Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
You’re a minhag shtus
The government now involves itself in far more than basic governmental functions, and serves more as a general wealth redistributor and manager for the entire population.
If religious minorities are going to be required to pay in to the system, it is not fair that they don’t also get to take from the system. Separation of church and state may have made sense when the government was only funding necessary functions, but at this point it’s simply unfair and a breakdown of the social contract.
popa bar abba: As usual, your comments are reprehensible. So, going to the mikvah- even once- is not meritorious??? Quoting your words: “it is is idiotic and pandering”. so, going to the mikvah and having a fully kosher wedding is pandering???
Boruch Hashem thst you are not in charge of weddings in Eretz Yisroel.
I won’t accuse you of always doing this, but you’re flying off the handle here for no reason.
Firstly, the pandering is the idea that after she hesitates to go to the mikva, the rabbi says your fiance will also. It is pandering, because if she didn’t want to do mikva because she thinks hilchos nidda is unfeminist, then having her chosson also do it for no reason doesn’t change anything. It’s also idiotic.
Second, we do chuppas nidda all the time–It’s a fully kosher wedding. And while it is meritorious for her to not do issurei kares for the next few weeks, I don’t think of it as being very important in the context that she doesn’t plan on doing it for the rest of her life.
Thats what I think. I know sometimes when Rabbis are doing Orthodox wedding for non relgious couple, the issue of the Mikvah comes up and it can be hard to convience the woman to go, so the Rabbi will suggest that they both go in order that the woman will go
That sounds idiotic and pandering, and I don’t know why the women would fall for it.
Also, who even cares. If she’ll never go again, why is there such an inyan do make her go before the wedding?
So they said it together. So basically acknowledging that she can’t say it.
So if she’s already acknowledging that, how does this even make her feel good?
Many people who are extremely cruel to animals are many times also cruel to their fellow human beings as well
Many people who are extremely kind to animals are extremely cruel to human beings.
Y
There’s an article today about an elephant who was shot by poachers, and came to a lodge to ask for help. They flew in a vet, and tranquilized the elephant to work on it.
Note that it took 7 minutes after they tranquilized the elephant before it went down.
And that’s why they didn’t tranquilize the gorilla.
Anyway, how about a compromise, I will stop coming to the coffee room and wont post anymore…. and you delete my subtitle?
I on the other hand, agree to continue coming to the coffee room, even though some posters are deliberately mean and insulting to me.
How about people who speak lashon hara, or talk during leining, which is actually assur?
chotch you could boycott them and try to convince other people to boycott them, and don’t let your kids be friends with their kids.
I actually have no idea where he gets his hashkafos from, but I had to post something, so I put random letters in a barrel, and the word b-o-i-c-h came out. So I posted that.
Interesting method. I did the gaon’s goral with a shas bavli and landed on the case where you are korei shem on teruma and maaser on part of a barrel, and then this was the best I could interpret it.
I used to be much better at the gaon’s goral. See my published works.
In other words, you don’t have a basis for your hashkafos other than your boich.
You don’t like my boich alternative with the random words in a barrel?
So let me get this straight.
The torah did not assur it. The noda b’yehuda thinks it is a good hargasha that a yid should have, at most. So if someone doesn’t do it, you can destroy their livelihood and their life.
How do you get these ideas? Do you like write random words on pieces of paper and pull them out of a barrel and string them together into ideas and then just believe in them?
Sam2, if you’re still following this retarded thread:
I assume you are referring to Rav Lichtenstein’s article that asks if there is a morality outside the Torah. IIRC correctly, the article proceeds along the lines that we are supposed to do things that are moral and correct even if not prescribed or proscribed by the Torah directly. A good example is the noda b’yehuda on hunting–the Torah doesn’t prohibit it, but it is inappropriate to be an achzar.
IIRC, he concludes by saying that, is there a morality outside the Torah? Who cares, so say that this IS part of the Torah.
This is basically the argument of Wittgenstein in Philosophical Investigations. Everyone agrees that Hashem wants us to do tov and yashar, and that the shuras hadin of halacha does not encompass every tov and yashar that a person can do in life. (Why doesn’t it? Different discussion). Arguing over whether that is outside or inside the Torah is just arguing about the meaning of words.
newbee: I’m not sure where you’re getting your ideas from, but it’s definitely not from the noda b’yehuda. Are there other primary sources on the topic we should know about? (rando essays not included)
Why would you legitimately want hide today? There is a huge surplus of clothing to choose from.
Why would you hunt for it when we can capture the animals easily today and can kill the animal painlessly.
You have a question why I want a fur if I can wear polyester? Because I like it.
And tell me please about all the methods available for me to get a lion skin.
Why should there be a difference? Fishing with the intent to discard the fish unused would be wrong.
It’s what the noda b’yehuda says. The theory is that we’re talking about a hargasha you should have of not killing animals for fun. If your intent is for fun, that’s what is wrong. If your intent is not for fun, that is ok. It doesn’t matter what you actually do with the animal–it’s about your intent.
~I’m glad we all agree now that outrage was warranted for killing Cecil in that fashion.~
The End
lol
It’s not a heter for sha’as had’chak. It’s not achzarius if there’s a purpose for normal human needs. It would be okay nowadays too, if there was a need for lion hides.
+1
I would take a step further that if you WANT the hide, and that’s your purpose it’s fine also. So if you want to go to Alaska and get a permit to hunt a bison so that you can make a buffalo robe, that’s fine. The teshuva says that it depends what your main purpose is; so you can’t just say “I’ll hunt for fun and give the meat to a soup kitchen” because G-d knows why you’re hunting.
I like the way you’re quoting portions of some random essay as if its the Torah.
lolol
Right about now is where you should gracefully retract your previous statement and clarify that you think anyone who hunt is immoral or something like that.
It would have been more graceful about 10 posts ago, but I think it’s still within the grace period.
This is a fairly simple point backed up by numerous examples in the Torah guys. Not sure what you are confused about.
Confused that you called the torah immoral chas v’shalom, and said halacha needed to be changed.
Just out of curiosity, did you read any of the examples brought from the Torah mentioned in the essay? Or are you continually ignoring this point on purpose?
I definitely did not read the essay you pasted above, if that’s what you’re asking.
To answer your question, see DY’s response above.
PBA: You are assuming that Halacha=morality and that any claim otherwise is Apikorsus. I think R’ Aharon Lichtenstein disagrees with you on both counts. Read his famous article. I could easily hear the argument that we, as human beings, are meant to outlaw immoral things Mishum “V’asisa HaYashar VeHaTov”.
At the very least that halacha does not equal “immoral,” and that halacha should not “be changed.”
I’ve read some of Rav Lichtenstein’s articles. As can be expected, my mesorah is different in some respects and overlapping in many respects. Regardless, Rav Lichtenstein certainly never wrote that halacha is immoral and should be changed, chas v’shalom.
First of all, the primary point is that hunting, especially in this brutal fashion, is immoral and should be made illegal if not already illegal. Indeed, from what I have read, both the dentists and the poachers with him were breaking the law. Any law that allows this behavior is immoral and should be changed.
So like, halacha for example?
This juicy bit of apikorsus brought to you by the letter A.
Do you also think it’s okay to endanger yourself to make a political point? (Look at the teshuvah to see what I refer to.)
No. I’m not planning to go hunting. And if I did, I’d do it in a farm like that dentist.
What point is being made anyhow – that the animal rights activists are wrong, and we’ll prove it by acting cruelly to animals?
See above.
Ok, I finally read the teshuva. Sorry, I’m not following the reference to political points.
In all events, what it says is:
1. It’s not assur in tzaar baalei chaim or baal tashchis.
2. If your ikkar kavana is for fun, it’s achzariyus and therefore ill advised.
3. If your ikkar kavana is for fun, it’s assur because it’s a sakana.
4. if your ikkar kavana is for fun, it’s a bad idea because the sakana makes that they are mazkir your avonos in shomayim.
So,
If you hunt in a farm like that dentist dude, then it’s not a sakana so it’s muttar.
Earning money by causing killing for the pleasure of killing is just as bad!
When it says for pasnasa, it means for food or fur so people dont starve and freeze.
It is? Why is it different than earning money from killing for the sake of earning money?
I’m not following your logic. The guides need the money so that they and their kids don’t starve and freeze.
What point is being made anyhow – that the animal rights activists are wrong, and we’ll prove it by acting cruelly to animals?
That wasn’t what I was thinking. I was thinking that society would be accustomed to the idea that human needs come before animal needs.
I am not advocating changing the law. I am objecting to popa’s statement: You should davka hunt to keep it clear that human life and needs are more important.
Oh, I hadn’t realized you were objecting to that. Why do you object? Why do you assume the noda biyehuda wouldn’t have agreed with me? Why is it less of a good reason than parnassah?
????? ?”?
?? ?? ???? ????? ?????…?????? ????
?? ?? ???? ????? ????? ??? ????
??? ??? ???? ????? ?????? ?? ????? ???? ??? ????? ????? ??? ?????..
I’m not sure what that means, but I am fairly sure that it is fair to say that Hashem made the mitzva of shiluach haken in part so that we develop our middah of rachamim.
Perhaps the gemara is saying that it isn’t that Hashem is being meracheim on the birds.
Let me get this straight – you want me to support ??????? because people make a living from ??????? Maybe we should support Maharats because the janitors in the Maharat Institute make a living from it?
Yes. And at least don’t advocate against.
PBA: Fakhert. If it’s a Mitzvah, it’s something Meyuchad to us that may or may not have an attached message. If it’s just about Middos Tovos, then it should be universal. Again, why should Goyim not have good Middos also?
I agree with the notion. I’m just having a hard time wrapping my head around what the rules are.
I think goyim should have middos tovos. The gemara praises certain goyim who had good middos and says they were rewarded.
If we’d be talking about being nice to people directly, I think I’d certainly agree that it’s important. But we’re really talking about doing things that develop your middos sensitives, which is really what the entire corpus of the 613 is about. So again, do you think it is appropriate for a goy to do shiluach haken?
I see you’re responded to that if it’s an actual mitzva then it’s meyuchad to us, but I don’t get that too well.
??? ?? ???? ?? ????? ?????? ???? ???? ?????? ??? ????? ?????? ??? ???????
I don’t support ???????.
The guides make their parnassah from it. If people stop hunting, they will lose their parnassah and more kids in Africa will be hungrier.
So maybe the Americans going to hunt there don’t have that intention, but perhaps you should think of it when advocating against them?
DY, Sam,
If it was an actual issur, it wouldn’t apply to bnei noach. Now that it’s just a good hargasha, you think it does?
Should bnei noach do shiluach haken?
Should bnei noach keep shabbos to be makir that Hashem created the world in 6 days?
DY,
The Noda Biyehuda’s teshuva applies as sheva mitzvos bnei noach also? I’d assume not.
So does it make sense to advocate policy for the country based on halachos applicable to yidden?
This is why I thin abortion should be treated as murder. Because in sheva mitzvos it is, and I don’t think the halacha for us should determine policy.
I used to be ambivalent about hunting. I didn’t really get killing animals for fun, but it didn’t seem like such a big deal either.
Now I’ve changed my mind. As this story shows, liberals are a danger to all humanity. You should davka hunt to keep it clear that human life and needs are more important.
Zdad, don’t be ridiculous. It was a 4 year old kid who obviously wasn’t allowed on purpose to be seriously injured and almost killed. If you need a tranquilizer from this story, by all means go and take one.
Not sure how Obama’s birthplace is a conspiracy theory. Do people think that the Democrat establishment had a brilliant idea in 1961 to hire a couple to have a baby overseas, whom they would then raise and promote to the presidency? If so, I wholeheartedly agree.
Not the democrat establishment. The jews.
So you don’t have proof, it’s just your opinion.
Right. Each of Kapusta and the well funded organization that has been devoted to this for 10 years and the rich dude from LA don’t have proof.
Fascinating.
popa, are fathers any more qualified, in your humble opinion, at being mentors than rebbeim?
I don’t find my opinions particularly humble, so we can leave that accolade off.
That’s a very interesting question, which I’m completely uninterested in.
Hopefully many rebbeim have maalos besides for convenience.
Many do. So do many other mentors. Rebbeim are convenient.
DY, that’s not what the ad says.
Also, sure, I’ve had that dynamic with rebbbeim. And friends. And other mentors. Yeshiva guys usually like to use a rebbi as that mentor for no very good reason other than convenience.
DY: That’s a pretty messed up dynamic; I’m aware of children who think that, but I’ve met few adults.
It’s a Rebbi’s job to guide. If he abdicates that responsibility he’s failed his duty.
You clearly had an unhealthy rebbi.
The Gedolei Hador have previously exhorted the Tzibbur and Bochurim to make every effort to marry at the earliest appropriate age. Therefore, we encourage Bnei Torah and their parents, if it is consistent with the advice of their Rabbeim, to consider shidduchim at age 21. May a sweet and pleasant life be bestowed upon those who listen, and may they merit to build upstanding homes in Klal Yisrael, and to raise children and grand-children involved in Torah and Mitzvos.
Even that is a strange message. Why did they print that, and not age 19? Why not age 12? If they are really just saying as early as you think is appropriate, why peg it?
Also, in what world do rebbeim decide when a boy is ready to get married? I’ve never met any rebbi who would think that is his position. I’ve met boys who thought their rebbeim would, but they were wrong.
Do you still not eat fish and meat?
The reason we don’t is because we don’t, but if we did, we would.
That’s how liberals see the world. Start everything from first principles and if you don’t know why something is, just destroy it.
It’s now how I see the world. Sometimes we don’t know why we started doing something, but the fact that it’s widely accepted indicates there must have been a good reason it was started in the first place.
I’m not all that familiar with the ads, but 1) I probably see nuance where others don’t. 2) PR is PR. If the ad were worded the way you wanted, it would probably be humorously weak, and wouldn’t accomplish anything.
Yes, that’s right. Because the nuanced argument actually is humorously weak.
I also don’t agree that even if it were “generally” (I guess that means for the majority) harmful, it should remain socially unacceptable for those it would benefit.
But maybe it does mean you shouldn’t make kol koreis about it every week in the yated, which aren’t quite as nuanced as you are being.
To which they bring a pretty good raya that it isn’t from every chareidi community in the world besides the American yeshivish.
Ok, fair point, they do bring a rayah.
To which we bring a counter-rayah that there is obviously some reason we don’t.
Popa, it’s a rarity that a boy would do what’s not so socially acceptable. They are trying to make it socially acceptable.
I guess the question is whether its a good idea to promote something being socially acceptable if its generally harmful.
Which goes back to whether it is generally harmful.
Which goes back to they addressed it by saying we disagree.