Avram in MD

Why is the Torah against the males and put them into an impossible situation.

Eh?

A women has the right not to work.

How does this harm men?

She has the right to stay home and be taken care of.

In the context of marriage, which, when healthy, is as beneficial (if not more so) to men as to women.

A women has the right too enter in to Contracts

So does a man, where’s the bias?

A women has the right to open a bank account

So does a man, and how do secular laws governing bank accounts reflect on the Torah?

A women has the right to spend money as she pleases.

I’m not sure that is accurate, and even if so, a man does too, so where is the bias?

I am having a very hard time making sense of all 4.

What doesn’t make sense?

As based on this a Women could go out one day enter into a bunch of contracts,

I’m not sure that is an accurate statement.

right checks that cant be cover,

That would be illegal under secular law.

and withdraw and spend all the money in a bank account, and then turn around and say. I am not responsible for covering any of these debts, as i dont have to work.

That is certainly not true.

Veltz Meshugener,

My question is similar to Logician’s:

Therefore one asks his posek, and doesn’t care what “most” people are doing. What’s the issue ?

If I have a halachic question or situation where there are differences of opinion, I ask my rav a shaila. He takes my whole situation into account and gives me a p’sak.

One thing that I learned after becoming frum (and this may be unique to my own situation and rav) is that it is better when asking a shaila to be very specific about the particular situation prompting the shaila with a goal to get a p’sak just for that situation, rather than phrasing the question in broad terms to seek a general ruling. That way, the answer I receive is tailored exactly to my situation, “bias” free. If I then feel that I need a more general answer to address future instances, I follow up by asking something like, “and if this happens again, what should I do?”

Gamanit,

Teenage babysitters. Few will tell you over the phone how much they charge,

My wife always asks a potential babysitter what her rate is beforehand, and will offer a rate if the babysitter responds that she doesn’t have one. Similarly, my plumber will give me a range before starting work; “It looks like you’ll need this, which costs around $350, but if I get in there and find that such and such is broken, we’ll need to replace the whole thing and that will run up to $850…” My auto mechanic always calls with an estimate before beginning work on my car. I can look up each dental procedure my dentist recommends to figure out its cost beforehand as well.

Despite the fact that a shadchan deserves payment as much as a babysitter, plumber, mechanic, and dentist, for some reason, it seems culturally more acceptable for the latter professions to state rates beforehand. In other words, a plumber would never have to start a CR thread asking for a polite way to request money instead of a gift for services rendered. Maybe this is what should change. If there is a significant problem with shadchanim not being paid appropriately, then perhaps community rabbis can be asked to highlight the halacha when addressing their communities, or be sure to mention the common rate when speaking to a family making a wedding.

Health,

Sam – I fail to see where HaKatan said that the holocaust wasn’t the will of Hashem!

I think Sam2 may be getting it from where HaKatan wrote:

By your “logic”, Hashem also wanted the Holocaust and every other tragedy to happen.

That said, I agree with you and am almost positive that HaKatan did not mean that there are things that happen that did not originate from Hashem or were against His will. Rather, Hashem gives humans freedom of choice and responds accordingly based on our actions. Hashem desires that we follow the mitzvos so He can reward us with the greatest and most open relationship with Him, which is the greatest pleasure. If we, cv”s, do not follow the mitzvos, the response we get is certainly Hashem’s will, but ultimately it was not the response that He would have preferred to give to us.

I am very glad to hear that you are doing better.

Maybe we can pay Hamid Karzai to make that point himself!

the-art-of-moi,

This thread is really upsetting me

Whenever popa_bar_abba trolling appears sacrilegious on the surface, there is usually something going on under the surface, a subtle point he’s trying to make.

I don’t think popa_bar_abba is objecting to saying tehillim. It sounds to me that he feels like these events he’s going to are cheapening the tehillim by sandwiching them between national anthems and speeches, and treating them as a performance to be watched rather than a service of the heart. His posts are essentially mirroring the attitude towards the tehillim that these events engendered, which is a form of satire.

The fact that he doesn’t explain the satire and lets the denizens go nuts with outrage is what brings his satire to the pedestal of trolling.

PBA – sorry if I’m ruining your fun 🙂

popa_bar_abba,

Is it better to just let them break the ugly vase someone gave you that you never use?

Nope, I’d argue that it’s better to get them something cheap to play with or break. Otherwise, reasoning that you also never use it, they may break the other ugly vase someone gave you that is priceless.

HaKatan,

The point is not what, al pi halacha, the Zionists should do now

Isn’t what, al pi halacha, we should do now is the fundamental mission of Jews? It should be the first question asked by a baal teshuva.

but that everyone should be crystal-clear that they should never have started

We should realize how bad our sins are and feel regret for them, yes, this is the critical first step of teshuva. But to take a fatalistic attitude that nothing can be done about it is to surrender to the yetzer hara. We can always return to Hashem.

So, as to what the Zionists should do after the above, this is for the gedolim of the generation to deal with.

That’s a fair response.

The purpose of the questions I’m asking you is to learn more about the reasons you are here bashing “Zionists.” In an earlier post, you connected your purpose with Eliyahu Hanavi’s battles against the avodah zara of his day. Eliyahu Hanavi’s purpose was not simply to bash avodah zara because it was bad. His purpose was to bring the Jewish people to do teshuva. He was motivated by love for his brethren, even those steeped in sin. If he did not love them, he would not have been worthy of his mission.

Yirmiyahu Hanavi was thrown into prision by the sinful government of Yehuda. Almost nobody listened to him. In fact, there were people pretending to be nevi’im, saying false things and attributing them to Hashem. He could have hated these people, bashed them, called them sinners, washed his hands of them, but when the exile came, he kissed the bloodstained ground where they walked, caught up to them, and attempted to place their chains on himself as well.

I see you doing a lot of Zionist bashing in these forums, taking pains to categorize Jews as sinners, but you spend very little time describing how to do teshuva. Whether intentional or not, this communicates a sense that your words come from a place of shame of association with and hatred of Zionist Jews, not concern for the spiritual well being of the whole Jewish nation. Do you want them to improve, or does your own sense of righteousness come from standing on their heads? Do you see yourself as part and parcel with the Zionist Jews, or do you see yourself as separate from them – that you are a “real” Jew and they are now imposters – divorced from the bris?

But people still believe in the heresy of Zionism and make it (part of) their faith.

Do you believe this can and will change?

oomis,

Maybe this thread has helped to make some people more aware that our actions ARE noticed, and judged as well, and perhaps we all need to think about how we are perceived, whether or not we think we are doing something wrong or neglectful.

I agree. Avoiding appearances of evil is just as important as dan l’kaf zechus.

oomis,

I said this earlier, I am beginning to think it is a generational thing, this difference of opinion.

I disagree that this is a generational thing. There were neglectful parents and careful parents 30 years ago, and there are neglectful parents and careful parents today. I’m sure that 30 years ago there were differences in opinion among parents regarding what was safe or not safe, just like we see in this discussion. And I’d bet a pound of grain that there were grandparents looking askance at the parenting of their children’s generation. Ain kol chadash tachas hashemmesh.

I personally would never do what the OP described with one of my infants, because from my perception of what he’s describing, it sounds uncomfortable and unsafe for the infant. At the end of the day, however, I did not witness what this specific mother did, what led up to it, what followed it, what her thought processes were at the time – I know very few of the actual facts. If the OP had asked, “do you think it’s a good idea to place your infant directly into the toddler seat of a shopping cart on his back and then put food on top of him,” I would have given a resounding no. What the OP wants from us, however, is to judge a specific mother’s care for her children, a mother who he alone saw, and only for a moment in time. Every parent makes mistakes they later regret. Some parents are truly neglectful. We don’t know what this was. Would any parent want someone to step in right at the moment they make a mistake with their child, and then post this mistake to the Internet looking for a chorus of boos? I am NOT comfortable with that – especially since others are using it as a platform to bash young Jewish parents in general.

oyyoyyoy,

is it better to not do something cause your a good prson, or cause hashem said so. killing for example

What defines a good person is societally and culturally dependent, as oomis eloquently described. What one society considers morally repugnant behavior another might see as great virtue.

Some behaviors, such as killing and stealing, seem to carry a greater universal morality than others, such as dietary laws. I believe this sense of heightened morality comes from the fact that societies cannot be built or maintained unless these behaviors are curtailed. Therefore, there are some basic moral concepts that all humans, who are social creatures, instinctively adopt. Also, we are wired to feel empathy, so most humans can develop a sense of, “what is hateful to me, do not do to others.”

Torah changes the entire ball game. Instead of morality from within, which can be influenced by environment, culture, and society, Torah gives us morality from Heaven. Some of that morality will line up with our instincts, but some will not. Building a society around this heavenly moral code is what the Jewish people are all about.

Also, if you are interested in learning Gemara, there is Rabbi Ayson Englander’s “Fundamentals of Talmud” (Yesodei HaTorah) program, which provides the tools to get started with learning Gemara. I think this program is best done with a shiur, but it can also be learned independently.

Agreed with notasheep that juice really shouldn’t be given to an infant under a year. I was thinking toddlers in my post.

HaKatan,

There are very strong anti-Zionists who live under Israeli rule.

But since “Israeli rule” came about due to Zionism, they certainly do not see that situation as desirable. I want to know what your idea is for where we should go from here, if we woke up one morning and Zionist ideology was gone.

One has nothing to do with the other.

The fact of Israeli rule has everything to do with Zionism. Zionism brought about the State of Israel.

I have heard a lot about how Zionism is idolatry, how it’s evil, how it’s shmad, etc. Fine. What I’d like to know is, what is your plan if you could do something about it?

The Zionist usurpers came and decided to create their abominable State in Eretz Yisrael.

But it’s done. 65 years ago. Now there’s nearly 6 million Jews living there, and hundreds of millions of Arabs surrounding those Jews who hate them with every fiber of their beings. So where do we go from here?? I’m honestly curious about your ideas. Suppose all 6 million Israelis came around to your way of thinking.

That is not, in and of itself, a reason to leave Eretz Yisrael.

That’s sidestepping my question. What do we do about the State of Israel?

there are many theoretical possibilities in between, CH”V, shmad and hisgarus baUmos versus large-scale suicide.

Ok! So what are some of these possibilities? You can’t just tear down without building up.

WIY,

The baby was not in any seat just lying across the width of the top small section of the shopping cart

That does sound strange to me. Was the baby lying on a blanket or something at least?

Juror number 4 just ate the defendant with french fries!

WIY,

I was shopping in the supermarket and I saw a frum woman

Would your reaction had been the same if she weren’t Jewish?

had her baby (maybe 3-5 month old) in the wagon it was the top part so she had him lying across the width.

In a carrier?

What bothered me is that she had a lot of stuff in the wagon it was really full so she put some lighter stuff ON THE BABY. I was shocked.

There’s not enough information for me to share your shock. Was the food directly on top of baby, or by his/her feet? What was the baby’s reaction? Was s/he distressed? Played with the food? Asleep?

Is this how you treat a human being?!

I put things on my lap all of the time. If the baby wasn’t bothered, was it such a big deal? Were you concerned about safety, or the baby’s dignity?

Am I oversensitive or do you agree this is wrong?

Not enough information to answer.

DaMoshe,

He once told me that there are times he regrets becoming frum again, just because he hears from so many people how being Modern Orthodox is against halachah, how being a Zionist is apikorsis, etc. He said, “If I’m doing wrong anyway, if I’m an apikores anyway, why should I bother trying?

In this world, there is nothing that anyone can do that someone else won’t disagree with. If a person has explored the options and made a choice, why favor the opinions of those who disagree with that choice instead of associating with those who would make the same choice? There are billions of Christians and Muslims who think we are all wrong about our religion; many of them believe we are going to burn in the afterlife because of it. Should I abandon Judaism because they say this to me?

If you are MO, Hareidim will disagree with you. If you are Hareidi, MO will disagree with you. If you became Chabad, Satmar would disagree with you. If you became Satmar, Breslov would disagree with you. I have heard religious Zionists insinuate that Jews who do not say hallel on Yom Yerushalayim may potentially face consequences after 120 because they did not appreciate Hashem’s miracles performed for them. I have heard others state that Jews not living in eretz Yisroel will have a diminished status when Moshiach comes and may not be allowed into the land at all because they didn’t appreciate it. Should non-Zionist Hareidim stop being frum because this was said about them?

My point is, serve Hashem with all of your heart, all of your soul, and all of your strength. That’s the best any human can hope to do, and Hashem is far more gracious and compassionate than humans.

One of the true evils of ketchup is that it is distributed in tiny packets or hard to pour bottles. Gallon jugs or converted cement mixers would be more suited to supply sufficient ketchup for french fries and chicken nuggets. 🙂

oomis,

I would agree 100% were it not for the fact that unfortunately in too many cases,though not all, the type of man who would refuse (as per halachic mandate) to give his wife a GET, is probably not the safest bet for strengthening that marriage.

You make an excellent point. Clearly a fundamental part of creating good marriages is educating young women and men about taking time to watch out for potential warning signs of abusive tendencies. Gila Manolson has an excellent section about this in one of her books about dating.

notasheep,

For those who are attacking me

I apologize for making you feel attacked. I think we had very different interpretations of the example you gave from the book. In end end, your personal example was no different than what I or any other normal parent would do. I wasn’t objecting to saying no to a baby, in fact, I think it’s very important to communicate with them what’s going on verbally as it’s done (no no, this is dangerous, or, I’m going to change your diaper now). I was objecting to the idea of exploiting baby’s natural curiosity to create a punishment situation in order to “train” him. I should have made it more clear throughout the discussion that my issue was with the book, so I apologize.

my point was that many people will put a review on something they have heard about merely to discredit it, when they have not read it themselves.

I absolutely agree with your sentiment here; but unfortunately in the case of this particular book, the raging reviewers are on the right track.

I agree with you that there is a dangerous trend towards permissiveness among many parents, and that parental authority is under assault in the present culture. I don’t think that “To Train Up a Child” advocates an accurate or healthy depiction of traditional parenting, however. Traditional parenting is built on a foundation of closeness and understanding a child’s behaviors and abilities. Sometimes food or water can solve a problem, sometimes a change of activities or location. Sometimes punishment is necessary. Many parents in today’s culture have little emotional connection with their children, so they have no ability to really interpret a situation from their child’s perspective. For these people, a punishment-centric approach is very dangerous and very well can lead to abuse.

zahavasdad,

We have wandered far from the original point that brought me into this thread. You imply that since you are not personally impacted by the activities of the open orthodox movement and since they seem to be few in number, then people on this site are not affected by them and hence have no reason to discuss them. This is not true; posters in the CR including the OP have been affected.

I asked how you were impacted by an alleged bicycle ban in a Chassidish community so that you felt it worth opening a discussion; you didn’t answer, but I’ll assume that somehow you were affected other than through hearsay. If you can open a discussion about something affecting you, then why not any other poster?

BTW – One angle of approach to alleviate the tragedy of agunas is to strengthen marriages and reduce separations. I don’t have an opinion on the “smartphone” asifa, but given that unfettered access to the Internet opens a risk for falling into behaviors detrimental to marriages, it would seem likely that the organizers were partly motivated by a desire to reduce the tragedy of divorce, and by extension, agunas.

Also, I agree that more discussion and action are needed to resolve aguna issues, but the problem is a uniquely personal one, with wide differences case by case. Certainly there are universal changes that can be made, but the problem is quite complex, and there is considerable variance regarding what should be done. If you have good ideas, please by all means open threads about them and I’m sure spirited discussion will follow. Perhaps even moreso than bike bans.

Feif Un,

I am sorry that you feel so pained by posts here, and although I have participated in some of the threads you have mentioned and probably not on the side that you’d prefer, I hope that none of my words specifically have caused you offense. I know nothing about RCA press releases, so I did not comment on that aspect – I got involved in the discussion further down.

I’d like to point something out that I have seen from your previous posts about the bias in the CR. You state that you are furious with the CR for allowing criticism and insults towards Modern Orthodox institutions because that is disrespectful, but you also attempt to hurl abuse towards Chassidish and Yeshivish institutions, and react with additional anger when those attempts are blocked by the moderators. It comes across to me, and hopefully this is not what you intend, that your problem isn’t with insulting rabbonim per say, but that this site allows your rabbonim to be insulted but not the rabbonim you want to insult. In other words, it’s less about the insulting itself and more about the inconsistent standard. If the site dropped all moderation and allowed any and all rabbonim to be insulted at whim, would you really be appeased?

I agree with you that many posts on this site go beyond the line in terms of insulting Orthodox rabbis. However, I think that your efforts to counter the problem would be more successful if you held that such activity is wrong across the board. In other words, rather than trying to legalize all bashing, work towards making all bashing illegal. Why do you get so upset to see your rabbonim and institutions insulted, when a CR littered with your blocked and edited posts indicates that you would do the same thing to others’ rabbonim and institutions if allowed the opportunity?

One final point – you are correct that sock puppeteering dramatically inflates the appearance of anti-MO sentiment on these boards. I think everyone focuses on “Joseph” so much that they don’t realize that there are other trolls and immature kids who exist and post here.

notasheep,

children that age [6 to 8 years] will NOT understand not to touch private property if they haven’t been taught the concept from a young age.

This makes no sense to me. If children cannot learn new concepts unless they were taught them at a “young” age, then how could they ever learn Torah, or to read, or math, or any complex subject?

As to your assertion that children below 12 months will not understand the meaning of the word no

I never intended to say an infant wouldn’t understand the meaning of the word no in the sense of parental disapproval – I’m saying that they might get confused as to why you are saying no or expressing disapproval.

I have also said no to an infant trying to explore an electrical socket, and he definitely noticed my no and gave me attention, but then went back to the socket. As he reached for it the next few times, I said no while moving him away from the light socket, and he gave me bewildered looks and kept returning to it.

At that point I have a choice: I could go the “To Train Up a Child” route, interpret his behavior as intransigence, engage in a power struggle with him until he fears my wrath and looks at me for approval before touching anything ever again (i.e., understands the meaning of no). Or I could simply block his access to the socket and we both move on with our lives with no trauma. By the time the child was 2, he could understand my instructions clearly, understand some of the reasoning behind it (he could get hurt) and also perceive that there would be consequences for disobeying.

And since I have acutally studied child development,

So you perceive no conflict between the “To Train Up a Child” model and your knowledge of child development?

I can tell you that from about six months of age babies are beginning to comprehend language and not just inflection,

And I can tell you that babies in the womb are beginning to comprehend language and not just inflection (newborns recognize their parent’s language as distinct from foreign languages, they recognize familiar voices, tones, and many other things such as music). I can also tell you that language comprehension has little relevance to what we’re talking about, which are worldly concepts such as object permanence, memory, cause and effect.

After the parent says ‘no’, they move the object out of reach.

So you are advocating doing something completely different from what’s described in “To Train Up a Child”. Based on your example from the book, you would leave the object within reach of the child and escalate your reaction until the baby breaks from fear. I’m glad that we’re not as far apart on these issues as it seems.

And why should the child become afraid of that object rather than learning it is untouchable?

And why wouldn’t the baby become afraid of the object, or the yelling and hitting parent? Different babies are going to interpret things differently.

zahavasdad,

Because of my employment situtation I am forced to defend people who appear on the front page of the NY post.

What does that mean?

Those communities are alot larger than the small one in Riverdale.

A misdirection play. YCT is spearheading a movement that is actively attempting to alter the Orthodox Jewish world. They are active in numerous cities across North America. Population and influence do not necessarily correlate.

And frankly I do have close ties to the Charedi community, stronger than you know, so they do affect me more than Riverdale does where I have none.

So how does the alleged bicycle ban affect you personally?

Also, just because you are not personally affected by the activities of the open orthodox movement, you extrapolate that nobody else here is?