ubiquitin

IITFT
“Who said so”
The Federal government , by which I mean the lawmakers if they didint feel we would be better off making murder illegal then it wouldn’t be illegal (though of course it would still be immoral)

If you view the idea of ““as a society we are better off if we all don’t steal and kill.” as Propaganda. Then go ahead start your society, see how well it functions. Your comment doesnt really make much sense, There seems to be some confusion, I’m not saying my opinion on the government not legislating morality is universally held.

NC

It is a serious thing, but more importantly it is real. It isn’t abstract. I’m familiar with several such cases and am aware of much more.

Kids are taught things simply black and white. If it is pikuach nefesh you eat on yom Kippur otherwise you fast.
The reality is much grayer. A doctor cant predict if X fasts on Yom Kippur he will die. It just doesn’t work that way.

Rabbonim’s job (with medical guidance if needed) is to figure out where people fall can they fast? must they fast ? if they should break their fast is it with shiurim or just eat ? If they can eat should they at leat attempt to fast and see how it goes? a few hours or attempt the whole day ?
not everybody falls into a must fast vs must eat category

furthermore, at times Rabbonim are more “lenient ” Particularly when it comes to pregnant woman as I explained above.

As for the topic at hand. Take Anencephaly there, is generally no MEDICAL (as opposed to psychological) reason to abort. while of course tragic and the fetus won’t survive there is no medical reason to terminate. Of course psychological stressors is obviously much greyer. If she were to develop a nervous breakdown and be at risk for suicide, r”l again that is a reltivly easy psak. but as you may realize that is not really how psychiatry generally works. what if her mental/emotional/physical health is at risk but not quite her life?

R’ Moshe did not allow abortions in such cases. the Tzitz Eliezer was very meikel. R”shlomo Zalman allowed it as well (though stricter than Tzitz Eleizer) Modern Poskim (especially chasidish ones) tend to allow it though not late into pregnancy .

This is but one specific example

R’ Ben Zion Uziel allowed abortion even late into pregnancy to prevent deafness (not death ) of a mother.
In all these cases it obviously wasn’t REQUIRED.

Nc
“It still doesn’t seem like you understand Avram’s “rare case.” He was talking about ”

I do. I already said those are rare.

“The case of the halachah “allowing” abortion is something you’ve invented. This is pikuach nefesh, the proper lashon is “require.” ”

So this is where you are 100% absolutly completly no room to agree to disagree wrong. Obviously t6his isnt publicly duscussed. Ask your local ob.

“Torah’s view and have likely been adversely influenced by secular, socially liberal colleagues.”

Nope, i shared with one the halacha that a condemned woman is put to death even if pregnant, even in the 9th month.
They we’re horrified, but i havent changed my view (not that i understand it). I dont have to understand it thats what halacha says then so be it.
I would never allow abortion onve the fetus is viable, but if a rav allows it so be it

DY
I’m not completely sure what tzedaka you are reffering to, i’ll assume you mean things like govt subsidized healthcare or welfare. Different measures are judged by different benchmarks

Otherwise I could say I don’t get it you claim you want limited government people should be free to own guns, but all of a sudden you wont the government to control what goes on in people’s bodies, and then you have the nerve to call yourself “pro-life” ?!. (This is directed to strawman conservative not you per se, and i’m not actually asking that question I can come up with differences)

I’ll explain my approach I believe in the government intervening to make all our lives better. This means individuals have to give up certain rights at times for the benefit of society* Otherwise If there is no impediment placed on others, people should be free to do as they please**

as a caveat to the above, my main concern is my community

Thus tzedaka, (ie healthcare welfare etc ) I believe society as a whole is better off if we provide a safety net to those in need. I believe we will all be better off if we spend less and get better healthcare than we currently do (whether single payer healthcare would actually provide that isnt really my point right now). This is especially true in my community where many rely on this tzedaka

As for abortion, goyim are my secondary concern, they may be doing something immoral that is for the Ribono she olam to figure out. see ** below
that said if there was a legal way to have Rabbonim evaluate each case that would be my ideal. however, this isnt doable. and a “medical exemption” wouldnt cut it. Thus keep government out of it let woman decide, on their own (ie with their rav) are some going to make the wrong decision ? without doubt but the benefits of letting thr individual decide outweigh those wrong choices

*(this isnt as controversial as it sounds, I assume most of us agree that we should all stop at a red light even if you pinky swear that you are an excellent driver and can time your way through an intersection safely

** This doesn’t necessarily make the person’s action correct. there are acts that I think are immoral but if all parties involved agree, the government has no business intervening

Jersey
“Giving tzedoka is a PRIVATE thing and NOT a govt thing.”

I’m not sure if you are new to Judaism, or if our galus has been so long that you have adopted foreing ideas.
In Judiam there is no such distiction. When moshiach comes and Jeish leadership iis reestablished the government will force you to pay maaser, with force if neccesary (kofin al mitzvas asei) they will force you to leave your field fallow every 7th year .

See if you learn Navi you would know this, (for example Yosheyahu sent soldiers to ensure that avoda Zara was eradicated)

Avram
“which is a tangent that is probably not a good idea for us to get into,”

I’m sorry but you lost me a little bit. what tangent? thats what I am (and I thought we are) discussing. Who should decide if a Frum woman wants (or needs) an abortion: The government or her/her Rabbi and her Dr.
.
If halacha would allow (but not require) an abortion, do you support the government stopping them ?

“What would these colleagues of yours say about the number of times halacha would require an abortion, but the medical establishment deems it unnecessary?”
Probably zero, though I didint ask because I’m not sure why we are differentiating “require” vs “allow”

As you may know halacha isnt always black and white. Even in more straight forward relatively less consequential decisions like kashrus questions there are many factors that come in shaas hadchak hefsed meruba etc there are times where eating food (or discarding it) is allowed but not required.

With these abortion issues it is far more complex. for example carrying an anencephalic child to term . there is a lot of haalchic literature on this. the Tziiz Eleiver allowed abortion (not in 3rd trimester IIRC) R’ Moshe argued.
nobody “REQUIRES” it.
how hard is it for a woman to go through with such a pregnancy. I dont know, and luckily I dont have to decide whether they should be forced to even if it will be difficult .
But if halacha allows it , let them decide with their Rav

Let the Rav decide what effect it will have on her mental health

Avi
great news!
Ifound it

Another glorious nonsensical back and forth between Health and Ubiquitin

the lis t we came up with includes:

hasagas gvul
ribbis
Onaas maamon
undoing land sales at yovel

We can add Shemtia

CA
“He asked me “do we know for sure that there is an afterlife?”
I answered “if there wasn’t what is the point of life“”

So what is the point of the Afterlife ?

joseph

“On that token you should be advocating for the legalization of homicide since, to borrow your argument, Halacha and lehavdil secular law have very different approaches to determine what is self-defense”

you made that foolish argument before.

Is this a problem in frum communities, do you know of anyone who was prevented from protecting himself in self defense due to this “very different approach” ?

“Do you support making illegal abortion for purely economic, non-medically necessary, reasons?”

no. In theory I would support making abortion purely in the hands of the rabbinate. In practice in the US (aside for that being impractical) would set a bad precedent and thus I support the next best thing
namely allowing the woman to choose
alos note, I dont support abortion that late in a pregnancy. However I am mevatel my daas to the Torah and if halacha allows it then although I dont understand it, who am I to argue.

TLIK
“Maaser Oni was only the third and sixth year of the Shmittah cycle”
Lol! of the what cycle?
can you elaborate what this Shmittah is ? I bet it was every conservative’s dream come true

Avi, we can add shemita to the long list we came up with of Torah economic policies that are clearly anti-capitalist

bk613
“I agree that when the mothers life is in danger you must perform an abortion, the baby is considered a rodef.”

who do you want to make that determination?

why is a a middle school math problem a riddle?

At least Meno’s is a riddle

Just the opposite

Our Neviim tell us explicity to vote for the liberal eg:
פְּתַח־פִּ֥יךָ לְאִלֵּ֑ם אֶל־דִּ֝֗ין כָּל־בְּנֵ֥י חֲלֽוֹף׃
פְּתַח־פִּ֥יךָ שְׁפָט־צֶ֑דֶק וְ֝דִ֗ין עָנִ֥י וְאֶבְיֽוֹן׃
Mishlei 31:8-9

Compare the number of timses caring for the poor , the downtroden the yosam and almanah is mentioned in Tanach vs how many time abortion is mentioned and you will have your answer

See this is what happens when you don’t learn Tanach

Joseph
yep, thats what I said

talmidchochom
“Sounds like a no-brainer to me that yiddish is no different than French.”

Ah, but if you did have a brain,…
kidding I already explained why they are different

Captain
they are wrong.

tiawd
“Do you all realize that no one here has defined the meaning of “holy”,”
I defined it .
Though I agree completely with you point , and in fact said the same (though much wordier)

Avi
“said that a language is a dialect with an army and navy.”

sooooooo… theyre not the same.
and again are you trying to convey some sort of point?

” In Europe it was called Jargon.”
what was?
and again are you trying to convey some sort of point?

“Rabbanim wrote to each other in Hebrew interspersed with Aramaic”
Are you starting a new thread?

“It was a sign of a ben Torah that he also wrote his business correspondence in Hebrew.”
Interesting, not sure he relevence.
and also source please?

You’ve really lost me I have no idea what you are trying to convey.

Learnin,
did you read Joseph”s comment? OR just copied it and repeated yourself?

“Yiddish is one of them. It is no more a separate language than Yeshivish.”

1) I am familiar with all four, and let me assure you that English is closer to yeshivish than Yiddish is to German. (are you really arguing this point?)
2) yiddish is recognized as a language by many bodies, it has a regulating agency It is a bit absurd to try to argue it isnt a language
3) Even if it isnt an “official” language (whatever that means) I still don’t understand your point .

Can someone explain this to me

“To me, it looks like a sign of immaturity; perhaps trying to live a life through their kids that they weren’t allowed to.”

I dont understand that thought process, is there one there?

Avi
“the Germans say the same things about Swiss German”
Of course they would. I’m not sure what you are trying to say.

talmud

“I feel sorry for you. Honestly.”

don’t. I’m not the one who can’t remember having commented on a thread a few months ago.
I’m also not the one who thinks it takes all afternoon to count to 4.

(BTW the thread “not worthy of comment by a Talmidchochom” now has 7 )

“Is Yiddish holy? A most ridiculous topic not worthy of comment by a Talmidchochom ”

Lol!
this is your 4th comment in this thread

“It is long past time that it was relegated to anthropologists.”

People have been saying that for centuries.
Yiddish has outlasted them all, and will outlast you too.
sorry if you find this disappointing

nope thats not how it works

Reply To: Guns

“I wouldn’t call it Bipartisan when only 8 Republicans voted for it.”

Lol me neither, I dint name it. why give credit to an anti-life party.

“Until ruled otherwise, a law is torah misinai until another court replaces.”
I dont think you know what “misinai” means
and again. The ruling you cited WAS (somewhat) overturned by Freed in 71′ deeming a national registry not unconstitutional.

“You are living in La La land and basing your arguments on the “What If” scenario.”
Just so I have this right , abortion is justified, and anybody who opposes it is trying to ” impose their tyrannical ideology on the masses.” correct?

“1) Car registration is not federal. As you already pointed out, even gun registration is state level.”
I dont follow. Ok so let every state have mandatory gun registration. I’m fine with that. I didint mean it HAD to be at the federal level.

“2) Car registration is a simple fee, same as gun licensing. The test is also very simple and majority of Americans pass it on the first try.”
I dont follow, ok so make gun registration a simple fee and a simple test. I’m not sure what you are saying

“3) Car registration and licenses are revoked for a period amount of time if you misuse your car. Should the same apply with guns? No.”

Seriously? Are you saying If a person misuses his gun he should be allowed to keep it? Do I have your opinion correct? (I have to assume this was a typo of some sort)

“4) Nearly 1.25 million people die in road crashes each year, on average 3,287 deaths a day. An additional 20-50 million are injured or disabled. Based on your logic, we should ban all vehicles!”

youve asked this several times. I dont follow youll have to walk me through this point slowly how you reached that conclusion.

“So what should we discuss, 40,000 people that die from gun violence (2/3 from suicide) or the 1.25 MILLION that are killed by a dangerous weapon??”

BOTH! why limit discussions? Lets try to lower that number of people who die from gun violoence including those by sucicide AND those killed with a dangerous weapon.

” including a majority of Republicans and even a majority of nra members.” Seriously? ”
Yep, seriously

In congress it doesnt have support. because the NRA is blood thirsty and lines the pockets of senators wit htheir blood money.
A majority of americans, yes even Republicans and Yes even NRA MEMBERS are good people, who care about gun safety (this was the NRA’s opriginal goal unitl the 70’s when they switched to unrestricted gun ownership) support universal background checks

Look up “Do majority of NRA members support background checks for guns?” On politifact .com you will fins links to many surveys showing widespread support for universal background checks

“You crack me up with your misinformation.”
Lol!

“since this is the law, there is nothing that can be done besides protesting.”

Just yesterday the house passed the “bipartisan Background Checks Act” expanding background checks to all gun sales at gun shows and internet sales.

Hopefully some Republicans in the Senate will finally take a pro-life stance and vote for a measure that has wide support among the public, including a majority of Republicans and even a majority of nra members.

“If there was an amendment that everyone can own a car,”

you keep making the same silly mistake. The constitution and the supreme court are not torah Misiani lehavdil.
If you oppose abortion it doesn’t become “right” just because the supreme court says it is or even if an amendment gets added enshrining abortion as a “right”.

If unrestricted access to guns is a bad idea, then even if the constitution DID grant that, (though as mentioned it doesn’t) it STILL would not become a good idea.

“However, since this is the law, there is nothing that can be done besides protesting.”
That is absurd. you have no idea how government works. Laws can change. amendments can be added (thats why they are called amendments) The supreme court can (and has) changed their opinion. these are elementary concepts as to how government works. Its is amazing that you think “nothing can be done” once a law is in place, you have made lots of wrong staments in thsi thread. but this one ” since this is the law, there is nothing that can be done besides protesting.” i’s flabbergasting

I’d like to respond to your Jews part, but I dont really understand the comparison .

“There is no gun problem with law abiding citizens. ”
Ah except that there is! accidental gun deaths, are a problem too.
and besides, this line is silly, since often they are law abiding until they arent
and again we require car registries even though there is no problem. and please please dont tell me that cars arent protected, youve said thsi illogical argument 10 times it wont start making sense now (unless you can explain WHY say gun registries are bad. )

“The issues arises from criminals who won;t be registering their guns and get everything illegally anyways. .
So….. lets make it easier for them and harder to trace source of htheir guns. got it.
Is that your approach to drugs too. Lets sell percocet at supermarket checkout counters since criminlas wil l get it anyway. Why penalize law abiding citizens ( in pain no less) make them go to a doctor then a pharmacy

“So what you are suggesting is instead of penalizing the criminals, you also include the law abiding citizens. How’s that for democracy?”

who is penalizing anyone? I have to wait at a red light, is that a penalty? It is a rule that keeps everyone safer. That is EXACTLY how democracy works. We all give up some freedoms (eg running red lights) for the betterment of society.
you really need a civics lesson

and again you havent answered my question about Abdul.

Look, as Ive said if you say, “hey I like guns I dont care that we have one of the highest gun deaths in the world. It is part of my freedom to be allowed to buy 20 guns with no questions act.
I get that I really do. we can agree to disagree on that point”.

But be clear with your position, stop pretending we are forced by the constitution, or that other countries have this problem,, stop making illogical arguments like criminals will break the law anyway why try to stop them, Just recognize your own position., and be logical about it

Reminds me of the guy who goes to his lawyer
“Help i’m being sued for breaking Reuvein’s lamp that I borrowed.

Lawyer replies ” first we will prove you never borrowed it, then we will prove that it was already broken when you borrowed it, finally we will prove that when you returned it it was fixed”