Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
What option does it limit (other than the ability to donate in the future) ?
It requires you to avoid risks that a normal person with a spare kidney can afford to take.
No, Joseph, I’m referring to this thread. I thought you would pick up huju’s hint, but apparently not.
Yes, DSG, it is really correct. That is what happened. Yes, Chabad loves all Jews, including the worst resha’im, and definitely including misnagdim. But misnagdim hated chassidim, and the fact is that the Alter Rebbe’s suffering during the few hours he was stuck in the misnaged’s home was worse than he had suffered the whole 53 days he was in prison.
The source is Beis Rebbi. p 66. If the moderators will allow a link, you can find it at https://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=3751&pgnum=83
Reb Eliezer, exactly. They were afraid, and when their talmidim saw that what they feared had not come about they ended their hisnagdus.
The halacha says that until a person is 20 years old, he is not mature enough to sell real estate that he inherited from his father. How much more so is such a person not mature enough to give away vital organs, parts of himself that Hashem gave him in case he ch”v needs them. So definitely wait until you are 20, and only then start considering it seriously.
Organ donation is a mitzvah but it’s not for everyone. It’s a major step that will limit your options for the rest of your life, so once you are 20 you must be very very sure this is what you want to do before you do it. Consult wiser people, people with more experience than you, talmidei chachomim and tzadikim, and pray for Hashem to guide you to the right decision. And if the result of all that deliberation is that you truly believe this is what Hashem wants you to do, then behatzlocho.
Benephraim, no, they do not! A mobile mikveh is by definition impossible. And Chabad, who are very machmir in mikva’os, could certainly not make such a thing.
Joseph, again with insurance? Why do you keep mentioning it? Do the insurance companies charge less for people who keep tznius?
GH, the song was composed by maskilim, not misnagdim. Though the line between them was not so bright: many misnagdim were unfortunately infected by maskilim, especially through the efforts of Shimon Hakofer in Vilna, and others.
R MIller’s proposed home mikveh was not portable! It was to be an integral part of the building, making it mechubar lakarka. That was a major point in making it kosher.
RebbeDebbie trolls: How is it that some posters are saying that they are saving seats for their wife? Are they davening in a shul without a mechitza?
No poster on this thread ever said anything about saving seats for their wife in shul. As you know very well, because you participated in that exchange, the only mention of saving a seat for one’s wife was at kiddish. Therefore I accuse you of trolling.
You know what a misnaged is. Someone who is opposed to chassidus. The chassidim did not give them that name, they gave it to themselves.
In those days many of the misnagdim were motivated by a genuine concern that the new “kat” would turn out like the SZ and Frank cults, and abandon Torah & Mitzvos. That is why they did everything they could to try to destroy it. When they or their children saw that this was not happening, that in fact not only was chassidus not causing people to stop keeping mitzvos, it was causing them to become more diligent in their observance, they stopped being misnagdim. They didn’t necessarily become chassidim but they stopped opposing it. That is why R Chaim Brisker said that by his time (more than 100 years ago) there was no longer any such thing as a misnaged leshem shomayim.
But there were always those misnagdim who were not lesheim shomayim, but were simply mecharcherei riv. Those people continued to be misnagdim to this day.
I see that Joseph asked a question a while back that I did not see before.
It seems to me that me’ikar hadin the consequences to the person don’t matter; what matters is that your intention is not to harm him but only to stop him harming you. That doing so will result in harm to him is his problem; he should have thought of that before he decided to harm you. Of course, in practice ahavas yisroel, ve’osiso hayoshor vehatov, and also Pareto optimality and simple mentchlichkeit (all four of these may amount the same thing) mean that you should balance the harms involved, and not subject someone else to a great harm merely in order to prevent a small harm to yourself; instead you should suffer the small harm and then try to collect it from the offender. If necessary by telling him that if he doesn’t pay then next time you will call the police. But if you do decide to just call the police I don’t think that makes you a mosser.
This also goes to answer your second question, about what I mean by a reasonable effort. Again, I threw that in not because I saw it in the Shulchon Oruch but because sevoro hi. It’s not right to subject someone to harm without first trying to resolve the situation. But you can’t be expected to take heroic measures just to save another person from harm. If a reasonable effort won’t do it then you’re entitled to save yourself at his expense, since he’s the aggressor. So what is a reasonable effort depends on the circumstances and your available resources, which include time and patience. It has to be reasonable to you.
Because when the police took him home, they delivered him to the wrong address; they took him to the home of a misnaged, and he was stuck there for a few hours until his people realized what had happened and came to get him. He said he suffered more in those few hours than during his whole time in prison. So the geulah began on the 19th but was not complete until the 20th.
Actually the basic halacha is that yes, when you are not in Florida you have to let others use your house there, provided they keep it in good condition and vacate it as soon as you need it. I would say that nowadays this halacha is not necessarily applicable, because we have many things in our houses, some of which are fragile, and some of which are personal, so having strangers squatting there does cost us something, if only menuchas hanefesh. Whereas in chazal;’s time a house was basically a shell, and if you were not there there was no reason not to let others use it. (Which is why in their days there was no need for Pesach cleaning; bedikas chometz was the cleaning.)
As for the driveway, you could make it known on your block that people are free to use your driveway, but they must be ready to move their cars at a moment’s notice. If you wanted to be nice you could even create a Whatsapp group for the block, and post on it when you leave CT, so whoever’s parked in your driveway has over an hour’s notice to move.
Knaidlach, indeed, even inside a kosher mikveh, if someone left a bucket in there one may not tovel while standing in it or (if it’s upside down) on top of it.
Why is anyone surprised or upset that a Xian minister says his religion is the only true one? What else should he say? Surely everyone believes their religion is the only true one, or they wouldn’t belong to it. We certainly believe that of our religion, so why should it upset us that they believe it of theirs?
The Xian bible says that it is impossible to be saved except by their god; every human being must either accept their god r”l, or else go to Hell. Catholics are not bound by what the Bible says, so their pope can say maybe there is another way to Heaven, just for the Jews. But Protestants are stuck with what their Bible says. This minister is honest; those who claim to disagree with him are either not being honest about it, or else they’re not being honest when they claim to be Xian.
The important point is that he loves us even though he thinks we’re going to Hell, just because the Torah says he should. He wants the blessing of “va’avor’cho mevor’checho”. And we should appreciate that.
By definition a mikveh cannot be portable!
Joseph, I’m not sure whose nusach of the teno’im I’m remembering, but that phrase is definitely in there. And yes, of course anything written in the teno’im overrides “the Halachic default monetary obligations of a married couple for a lifetime”. That’s what teno’im are: The terms of the marriage. If the original terms of the marriage are that the couple will have equal control of their possessions, then they do, regardless of what the halacha would have been without such a condition. How else could it be? What did you think teno’im were, that you dismissed them like that?
Philosopher, what is the meaning of the great mitzva of Hachnosas Orchim which is greater than the acceptance of the Shchina?
Actually Philosopher wins that point. Hachnosas Orchim means inviting travelers, people who have no home to go to. Inviting people who have a home at which they could eat is NOT hachnosas orchim. If the people are lonely then inviting them is surely a great mitzvah, but not that one. It falls under chessed, ve’ahavta lere’acha kamocha, and the Torah’s general concern for the stranger, orphan, widow, and Levi, a category which surely also includes the divorced and the single, but the Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chaim ch 308) defines hachnosas orchim and this does not fit the definition.
Cyrus was an idolater and yet the pasuk calls him Moshiach…
So long as Trump’s affairs were with single women they were not adultery. We won’t talk about what he bragged he was doing during the Vietnam war, because that was a long time ago when he was a liberal Democrat. In any case, nobody has ever upheld him as a politician who promotes family values. He has other qualities, but that is not among them and nobody pretends it is.
“….One is the loneliest number a yid will ever know….
No, for yidden nine is the loneliest number.
Not just probably, but very probably. There is NO REASON to suppose that they are unsafe.
The idiot above who was worried about taking chemicals into your lungs, guess what, that’s what we call breathing. Fear of “chemicals” is one of the stupidest things ever, since literally everything in the world is chemicals.
The recent illnesses and deaths have now all been traced to people replacing the genuine product with some toxic mixture they made themselves or bought illegally. There have been no illnesses among those who smoked a genuine product as it is sold in normal stores.
And what’s wrong with nicotine addiction? Why is it any worse than caffeine addiction? So long as you’re getting your nicotine in a safe manner, as vaping is, what’s the problem? The problem with smoking is the tar, and vaping has no tar.
So are a large portion (a majority?) of “Reform Jews”.
He may end up in a Kensington in ek velt, but we should hope and pray that the Uber will not take him to yenner velt!!!
No, but sunflower seeds grow in pods.
The standard teno’im (at least every time I’ve listened to them being read) says וישלטון בנכסיהון שוה בשוה. Therefore none of the halachos that the OP referenced apply any more, and the wife has the same right as the husband to make any purchase.
Google search just tells you how people spell it, not how they should spell it. “Boro” is a careless shortening of “borough”, just as “lite” and “nite” are often used instead of “light” and “night”.
Because nachos are exactly the sort of thing pizza stores do sell. But for some reason they usually don’t sell them anyway. The real question is why all kosher pizza stores sell french fries, and Jewish customer expect them to, when (I’m told) treife pizza stores never sell them, and it wouldn’t occur to anyone to order them there.
Just as with the Russia hoax, even if the allegation were true there would be no crime.
It’s very interesting that the Democrats are all up in arms over Trump allegedly doing exactly what Biden bragged about doing. Let’s assume that Trump actually did what they’re accusing him of. Explicitly or implicitly he conditioned the aid that he had offered (and that 0bama had refused) on an inquiry into Burisma’s corruption. There is no doubt whatsoever that Biden explicitly conditioned $2B in aid on the prosecutor being fired. The only question in both cases is the motive. Did Biden want the prosecutor gone because Burisma was paying his son for precisely this sort of protection, or was it because he truly believed the prosecutor was corrupt and needed to go? Did Trump want the Burisma investigation reopened because the father of one of the targets was running for 2020, or was it because the corruption bothered him?
Anyone supporting this impeachment push should seriously ask themselves, do they really want to say that running for president should make one immune from any investigation into serious criminal allegations against one or any member of ones family? And if you truly do believe that, how can you possibly justify the FBI’s and CIA’s investigating anyone connected with the Trump campaign?
You can’t have it both ways.
Correction: What something is called can be relevant, but does not define what it is. For instance, the whole takanah of kitniyos was made in the first place because all kinds of cooked grains are called “porridge” (דייסא in Aramaic, קאשע in Yiddish), so if a rice or lentil porridge is permitted then people will think all porridge is, including wheat or barley porridge. So they forbade anything with which porridge is made. And since many of those things grow in pods they forbade everything that grows in pods. But that doesn’t mean that when someone comes along and sees a pomegranate or a cacao fruit and says “Hey, let me call that a pod”, the takanah automatically extends itself to that! Now if people started calling chocolate “porridge”, then we’d have a serious shayla; but they don’t, so we don’t.
What it’s called is irrelevant; what matters is what it is. The thing is clearly not a pod, it’s exactly the same as a pomegranate’s rind. That English-speakers call it a pod is no more relevant than the fact that they call the seed a bean.
Growing in a pod is not the only criterion. It is sufficient but not necessary. Rice and buckwheat are both kitniyos because they are cooked as porridge, which after all is the reason for the takanah in the first place.
Cacao “beans” are not beans; they grow on trees. And do not really grow in pods, any more than pomegranates do.
Discussing whether Reb Aharon or The Satmer rov could be the moshiach, meirs asserted that they could not because “they do not fit the Rambam’s criteria of who Moshiach is”. MDG replied that the Lubavitcher Rebbe doesn’t either, and meirs insists that he, unlike them, does.
The truth depends on what you mean by “fit the criteria”. The Rambam gives very few criteria for who could be the moshiach, and based on those criteria all three qualify. The Rambam’s main point is to give criteria for how we will know when someone is the moshiach. He says we will know the moshiach by his actions, and gives two sets of tasks that he holds the moshiach will perform; if someone has performed the first set then we can assume he probably is the moshiach, pending his completion of the second set.
If this is what you’re referring to, then none of the three performed even the first set, let alone the second. The Lubavitcher Rebbe did certain things that could be seen as symbolically foreshadowing the tasks that the moshiach will perform. Had he then gone on to perform those tasks themselves (or if he ever does perform them) then those earlier actions would be seen in hindsight as a beginning, much like the symbolic actions the nevi’im used to take, to signify later realities. If one were to analyze the lives of the other two the same way, one might well find some or all of the same tasks foreshadowed somehow in their lives too. None of it means anything unless it eventually leads to the reality. If one of the three comes back and does the tasks themselves then they will be the moshiach.
Only according to Hillel can a bosor v’dom be Meshiach, because his coming and Techyiyas Hamesim will be at one time, but he is dismissed from halacha.
You’re both an amho’oretz and an apikores.
1. Hillel has nothing to do with this subject.
2. One who does not believe moshiach will be a bosor vodam is an outright apikores.
3. Techiyas hameisim will be in stages, and those who will be needed immediately will rise immediately when the moshiach comes or even earlier.No problem but why extend it EVEN FURTHER to mustard??
It was not extended “even further”. There is a common belief that the original takanah was to forbid specific named species, but there is no basis for this belief in any pre-20th century source. Every pre-20th century posek, as far as I know without exception, says that the takanah was against all species that fit the criteria, and one of those criteria is that all species that grow in pods are forbidden. Therefore, since mustard grows in pods, it is forbidden. End of story.
Lakewhut, nachos are not supposed to have meat in them. Nacho Anaya’s original recipe was just corn chips, cheese, and jalapenos.
How can C&G serve nachos? Pareve “cheese”?
Toi:
if any litvishe gadol came out and proclaimed with full sincerity that one of his colleagues was Moshiach, the firestorm of condemnation would take approx. 5 minutes to fall.From whom? Only from amhoratzim and apikorsim, who don’t believe that Moshiach is a bosor vodom.
Go ask any chabadsker to unequivocally proclaim he’s not moshiach. They will never, ever do that.
Of course not. How could anyone unequivocally proclaim such a thing? I think it is unlikely that the Lubavitcher Rebbe will be the moshiach, but I have no basis for ruling it out completely, and neither do you. You and the messianics are guilty of the same error: you both are trying to add an item 12a, to the 13 ikkarim. They want to say “I believe that the moshiach will come, and it will be the Rebbe”, and you want to say “I believe that the moshiach will come and it will be anyone but the Rebbe”. You’re both equally wrong.
anIsraeliYid, Chizkiyahu could very easily have become the moshiach; he had a unique opportunity but he blew it. See Malbim on the story in Tanach. When Nevuchadnetzar sent an ambassador to find out why the sun had stopped, instead of saying it was Hashem showing his concern for Am Yisroel during Sancheriv’s siege, he said it was a private miracle for himself, to show that he would recover from his illness. Had he said the right thing, Nevuchadnetzar would have sent the ten tribes back home, and would have resolved never to try invading Eretz Yisrael, and that would have been the geulah. This is what the gemora means, that he didn’t say shira on Sancheriv’s fall. He did say shira — but for his recovery, which was the wrong reason.
Technically Chizkiyahu could still return and be the moshiach, but there’s no reason to expect anything like that.
Reb Eliezer, what you’re missing is that the Gregorian correction (10 days in the 16th century, plus 3 days since) brings the equinox back to what it was in the 4th century, when the date of Easter was established at the council of Nicaea. At that time the March equinox was on March 21, so Gregory corrected the calendar to bring it back to that date. But our Tekufos were set about 500 years before then, so Tekufas Nissan, instead of being on April 3 (March 21 + 13 days) is four days later, on April 7. This is also why Xmas is on the 25th rather than the 21st.
Believing that a dead Rebbe is moshiach is idol worship,
No, it is not — but claiming that it is, is itself a symptom of idol worship. The only way you could possibly come by such a view is if you are not a Jew but a Xian, and therefore to you the word “Messiah” means a god, r”l. Xians worship the person they call “Messiah”, so it’s very important to them that he is the Messiah. Jews, actual Jews, believe that the moshiach (lower case M) who will soon come will be an ordinary person, of flesh and blood, and no more an object of worship than any tzadik. He will be a king and a religious leader, not a divine entity.
And while we expect that he will be someone who is currently alive, there’s no actual reason he can’t be someone who is not currently alive but will be then. We already believe that techiyas hameisim will occur in stages, and the greatest tzadikim, who will be needed immediately, will return then. So there’s no reason one of those early risers could not turn out to be the moshiach. I don’t expect that to happen, but I wouldn’t be shocked if it did. Maybe even Dovid himself (though that would contradict a gemoro that says the moshiach will be descended from Shlomo; but maybe the moshiach will not pasken like that gemoro).
please explain to me why are socialists evil who help the needy.
Because they don’t help the needy, they steal from other people to help the needy. Or just stam, because they don’t think people should be rich.
The rich should pay more because they use the benefits of the country more because they have more to lose.
The top 20 percent of households pay 88 percent of federal income taxes. They certainly don’t get anything even remotely approaching 88% of the benefits. The top one percent pay 40%; you can’t claim they get 40% of the benefit.
They are not all criminals who are separated from their families.
Yes, they are all criminals. They all entered the country illegally, which is a crime for which they are arrested.
If they are illegal, then the whole family is illegal.
The children have not committed any crime. And under the Flores consent decree they can’t be kept in custody for more than 20 days. In any case you can’t have it both ways; you can’t complain both about children being in custody and about children being separated from their criminal parents when the parents are arrested.
The cases where abortion is necessary to save the mother’s life are extremely rare; almost to the point of nonexistence.
At least seven children are known to have died in immigration custody since last year, after almost a decade in which no child reportedly died while in the custody of U.S. Customs and Border Protection.
And who is suggesting that the government is responsible for these deaths? Nobody. It’s a ridiculous idea. Every one of those children died because they were sick, and they didn’t become sick in custody. They just happened to be in custody when their time came. And of course there are more of them now than 10 years ago, because in case you haven’t noticed we now have hordes of invaders crossing the border, including children, which we didn’t have before..
Ah simpelton*, but what if the baby isnt attacking the mother? What if cancer is attacking the mother and chemo would kill the baby.
In such a case you are not killing the baby, you are treating the mother. The baby’s death is an unfortunate side-effect, which you very much don’t want, but have to accept because life is cruel. Psik reisha delo nicha leih. In such a case even lehavdil the Catholic church permits it. And there is certainly nobody in the pro-life movement proposing that it be banned.
My point is WHO should decide You? the state legislature? congress? Or the patient and their Rabbi?
The same people whose job is to decide whether any killing is justified. The legislature to set standards, and the courts to determine whether they apply in a particular case.
It is not possible for the exact same act to be murder when a nochri does it and not murder when a yisroel does it. Murder is murder, regardless of who is doing it. The penalties may be different, but the act is the same.
how cheap can human life be to you that mass murders are “normal”
Murder is normal. Given a certain population size, you are going to have a certain number of murders. And different demographics are going to commit murder at different rates. After adjusting for demographics the US murder rate is lower than in many western countries. And mass murder is so rare that it’s a statistical blip. It’s impossible to tell whether it’s falling or rising, because the sample size is so small.
The Torah is not at all socialist. It does not oppose ribbis; on the contrary, lanochri tashich, and nochrim are expected to charge each other interest too. We Yisre’elim are not to charge each other interest not because it’s somehow wrong but because we’re supposed to treat each other like family, and you don’t charge family interest. It’s a subset of the mitzvah of ahavas yisroel. The obligation to give tzedokah is also a subset of ahavas yisroel. There is no mitzvah to give to nochrim, and if you do give you get no sachar for it, because there’s no mitzvah to love them. Nor are they expected to love one another, so they too get no sachar for giving each other tzedakah. The same applies to that whole set of mitzvos; this is not the normal moral standard of how we’re to treat people; on the contrary, the idea is that we are to treat our fellow Yisre’elim BETTER than standard, to do them favors we would not do for a normal person, because they’re not normal people, they’re our own flesh and blood.
What right do we have to tell our host country what their laws should or shouldn’t be?
Are you crazy? We have the right and duty to tell the whole world what is right and what is wrong.
The Torah also forbids killing (unless in exceptional circumstances, like the death penalty,
Stop right there. The Torah supports and requires the death penalty. One of the seven mitzvos is dinim; the nations are REQUIRED to enforce the other six laws with the death penalty. And part of Losheves Yetzoroh is a particular requirement to enforce it in the case of murder and robbery. And no, the court is not supposed to try to exonerate a murderer. On the contrary, “the earth cannot be forgiven for the blood spilled on it, except by the spiller’s blood”. Even among Yisre’elim the batei din must be supplemented with the king’s courts, which make sure murderers don’t live to murder others. For nochrim there are no procedural barriers at all.
I think that’s enough for now.
By the way among the Rishonim this is not an Ashkenazi / Sefardi split. Rashi held that one does not say a bracha on half hallel.
Eastern Sefardim don’t say a beracha on half hallel. Western Sefardim say Ligmor Et Hahallel on whole hallel, and Likro Et Hahallel on half hallel.
Shearith Israel, the oldest kehilla in America, says “1/4 hallel” on Thanksgiving, starting from Hallelu Et Hashem Kol Goyim. Obviously without a beracha. But today of course they said half hallel with a beracha.
I agree that a rebbi should have a higher standard. I do not agree that this means he shouldn’t have a smart phone. Or that he must wear a hat. And it certainly doesn’t mean anything about his wife’s level of observance; she is an independent person and he cannot control her. He can discuss it with her and request her to improve herself, but if she isn’t willing what is he supposed to do? Divorce her ch”v?!
Are you sure?
Yes, I’m sure. There is simply no such suggestion. Some evil people are insinuating it, but not openly suggesting it because they know they have no basis for doing so. Any time you have a large number of people in custody, some of them will die, simply because it was their time.
The Torah regards killing an unborn baby exactly the same way it does killing a nochri. A nochri who kills another nochri, whether born or not, or an unborn yisroel, is executed for it. A yisroel who does the same is not executed. Does that mean it’s not murder? You tell me. But whatever you say about killing an unborn baby you have to say the same about killing an adult nochri.
Also, if abortion were not murder we wouldn’t need to justify it when the mother’s life is in danger by invoking the law of a rodef. A baby who is attacking its mother and putting her life in danger is killed exactly like anyone else who is doing the same thing. If someone is pointing a gun at an innocent person and about to pull the trigger it doesn’t matter whether that person is 20 years old, 2 years old, or minus two months old.
“Reb Eliezer”, are you now admitting to also being jackk?!
I didn’t call you an evil person yet, but if you are a socialist then I’m calling you it now.
You’re also a liar. Trump has done nothing at all against immigrants. He has acted, properly, against illegal immigrants, taking them into custody for their crimes, and therefore separating them from their innocent relatives just like any other criminal. Since you have no problem with separating robbers and rapists from their families, why do you object to this?
It is also a lie that Trump “supports the rich by only givihg them a tax cut”, though indeed he should do that. The rich are the ones who pay almost all the taxes. You can’t cut the taxes of someone who doesn’t pay any. And you can’t give a big cut to someone who only pays a tiny amount. The fact is the rich pay far more than their fair share according to halacha. The halacha is clear that a person may be taxed only in proportion to the benefit he will get from that tax. Our progressive tax system violates that law, so the top rates should be cut without any cut to the lower rates; but that’s politically impossible, so it hasn’t been done.
You also lie when you claim “Some are fanatic and don’t allow abortions in any case even when the mother is in danger when a child is a rodaf”. NOBODY of any importance in the pro-life movement is proposing to criminalize abortions in those extremely rare cases where it’s necessary to save the mother’s life. Under even the most radical proposals out there, the defenses of necessity and defense of others would remain available to any such abortionist.
It doesn’t matter what’s available on a smart phone. Sure a lot of bad things are available, but so are a lot of good things. You can use any tool for good or bad, and the better the tool the more of each you can do with it. Saying that this rebbi shouldn’t have a smart phone because he could use it for bad is like saying he shouldn’t have a car, or a knife, or a gun, or matches, or most anything we depend on, because he could use it for bad.
But he’s right, it is an antisemtic rag. It had a brief moment of quality in the 1990s until its communist proprietors realized what was happening and fired the editor.
“Reb Eliezer”, the Democrats are now for abortion. They are upset when abortion numbers decline, and demand an inquiry to find out why, and what can be done about it. The days when they pretended to want abortion to be “legal, safe, and rare” are long gone. And yes, it was a pretense; they never actually believed it.
There is also no evidence for the abortionists’ myth of “back alley abortions”. On the contrary, the example of Dr Gosnell — Philadelphia’s answer to Dr Mengele — the total suppression of media coverage of his crimes, and of the documentary about them, shows how legal butchers are protected by the Democrats from any criticism that could chas vesholom harm their holy cause of murdering as many babies as possible.
At least jackk is honest, labelling himself a typical troll.
How many people have died in ICE custody the past 3 years?
No more than would be expected. No more than die anywhere else. A person has to be somewhere when he dies. Most importantly NOBODY HAS EVEN SUGGESTED that ICE was in any way responsible for any death that occurred in its custody.
How many families separated ?
Why is this a problem? Every time a criminal is arrested a family is separated. Do you have a problem with this?
How many mass murders have there been in America the past 3 years?
No more than is normal, given the US’s demographics. What has this got to do with politics?
How many refugees have we sent back to die in their own countries?
Genuine refugees? Almost none. But tell me why we have any obligation to take in every person who wants to come here.
How many people would have suffered if they had lost their insurance due to removing obamacare?
None.
When the republicans truly care about the living , I will vote for them .
Liar. You would never vote for a Republican because you are a socialist, i.e. an evil person.