Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
DY and Sam2
“The question is where the cut-off is. And I honestly have no idea where to put it.”
Those where my exact thoughts. Imagine the following scenario. (not at all related to the one that happened)
A family goes to sleep leaving a blech on the highest flame right next to a bunch of towels there are bottles of turpentine and propane all over the place (They are repainting the house and planning a camping trip at the same time). There are no smoke detectors.
Over night tragedy strikes and r”chl the house burns down with the family in it. Obviously a terrible tragedy, though perhaps avoidable.
Is this a sign from Hashem? Of course it is a tragedy. and of course we should always do Teshuva.
But I think in this case you would agree with Sam2’s
“Don’t try to say the reason is X. Don’t say if you want to get smoke detectors [and not leave flammable substances lying around] then you missed the point. Don’t pander to the crowd who think that the purpose of Emunah is to be able to understand every tiny detail of life that happens. And stop pretending a Rabbi’s job is to be able to answer them.”
Would you disagree in that case?
No but they aren’t alive and they don’t have any descendents who can claim ownership of their name.
If Rav Pam’s descendants allowed it I would certainly be ok with buying it. (Though again, it would be a very strange name)
Joseph relevant or not it is nonsensical. At any rate:
Would you purchase a bottle of Rav Belsky Orange Juice*?
Assuming it was kosher and tasty. Absolutely
Would you find that brand name objectionable?
Assuming he allows it, no why would I?
joseph obviously.
Though your compariosns should be relevant to the subject at hand. none of your examples made any sense
For anyone looking for mekor keneged most of these see
Devarim 18:13
chulentmoma613
Im not sure I follow, but I think I understand
“Does a person always choose a hat? Is it a choice if society forces it upon him?”
In this case yes to both, the person “chooses” to comply so that his kids get in the “right” schools right shiduchim etc. (We arent talking about “everything in life” just hats)
At any rate your question was about not wearing a black hat. I have never met anyone who wanted to wear one but felt pressured not to based on the above reasons (incidentally this speaks volumes about the tolerance of different communities compared ot each other.
Are you aware of a person who does not wear a hat involuntarily? THAT is what you were discussing in the op. I’d love to explain this to you further, but just want to make sure we are discussing the same thing
Ooh ooh picke me here we go in order
No
Yes
Lots of reasons mostly sociological
Yes
Hats arent inborn. The person chooses to wear or not wear a hat.
Ive been saying it for more than 10 years. I said it as soon as saddam was overthrown Though you are right people did say I wS crazy. Consider this though the Israelis are “letting” also.
Joseph, I dont follow was R’ Moshe a chilent maker? Waa Rav Elyashiv a fishmonger? Etc…
Yosi7, i’m a step ahead. Reread post.
Scared ive reread your post a few times and am still not sure which way you are arguing.
At any rate here are a few yeshivos named after rabbonim. Feel free to add more:
Chofetz chaim
Yeshivas rabeinu chaim berlin
Yeshivas rabeinu yitzchak elchanon
Chasan sofer
Beis yosef navardak (unless yosef was a donor)
Nequuitam and yekke2
The only one who brought a “mekor” of any kind on this thread was comlink (and Joseph). I double checked. (you dont provide a mekor either). This thread is chockfull of non-mekor based misogynist views. (Obviously that doesnt necessarily make them wrong)
That said, I never said I disagree. I said that I found the juxtaposition between:
“somewhere that in the End of Days, women would be equal to men, and that this begins to happen in the world as we approach that time.”
and the next post “and ?? ????? ?? ??? ?? ?? ????? a woman, who has pretty much zero ??? ????” Funny.
Thanks Yekke2 your post (absurd as it was)cracked me up reading Comlink’s post about women becoming equal to men and then in the very next comment “and ?? ????? ?? ??? ?? ?? ????? a woman, who has pretty much zero ??? ????”
made for a funny juxtaposition
BTw are you serious? (Poe’s law)
a mamin
Do you remebr the name Avigdor KRasny A”H? I didnt
I may be naive but I dotn think anybody will forget the Sasoon family.
scared.
Its not quite the same, but similar. At any rate are you agreeing or disagreeing?
Its more similar to naming a hospital Maimonidies
Joseph
Its a bizayon to use holy names for trolling
Scared
Rashi was a winemaker (or at the very least is beleived by some historians to have been one), thus it is a very appropriate name for a wine company. (I am not sure about the others)
DY
Your last post, may have been the best thing I have read on this website. Yasher Koach
Thanks Stam. I’m looking forward
DY thanks
Avram
Sort of, though this case (as I understood it) was about a guy who wears a srugi not being allowed to daven for the amud period. Even with a hat or at by day with a Talis. Perhaps I misunderstood
DY
Say there motive was that they did “not want to send up a shaliach tzibbur whose dress clearly represents a different hashkofo than the tzibbur he is supposed to be representing”?
Also why don’t you assume this is their motive? Did Damoshe tell you this was their motive, or did you assume it in the lakewood case?
Avram that wasnt all you said, you also said this :
“Different communities and shuls will have different definitions for dressing respectfully. You may disagree with their definition, and that is fine, but they have a right to their own definitions, and they have a right for their customs to be respected. “
So what about in the no shtreimel in Teaneck scenario
DY ,Joseph and Avram
I’m curious what you would say if say in Teaneck there was a rule that a person wearing a shtreimel cant daven for the amud?
Stam I never said angry. Im merely irritated. Its annoying that refuse to answer simple direct questions. I have spent time educating you about so many points that you are so uninformed about. (Sinai? Oker harim? Dont make me laugh you dont know the aleph bais of the sugya). The least I deserve are answers to direct questions, even if you cant reply to every point.
Stam
Continuation of #2 above.
In order to understand why the study you demand is impossible we need to discuss (briefly) an overview of study design.
you begin with a theory that you want to test, say Vaccines cause autism (or more accuratly are linked to autism) Or lets take a simple example you have a coin you suspect is an uneven coin.
You know want to design an experiment to determine if your coin is uneven (lets assume an even coin has a 50/50 shot of landing on heads) so you set up a “null hypothesis” That is that there is no difference between your suspicious coin and a regular coin. Our experiment will be designed to determine whether we should accept or reject the null hypothesis in favor of the “alternate hypothesis” which in this case would be that the coin is uneven.
Now obviously simply flipping the coin once and getting heads doesnt tell you to much. nor does flipping it twice even if both are heads, after all flipping an even coin twice would be expected to result in 2 heads 25% of the time This hardly proves the coin is uneven. Obviously you will have to flip your coin several times.
Now lets take it to the other extreme. Say you flip your coin 100 times and all 100 are heads. Is it impossible to have occurred by chance alone? Of course not, while admittedly suspicious it is POSSIBLE that you have an uneven coin and the unlikely occured. What to do with the hypothesis? To make it more complicated what if the split was 90 heads to 10 tails or 70 to 30 or 55 heads to 45 tails. Which of these splits are “statistically significant” proving that your coin is uneven and which are expected occurrence of chance?
To answer this question a “p value” is needed. The p value is a calculation of how likely the outcome is to occur based on chance alone. Generally a p value less than 0.05 or 5% is used. This means that in any significant study with a p value less than 5%, there is a less than 5% chance that the outcome occurred based on chance alone. By flipping a coin 100 times yielding 90 heads the p value is 0.0045 (I totally made this up, maybe charliehall can help if hes bored) this means that there is a 4.5% chance that the outcome occurred randomly which leads us to reject the null hypothesis and conclude that the coin is uneven.
So far so good?
Ok now on to your study
Stam
!. Thanks I’m looking forward. Do you have anything specific she wrote that you can recomend?
Also have you had a chance to read any of the studies I sent as per your request?
2. I explained earlier see http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/coffeeroom/topic/things-causing-autism-jokes#post-561945.
I will provide a seperate more detailed explanation though later this evening b”ln.
At any rate: Please dont dodge the issue. I provided several studies that meet YOUR criteria regarding Autism. Can we agree on that? If not why not?
3. how on earth can you determine if it cause harm without evaluating a study? Is your whole viewpoint based on a hunch?
4. No stress, do’nt worry Just irritated. That said you cna help by answering my simle direct questions. I have offered you the same.
I will copy paste it here so you can find it easily:
I provided several studies that meet YOUR criteria regarding Autism. Can we agree on that? If not why not?
Owl
As A follow up to last set of “Can you explain” questions here is another:
Can you explain why in underdeveloped areas with an equal vaccination rate, the Autism rate is so much lower?
(To comlpicate it further, consider the same cant be said for the other can you explain items namely: Coputers, cellphones and internet i.e. Areas with a higher prevelance of Computers etc.. have an increased incidence of autism.)
Stam, another point
“The medical people want to solve everything with drugs and vaccines “
This isnt quite true. The only thing I care about is evidence. If there is evidence that tantzing ah kezaktzke prevents polio, we would have the exact conversation just copy/replace vaccines with tantzing ah kezatzke. If there was evidence thta tantzing ah kezatzke caused (or was linked) to Autism, I would avoid tantzing. The “medical people” don’t advocate drugs/vaccines per se. It is an advocation of evidence, wherver it leads. Drugs are recomended and recalled as the evidence dicatates.
Stam
1. I have, but I’d like to broaden further. Please provide a sugestion for me to read, and if I havent read it already I bl”n will. I provided you with SEVERAL studies that you requested. Have you read any of them?
2. The study you suggest is mathematicly impossible (as explained above). Please dont dodge the issue. I provided several studies that meet YOUR criteria regarding Autism. Can we agree on that? If not why not?
3. LOl! Thanks for raising my spirits. I showed examples of where you who claim ot have researche dthe subject are woefully ignorant about the aleph bais of evaluating a study. Your response was some vagaaries about “venturing to say…”
Thank you for leaving the labeling of infomed vs uninformes to me. I provided specefic areas where you are uninformed regarding matters you claim to have reasearched
4. I can not becasue of 4b. in my previous post
Stam:
1) Stop pretending, the government didnt reveal anything an independent journalist exposed the fraud that is Wakefield. Yet in spite of the evidence you still say “supposdely” refuted. Wheras when it comes to the “medical establishment” based on no evidence whatsoever you claim they are all lying for finacial gain. You have such firm convictions based on all the “research” youve done, yet the best you can determine regarding wakefield is “supposedly debunked” in the face of the overwhelming evidence against him. I’m sorry that makes you a supporter of his
2)”Autism is only one piece of pie. Again, i do not know enough to comment on any one study. I want to know the whole picture and that can only be done with the large scale study with all sides involved as i and others have suggested.”
Ok so lets focus on that one piece. Several large scale studies that you have sugested have been done and I provided them above. If you cant admit that there is no link between vaccines and Autism (just that one piece) in spite of my providing you with studies you demanded. Please do’nt claim to be “”honest enough to entertain the other side”” Not only that, you arent even honest enought o entertain your own side, since youd be moving the goal post you yourself set up!
3) nothing is impossible. Besides you have the terms confused. It is the unvaccinated who are uninformed, and are in fact being punished! So conceivable or not it is happening.
4) I am very irritated.
a. because you claimed that with a study you would change your mind. I provided several studies.
b. You are putting lives at risk.
and c. you pretend to be informed but you dont know the aleph beis of study design. Earlier you didnt know what statistical power is, you made a demand for a study that is impossible, you dont understand the fundamentals of a RCT. Which is fine of course, just dont pretend you researched a subject you know so demonstrably little about
OWL
you left of the rest of the quote so I well go that route. The only link they found was anaphalxis.
“can you help us to understand why autism has gone from 1 in 10,000 to 1 in 100 during the vaccination era? “
a. I cant
b. can you help us to understand why autism has gone from 1 in 10,000 to 1 in 100 during the computer era?
can you help us to understand why autism has gone from 1 in 10,000 to 1 in 100 during the cell phone era?
can you help us to understand why autism has gone from 1 in 10,000 to 1 in 100 during the internet era?
Can you help us understand How vaccines cause Autism?
Can you help us understand why in spite of several studies proving that there is no link (let alone a causal one) people still cling to this?
As pointed out Hashem doesnt have emoions. We attribute our emotions to Him in order to relate/understand. We percieve Hashem as being Angry etc. In which case I dont get the question if you percieve something coming from Hashem (and everything does) as being humurous then Hashem has a sense of Humor.
Heres a (not great) example. I’m sure all know the classic joke of the Reform Rabbi who goes golfing on Yom Kippur and gets a hole-in-one. The Malachim ask God How can you allow this when the Rabbi is desecrating the holiest day. God replies: Who can he tell.
Now whether or not the joke is funny, is it kefira? Since it is attribuing an emotion to H”KBH?
More to the point though. Suppose the story was real, namely the reform Rabbi is golfing on Y”K and gets a hole-in-one. The Rabbi “gets” the joke and is annoyed at his hole-in-one since he cant tell anybody. and views it that way as if Hashem is “playing a prank” on him. Is that view kefira?
stam
I would like to point out some dishonesty in your post, in attempt to show you how youve been blinded:
you say : “What can i tell you my friend? I just don’t trust the govt. and medical establishment since there is so much money involved. “
(as an aside don’t trust them blindly nowhere did I say vaccinate because the governent says so or the medical establsihement says so,)
You say you suspect them becasue of finacial biases. Fair enough. Yet you also accept Wakefield, although he had finacial biases too! (keep in mind the government doesnt make money on vaccines. They SPEND both on development and administration (medicare/medicaid)) This is not being “honest enough to entertain the other side”
you raised a series of points above. I responded to each and every one.
Here is another example. Earlier you said you would agree if a study involving “1000 people” could be done. Granted I could not provide any showing that there were NO risks associated with vaccines (nor did I claim that to be the case). Yet I did provide SEVERAL studies showing just that, with regard to Autism. You chose to ignore them. this is not being ” honest enough to entertain the other side”
“I say to both of you, spend ten hours online reading the other side with an open mind.” I have (sadly)
finally:
“but i wonder if He will punish someone who makes an uninformed one!”
He has already! and whats (arguably) worse He punished the informed as well as a direct result of the uninformed’s actions.
Stam Big name or small name if your doctor tells you “I know nothig about health” Its time for a new doctor
“I said even though Wakefield is discredited,”
Um no! you said quote “”Just because he was SUPPOSEDLY discredited ” (emphasis added)
“the theory stands”
why? and on what?
“There are way too many unexplained diseases that vaccines can be the culprit”
I’ve asked before and i’ll ask again. Why vaccines? Why not computer usage?
stam: 2 more points
“”I know nothing about health – i only know how to prescribe drugs!!” ” Please get a new doctor! There are plenty who do know about health.
“One thing i have learnt in my pursuit of health and that is you cannot separate the money and politics away from the health advice and medicine “
Yet you do trust wakefield? Earlier you said : “Just because he was supposedly discredited ” I assumed the “he” was wakefield. You do know his “study” was funded by lawyers looking to sue vaccine companies right? And furthermore he wasnt even opposed to vaccines. quite the opposite he was opposed to the MMR and favored a single vaccine that he secretly held the patent for!
This is the guy you trust, why the double standard?
STam:
1. Look up statistical power. Briefly say Leukemia has a prevelance of 1/2,000 comparing a group of 1,000 with vaccine vs. 1,000 without would not be expected to show a difference. If you want to include “Anything” in your study it would need to be powered to find a difference of prevelance in diseases much less prevelant than 1,000.
2. That wouldnt be randomised, a study like that would “prove” that suspicous people are less likely to develop diseases as much as it would prove unvaccinated are less likely.
3. I am not sure what you mean. Case studies wouldnt help in this case. If you mean Case controls they are looked at over years, but retroactivly. For example you take 1,000 people with Autism (cases) and “match” them to 1,000 without (controls) and you see if there is a difference in vaccination rates between the two. Which brings us to…
4. Forget the fact that he has been discredited. The very study you demand has been done. Pleas see sources above!
Can you agree to put that hoax aside? Now that several studies has been provided to you?
5. I’ll phrase my aside in the form of a direct question: Why do you think Vaccines casue problems? If it is just base don increase incidence of Autism this occured along with an increase in computer ownership, how do you know computers dont casue Autism? why vaccines?
6. “There is simply too much money involved to trust the govt. ” the government pays for vaccines they dont make money of them
Lol stam
The study you describe is impossible “taking into account EVERYTHING” That is a lot of stuff. firstly 1000 people wouldnt have enough power to detemine if there is ANY difference between the two groups so your demand doesnt really make sense. (keep in mind, we aren’t even discussing cause, this is merely looking for a corelation. )
Furthermore, a prospective Randomized controlled study would not be ethical, as it would endanger children by denying them, what ALL evidence we have indicates is life saving therapy. So the best we can do is a retrospective case control study to or a cross sectional survey. Both of these HAVE been done (some with over a million!!! people). However, again with a case control you have to know what you are looking for, you cant just look at “anything” otherwise you cant find controls for each of your cases.
From the diseases you mention, Autism, learning disabilities and leukemia have all been looked at.
Secondly, this thread is about Autism which HAS been looked at. in a study with “1000 or more people involved on each side” Can you agree to put that hoax aside? Now that several studies has been provided to you?
As an aisde maybe it is the prevelance of Personal PC’s why dont you provide a study with “20 YEARS study please taking into account EVERYTHING from autism to cancer to leukemia to learning disabilities to ear infections to sids etc. etc.. etc……1000 or more people involved on each side.”
Two more points:
“I am saying that anyone who thinks it’s 100 percent safe is a fool.” Agreed! Nothing in life is 100% safe (nor is life itself) sorry if I misled you.
“billions of dollars has already been paid for vaccine injuries. “
source please
Stam I’ll take that challenge! though forgive me if instead of one study I’ll provide several:
Increasing exposure to antibodystimulating
proteins and polysaccharides in vaccines is not
associated with risk of autism
DeStefano F, Price CS, Weintraub ES.
Journal of Pediatrics. 2013;
On-time Vaccine Receipt in the First Year Does Not Adversely Affect Neuropsychological Outcomes
Smith M and Woods C, Pediatrics. 2010;
125(6): 1134-41
Measles-Containing Vaccines and Febrile Seizures in Children Age 4 to 6 Years
Klein N, et al., Pediatrics. 2011; 129(5): 809-14
No Evidence for Measles, Mumps, and Rubella Vaccine-Associated Inflammatory Bowel Disease or Autism in a 14-year Prospective Study
Peltola H, et al., Lancet. 1998; 351:1327-8
Mumps, Measles, and Rubella Vaccine and the Incidence of Autism Recorded by General Practitioners: A Time Trend Analysis
Kaye JA, et al., British Medical Journal. 2001; 322:460-63
MMR and autism: further evidence against a causal association
Farrington CP, et al., Vaccine. 2001; Jun 14; 19(27): 3632-5
There are more, but I do not want to overwhelm you. I’d be more than happy to discuss further any questions you may have on any of these (or other) studies you come across.
Please let me know if you would like some more
stam a deya
MAybe it was the carseat? Could it just be a coincidence that he was in a car seat?
What would you say if a result your neighbor didnt place his other kids in car seats? What if he convinced others not to put their sons in car seats?
DY my last reply was to vague for my liking here is a direct (tentative response):
Making fun of the anti-vaccine movement – should be done becasue it is not based on hosent mistake and causes harm (Although the movement includes those with tragic circumstances)
making fun of anti-vaccine individuals: if honest mistake- I think making fun is wrong
if its deliberate misleading: If harm can result absolutly make fun
If harmless, I wouldnt in tragic circumstances
Hope that helps. I am not writing this in stone though
DY
Good question.
Honestly I am not sure. If it was deliberate misleading, given the consequences that can and have resulted, I think I would make fun of the misleading and dishonesty, obviously never of the terrible situation that person is in. I dont think having judgement clouded is an excuse to threaten other lives, though again I am torn.
For some reason this is a charged topic. So lets use another (hopefully non-controversial) example. A person’s son got hit by a car shortly after davening in shul R”chl. The person is now petitioning the government to ban shuls posting on forum about all the studies proving shuls cause Car accidents etc etc needless to say this person has gone through a terrible tzar that nobody should ever go through. (note avoiding shul isnt as dangerous as avoiding vaccines) I think I would mock the Anti-shul movement, if they refused to listen to evidence and reason. Though I probably would not make fun of the specific person unless he himself was a threat to People going to shul.
Though please note I always address the actual argument.
Please see here: http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/coffeeroom/topic/to-the-people-who-refuse-the-gift-of-vaccines#post-561090
where I asked Owl for evidence of his assertions, of course he never replied.
OWl
The causality they found is with ANAPHALAXIS ie allergic reaction.
They went on to say:
“Additionally, evidence favors rejection of five vaccine-adverse event relationships, including MMR vaccine and autism and inactivated influenza vaccine and asthma episodes. However, for the majority of cases (135 vaccine-adverse event pairs), the evidence was inadequate to accept or reject a causal relationship. Overall, the committee concludes that few health problems are caused by or clearly associated with vaccines.”
I’d like to highlight that entire paragraph, in particular the last line:
“Overall, the committee concludes that few health problems are caused by or clearly associated with vaccines”
From the VERY source you quoted!
Of course you left this out of your post.
Now the question becomes if you DELIBERTLY left off that last line. OR if it was an honest mistake. For an honest mistake, I wouldnt make fun. Now that mistake has been corrected and you know that “Overall, the committee concludes that few health problems are caused by or clearly associated with vaccines”
IF however this was an intentional misleading of the public, given the dire effects that can and have resulted from such dishonest manipulation it is VITAL that you and those like you are made fun of
DY
“That’s correlation. Is there also causation?”
Presumably (though arguably not definitively). This is because there is a understandable/viable mechanism as to how your pressing send causes your post to go up.
The problem is the shoe lobby is too strong. There is tons and tons of research out there proving that shoes cause autism but the government and shoe stores are working together to bury it. Thank you Rebyid for helping spread the word!
Teyereh Health,
Before you repeat yourself over and over without actually answering my questions or responding to my points, please take a second and look up the term “hocking ah cheinek”
We arent talking about agreements involving carpool, babysitting or the buying chinese tea. We are discussing the agreement made by the early Zionsits not to draft the charedim. Stop trying to evade the subject, THAT was the agreement you at first claimed lasted forever, and then when i pointed out how nonsensical that was, you then claimed in response “”I never said “agreements last forever”! Are you now talking about another agreement that isnt the topic of this thread?
Thanks dearest Health, your last point cracked me up while at the same time providing examples of your dishonesty and evading questions:
Earlier you said:
“they made an agreement. Who says they wouldn’t abide by the agreement, even though it’s 2015?” … “Do you think that the US Constitution lasts forever? The agreement from the founding leaders in Israel, called the “status-quo” is like the Constitution!” (both are verbatim from your own words)
So yes if that isnt outright saying that agreements last forever it is certainly implying such
Now you say:”I never said “agreements last forever”! Somehow you think that I implied that.”
🙂
(As an aside, if you (correctly) dont view government agreements as lasting forever, how long do they last? a year? a decade? A generation? until circumstances change? or until overruled by the legislature/court?)
I then asked you
“If the draft gets revoked and R’ S Aurbach supports voting in the next election would that be him changing his mind regarding Zionsim and now viewing the Brisker Rav as wrong?””
Please note that like most of my points pointing out how flawed your “logic” is, you simply ignored it while repeating it as if you were addressing it.
oyoyoy
I’m not sure if the “your” in your post was directed to me. But I am not saying that Yeshivas should have a mandotory nach seder. In actually dont think there is a solution. I am just pointing out a very real problem that exists in our Yeshivas with their single minded focus. Again this doesnt mean the single minded focus is wrong ch”v, it has a flaw but overall MIGHT be the only way to produce bnei Torah.
Keep in mind, once leaving Yeshiva this becomes less of a problem, since outside the daled koslei hayeshiva, people can be celebrated/appreciated for a variety of things even if they arent “cut out for learning” whether it is the baal chesed, succesful in buisness (lav davka ina financial sense, I mean in a way that helps people, though financial sense woks for some people too. ) Or even “merely” raising a nice family, most peopel can and will achieve at least one of these, giving them the sipuk they need. Yeshiva guys have just one thing. Learning, and even that is limited to one mode of learning.
Health more dishonesty. I did explain to you why you’re idea that agreements last forever is absurd, you have yet to respond to that
(“As mentioned before Agreements dont last forever especially when governments are involved. (read the Senator’s leter to Iran for a modern day example)So sorry to have to burst your uninformed bubble (again).”
You then replied with a non-sequitor about R” Shmuel Aurbach and then more non-sequitors about feeling guilty.You never replied to my point. I, of course easily responded to every unrelated point you made, but dont lose track of the original thread)
Now you are shifting gears again, but of course I will patiently explain to you how wrong you still are.
“That was my whole point! A lot of people are starting to see that the Brisker Rov was right about Zionism & Zionists.”
That was not your point!
Let me bring you up to speed since you are having trouble following your own train of thought (again)
You claimed I feel guilty that R’ S Aeurbach now sees the Brisker Rav as right.
I pointed out that this isnt a reason to feel guilty since I am not one of his followers.
You now either a. forgot what your point was or b. are changing it to a new similarly irrelevant point. one which you have been doing this entire thread.
Two other points:
a. R’ S Aurbach can hardly be called “a lot of people” Please see here: http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/news/headlines-breaking-stories/293145/photo-essay-admorim-and-rabbonim-voting-in-eretz-yisroel-on-election-day-2015-photos-by-jdn.html
and here:
b. If the draft gets revoked and R’ S Aurbach supports voting in the next election would that be him changing his mind regarding Zionsim and now viewing the Brisker Rav as wrong?
Catch yourself. I dont want to get caught up int he specifics of one example. bottom line is the gas case is muttar for any number of reasons, not least of which is pikuach nefesh.
I learnt in Ner Yisroel, when I last checked it was the second largest “black hat” yeshiva in america (Waterburry might be overtaking). There is no regular Halacha seder at least that is adhered too. I am not saying there should be, after all there isnt a chumash seder either, obviously that doent make it unimportant ch”v.
The bottom line is mainstream Yeshivas do not place a chashivis (or emphasis) on pactical halacha. I am not saying this is wrong or even a problem per se, but this is certainly the case.
What I do think is a problem, which is what i understood the OP as saying, is that as a result of the deemphasis of practical halacha, bekiyus, Nach and other limuddim, those who are not cut out for iyun are made to feel inadequate. Nobodody wants to feel inadaquate. Similarly those who are not cut out for learning at all, but have other kochos, be it music sports art etc are not appreciated for their strengths either. Obviously this does not mean Yeshivas should introduce Art, or music Sedorim. i am just pointing out a very real problem with no obvious solution or perhaps no solution at all.
catch yourself IF its Kli shemelochto lissur, it would be mutar to shut it litzorech gufo, to prevent foul odor.
Thank you for highligting the lack of practical halach learning in “mainstream yeshivas”, though I think that is secondary to the OP’s point
Um everybody would. It depends who he was running against.
APY The start of your last post is spot on up until here:
“but you can not say “the food that person certifies is not kosher”. The more private an individual the better chance they have at a successful defamation suit.”
This part contradicts your first few lines
In order for the court to determine whether the defendant’s saying “the food that person certifies is not kosher” is defamation or not the court would – by definition- have to get involved “in determining if the shulchan aruch and nosei keilim or lihavdil the jts handbook on kashrus is what determines kosher.” Which as you correctly start out saying, they will not do. There is zero chance of a successful defamation lawsuit much as if you sue me for saying your Eruv, or Mikvah arent kosher
Health
“The Truth hurts – doesn’t it? The Herzl Zionists were better than nowadays Zionists [- the “Religious Zionists” which are Biyet Hayehudi (NRP – Mizrachi)]! “
As explained to you it isnt the truth. You are dishonest.
“Over the fact that even R’ S. Auerbach was angry at the last gov.!”
Nope I’m not one of his followers, never was. It is no different than the Satmar’ Rav Shita. I didnt feel guilty then I dont feel guilty now.
APY it is not defamation if it is true even they were damaged by the remarks.
For example if I say John is a molester, he sues me becasue now his child care he runs in his basement is suffering. If it turns out he is a molester, I am not liable even if his business suffers. In order to determine liabilities the court will decide if my remarks were true.
Now on to kashrus
If I say Shirley’s organization is unrelaible and her “hechsher” business suffers. In order to be found liable the court would have to determine if I am right or not. However, as you correctly pointed out, “The law will not decide whose standard of kashrus is correct ” Therfore the case will get thrown out even if her business suffers since the court can not determine whose interpretation of Kashrus is correct.
This isnt limited to kashrus. If I say a mikva isnt kosher would be the same thing
Any specefic (recent) case you can cite that says anything different?
(In the old days there were laws protecting Kosher. Kosher was determined to be only by orthodox standards. Then (not anymore in NY) the opposite of what you say could occur, since I could ahve sued Shirley for claiming to be Kosher when she wasn not by orthodox standards. But this is moot today)
“Have no idea how things work over there, to me it would seem even a bit shallow that the “whole of Klal Yisroel” is mixed into these things. No? “
Shallow? Absolutely not. Events that involve/concern litterally millions of Yidden can not be called shallow