Chortkov

Nowadays, anyone who disagrees with you isn’t just different or misguided, they are a bad person who must be ostracized/destroyed. Thoughts?

Okay, I’ll bite.

When it comes to opinions or taste, acceptance and tolerance are the keywords. You have no right to impose your views on anyone else, and while you don’t have to respect other people’s views, you do have to accept that he has the rights to his own opinion.

When it comes to morality, religion and anything with a universal truth, this is not the case. While you can’t judge, and you certainly can’t blame, you don’t have to – and often musn’t – accept or tolerate. If anyone is doing something which contravenes Halachah or contravenes Rotzon Hashem, you have every right to condemn the action, and in many cases (for a whole host of reasons) an obligation to protest. In these inyanim, there is no “mind your own business”, there no “live and let live”, and certainly no “respecting his opinion”.

Must they be “ostracized/destroyed”? That obviously depends. Every situation needs to be weighed individually. There are almost always disadvantages and collateral damage by ostracizing and destroying. Sometimes you have to do it anyway. Sometimes you will lose more than you’re gonna gain.

I guess that first question you need to answer – are you discussing a mix in the student body, or a mix in the style of Yeshiva’s running?

What do you call a good yeshiva, and what do you consider Chassidish?

Novominsk is quite a balance, if I understand correctly, although primarily Litvish.
Gateshead (England) has a lot of both.
Lakewood Mesivta? (I don’t know much about them, but I know a few Litivshe bochorim from there and a few Chassidishe bochurim from the same place, and I’ve heard the chassidim are well integrated there)

Joseph and Yekke2 are both right so maybe the Chassidish way is better – just meet in the parents or the shadchan’s home. No deciding where to go etc and the girl is not expected to arrive as though she is a film star.

I dunno what you think I said, but I definitely didn’t agree with Joseph.

Its normally quite easy to see what reaction you’re trying to elicit, but I’m not sure what response you looking for here.

I’m assuming every Talmud Torah in Gateshead isn’t mentioning homosexuality in any way, shape, or form.

Of course they don’t. However, a lot of the failing is due to the reactions of the children selected during the inspection, and it is likely that in most frum schools – at least in the high schools – there are children who are exposed to the concept of same sex marriage on some level. Depending on the child’s initiative, the answers can vary in standards and can often reach the pass level even without being taught. Viznitz, however, would be blatantly clear that the children do not know of or support homosexual marriage.

I know, thank you.

Not all categories have topics readily available without searching… I guess googling it would work, though…

The Automobile, Trains , Printing Press and other inventions did more damage for Yiddishkeit than the smartphone could ever do

If you define “damage to Yiddishkeit” as the unraveling of Yiras Shamayim or as facilitating and causing people to be oiver more issurim than they would without it, then your claim is nonsense.

I wonder how you define “damage to Yiddishkeit”.

It is very much part of Torah Mi’Sinai. You’ll see all over Torah Shebichsav uses of nouns in either masculine or feminine. Some nouns have dual forms, as Rashi al haTorah points out (is it in Chayei Soroh? Can’t remember).

Yekke2 what do you mean by this “There is shame, however, in having mental disorders.” how so if someone is born with a heart disorder how is that different from being born with a mental disorder?

Embarrassment is nothing to do with being fault or blame. Embarrassment is about perception. And people perceive mental disorders different to heart disorders.

There is no shame in going to therapy. There is certainly no shame in being healed. There is shame, however, in having mental disorders.

I’ve rarely seen people judging someone because he has a sore leg. Mental disorder, however, will change the way people interact with you, one way or another. It is obviously more private.

Having said that, I once heard from a kid in Yeshiva that his therapist told him that it doesn’t matter that monsters come out from under his bed at night. I thought it funny that his therapist didn’t tell him there were no monsters, or at least that they don’t come out at night. Someone asked him who his therapist was, and he said “I’m not saying, it’s private.”

That’s open for you!!

The world get confused between Human rights and human privileges.

All humans have rights to live, and to live like mentches. So any form of racial distinction is both illogical and morally wrong. Youre right to live grants you rights to live where you want, to travel on the same buses, to visit the same parks, and to marry whomever you want.

Your right to live does not, however, grant you the ability to make decisions you are not qualified to make. Anything which involves decision making – voting as far as I am concerned is only a minor issue; court jury service is much more problematic – should need basic qualifications to prove you sane, fairly intelligent and of the ability to make decisions.

As far as voting is concerned, this is impossible; in a democracy, we need the voice of the people. If the people are stupid, then their voice may be equally stupid, but it is the voice of the people which counts. If you don’t like that, do away with democracy.

When it comes to decisions in courts, where a jury can decide “guilty” or “innocent” just because the defendant looks sinister or because the alleged victim has a cute smile, no human with a conscience and a sane mind should allow half the country to decide the fate of another person with such impunity.

If one is to be deemed by the state as adult, then that person should no longer be bound by laws that discriminate by age.

Isn’t that a bit of an oxymoron to say that you can only discriminate against children by age?

I simply believe that should be the definition of an adult. If that age is deemed to be 21, then so be it. But I don’t believe the state should be allowed to tell some of its subjects that they are not yet responsible enough for a particular activity.

I can hear a case for the law not interfering in people’s personal danger zones, but that case would legalize drugs. If you agree with the state using legislation to protect it’s citizens, then why wouldn’t you understand an age where things become legal?

To take this argument to its logical conclusion, if there were a scientific, peer-reviewed, double-blind study showing that people aged 40-46 are 32% more likely to be involved in an automobile accident, would there be a case from restricting the right to drive for people in that age bracket?

Driving is the one thing which is logical to restrict; people more likely to cause accidents are more likely to kill others. This isn’t protecting people from themselves, this is stopping them harming the public. This is like restricting guns. The way you present it, is requiring drivers to pass some form of test to prove their driving capability wrong?

I would argue certainly not, and ages 18-21 should be no different, unless we legally consider them children.

How do you justify monitoring children?

As for the army, halachically it should be 20-60 although one rav suggested that 18 is a horaat shaah.

Hora’at Sha’ah. Lol.

The Chofetz Chaim once sent someone (I’m pretty sure it was R’ Elchonon, but not positive) collecting, with the mission to raise 50,000 rubles (Insert your own denomination here). The emissary went on his bidding, and tried his hardest to raise the money – to no avail. He returned empty handed to the Chofetz Chaim. As he came in, a rich man entered and gave the C”C 50,000 rubles – the exact amount they needed. Disheartened at the waste of time and energy, he complained to the Chofetz Chaim.

The Chofetz Chaim explained that all hishtadlus is like that – our obligation is to perform the token effort necessary to achieve the results – and then Hashem gives what you need, which is totally unrelated to the actual effort. The results are not consequences of the efforts.

This is the huge nisayon of Hishtadlus – to be able to see through the smokescreen of hester and dispell the illusion of כחי ועצם ידי – the feeling of success when your efforts succeed – and see that everything comes from Hashem, no matter how hard or little you try.

An aveira b’shogeg or b’oneis can still happen (not necessarily piggul), i. e. a person would probably still be able to accidentally hit a light switch on shabbos.

Shogeg is defined by transgressing a prohibition without knowledge – either you didn’t know it was forbidden, or you didn’t know that the circumstances involved a prohibition. Eg, you thought it was permitted to switch on a light on Shabbos, or that it wasn’t Shabbos.

Accidentally hitting a light switch isn’t a שוגג, it is מתעסק. You are unaware of the action you are doing. The Achronim debate the exact halachic status of מתעסק, but many consider it (at least on Shabbos, where you need מלאכת מחשבת) not to be a transgression at all. According to plenty of Poskim, if you see someone leaning against the wall about to hit a light switch unawares, you do not need to stop him.