions between the climate science itself, which is politically neutral, and the policies proposed by people with their own biases. I personally see your inescapable conflict as a false dilemma. City planners who try to develop the urban landscape to mitigate traffic congestion as the population grows are not lacking faith in Hashem, nor advocating for a cessation of city growth. I see this problem as city planning on a larger scale. We should be smart about how we use our resources, because we want to create a great quality of life for as many people as we can. And when we’ve optimized resource usage as much as possible and it’s still not enough for our children, it’s time to move to the suburbs or grow the city! Hashem created a vast universe beyond Earth that is full of resources. I personally don’t believe that a need for population control must be part of any plan to try to create an environment that is optimal for a thriving humanity.
ubiquitin,
“for example while in NY 2017 ma yhave been a colder than average year”
It was actually the 10th warmest year for New York statewide since 1895 (123 year period), despite the sharp cold snap to end the year.
Little Froggie,
“Again, you got me wrong. They have an agenda. And NOTHING will get in their way. It’s hot today? – that’s the global warming at play. It’s cold today? That’s the global warming at the cooling cycle. It’s really hot, you just don’t realize it. The weather changed? That’s the issue. Unbiased, honest, I say!!!”
Who is “they”? A climatologist would not make such silly claims. They are looking at decades, not days.
DaasYochid,
“Are you two talking to each other, or over each other’s heads?”
We’re parallel pontificating.
akuperma,
“it would seem that davening for a particular climate might be a bet dubious, though one supposes there is no harm is asking Ha-Shem to violate the natural order.”
We daven for weather-related things that we understand are beneficial to us. As we say between Sukkos and Pesach, v’sein tal umatar livracha – we daven for a good rainy season in eretz Yisroel. And outside of the rainy season when rain would be harmful to standing crops, v’sein bracha.
square root of 2,
“I do think there seems to be a hashkafic side to whether or not scientists can be believed, as is evident from the subsequent posts.”
I think the issue is not so much whether to believe scientists within context of their field, but how much weight to give to “their” opinions outside of their field. I think most of the rage on the right against climate science has nothing to do with climate science per se, but with political and economic policy. Much of the anger towards Hawking, likewise, was due to his athiestic pronouncements and stances on Israel where his knowledge and intelligence was no better than the next guy’s, not his research on black holes.
Little Froggie,
“You totally missed my point. When some bright scientist can claim that some oxyhyperflorurobihydronation in the hypershpheric region of the iosphere causes our weather to get hotter, and then tomorrow claim that the oxyhyperflorurobihydronation in the hypershpheric region of the iosphere causes out weather to get cooler and then claim that oxyhyperflorurobihydronation in the hypershpheric region of the iosphere causes out WEATHER TO CHANGE!!! is when we need to get a hard look at our UNBIASED, HONEST scientists!!!”
The problem with your point is that you are completely making it up. Not just the fake science words, but the notion that climatologists have flip-flopped. This notion came from some magazine in the 1970s that was likely responding to the fact that particulates – dirty stuff that gets put into the air – causes less sunlight to reach the ground. This is totally unrelated to carbon dioxide (CO2 – CO is carbon monoxide), water vapor, etc. acting as greenhouse gasses. Particulate pollution has dropped quite a bit over the U.S. and Europe during the past few decades (your mommy dealt with a lot more smog than you do), but CO2 continues to increase.
Presidential candidates aren’t the only ones who have to deal with inaccurate, sensationalized media. Ask your doctor how many times he’s rolled his eyes over some crazy medical claim made in a magazine based on research the author didn’t understand.
Health,
“Question – Did you vote for Trump?”
Give me two million dollars and I’ll tell you who I voted for!
“If not, why are you quoting his absurd comment?!?
He is an actor – not everything he said is 100% truthful.”Of course he was pandering to his base when he tweeted that. I included it as an example that opposition to vaccines is coming from different parts of the political spectrum.
akuperma,
” In America there are regional accidents, though mid-western (mid-Amerca) became standard as a result of the civil war (when someone from Illinois accepted the surrender from a Virginian)”
I don’t think this is quite accurate. Lincoln himself spoke with a distinctive Kentucky twang. I think the “American Standard” dialect developed conceptually more in the 20th century with suburbanization (middle class whites eschewing regional accents perceived to be associated with poor inner city areas, and favoring accents more similar to Anglo-Saxon residents of the interior Northeast and Midwest), and television and radio broadcasts that adopted the same. A possible Civil War connection may be the association of Southern accents with stereotypes of poverty and slowness, due to the extensive poverty in the South following the war. Regional accents in the Northeast were likely associated with poverty due to the high number of new immigrants in the early 20th Century.
Avi K,
“I have noticed that many posts are written half in Creole German. Is this normal English?”
It is for many Jews!
Children are messy by nature, and the typical child adult ratio in an Orthodox Jewish crowd, particularly at events you describe, is likely much higher than other groups visiting the establishment. That’s one possible reason. Another reason: Packaged food brought in from the outside tends to generate much more garbage than food bought on premises, so even if the in-the-can vs. on-the-floor garbage ratio is the same between Jewish and non-Jewish crowds, the sheer volume of waste may just be higher. Perhaps these factors could explain why the “entertainment center” became messier than usual during the chol hamoed event. That said, cleanliness is stressed by the Torah, and parents must teach their children to be conscientious and to clean up after themselves.
klugeryid,
So let’s just sum up this thread
Seems like a turf war between Hatzola and Ezras Nashim.
In my family, when we have called for EMS/ambulance service, we knew that going to the hospital ER was likely needed, and that time could be crucial, making driving ourselves potentially dangerous. When we’ve not been sure whether an ER or urgent care visit is needed or not and time is not yet of the essence, we first try to call our doctor to get advice. They have an after-hours answering service that pages a doctor on call – they state to hang up and call 911 if it’s a medical emergency. From what I understand, Ezras Nashim dispatches EMTs, but they don’t provide transport to the hospital, so I have a hard time ascertaining for what situations they intend to provide service. If it is simply to guarantee a frum female presence on the first responding medical team during an emergency, then they should instruct patients to call 911 or Hatzola first, to avoid any delay in transport. If the purpose is more geared towards determining whether something can be managed at home or not, maybe that should be clarified, and instructions to call 911 or Hatzola in the event of a medical emergency should be stated?
The Great Battle of Scare Stories!
“My kid was totally healthy, but then right after he got vaccinated, he became an asthmatic diabetic on the spectrum!”
“Mom dies of freak illness that she may have gotten from an unvaccinated kid!”
This is unlikely to convince anyone. Parents who consciously choose not to vaccinate are not selfish, nor are they stupid. They are afraid, and skeptical of what they are told by authority. And this comes from both sides of the political spectrum. Conservatives don’t trust the government. Liberals don’t trust the pharmaceutical companies. President Trump linked vaccines to autism on the campaign trail, advocating against “one time massive shots.” And add on top of that a breakdown in trust between doctors and patients. If this “battle” is going to be won, it has to take place in the exam room, with a doctor actually seeing his patients as human beings, and treating them as such. Maybe even getting to know them, rather than seeing them as nuisances with too many questions taking up too much time, or as threats to his/her perceived authority. Medicine is no longer seen as מן from above, doled out by benevolent superiors who know best. It’s a marketplace, and doctors are selling goods and services to customers. Time must be taken to actually identify and address fears and concerns, relate on an emotional level, and provide clear information that empowers patient decision making, not belittling or bullying them.
DaasYochid,
Note that you should tovel the disposables too if you use them more than once.
What are “wen”? Is that the new hipster word for wimmin? I’m shocked by Joseph’s silence on this.
As long as the cotton wasn’t grown adjacent to a wheat field, you’re ok.
Eli Y,
“Now let me ask the non-Chabad folks a question if I may: What does one achieve by saying Kaddish?”
Kaddish is a public sanctification of Hashem, and by saying it, one prompts a minyan of Jews to publicly sanctify Hashem in response (y’hei sh’mei raba…). This is an extremely holy and meritorious act. To do so in the context of mourning is extremely powerful, because the mourner declares the greatness of Hashem even through his pain. Since this tremendous mitzva was done for the sake of the deceased, the merits are also added to the merits of the deceased.
Eli Y,
I have not consulted the letters myself but I am told from my Rabbi who is trustworthy that he has observed remarkable coincidence between the letter picked at random and the seekers issue.
This is why horoscopes are so popular. People can pull out from them what they desire. It may be an amazing feeling for someone to believe that they are getting miraculous, supernatural responses, but the system Hashem set up for us through His Torah was to go to a living, breathing Torah authority with our shailos. After Moshe Rabbeinu passed away, when the people sought advice, they didn’t pick out random statements that Moshe Rabbeinu made and try to fit them to the question, they went to Yehoshua!
Chabadshlucha,
Again one line out of context. You never had a feeling so deep you felt you could only share it with a very close friend?
Not out of context. This is a song about desiring a spiritual connection, and in that realm there is only one very close friend that we can connect with: Hashem. A rav or rebbe, no matter how holy, serves to help us strengthen that one connection, not to make one in addition to or in the middle of it.
Sechel HaYashar,
“What the rebbe wants of me?”
“A Rebbe, in any Chassidus, is a Moreh Derech, someone who instructs you how best to live your life. This is not unique to Lubavitch. I’m sure Litvaks have such a concept too.”
I do hold that my rav is a moreh derech for me, because he helps me to clarify what Hashem wants from me. My rav is also very dear to me. At the end of the day, however, my focus when working on my life’s goals should be on Hashem exclusively, and the words I use and the songs I teach my children, should reflect that. If my rav heard me or my children singing a song about angst over what he (the rav) wanted from me, he’d be terribly upset and correct me at once. I imagine that the Lubavitcher Rebbe, ZT”L, would have felt the same way.
Health,
If your goal is to advocate for the frum population to make a healthier lifestyle (e.g., healthier eating habits and increased exercise), it would be good salesmanship to avoid anything that may sound like a knock against frum culture.
Also, I think the ads you mention skew more towards younger people because their deaths R”L are usually unexpected, and therefore there is a higher chance that there wasn’t a completed plan of support for their dependents. I don’t think we can derive statistics from those ads. Also, the causes of death cited in those ads tend to be things like cancer or accidents, not obesity related disease.
zahavasdad,
“There is definatly not a trend to eat more veggies , especially green ones. Alot of Shabbos food is grease and fat which is unhealthy.”
So start one! Invite guests for Shabbos and knock their socks off with delicious foods packed with green vegetables and whole grains. Brag about the health benefits. Share the recipes.
“How many frum people even play pickup basketball or Raquetball which are healthy exercises”
How many Christians walk to church on Sunday? Why limit the options to things that may not be the best cultural fit for the frum community?
akuperma,
Just because things were worse in previous generations does not mean we should accept the status quo now if there is a problem. We believe that every life is precious, so if there is a way to save or improve even one life, why would we sit back and say, well, at least it’s not a thousand lives like it used to be!
And if someone calls avoda zara by a different name it does not make it not avoda zara.
Chabadshlucha,
“again Im being misunderstood. I wrote that the Rebbe is human in the very line you quoted”
Yet you beseech him “not as a human.” Just because I do not accept what you are writing does not mean that I misunderstand.
“My emotions deep within me
I can only turn to you”Rachmana litzlan
mik5,
When I daven mincha at my office, if possible, I will block out a 15 minute period on the calendar for a small and private meeting room. If I don’t have a reservation, I opt to daven in the break room rather than my cubicle, because people may stop by my cubicle with questions, raising the chance of interruption.
In your case, the lounge might be the best bet, even though it’s probably not a quiet place. If the lounge does not work, I’d speak to a friendly faculty or staff member, or even a security guard. More often than not they are delighted to help, and their solution might be much better than a stairwell. At my first job location, my start time was too early to make shacharis with a minyan. I spoke to a colleague who managed the office IT equipment, and he pointed me to an IT storage room that almost nobody went into except for him. He jokingly called it “the synagogue” after that.
What are we talking about?!?
Who says it’s ok?!?
5ish,
I talk to my mother in law too, I talk to my boss too
On the telephone or in person I’m sure, not whispers in your heart while no other person is with you.
why are you so bothered by who people are talking to???
Because Chabadshlucha is part of my spiritual family, and I am alarmed by some of the things I have read. Her “I talk … directly to Hashem too” comment was specifically a follow-up to this:
“When we ask the Rebbe for help, were not asking him as a human. That would be wrong as we only ask Hashem for things like the Rambam says. Were asking Hashem, through his human messenger”
Whether you like it or not, the Rebbe was a human, and this statement is dangerously wrong. It is identical in every way shape and form to Christian theology, where J-man is claimed to be perfect (conquered his yetzer hara), a manifestation of G-d’s “word” on Earth (chas veshalom), and that, by praying to him, one is not praying to a human, but praying to G-d, “in J-man’s name.” 2000 years ago the Jews objected to this, and were denigrated as Pharisees obsessed with the “Law” and blind to the “Truth.” Now the term “Misnagdim” is hurled at the non-believers. Villains who act, not because they have genuine, deeply held beliefs, but because they hate and are jealous of the “true believers”, and seek to tear them down. 2000 years of bloodshed against the Jews arose from this type of accusation. Do we really want to walk down that road again?
Guess what? I don’t hate Chabad. I owe Chabad tremendous hakaras hatov, and have given sustained financial support. This thread has shaken me to the core.
Chabadshlucha,
“Just to clarify I talk plenty throughout my day directly to Hashem too.”
What do you mean by “too”?
“And since people keep bringing it up, lhavdil elef havdalos, the other guy was no tzadik at all and also held himself to be his own SEPARATE power than Hashem. That’s avoda zara.”
No, they claim he was “G-d in the flesh”, chas veshalom, which is frighteningly similar to your arguments here. This whole conversation has been quite disturbing.
The little I know,
You wrote: “Absolutely everything that is done in the way of chinuch must be focused on bringing about the desired result of the child’s learning“, to which I replied, “Phrased another way, the ends justify the means? And only a navi can foretell the actual ends.“.
I misread your sentence (interpreted “that is done” as “must be done”), and retract my response.
The little I know,
“In a few of your comments, you have labeled me something that I am not. Whether this fits the technicality of מכנה שם לחבירו or not is not the issue.”
Nonetheless, you wrote it, so please clarify what you mean. I have had no intention of labeling you with anything. There are some elements of the parenting philosophy you presented here that I have taken strong objection to, just like you have taken strong objection to the “pronouncement of the Satmar dayanim.”
“If imposing will on him just makes him rebel, then we need to find another option.”
Not everything is in the control of the parent, including whether the kid rebels or not. And there are limits on what we can and should do in our attempt to prevent rebellion. That doesn’t mean we don’t love the child, or that we are rejecting the child.
“But his acting out from his personal pain does not designate him as an apikores either.”
I never wrote that it did, and I would appreciate it if you stopped implying that that is my position.
“At the wrong time, it does not convey a message of direction but a set of criteria to earn punishment.”
You’ve written this multiple times, and I have disagreed multiple times. Maintaining boundaries and meting out punishment are not the same thing. If someone is breaking things in my house and I call the police, I am not punishing him, I am protecting my house.
“Absolutely everything that is done in the way of chinuch must be focused on bringing about the desired result of the child’s learning”
Phrased another way, the ends justify the means? And only a navi can foretell the actual ends.
“But the kid needs to hear it as a boundary, not a criterion for punishment or tolerance. Hashem’s love for Klal Yisroel was ever present even after the חטא העגל. That needs to be our role model for how to love.”
Go back and read Sefer Bamidbar and tell me that klal Yisroel never felt that they were being punished, or that their rebellious behavior was tolerated, or that Hashem continually changed His approach with the goal of preventing rebellion. How does the long golus we find ourselves in fit with your philosophy? I don’t think the Torah narrative supports your position, and you continue to misrepresent mine by implying that I somehow support a complete rejection of a child or the withdrawal of love.
zahavasdad,
“16 year old kids can get part time jobs”
If a 16 year old can get himself a job, pay for his own phone, Internet, etc., then zei gezunt. He’s not going to sit in his parents’ home and whine about how their Shabbos restrictions crimp his style. He’s going to blow out of there at age 18 and graduate summa cum laude from somewhere. The vast majority of these OTD type discussions center around kids who still have quite a bit of dependence on their parents, but chafe at the rules of the home.
zahavasdad,
“You can get unlimited Data on many plans for about $50 a month and just turn your phone into a hot spot. it doenst cost $100 a month.”
Yeah, those Verizon offers look really good, don’t they? I’m talking about the bill. But whatever.
“The problem is you keep asking a Kasher of a Maaser”
I think you have misunderstood my points, and have responded to the least important part of my post and completely ignored the most important. If the “kid” is choosing between hanging with friends and watching entertainment he supplies himself on Friday night, it is unlikely his shomer Shabbos parents’ blessing on TV watching will make much of a difference in his plans. My harping on the difficulties of setting up these activities serves only to demonstrate the independence that this “kid” already wields.
“Whenever I bring up some clearly Unshabbosdick activity you can you will shut off the router or the 4G costs too much.”
I’m sorry, I probably didn’t make my reasoning for writing those responses clear. The reason I keep mentioning the difficulties in acquiring these “unshabbosdik” activities is to show that we’re not really talking about a “kid” here, but rather a young adult. Let’s make a deal – you stop placing a hypothetical adult into my home and calling him a child, and I’ll stop pointing out how your hypotheticals require adult skills to accomplish.
“(Kids arent stupid, they probably know more than you and can defeat any roadblock you put in front)”
It’s sad to me that you think that by simply not providing something, that is a “roadblock.” No wonder so many young people have a sense of entitlement that is completely out of whack with the real world.
“Maybe the kid has a job to pay for things like their phone (Dont make a Kasher of a Maaser what kind of job and you can stop him from working)”
So again, we’re talking about an adult here. Not a child.
“I never advocated doing it in the living room, Obviosuly you tell the kid to go upstairs and watch in their room quietly”
Then why on earth are you arguing with me? You should be arguing with TLIK, because according to him, by telling the kid to go upstairs, you are rejecting him and causing him horrible pain and driving him off the derech. No watching in the living room on Shabbos is a <shudder>boundary</shudder>.
zahavasdad,
“Is the following an incentive or harm reduction. On friday night, the kid says I am going to hang out with my friends (And you know that means activities including smoking pot) or I am going to watch TV (Or Netflix or whatever).”
That’s a very unusual statement for a child to make. Would he really base his decision on what to do that evening based on my “permission” to watch TV or Netflix or whatever? Probably not. If the kid really wants to hang out with friends, would TV dissuade him? And if he really wants to watch TV, is this whole hang-out setup a threat of some sort? This doesn’t strike me as a realistic conversation.
And the specific boundary I’m talking about that TLIK thinks is so horrendous is disturbing the oneg Shabbos of the house – I don’t want a TV or laptop or whatever in my living room, in view of the rest of the household, for example. I’m not suggesting forcing a kid with his own 4G data plan to sing zemiros at my table, nor doing searches of his belongings.
“Which do you choose? Is it really an incetive to let them watch TV (Or Netflix on their ipad with 4g that you cannot control with the router) or harm reduction”
Sure sounds like an incentive to me – incentives and harm reduction are not mutually exclusive. I’d be interested in the age the child in this example is, in your mind. A quick price check on an iPad with an unlimited data plan (needed if the kid is going to stream endless Netflix over 4G) came in at around $100 per month – nothing to sneeze at. And that doesn’t include a phone,/phone line/taxes, etc. Netflix is $8 to $14 per month. We might be talking about a monthly entertainment cost of $150-$200 here. Where’s the dough coming from?
The little I know,
The matter at hand was a generalization that all OTD kids are to be permanently rejected, zero kiruv, and no possibility of teshuvah
No, that’s not the matter at hand. This position which you attribute to Satmar dayanim represents an extreme that both of us agree is not correct. Your persistence in refuting it in response to my posts does nothing to respond to what I have written, therefore it seems to me like nothing more than a straw man. I am raising two objections about the parenting philosophy that you have introduced on this thread, which I believe goes to the unhealthy opposite extreme of the so-called Satmar philosophy:
1. Lack of boundaries in the home. So far you have responded using a series of lengthy feints – either re-characterizing reasonable boundaries in the home as restrictive or punitive rules on the child (which they are not), or making it sound like you agree about the importance of boundaries, but then justifying their removal. This is dangerous and destructive both for the child in question and the home. Responding by telling me again how bad the “Satmar” extreme is does not address this.
2. A setup that seems to incentivize going OTD, particularly for families with more than one child. You can chastise my intelligence or stability for bringing this question up all you want, but it’s a legitimate issue and you have failed to address it. GAON offered his own response, and I responded to him as well, which you can read above if you want.
If you want to say let’s agree to disagree, I’m fine with that. But I don’t want my position misrepresented in the process.
josh2336,
“Multiple independent studies of GMOs done in France,
UK, and now Russia confirm, that GMOs cause sterility in the third generation of those mammals that consume them.”If this is so, it should be fairly simple to cite such a study. Can you provide the title of such a study, and the publication? Thanks!
Neville ChaimBerlin,
“99% sure this is a troll thread”
Agreed.
“When Gregor Mendel changed color of pea pods by moving pollen from one type of pea plant to another (the same way bees do), the resulting plant is technically a genetically modified organism.”
Not true – that is cross-pollination, or cross-breeding, and does not fall under the GMO rubric. GMOs are produced through genetic engineering (direct manipulation of the genes of an organism) or transgenic techniques (artificial transfer of genes from one organism to another – doesn’t necessarily even have to be the same species). Neither technique can happen naturally.
GAON,
“Of course it all depends on the “good kid” as well. i.e. if the fact that he didn’t get his breakfast is by no way effecting anything in the long run”
Absent having prophecy, there is no way for anyone to know this.
“if the “bad brother” would be ‘physically’ ill and needs extra care etc. and the well brother needs the exact above scenario – is the above excuse legit? No doubt, you can absolutely tell him: “sorry your breakfast money went toward your brother’s meds etc”.”
I would never tell a child that I cannot provide something for him because of his brother’s medical condition. And if you respond that I can do the same by the OTD brother’s support, au contraire. Disparities in material support and attention given among siblings is way more concrete and apparent to children than medical support stressing an entire family’s resources. And the siblings can see (and be reminded) that the medical condition was not the sick child’s choice to have, and the suffering R”L is more visible. Even if the OTD child faced nisayonos in his life or has a personality disorder of some sort, he is in control of his choices.
Furthermore, I dispute the notion that unconditional support for a child’s choices (note I did not say unconditional love) is ever an advisable course of action. I have never encountered a parenting philosophy that presents that as a good idea, outside of this “twisted” parenting as presented in this thread.
“Now of course each and every case is different and needs to be guided and diagnosed properly, if that is indeed the case of the “bad” kid.”
I agree.
The little I know,
“Your discussion of the two brothers was neither rational nor stable.”
You really don’t have a good response for how to handle the issue my example brought up, do you? Otherwise, you would discuss it rationally and without so much ad hominem. I did employ some satire in making the point, but the point is 100% valid and reasonable, and if you want people to accept or consider your “twisted” philosophy, it would do you well to address it.
“That is one way of making a point when there is not one to make.”
You may wish there is not a point, but there is – and it is to the peril of your “twisted” philosophy to not address it.
“Much of your commenting has been rational, whether I agreed with you or not.”
This is written like a compliment, but it is nothing but a bullying technique. I do not fear losing your supposed respect for my intellect, so it won’t work. The only thing you have shown is that your philosophy lacks resilience to a fairly basic question.
“When I address the tolerance of the wayward kid, I never insinuated that we should withdraw support from a good kid for the OTD one. Your insinuation was a bizarre extension of my message.”
Finally ,an actual response.
Exhibit A: “concentration of chinuch efforts on the child who is acting out, even if that means to scatter the other children to live with other family and friends”
Exhibit B: “Rav Elyoshiv told a mother to move her other 8 children out of the home to concentrate on the one who was acting out”
Exhibit C: “Whatever amount of money you usually give your kids – give this child DOUBLE!”
Exhibit D: “Send all of the other children out of the house and give THIS CHILD ALL of your attention!”
C and D are attributed to the Divrei Yoel without sourcing and without context. Which makes them just as dangerous as referencing Yitzchak and Yishmael or Yakov and Eisav to justify throwing a child out of the house. My objection follows directly from statements such as these, and they need to be addressed if you want to honestly present your philosophy.
The little I know,
“Your comment is neither accurate nor responsible.”
Which comment are you referring to?
“I thought your intellect was above that.”
Instead of an unproductive veiled insult, why don’t you explain how whatever comment I made was inaccurate or irresponsible? I’m a bit surprised to see this type of response from someone preaching love and infinite tolerance.
“Sorry, but I am in the know on this. I stated fact, not some bizarre idea/accusation.”
Joseph is trolling, but your response is an appeal to authority fallacy. This is the anonymous Internet, and you have not been crowned king.
The little I know,
Explain to me how your “twisted” philosophy doesn’t incentivize acting out and going off the derech.
Brother 1: “Mom, can I have $20 so I can go to a ball game on Saturday?”
Mom: “Here’s $400 – go buy yourself a TV so you can watch the game here at home and not go out.”
Brother 2: “Mom, can I have $20 so I can grab breakfast after Shacharis?”
Mom: “Sorry dear, I gave all my cash to your brother so he can buy a TV so he doesn’t drive on Shabbos. He’s acting out, so he’s more important than you right now”
Brother 2: “Hmm…”The little I know,
“Our real questions should be, What will work?”
I agree, keeping in mind that parents are responsible for themselves and every child.
“How much compromise is appropriate?”
Also known as boundaries. A rose by any other name…
Me12345,
“I’m sorry of this comes across as harsh and it only most cases not all. Most otd teens went off because of their parents. Because the parents didn’t do their job to correctly get to know their child until it’s too late!”
Your words did not sound harsh at all – I think you expressed yourself clearly and politely. And I think you made some very good points. It’s crucial for parents to remain connected to their children, and the culture in which we find ourselves is not conducive to that, so parents have to consciously and actively connect. One point: OTD teens go off because they decide to go off. They can point to their parents as reasons to justify their decision, but at the end of the day it is a choice they did not have to make.
The little I know,
Now let’s explore the reality of this issue.
And thus you prepare your rhetorical escape hatch.
I noted earlier than boundaries, to be effective, must be taught, not imposed. I want the guardrails on the highway to serve as a visual cue to maintain the proper direction of my car.
Agreed.
To create a guardrail that one will continually ram, even if it effectively blocked the vehicle from exiting the highway, is not a boundary, but a barrier.
This is nonsensical. If my car is continually ramming a barrier, it’s not because the highway administration randomly put a guardrail up for my car to crash into. It’s because my car is veering off the road.
My kids need to be happy in my home
My kids need to be safe, nourished, nurtured, loved, and prepared for adulthood in my home. G-d willing most of the time they will also be happy, but there will be times that they are not. And in those situations it is my role as a parent to help them to respond positively to adversity and not always getting what they want. Not to do whatever I can to make them happy. That’s not a recipe for raising well adjusted and high functioning adults who are prepared for the real world.
Boundaries need to be taught, where the kids learn what is right and wrong, what is good or not.
I agree 100%.
I suggest that a great many OTD situations involve problems with this process, having been done incorrectly, or in a manner that was not effective.
I think there are cases where that is true. I think, unfortunately, that the majority of OTD issues arise within the influence of a toxic peer culture that directs kids to look to each other for guidance, not their parents. Children instinctively look for a single authority – see how upset they become if there is a disparity between what they are taught in school and what their parents say. If a child’s peers become his authority, then his resilience towards his parents shrinks considerably. Parents and children are not angels and will make mistakes, and in a normal world parent and child should be able to reconnect lovingly following a rupture. But when their world is filled with disrespectful teenage role models, connection becomes far more difficult.
Now that the kid is acting out, now we are going to impose boundaries.
Nope – just because a kid is acting out does not mean that all boundaries become magically transformed to newly imposed and punitive.
This does not work. This imposition of boundaries is a parallel with rejection, because that’s the only message. Sure, the situation is frustrating. I freak when my toddler grandchildren discover a light switch they can reach. No one wants chilul Shabbos in their home. But the fight is futile, and carries major risk, in short term and long term.
If rebellious teenagers decided to write a book on parenting teenagers, it’d probably read like this.
We may have done a great job at teaching boundaries to all our children. But if, for whatever reason, it did not work with this one child, I have an obligation to accomplish that teaching in a way that will be effective. That is the OTD kid. Not necessarily bad parents. Just the failure to match the right parenting skills needed for that kid.
And whoosh – out the escape hatch you go. Boundaries are good, but only if you “teach” them beforehand, and it’s almost impossible to teach them all beforehand. And now they’ll just be viewed as punitive. So…
Getting kind of long… -33
zahavasdad,
Who said you bought a TV, I just said they were watching TV (Or Netflix) an 18 year can have their own money and spend as they want. They could have a TV or netflix that you did not purchase
That’s 100% true. As the manager of the house, however, I have a say about what items are allowed into the house, where they are allowed to be used, and I also manage the WiFi password and settings. If devices connected to the WiFi are causing upsetting disruptions to the Shabbos peace in the home, the WiFi may need to be unplugged from Friday afternoon until Saturday night. If there is no apparent disruption, I don’t see a need to add an additional task to the Friday checklist of stuff to do. At the end of the day, what boundaries I choose to set should be based on maximizing everyone’s health and safety, including the “OTD” child, and the choice would involve extensive thought and discussions with a rav very familiar with my family. And I’m certainly willing to talk everything through with a family counselor, to make sure that everyone feels heard and understood. I would hope that I would have sought outside resources long before the situation reaches such a point.
I’m curious how far you think this right of a child to do whatever he wants in your house, nyah nyah nyah, goes. Would you allow a child to just go and buy a cat and bring it into your house no matter what you think? What if you or one of your other children was allergic to cats? Would you let him commit crimes from within your house? Also, would you think restrictions on Netflix or phone usage would be so unreasonable if, instead of Shabbos, we were talking about overnight usage before a school day? Should your 16 year old be allowed to tappity tap all night on a phone and sleep through class the next day?
A non shomer shabbat kid is going to do something Mechalal Shabbos either in front of you or behind your back
I am not a TSA agent and my home is not an airport security checkpoint. At the end of the day, however, I am responsible for everyone’s physical, emotional, and spiritual safety in the home.
and what if the kid says to you I am going to watch a movie on Netflix and if you dont agree , I am going “somewhere else”. No he wasnt Mechalel shabbos in your house, he was Mechalal shabbos elsewhere
Sounds like a child with serious perspective and maturity issues. If we’re talking about an adult child, I cannot stop him, and I’d remind him that we love him and are always here for him, and he’s always welcome. If it’s a minor child – the home is not a prison, but since we are responsible for his safety and well being, we expect him back at so-and-so a time. And if I have reason to be concerned about his safety and I cannot find him, I will call the police.
Curious1000,
Second, without basing anything on evolution there is no reason to call chickens dinosaurs.
Why? It’s just simple categorization. If we had never seen a chicken, but instead found a chicken fossil, it’d be categorized as an avian dinosaur.
Rand0m3x,
That’s “Canada goose.”
Thanks!