ubiquitin

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 50 posts - 4,151 through 4,200 (of 5,407 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Yerushalayim Autopsy – what would a Sanhedrin do? #1121516
    ubiquitin
    Participant

    Joseph

    Too bad The Tzitz Eliezer had to spend several pages in several simanim not to mention many many others who adresss if/when autopsies are allowed, along with other Poskim including in cases similar to the op’s. Shouldev just asked you

    Are Autopsies allowed to solve a murder?

    Joseph: “Autopsies are kinegged halacha, so how could you even have a shaila”

    (no to mentiont he fact that you are aslos wrong about THIS PARTICULAR case since the Tzitz Eleizer does seem to allow it.

    At the very least though, it is a shaila.

    Can we do this for everything?

    Is the Kosher switch allowed?

    Joseph : Turning on lights on Sahbbos is keneged halacha, whats the shaila

    Can a pregnant woman undergo radiation if delaying it will risk her life but doing know will require abortion?

    Joseph: Abortion is keneged halacha, whats the shaila

    in reply to: Yerushalayim Autopsy – what would a Sanhedrin do? #1121510
    ubiquitin
    Participant

    Joseph stop your silly games

    You made a blanket stament:

    “Autopsies are kneged halacha,”

    This (like many of your posts) is simply false.

    Other wise your response doesnt make sense:

    OP:

    “…would the Sanhedrin order an autopsy to determine if the day care worker is guilty?…”

    Joseph:

    “Autopsies [” regarding a suspected murder”] are kneged halacha, so how could you have even a shaila if the Sanhedrin would order an autopsy?”

    This doesnt answer the question. IT is merley restating the OP’s question in stament form.

    Is that really what you meant?

    You clearly meant Autopsies in general are not allowed. Which of course is wrong.

    GAW

    “I don’t know why you say that. “

    Because I’m not sure how well known this is Especially in ISrael. In the US there is a widespread campaign to spread knowledge. Shaking babies does work and stops the crying it was routinely done until a few decades ago, without being told not do it I’m not sure its self-evident.

    That said given Eidim and hasraa not to shake a baby and the person shakes the baby and it dies Rch”l

    Why would you need an autopsy at all?

    in reply to: Yerushalayim Autopsy – what would a Sanhedrin do? #1121504
    ubiquitin
    Participant

    GAW

    chas vesholom!

    There is no such thing as Sanhedrin killing without eidim.

    The Gemara (in chulin i think) that Sam alludes to is discussing doing an autopsy on a murder victim (where the cause of death is known there are eidim etc…) in an attempt to prevent the murderer from misah, since if the victim was a treifa then there is no misah for the murderer.

    There is a Tosfos in Bava basra that Allows Autopsy in specif situations for finacical gain though I forgot the specifics of hand. (The Gemara discusses a fight over wheterh a seller who died was a gadol or KAtan making the sale valin or invalid respectibly nad R’ Akiva (?) offers two answers why autopsy isnt allowed 1) nivul hames and 2) it wouldnt be conclusive. Tossfos says both reason are neccesary since Nivul hames alone wouldnt allways prevent autopsy if there was a (financial) benefit. Though again I dont rmeber the specific application of Tosfos

    in reply to: Yerushalayim Autopsy – what would a Sanhedrin do? #1121502
    ubiquitin
    Participant

    http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=14503&st=&pgnum=92

    Its a long siman and I didnt reread it now. I remember him saying that to solve a murder/prevent future murder it is mutar. (though in the summary he doesnt mention this case but does allow in a case where the casue of death is not known and just to give the family ease)

    Please someone correct me if I’m wrong

    Shaken baby is nut murder per se but it is dangerously close.

    Please note: I dont know the specifics in this case and like the op am just adding a source.

    ALso please note that like almost every post Joseph has absolutely no clue what he was talking about. For example if there is a choleh lifoneinu who would benefit from an autopsy virtually ALL poskim allow one including the Nodah Byihuda, the Chazon Ish among others (the Binyan Tzion and R’ Moshe are some notable exceptions)

    in reply to: Popa's Law of the Coffee Room #1229612
    ubiquitin
    Participant

    Great Law!

    I wvote it shoudl be added to the stickies list so

    I can find it easily

    in reply to: Are Kollel Folks Better Jews Than The Rest Of us? #1174395
    ubiquitin
    Participant

    “Whats the difference between being ranked higher and being considered “better”?”

    The ranked higher I was reffering to is they are bigger Talmid

    Chacham. OF course (generally speaking )those learning in kollel are bigger talmidei chachamim than those working.

    The OP was regarding which is better

    The big talmud chacham who has terrible middos and (to quote the rambam) is mevazeh the Torah. Or the Working person who learns every free minute?

    More to the point. Though why does it matter? Be the best you can be dont worry about being better than other people.

    I really dont get this thread.

    I think working people are better than kollel people. Though who cares what I think

    I thought this is what you were saying in this post

    (That a. There are many variables and b. Why does it matter)

    http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/coffeeroom/topic/are-kollel-folks-better-jews-than-the-rest-of-us#post-593969

    in reply to: Are Kollel Folks Better Jews Than The Rest Of us? #1174391
    ubiquitin
    Participant

    “Categorizing some people as talmidei chachomim and categorizing other people as not being talmidei chachomim is ranking them, needs to be done …”

    Agreed but that wasnt the OP

    The OP was about which group “are better ” Which as APY said is a falwed question. DOnt worry about being “better” be the best you can be

    in reply to: Are Kollel Folks Better Jews Than The Rest Of us? #1174362
    ubiquitin
    Participant

    DY and Feivel

    “?”? ????? ????? ??? ?? ?? ??? ?? ???? ?? ?”? ????? ??? ??”?”

    “that was in ancient days…”

    A few years ago at irgun shiurei Torah hookup Rav

    Shteinman was asked if a person has a choice between a bas talmud chacham or a bas rich person who can support him, who should he pick?

    Rav Shtienman asked the questioner: what about middos?

    Questioner: They are the same

    Rav Shteinman replied (witha grin) that there is no real talmud chacham bezman hazeh

    in reply to: What did people do before Rashi invented Rashi tefillin? #1120108
    ubiquitin
    Participant

    ROB

    As others have pointed out, the machlokes predates Rabbinue Tam SO opening up earlier sets of Tefilin wouldnt have resolved much since they’d find “Rashi” sets and “R”T” sets long before Rashi/R”T

    There are many things that different segments of kala yisroel do differently. IT wouldnt be surprising if you learnt through a sugya and came to a conclusion that say the correct approach is to say eat in Sukka on shemini atzeres.

    In generations from now if that shita becomes known as the “Shitas ROB” Some might ask how can it be a machlokes? What did Rob’s parents/grandparents do?

    Again, like all analogies this one is flawed. But the idea that there is machlokes in klal yisrtoel and different poskim go through a sugya and come out one way or the other isnt surprising in of itself

    in reply to: Are Kollel Folks Better Jews Than The Rest Of us? #1174336
    ubiquitin
    Participant

    “Is there a source anywhere that suggests that people in Kollel are better Jews?”

    Yes

    there is a source for everything. There are sources that say that working is better (as indicated above). I’m sure those who learn have a heter to avoid work.

    Why focus on who thinks they are better. You should think you are the best you can be, and if not strive for it. I dont understand the question, who cares what they think?

    in reply to: Bombing Agrabah #1120120
    ubiquitin
    Participant

    I bet Cruz is in favor of carpet bombing

    in reply to: Are Kollel Folks Better Jews Than The Rest Of us? #1174326
    ubiquitin
    Participant

    We can phrase questions all sorts of ways.

    Are people who combine Torah im derech eretz better than Troah alone?

    Are people who decide to learn all day, not work and subside off tzedaka better than people who dont?

    Simplifying the question doesnt always make it easier to answer.

    More importantly. Why does it require an answer?

    in reply to: Are Kollel Folks Better Jews Than The Rest Of us? #1174323
    ubiquitin
    Participant

    Who cares what othe people think is better. I think people who are working are better than the rest of frum people. I doubt anybody in kollel cares what I think.

    Just do what you/your spiritual adviser thinks is best FOR YOU and dont worry which group they think “are better Jews”

    in reply to: What did people do before Rashi invented Rashi tefillin? #1120100
    ubiquitin
    Participant

    I think Old aman raises a great point.

    Assuming Rabbeinu Tam didnt wear Rashi’s Tefilin. Would you say he wasnt yotzei tefilin in his life R”chl? I feel very uncomfortable saying that.

    Today however if a person never wore Rashi’s Tefilin I would say he wasnt yotzei.

    in reply to: What did people do before Rashi invented Rashi tefillin? #1120099
    ubiquitin
    Participant

    “Is that the halacha?

    No, and I would agree with your implication that this disproves that theory. “

    Im not sure I would dismiss it so quickly.

    Tefilin isnt the only machlokes we have.

    For example regarding the sound of the teruah the question whether it is a shevarim, (what we call) teruah or both is well known. As to how the question came about the Rosh brings from one of the Geonim (Rav Hai?) as one possibility that there were sounds added to enahnce the mitzva and with time we forgot which was the real sound and which enahmcement.

    Another possibility the Rosh gives is there was no standarized minhag and (Abaye?) instituted a standard.

    Please correct me if I’m wrong, thats the way I remeber it ill look it up tonight.

    This sounds similar to the tehory mentioned by old man.

    Yet, if somebody only knew how to blow a shevarim sound (and tekiah) should he do it? (putting aside issues of zecher bealma) I would think it is pointless. Now that it was instituted that teruah is either teruah/shevarim/both. Just doing shevarim is pointless even though it once was ok.

    Similarly it is possible that there was no orgiginal standard order of parshiyos but now that there is, just doing any order without a shita backing it is pointless.

    (of course the anaolgy isnt perfect, and im not sure just doing shevarim is pointless, does anybody discuss this issue?

    in reply to: Genetically Engineered Animals and Kashrus #1119600
    ubiquitin
    Participant

    Wolf

    Judaism isnt a dead historical religion it is a living one based on mesora. We do what our parents did and they did what theirs did etc. OBviously given thousands of year there is some change along the way and I dont mean this facetiously but I do find it interesting to study when/why/ how things left or joined our religion (for example, when/why did metzora , Para Aduma, techeiles mong other mitzvos (none of which are (directly) related to the beis hamikdash disappear, or tracing the history of Simchas Torah a yom tov that didnt exist during the time of Chazal and it in its present form didnt exist until mid-late Achronim)

    We dont have to look for the mesora of the mesora. Assuming a person grew up in a home/community that was yorei shomayim and shomer Torah umitzvos their is no harm in following their footsteps, and there may in fact be harm in looking into all their actions to determine if they were “correct”

    in reply to: Genetically Engineered Animals and Kashrus #1119598
    ubiquitin
    Participant

    Wolf

    the way I see it turkey does have a mesora. My Father, Grand father and Great grand father were all God-fearing Jews and ate Turkey. I and most of those I know do in fact have a mesora allowing Turkey.

    As to how my Great great great (insert as many as needed) Grandfather ate turkey without a mesora, well that is a very interesting historical question that doesn’t have much practical application.

    in reply to: changing neighborhoods and anti-semitism #1136225
    ubiquitin
    Participant

    Avi

    The problem in “Reed vs. Town of Gilbert” was again one of reguating signs based on content. A blanket ban on all signs/flyers/Lechis would not be affected by Reed.

    in reply to: changing neighborhoods and anti-semitism #1136224
    ubiquitin
    Participant

    Joseph

    Since you are so instent I’ll pateintly break apart each line of your wrong post. Since I’m such a nice guy.

    “For the umpteenth time, your hypothetical question was about an ordinance for the (to directly quote you) “obvious goal of preventing Goyim from moving in”.”

    Correct! That is my question

    ” I told you such an ordinance is unconstitutional on the face of it.”

    You did say this, but are wrong.

    ” Tenafly proves my point.”

    No it proves mine.

    ” If the intention of the municipality (as in your hypothetical) was to specifically and directly and singularly target a specific religion, it is unconstitutional.”

    Read Tenafly it was NOT regarding the intention of the ordinance.

    “That’s what your question pertained to and was.”

    Yes

    ” Tenafly did target a specific religion and thus it was unconstitutional.”

    The ordinace didnt target a religion, rather the ENFORCEMNT did.

    ” It doesn’t matter that the ordinance was broader”

    It does! the ordienace in of itself. IF evenly enforced is constitutional even if it prevenbts the eruv!!!

    “since what mattered was how they selectively enforced it.”

    This part is right! Im not sure how you got so muddled regarding the rest!!!

    AGAIN, just so we are crystal clear the violation accoring to the Tenafly appeals court was the selective enforcment! not the ordinance nor its intent.

    Which of course brings back my question…..

    in reply to: changing neighborhoods and anti-semitism #1136223
    ubiquitin
    Participant

    Joseph

    I meant obvious to us.

    Did you read Tenafly? It doesnt discuss intention (nor can intention usually be proven. It explictly ruled that if the ordinance where uniformly enforced it could stand (regardless of intent though that isnt explicit since intent of the ordiance wasnt addressed). IT was unconstitutianal becasue it wasnt unifomly enforced not becasue of the intent!

    If we gather together and between us decide lets prevent Goyim from moving to town by banning christmas trees. Then enact an ordinace that is applied across the board say to prevent fire hazards. Even though it is obvious to us what are intention is according to tenafly it could theoreticly stand. Much like the anti-utility pole ordinance is ok as long as unifromly enforced. The intent was not addressed in Tenafly. Nor is it easy to prove (even if obvious to us)

    I’ll say it again becasue you are so utterly confused on this issue.

    Tenfly did not address the intent of the ordinace.

    (nor could it have sinc ethe ordinace long predated the eruv).

    So yes an ordinace with “the obvious goal of preventing Goyim from moving in” (obvious to us) CAN ABSOLUTLY be enacted in a “constitutianly sound way”

    (and even if it couldnt be done, as I provided via example above you are not one to shy away from hypothetical questions so even in your misreading and misapplying of the law you are still a phony)

    You dont need to repeat yourself. You have been doing that until know and know you stil havent answered my simple question.

    You misinterpretedcase law and misapllied your misinterpretation. That is not an answer.

    “In either event I’m done wasting my time. “

    Great so stop your trolling. Stop posting blanket incorrect satments both halachic ones and factual ones its annoying and dishonest. IT was dishonest when you did it under multiple screen names often on the same thread and it is dishonest now

    in reply to: changing neighborhoods and anti-semitism #1136220
    ubiquitin
    Participant

    No Joeseph you have it complelty wrong. The ordinace was in existence years before there was talk of an eruv.

    In Tenafly the court ruled that since the ordinace was not being uniformly enforced, and that house numbers, flyers even a church sign were all allowed on municipal poles with no fuss the fact that they were suddenly enforcing it regarding the eruv was unconstitutional.

    Here is a direct quote from the court of appeals final ruling freely available online “We further hold, however, that the Borough’s selective enforcement of its ordinance likely violated the Free Exercise Clause.”

    In other words if the Borough non-selectivly enforced the ordinace and banned every flyer, house number AND LECHI frm their poles they could in fact prevent the eruv (this isnt a diyuk if you read through the opinion they outright say this).

    In other words you have it completely wrong! and have not answered my question.

    (as an aside even if hypothetical im not clear why you are afraid/hesitant to answer)

    however this discussion is in the past, and Ive kinda lost interest. IF you are to uncomfortable/dishonest/afraid to answer a simple question fine.

    The reason Im bringing this up is to show your statement “as you don’t accept responses not to your liking – and then you go on and pretend to have not received a response as you re-post the same question a half dozen more times after slightly altering the wording of the question (and claiming it is a new question that was not previously addressed).” in the Chanuka thread is wrong

    I’d accept your “answer” if it was factually based. I dont accept nonsense as an answer and your reply in this thread and it many others (I’d be happy to provide more examples if youd like) are nonsense and counter-factual as I have demonstrated and sourced above.

    in reply to: changing neighborhoods and anti-semitism #1136217
    ubiquitin
    Participant

    JosephI’m bumping this thread to give you a chance to either

    a. point out an answer that you gave that I ignored

    b. reply to my question

    c. admit that you cant

    or

    d. prove what a phony you are

    Here is my question:

    “”what about KJ making a law designed to prevent some goyish custom that was done in a constitutioanl sound way but with the obvious goal of preventing Goyim from moving in.”

    Is that wrong?”

    you “replied”

    “ubiq, the Jews won in court and had the Eruv ban in Westhampton overturned because the ordinance banning the Eruv was an unconstitutional interference of government in religion. There is no roundabout way to make a ban that is intended to inhibit a religious practice be constitutional by pretending the law was enacted for an allowable secular purpose when the true intent, even if not admitted and outright denied, was religious based discrimination. It is unconstitutional on the face of it.

    You are are asking about hypothetical laws that can’t be legal any way you cut it.”

    To which I explained why you were simply factually incorrect

    “Nope you are wrong. for example in the Tenafly case the court ruled (as I recall) that if they banned ALL postings etc attached to utility poles then they can prevent the Eruv.”

    You then didnt actually reply to my question, but claimed you did

    “Impossible to be done in a constitutional way, as I explained.”

    To which I replied

    “And as i replied (and double checked) You are wrong. see Tenafly Eruv Association v. Borough of Tenafly. The judge ruled if done in a general neutral way banning all attachments to an utility pole, an eruv can essentially be banned.

    If Westhampton were to institute such a ban now, would they be wrong?

    If KJ were to institute a similar ban agaainst bringng trees into houses would they be wrong?”

    I’m sorry it is not I who “pretend[ed] to have not received a response”

    I researched it and sourced it too

    in reply to: Chanuka presents- a sad state of affairs #1118942
    ubiquitin
    Participant

    “I’m the referee. ;)”

    Ah so thats why you dont need to reply to my points.

    “As I told you after our experiences in previous threads, as a general rule I will decline to respond to your repeated questions as you don’t accept responses not to your liking”

    This is no fewer than your fourth demonstrable lie in this thread. You did not repy to my very first question posed to you

    You dont reply becasue you cant, but arent man enough to admit it. This has occured on multple threads mostly becasue you have knee jerk reactions and havent though things through or researched a topic.

    a perfect example of this is in this thread:

    http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/coffeeroom/topic/changing-neighborhoods-and-anti-semitism#post-589393

    where you display an elementary lack of understanding of the subject at hand. (I explained (with sources) why you were wrong. YOU repeated yourself without actually responding)

    I’d be happy to provide more similar examples.

    Can you provide an example of a question you feel was answered. Id be more than happy to explain why your answer was factually incorrect (which in my view isnt an answer) or concede.

    Besdies, in this thread you told multiple lies. You did not respond to my questions at all.

    “And, as you know, I’m not the only one who has had this experience with you and told you as much.”

    Nope just you and DY.

    “There’s a real minhag to give one’s spouse a gift for the shalosh regalim.

    But, then again, it isn’t Christmas season so perhaps some don’t hold much of it”

    Who doesnt?

    Here are questions posed in this thread that you havent (cant) answer

    Feel free to point out where you “already answered”

    “did you get christmas chocolate this chanukah?” (5 times)

    “You said “Many people all the time put out …trees… to … celebrate an occasion”

    Granted I edited it to make it relevant to the subject at hand. I never heard of this, is it true?” (twice)

    ” Do you have any source forbidding Chanukah presents, or is it your boich sevara?”

    in reply to: Chanuka presents- a sad state of affairs #1118938
    ubiquitin
    Participant

    Joseph

    “Btw, why don’t the people who give so many Chanuka presents to all their family members do the same on Succos and Pesach and Shavuos and give all their family members similar presents, in quantity and quality to all the same people, they do on Chanukah?”

    Nope, it is because the minhag of giving gelt is a Chanukah one so with time the gelt became Presents.

    BTW Im not saying we didnt copy goyim. We did! But that doesnt make it assur. Please see the Rema, alos see this quote of yours from last year:

    “”This isn’t chukas akum but it certainly is in the “spirit” of it. So whilst it may not be technically assur, I wouldn’t do everything that is technically muttar.””

    Care to respond to any of my questions posed throughout this thread?

    Ive posed several. I assume you have no answer.

    I have one more. Do you have any source forbidding Chanukah presents, or is it your boich sevara?

    in reply to: Dvar Torah Parshas Shemos #1118838
    ubiquitin
    Participant

    “It appears to be the source for the Yiddish word for “grandchild” AKA “ainekel.””

    Lol. I’m curious when people make assertions like that. Did you bother looking it up in an etymology dictionary? did you look up the word Granchild in German?

    It is cute though

    in reply to: Chanuka presents- a sad state of affairs #1118935
    ubiquitin
    Participant

    Notamod

    “Seriously though, Chanuka presents are a perfectly harmless way to get kids excited about Chanukah nothing wrong with that”

    Agreed

    ” but I don’t think anyone seriously considers it a minhag.”

    yet. Though some do equate it with money, both are a minhag

    see here: http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=872&st=&pgnum=251

    (source provided by DY)

    “Shlissel challah is accepted as minhag”

    among some – present company included

    ” and suggesting that it originates from cross loaves is heading down a dangerous path.”

    I’m not suggesting it, Iam outright saying it

    “I agree that we should be wary of strange new minhagim but at the same time we must be careful not to fall prey to the skewed thinking of pluralism and the likes of it.”

    Sure why not

    Joseph

    “In a few centuries, if things stay this way, you’re gonna have mekors for chanukah trees, chanukah presents, pesach bunnies, purim ash, etc.”

    You may be right. And of course your Grandchild will defend the “Millenia old” minhag of Chanuka trees

    Care to respond to any of the many questions posed to you? BTW I see dishonesty is your MO here. A year ago you posted under a different name “This isn’t chukas akum but it certainly is in the “spirit” of it. So whilst it may not be technically assur, I wouldn’t do everything that is technically muttar.” see here: http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/coffeeroom/topic/what-is-the-origin-of-chanukah-gifts

    “And Succah-treating of course.”

    Sukkah hops already exist

    in reply to: Chanuka presents- a sad state of affairs #1118928
    ubiquitin
    Participant

    Lol Notamod

    I did not catch on (Poe’s law) (My only suspicion was the assur bhanah part)

    Its too early for Shlissel Chalah. The article you allude to is addressed in the thread above.

    Keep in mind while today there is no mekor for Chanukah presents if things stay this way in a few centuries there will be.

    in reply to: Chanuka presents- a sad state of affairs #1118924
    ubiquitin
    Participant

    DYDT

    Read this thread http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/coffeeroom/topic/schlissel-challah

    or look at google images of medieval keys

    or better yet have a look at the symbol of the vatican…

    in reply to: Chanuka presents- a sad state of affairs #1118922
    ubiquitin
    Participant

    Schlissel Challah

    the evidence for the two is pretty similar namely a temporal relationship.

    Goyim made loaves with a cross marked on them around Easter time first then we made loaves with a key marked on them around PEsach (lehavdil!)

    Goyim gave presents christmas, we give presents Chanukah (lehavdil!)

    The only differecne is that presents is more recent. And as I said over there Give it(i.e. presents) a few hundred years, as it enters minhagim seforim and reasons are given eg the wrapped present represents the hidden pach shemen or some clever gematriya, or that Matanah stands for Mitzvos, Torah, nisism and Hashem which is what really won the war agaisnt the yevanim. At that time our descendants will have the exact discussion regarding presents as we did regarding the “ancient minhag” of shlissel Chalah

    in reply to: Do You Allow Your Spouse To Read All Your E-Mails? #1120032
    ubiquitin
    Participant

    Joseph not at all

    Can we assume that when you ignore questions, it is because you are admitting you are wrong?

    in reply to: Chanuka presents- a sad state of affairs #1118917
    ubiquitin
    Participant

    Notamod

    This whole thread is litzanos, with a touch of ama haaratzos and dishonesty to spice it up.

    Shimen

    Halacha can change if it becomes a goyish act. Bamos being the classic example.

    But, i hear so here is a non-halachic example:

    Having grown up with it, it never occured to me that there could be anything wrong with it. Every year we joyfully wish each other “have a gut yontiff” It was just part of the family tradition.

    Then, this year not long after the a hearty gut yontiff I happened upon an opinion price in one of the frum magazines bemoaning the fact that yom tov has become very similar to other unrelated holidays which stands for the exact opposite values.

    I came to the realisation that wiching each other “gut yontiff” are indeed chukat hagoi , so my question is; how do I return the assur bhanaha greetings without offending the givers?

    in reply to: Chanuka presents- a sad state of affairs #1118916
    ubiquitin
    Participant

    Joseph

    Gladly

    Slow down your are losing your train of “thought”

    You wanted to know if I was “… family Chanukah tree”

    I replied, that unlike presents which are a ubiquitous and innocuous act, the above (a tree) is not.

    I hlpfully supplied multiple occasions when presents are given.

    We arent talking about “beutifying homes” with “flowers, plants, trees etc” which you are right about and of course is complelty muttar.

    We are talking about Celebrating. You said “Many people all the time put out …trees… to … celebrate an occasion”

    Granted I edited it to make it relevant to the subject at hand. I never heard of this, is it true? Did you mean the flowers are for celebrating and trees for beautifying? OR is it your third lie on this thread? (That would have to be a record even for you 3/5 of your posts containing lies).

    And for the fifth time

    did you get christmas chocolate this chanukah?

    for the second time

    Why the reluctance to answer?

    in reply to: Chanuka presents- a sad state of affairs #1118913
    ubiquitin
    Participant

    Notamod

    “What next, matzah bunnies? “

    Probably not, but stay tuned for after Pesach for Hot cross buns aka Schlissel Challah!!! yuuuuum

    “Chanuka was always about donuts, latkes and family time. Out ancestors were Moser nefesh for latkes not goishe presents. “

    Lol that isnt what it was “always about” Both Latkes and donuts came later, with time more minhagim were added including eating milchings (which I believe is actually older than latkes) dreidel, Gelt (first to rabbeim then kids) and now presents

    in reply to: Chanuka presents- a sad state of affairs #1118911
    ubiquitin
    Participant

    Joseph

    Slow down your are losing your train of “thought”

    You wanted to know if I was “hanging a red stocking on the family Chanukah tree”

    I replied, that unlike presents which are a ubiquitous and innocuous act, the above (stocking and tree) are not.

    I hlpfully supplied multiple occasions when presents are given.

    We arent talking about “beutifying homes” with “flowers, plants, trees etc” which you are right about and of course is complelty muttar.

    We are talking about Celebrating. You said “Many people all the time put out …trees… to … celebrate an occasion”

    Granted I edited it to make it relevant to the subject at hand. I never heard of this, is it true? Did you mean the flowers are for celebrating and trees for beautifying? OR is it your third lie on this thread? (That would have to be a record even for you 3/5 of your posts containing lies).

    And for the fourth time

    did you get christmas chocolate this chanukah?

    Why the reluctance to answer?

    in reply to: Chanuka presents- a sad state of affairs #1118907
    ubiquitin
    Participant

    Joseph

    More lies: “It’s a basic human expression of celebration/joy much like having a party/singing/eating/smiling”

    Please tell me what holiday or special occasion is celebrated by placing a tree or stocking in a house. (we arent talking about flowers, and as For Shavuos well I have a surprise for you though I dont want to change the subject to much)

    It is ok to be wrong, I understand you like assering things with minimal knowledge (both halacha and general) it is much easier than thinking or researching. That is ok, Im happy to help educate you.

    Lying however is not ok, you told two lies on this thread.

    As for presents here are occasions when presents are routinly given:

    Birthdays

    Aniversaries

    Graduations

    to a host

    as a general thank you

    Christmas

    Afikomen

    Chanukah

    Engagments

    Bar mitzvahs

    Retirement

    Marriage

    Having a baby

    Feel free to add your own…

    Oh and for the third time:

    did you get christmas chocolate this chanukah?

    in reply to: Chanuka presents- a sad state of affairs #1118904
    ubiquitin
    Participant

    Joseph

    no absolutly not, that would be chukas akum unlike Presents which are a basic human expression of celebration/thanks/appreciation/joy etc. much like having a party/singing/eating/smiling etc non of which are assur on chanukah even though Goyim may do it on their holidays

    (You also lied when you said it was my family tradition. You can easier make a case that lying is chukas akum more than chanukah presents)

    Now your turn:

    did you get christmas chocolate this chanukah?

    in reply to: Chanuka presents- a sad state of affairs #1118899
    ubiquitin
    Participant

    Joseph

    did you get christmas chocolate this chanukah?

    in reply to: Chanuka presents- a sad state of affairs #1118898
    ubiquitin
    Participant

    I’m here!

    Having grown up with it, it never occured to me that there could be anything wrong with it. Every year we would wait eagerly as my mother served a wonderful yom tov seuda(usually delicous meat and side dishes). It was just part of the family tradition.

    Then, this year not long after the big yom tov seudah I happened upon an opinion price in one of the frum magazines bemoaning the fact that yom tov has become very similar to other unrelated holidays which stands for the exact opposite values.

    I came to the realisation that Yom Tov seudahss are indeed chukat hagoi , so my question is; how do I return the assur bhanaha food without offending the givers?

    in reply to: Donald Trump is a jerk. #1137626
    ubiquitin
    Participant

    Neville

    It is hard to imagine too many people voting for the hated Hillary over say Rubio just to stick it to the GOP. Granted many wouldnt vote, but they would proabbly be less than those who wouldnt vote for Trump.

    Do you think trump can win a general election?

    in reply to: Are the girls causing their own shidduch crisis?? #1120584
    ubiquitin
    Participant

    Hashemisreading

    nope. not sure what it added

    in reply to: Donald Trump is a jerk. #1137621
    ubiquitin
    Participant

    Neville

    “How can a person argue that a candidate who gets the nomination by popular choice would fare worse in an election than some RNC crony forced on us? “

    Because to win a general election you cant ely on “us” if only Republicans vote the gOP cant win. you need independents/etc as well. There is no chance of Trump getting enough of them to win a general election. Common sense, election history, polls etc etc etc all tell us this.

    Do you think Trump can win a general election?

    Very few people vote in priamtries. If say, Rubio is forced on them what do you think will happen, they will vote for Hillary? They will sit out and let her win? Sure those die hards may be upset but at least the gOP will stand a chance.

    in reply to: Screen Names #1176204
    ubiquitin
    Participant

    Ubiquitin is a small protein that is found in almost all cellular tissues in humans and other eukaryotic organisms, which helps to regulate the processes of other proteins in the body.

    in reply to: Are the girls causing their own shidduch crisis?? #1120580
    ubiquitin
    Participant

    Hahsemisreading

    That is without doubt true, but Im not sure who in this thread said otherwise

    in reply to: Are the girls causing their own shidduch crisis?? #1120577
    ubiquitin
    Participant

    techinlca20

    “I think that thousands of girls out there will agree with me.”

    There is no question that is true.

    However there are thousands (hundreds?) of others who felt no connection after 5 minutes, but gave it another shot anyway and are now happily married…

    in reply to: Donald Trump is a jerk. #1137618
    ubiquitin
    Participant

    Neville

    “I believe them in this case”

    you cant be serious.

    “nothing could be worse going into the general election than a candidate forced on Republican voters by delegates.”

    i hear though Im not sure how much Republican voters care about the primary process. And besides, there is something worse and that is:Trump

    “But, the way to win is not to close your eyes and pretend your enemy doesn’t exist.”

    I’m not sure what you mean by that. Many are in a panic that he might win. Its comforting to know that mathematically it is improbable.

    “yes, he might lose Iowa…”

    He will lose Iowa. And not just because of polls, It is hard to imaging a 4 times married unscrupulous flaming liberal until recently who made his money off casinos winning a state like Iowa. and with that he is a “Loser” one of the most dreaded words in the Trump lexicon he will rapidly lose steam.

    in reply to: Are the girls causing their own shidduch crisis?? #1120551
    ubiquitin
    Participant

    callitlikeit is.

    You do realize that “silly reasons” is extrmely subjective.

    for example I strongly disagree with your notion that wanting a plan for a boy who is learnin or wanting someone “Serious about learning” even if currently working are silly reasons.

    in reply to: Donald Trump is a jerk. #1137612
    ubiquitin
    Participant

    Btw neville the math is heavily stacked against trump. Many states, especially the early ones divide their delegates proportionaly so even if trump comes in first place he doesnt get all that states delegates.

    Then of course there are the superdelegates many of whom are republican insiders who obviously will do anything they can to block trump.

    Bottom line even if he wins a few priamaries/caucuses the odds of him getting enough delegates to actually win the nomination are negligible.

    Sorry Hillary.

    in reply to: Donald Trump is a jerk. #1137606
    ubiquitin
    Participant

    Neville

    “what will you say if he takes Iowa and New Hampshire?”

    I highly doubt he will take Iowa. Once he loses Iowa he is a “Loser” which int he Trump Lexicon is worse than a socialist-islamic-kenyan.

    ” At what point do you start considering him a legitimate candidate?”

    I f he somehow does win Iowa

    That said there is zero chance of him winning a general election.

    in reply to: 1080 #1117806
    ubiquitin
    Participant

    1080 is the number of chalakim in an hour (each = 3 1/3 seconds)

    not sure about the other

    in reply to: College #1117595
    ubiquitin
    Participant

    “In other words, it’s not something from nothing!”

    Evolution is not “something from nothing”. Evolution is how species develop from other earlier life forms over time.

    Darwin’s main mechanism for evolution is natural selection.

    MRSA is a perfect example of natural selection in particluar, and evolution in general.

Viewing 50 posts - 4,151 through 4,200 (of 5,407 total)