Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
I agree, but I mean whatever. New York was liberal before and now it’s liberal again. I don’t think anything is really going to change.
As for those posters who’s locality is Lakewood, there are already plenty of threads about their local government.
Coffee: Just to clarify, you are joking, right?
RSo
“CS: “There is a general lack of the kind of leadership and tzaddikim of yore- even during the Rebbe’s days there was a lack of tzaddikim with no yetzer hara.”Absolute garbage and apikorsus. I am mocheh in the strongest terms.”
Where did she say that? Did the mods remove it? That would be hook-line-sinker we win/Chabad showed its true, ugly colors/we can finally stop talking about it. I would understand mods removing a comment from a Lubavitcher slandering all the tzaddikim of the last generation as they so often do, but it’s important for people to see with their own eyes that we aren’t just making all of this up.
I don’t know. It looks a lot worse than what I thought. I never believed Republicans would lose the Senate, but I think most of us expected the Democrat success in the house to be less than the “analysts” and “pollsters” were predicting. These are probably the same analysts would told us Kasich would win the 2016 primary against Trump and that Hillary would win the 2016 election by a landslide.
This time, they were actually more correct, unfortunately. Seems like a pretty big victory for them. However, I don’t see how they could get in their beloved tax hikes or anything else they want to do while only controlling the house and nothing else.
Congratulations, Democrats. We take back everything we said. Just please don’t raise our taxes.
Yeah, what Syag said about going back to threads after the fact is very true. I go back and look at old threads where I thought everyone was being hostile, and then realize that, if anything, I was the hostile one.
It’s funny that the CR still appears hostile to people coming in after the old Zionist War threads. Those were hardcore. We had some posters back then who were very religious left (one even described himself as Open Orthodox) who were much more antagonistic towards Chareidim than today’s posters. We still have MO posters who have stuck around and I consider to be generally moderate and respectful, but none of us sounded moderate back then. This is probably exactly how I will reflect upon the Chabad Wars 3 years from now.
How many more threads are we doing on this same subject? Also, when do the mods plan on closing this one? I don’t want to get to enveloped in it as fascinating as it obviously is to discuss the local politics of a small town in New Jersey where I have never lived.
“I actually appreciated the chofetz chaim referenced.”
If that’s what it looks like when you appreciate something, then I don’t want to know what it looks like when you don’t.
“What you won’t find any lubavitcher who frequents this forum… trying to convince any non lubavitcher to accept the Rebbe as moshiach.”
We saw exactly that. The thread containing it was linked earlier on this page.
“every (ok most) lubavitchers actually shy away from the topic and aren’t so conformable with it altogether.”
Yes, thank you, that’s exactly my point. You’re purposely avoiding the topic. If you were totally comfortable with it, you would be doing more than just subtle winking.
As has already been pointed out, the headline “don’t misunderstand us” is not indicative of a person wanting to hear and appreciate other shittas. It indicates that you want to convince us that we’re abjectly wrong for questioning Chabad’s approach to geula (which is synonymous with meshichism).
Oh, and before anyone forgets to explain what RSo says, Gezhe means the Lubavitchers who come from the family of Lubavitchers going back prior to the last Rebbe. They usually still speak yiddish and their practices tend to be less controversial than those of the new age Lubavitchers. I’m sad you hear you had those same problems with them, RSo.
CS: RSo never said anything even kind of like what you’re accusing him. You aren’t going to trick anyone into thinking he did. To summarize:
-He brought a proof from the Chofetz Chaim, which almost actually helped your side
-You criticized him for using a Litvish rabbi as a proof
-He referenced HaRav Shach
-You criticized him for using a Litvish rabbi again and decided to coin the phrase “Rav Shach excuse,” which I’m surprised but glad they allowed through to show how little respect Chabadniks have.
-You were asked for an obvious clarification on your position on geula on a thread about geula
-You skirted the issue and referred us to a thread on which you skirted the issue relentlessly for 19 straight pagesDo any objective posters see anything inaccurate about this summary?
CS: What did you want to get out of us from this thread? Was it just to solicit out-on-context quotes to make Litvaks look bad? Was it an earnest attempt to convince less-knowledgeable people that Chabad Meshichism is compatible with the mainstream?
I think our position is pretty crystal clear: we hold, like our rabbis, that meshichism is kefira. That’s not an “excuse,” that’s how we posken. You can’t get away with continuously making threads that you think are subtle in their meshichism and then accuse us of being the ones turning it towards that subject. There’s just no point; we’re always going to see through it.It’s pretty common even for proudly Modern Orthodox people to say stuff like “we aren’t ‘frum,’ we’re more modern,” or “we think that community is to frummy; we would like a more modern community.”
I know from another thread you had some experience in a Chabad school; I only say this because it might be worth pointing out that Chabad’s yiddish colloquialisms differ a little from those of others. Eg. they use frum to mean any level of religiosity while most people use it as the yiddish word for chareidi, they use heimish in somewhat of a negative connotation while most people use it in a positive way, etc.
As for the hostility, yeah, welcome to the internet. I started out here occasionally trying to get people to be more “civil,” but eventually I gave up and I’m kind of embarrassed that I ever did that. In retrospect, it comes across as preachy. It’s more fun to just be a jerk who hides behind internet anonymity.
I feel like you have to stick to one prediction, otherwise you’re just covering all your bases.
Even though I think polling to probably rigged like it was in the 2016 election, I believe the Democrats will actually win a majority in the house. Trump should have gotten more done while we had the chance.
CS: You seem to have missed this part of my last post: “stop with the issue-skirting strategies they taught you in shliach school.” This thread is about Chabad’s beliefs on geula. Obviously Meshichism comes into it and you know it. I would sum up the techniques you were using in the other thread and here, but I think Syag already did it perfectly in this comment:
“question to you: Why do you only eat fruit on tuesday?
response: The dietician spoke for an hour about the importance of eating fruits and vegetables. Im sorry if you are not able to understand her lecture. It was very clear that fruits and vegetables are important for our health and therefore we need to eat them every tuesday. If there was a part of her lecture you did not understand, please ask.
question: I asked why only on tuesday? I did not question the importance of fruit.
response: I don’t know how to make it any clearer. Every doctor will tell you how many vitamins are in fruit and what benefits they have to your body. Even small children know how important eating fruit is to our diet. Your questioning our tuesday fruit eating must be because you are used to eating junk food.
question: I am not attacking your custom, I am trying to understand why you link the fruit eating with Tuesday, we understood the importance of fruit but there was no mention of eating it on Tuesday.
response: If you really want to know more about the health benefits of fruit, please go to a dietician and speak to her. If this hasn’t explained the importance, I don’t know how else it can be explained.
It isn’t the concept of a Rebbe that confuses us, nor turning to a rebbe for brachos, nor davening at their kever, nor the concept of a tsaddik or a tsaddik gamur. those are all known and accepted concepts. it is your proofs and sources that are lacking, and that concept seems beyond your reach.”
It doesn’t matter the diversity of schools you’ve attended, it just matters who’s story you believed. If you believe that MO is authentic Torah yiddishkeit and the frum world is a breakaway sect, then you drank the MO cool-aid because that is not the reality.
You’re allowed to be MO on the CR, but if you’re easily offended when people put down the MO, you aren’t going to have a good time. There was once a time where every thread turned into a fight about religious Zionism even if it was about something like gefilte fish recipes. That trend is not as bad anymore. I’m not meaning this as a threat, really just a fair warning. Whether you like it or not, you will be pigeon-holed into a camp here, and almost every thread is argumentative in case you hadn’t noticed. You aren’t ever going to feel like the other side respects you views. That really just isn’t how the internet works.
“However I find it ridiculous you even bring Rav Shach into the discussion as you’re not even a litvak and hence can’t even pretend hashkafic integrity here.”
This is what really proves the isolation. Good Chassidishe rabbis reference the Gra and other litvish gedolim; good litvish rabbis reference the Satmar Ruv, Sfas Emes, etc. I’m not saying its a requirement to learn sources outside of your mesorah, but you’re talking like it’s an issur. It’s a good thing, not a bad thing. There’s no eternal struggle between Chassidim and Litvaks. Chabadniks are the only ones still fighting.
I did not mean what RSo thought I meant regarding initiatives. I meant that Chabad refuses to hear or tolorate other hashkafas as you can clearly see here on this thread.
As for the whole “what do you want me to do clap every time you get a reference?” business, I’ll tell you what we want you to do. Stop with the issue-skirting strategies they taught you in shliach school and tell us straight that you believe the Rebbe is moshiach. Otherwise, you have no business accusing us of “misunderstanding” this geula stuff.
Lol:
Stuart: “You guys have no idea was daas Torah means”
Syag: “Actually, it is you who doesn’t understand daas Torah”
Stuart: “How dare you say someone doesn’t understand that. You’re evil!”He’s knee deep in MO indoctrination. But, we’ve had way too many threads to discuss these things already. It would probably be better to revive an oldy.
I actually didn’t really understand why the Lakewood thread got closed either. Then I didn’t understand why they allowed it to reappear. Then I didn’t understand why it got closed. I’m not from Lakewood, so I have no knowledge of what that poster was talking about or why it’s controversial.
“How the Geula and appearance of moshiach will actually unfold though, is not necessarily in that order.”
By the way, on the topic of “don’t misunderstand us,” we all know that when you guys talk about “not necessarily in that order” you’re hinting that you believe tichiyas hameisim can happen before moshiach is revealed, therefore allowing the dead to be candidates for moshiach, therefore allowing Meshichism to survive. These Meshichist winks that you think are subtle are not going over our heads as you might hope.
CS: I think the most offensive thing about your claim that the Rebbe is the only/first rabbi to ever care about non-frum yidden is the fact that you probably actually believe it to be true.
You can claim over and over to respect our poskim, but when you say that someone should weigh the Rebbe’s opinion more than that of the Chofetz Chaim on account of the poster “not being a Litvak,” you aren’t doing yourself any favors. It’s like you’re saying “it’s sad when a fellow Chossid hates Chabad so much he looks for sources from the writings of ‘the enemy.'”
Despite all of these threads, the self-awareness problem remains the same. Chassidim learn the Mishnah Berurah, Litvaks often learn some Chassidishe meforshim like the Sfas Emes. Chabad is the ONLY group that completely separates itself from the rest of the frum world. It’s a shame Icemelter went to far with his comments and got some blocked (I’m sure it was necessary; I have good faith in the mods). A lot of what he was saying about what Lubavitchers say about other groups was 100% accurate. The genius of Chabad is how well they behave on the internet vs. real life. It allows people who haven’t had the personal experiences with Chabad to assume all of these anecdotes are just made up.
Now THIS is what the CR should be like!
I think Rav Dovid and Rabbi Kamenetsky are more referenced as gadolim at least in the Balhabatish world. Along with the Israeli poskim, of course. I do not often hear people bring down shittas from most of the other names being mentioned here.
It’s all just anecdotal evidence, though. Most people don’t try to call the biggest rabbi of the generation every time they have a shailah.
CS: Your response to RSo’s Chofetz Chaim proof is telling. I think you guys are so used to the Chabad Rebbe being a daas yochid on everything that you don’t know how to react when someone brings a proof that might agree with him. This whole debate is on a shittah of the Chabad Rebbe, don’t you see how it doesn’t make sense to bring proofs from the Chabad Rebbe in such a debate? If you refuse to bring any source other than the Rebbe (probably because of the whole “bittul to the Rebbe” thing) then you can’t really expect to get anywhere debating people you will bring sources from anywhere. It’s like bringing a knife to a gun fight.
As far as the difference between what the Chofetz Chaim says and what the Rebbe says, it does kind of seem like semantics based on how it’s being represented here. To me, the biggest proof is in the pudding: whatever Chabad did differently in their approach to awaiting Moshiach caused Meshichism; our approach didn’t. No matter how much people avoiding bringing that in, that’s what this debate is really about.
Syag: I never said anything about sheltered people not being Jews, I complimented the lifestyle of Chassidim, and I don’t see how level headed responses to the tune of “there has to be a limit to sheltering at SOME point” is extreme.
We’re the ones arguing for the moderate approach here. Saying that we’re all just arguing from personal experience and therefore our points are invalid is pointless. Everyone’s opinions are based on personal experiences or on people we’ve met. What makes you think your personal experiences are more valid than our’s? Because they were purely positive and we also see the negative side? If sheltering is done properly everyone turns the blind eye to the negative side and ignores the unhappy?
No, the parents are the ones projecting priorities. The priority of staying frum over everything including sanity and well being. I’m not talking about moderate sheltering here. I’m also not talking about an alternate society like the Chassidim have where it can work. What I’m talking about is Litvish parents who expect their children to succeed in the normal, working world, but make it impossible for them to connect to people.
We can talk about reality here. We both know there are frum yidden who “have their priorities straight,” and still are not happy. The older generations pushing their children into getting abjectly worse secular educations than what they received does not help anything. I’m not sure how you interpreted my opinion, but it obviously was not supportive of fully, unlimited, unsheltered upbringings. If you’re bothered by any criticism of sheltering I have to assume you support the full-throttle sheltered upbringing that produces fully grown men who write emails that look like they were written by a 12-year-old because they got a proper 21st century yeshiva education.
RebYid: So, you think drugs should be legal since some people like them? I guess at least you could say they serve a purpose to some people other than murder, so it’s almost more logical for them to be legal than guns.
On the point that some people value guns: yes, MS-13 members, Islamic terrorists, budding serial killers all value guns. I have come to the conclusion that ruining those people’s days is worth it for the greater good.
RebYid: I think a comparison would be certain objects that are only used for the use of illegal drugs. These devices are actually 100% legal to own and sell even though they will inevitably be used to something illegal. I see no logic in this, but it’s the law. You guys would say this makes sense because drug-addicts would find ways to illegally obtain the paraphernalia just like they illegally obtain the drugs?
The flaw in that argument is that you can’t always get the criminal for the crime you know he violated. Some times you have to lock up Al Capone for tax evasion. Or, lock up a gang member for owning illegal weapons, if that’s all you can prove.
Why should it be a “right” to have something that’s only use is to do bad, like drug paraphernalia? The only difference between it and guns is the Constitution argument.
If you think the president needs to end every sentence with “by the way, this doesn’t mean I support white supremacists,” then your opinions are a joke and nobody should be wasting time talking with you. The truth is, YOU LIBERALS (who are my enemy and the enemies of the country) will never be satisfied with anything the presidents says. We finally got someone who talks about what conservatives actually want to hear and it terrifies you. And, where is this even coming from that he’s “never denounced the white nationalists?” He absolutely has; are you guys just trying to get in on the booming fake news business?
On a side note, I do not believe Obama was an Anti Semite. I don’t believe in accusing everyone with different opinions of bigotry. That’s a the leftist strategy.
Obviously it depends on the level of sheltering. The reality is not really as black and white as the OP makes it sound. The highly sheltered Yeshivish style being described seems to mostly be practiced by the creme de la creme of the Yeshivish velt (like probably Lakewood). It’s become pretty standard for yeshiva bochurs to know a certain amount of pop-culture references (too many in my opinion). The no-smart-phones thing didn’t really catch on well in America at all (I wish it had, but it didn’t). A lot of people in the yeshivish world like to pretend to be more out of touch than they really are when you first meet them.
Sheltering from all references to non-Jewish culture (even stuff like Shakespeare and perfectly kid-friendly literature) can make them seem like weird aliens who are new to the planet when they go out into the workforce. Obviously, that will help them not assimilate, but I’m not sure it’s good for their happiness and success.
“Laws don’t deter criminals, that IS why they are criminals”
So what’s the point of having any laws ever then? Don’t tell me I’m straw man’ing either; I really want you to answer the question. If, in your mind, laws will always just be broken anyway, why shouldn’t that apply to everything?
The Minhag Vizhnitz is to have the ribbon on the right side.
I’ve heard its because of chukas ha’akum that they’re avoiding the normal placement of the ribbon. I wouldn’t be surprised if it also might have to do with the significance chassidim tend to place on the right-side like with buttoning and what not.
Avram, that isn’t an example of Trump spreading theories against Jews. If you interpret every time someone criticizes globalism as “the Jews control the world,” then you have apparently been programmed to be subconsciously anti-semitic. If people interpret what he says as this mythical “wink” you liberals love to bring up, that isn’t his problem. He can’t refrain from talking about the real issues like globalism and immigration just because a small fraction of rightists will take the rhetoric too far. I don’t believe leftists like Bernie Sanders should be held back from talking about issues out of fear for extremists either.
What I have to assume you want to go back to is bland, Bush/Clinton status quo America where none of the politicians talk about the issues people care about. I imagine you are the type to complain about “everything being polarized,” and how “everyone used to be more moderate.” Am I correct?
2016 should have been a wake up call. The people were never laid back about issues like immigration, they just didn’t have a candidate to support their actual views on it before. Having real, Conservative representation is not a bad thing.
RebYid: That isn’t a legal question. I’m not really sure where you’re even trying to go with it, unless you’re just kind of joking around.
Health: Nobody interprets the second amendment as the right to open fire on anyone who he thinks deserves it. I’m all for stopping the migrants, but it should be done by the military and police.
That point is trivial.
Its supporters say the Constitution protects us from overreaching government, which is absurd. The Weimar Republic probably had some form of constitution that didn’t stop Hitler; England definitely had a constitution which didn’t stop Oliver Cromwell from becoming a dictator. It fails at what it’s supposed to do.
It has, however, been used to silence state propositions (the most democratic, freedom-laced mechanism in the US). It’s also been used to destroy long-standing religious monuments in town parks which were loved by the townspeople.
How could anyone still think we need the militia clause? After seeing what “well-regulated militias” coming to power gets you from 20th century Europe or modern day Arab countries. All people need for self defense are pistols and shotguns, not assault rifles.
So, wait, in the name of not having partisan newspapers you guys are slandering this paper because it competes with the partisan newspapers you like?
“A pseudo-democratic government that allows its people too much freedom is better than one that chooses safety over freedom.”
Freedom would imply actually giving the population what they want regardless of whether or not it goes against the ancient document. In California, they used the Constitution to overturn Prop 8, which was voted in by popular vote. How is that protecting freedom?
If people want better gun-control, which I believe they do, they shouldn’t have their votes silenced by the NRA touting the constitution.
Jackk: I don’t believe that post was removed. All the statements in it made by liberals were real. Not all Democrats are calling for violence, but those celebrities/politicians that are get a lot of positive attention in the press.
Conspiracies against Jews leading to Antisemitism are out there, but they aren’t being spread by Trump. Support for violence against Jews is Israel, on the other hand, is being publicly spread by liberals.
It’s been amended many times without causing a civil war.
The point is not whether or not the Constitution is “in charge.” My point is that it has no relevance in an opinionated discussion on an internet forum. You Constitutionists always act like if you pull a proof from the Constitution it automatically makes your opinion the only valid one. You agree with the opinions of the framers of the Constitution… So what? Others don’t. Nearly every other civilized country has been able to advance in this regard by not being tied down to a crusty peace of parchment like they’re some kind of secular theocracy.
Because being allowed to daven doesn’t kill people.
I’ve never claimed to care about the Constitution, which makes arguing with me weird. It’s come up before on the CR.
The Constitution is the Supreme Court’s problem. The belief that it’s meant to dictate the opinions of everyday Americans, and anyone who goes against it is a traitor is a relatively new thing. Even if the second amendment explicitly said “this means the right to automatic assault rifles,” why would I change my opinion? If a >200 year old document is outdated, I’m going to call it outdated. It’s not like it’s holy.
You have to use logic when you argue with me. Bringing proofs from the Constitution is totally meaningless in my opinion.
I was wondering what happened at Stony Brook.
It is petty, Geordie. In America, certain things are partisan issues, meaning if people feel like its an issue representative of their party, they’ll argue it to the grave. No matter how much or little sense it makes.
Hunting is not a religion, nor would it matter if it were. There are small religions that claim spirituality of doing drugs, but that doesn’t make them exempt from the law. Also, notice how Jewish conservatives act like you’re a big koifer if you don’t vote with the halachah on other issues, but with hunting it’s suddenly all “we can’t enforce the halachah on others.” It’s all just partisanship.
Lol, I have no idea what most of these things are that are being spoken of, but I think it’s hilarious how extremely some of you are reacting to a new newspaper showing up at your door.
The argument that people will break the law anyway so we might as well just not have the law at all is not a legitimate point. We shouldn’t still be having to say that here; this isn’t third grade.
“Gun culture does exist, and you can’t just take away people’s guns.”
Why not? Does the existence of drug culture prove that we can’t take away people’s drugs? Does the existence of polygamous cultures prove that we can’t enforce monogamy? Just because something has a backwards and deranged culture associated with it doesn’t mean it has to be legal forever.Guns are important to politicians because of the NRA. They’re either accepting money to be pro-gun or fighting against the pro-gun types by being anti-gun. This has caused it to be a “conservative litmus test” in American politics.
To normal Americans who are pro-gun: usually their stance on guns is symbolic of general conservative views. An attack on gun rights is seen as being symbolic of overreaching government and rampant liberalism by them. Contrary to popular belief, hunting has almost nothing to do with it. The fraction of Americans who hunt is negligible, albeit more than in European countries of course.
Also, of course, it’s a big deal because of our Constitution. Most Americans have some degree of a sense that “once you start messing with the Constitution, nothing is safe.”
I don’t see how that feature could work on YWN (or anywhere for that matter). We would just end up with threads being duel discussions with people only seeing the people they haven’t blocked.
Aren’t the Vues the 5 Towns thing that Joseph is known to write op-eds for?
I generally always deny conspiracy theories, but I would actually give this about a 40% chance of being a liberal conspiracy. For there to be that many bombs and have all of them conveniently be faulty could cause suspicion. However, given that they all probably came from the same source, they could have just been made by a bad bomb-maker. The main thing is, even though this thought has crossed all of our minds, the conservative media and politicians need to resist the urge to share this theory. If they do, that would be exactly what the conspirators would want.
Even though I would not at all be shocked if this were a liberal conspiracy, I’m still saying 60% chance it was some Timothy McVae anarchist type. These things do happen, unfortunately.
Also, with regards to the 9/11 analogy: we know who was responsible for 9/11. Anyone who suggests that someone else was responsible for 9/11 is, by definition, a conspiracy theorist.
With this case, we still don’t know who did it. So, any discussions regarding it will be theoretical.
I still believe that Joseph truly holds by his opinions reflected here, and therefore I hesitate to call him a troll. The derailing of this thread, however, was clearly intentional and calculated.
For the record, I never directly responded to the derailed discussion. Us CR elders have seen the exact argument, with the exact same Rambams so many times now that we know better. The Chabadnik posters are a little newer so they’re having to learn the hard way.
Wow. I never thought I would live to see the day. Charlie Hall has finally made his triumphant return.