Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
It is very common for people with Jewish fathers or whose mother or mother’s mother had a Jewish father and a non-Jewish mother as well as those who descend from “converts” done by Reform and Conservative “rabbis” (or adoptees of Conservative and Reform families) to think they are fully Jewish without for a second doubting their Jewishness. And then meet up with a kiruv professional who accepts their alleged Jewishness for granted without ever realizing they are halachicly Goyim. And some of these non-Jews who think they are Jewish r”l integrate into an Orthodox community and marry (or their children marry) within the Orthodox world.
The above is in chut la’aretz. In Eretz Yisroel the problem is many of the fake converts who never kept a single Shabbos in their lives (mostly Russian and Ethiopian but others as well) done by en masse by the rabbanut are mistakenly assumed to have a valid conversion and r”l intermarry with real Jews.
Philosopher pointed out that many of those who claim to be Jews but not religious are actually halachicly gentiles and not Jews.
It’s definitely Moshiach’s tzeiten when RY23, Philosopher and Avi K all agree with me.
Charlie: Clinton and Kennedy were more immoral.
Non-Jews like Hitler remain in gehenim forever. He is still burning a horrendous hell every split second over and over again.
Agreed!
OP: Is this the first time we’ve agreed on something?
You’re welcome!
AJ:
1. Incorrect. Their opposition was not out of fear of a flood of cases materializing but rather because even one case can bankrupt an institution. For something allegedly that occurred 50 years ago, or 60 or 30, under completely different faculty and students that are long gone. Even a false case can be won, as TLIK explained.
2. Because even one incident in 25 years is one incident too many.
“However, there are instances where people were wrongly accused of abuse. This is a very sensitive topic of dinai nefashos”
Excellent point. This is a *fact* that the vast majority of abuse “advocates” refuse to acknowledge and generally are in complete denial about.
“I am not certain but am pretty sure the suit is not against institutions that have all new administrations.”
Syag, you are factually and legally incorrect. New administration or not has absolutely no bearing on the ability for the institution to be sued under the new law. Whether it allegedly occurred 60 years ago, 40 years ago or 10 years ago.
KlugerYid:
1. The plaintiff victims are suing the institutions, i.e. the yeshivos, not the individual abusers. There’s no big money to get from the individual abuser and no lawyer will waste his time suing an abuser who won’t be able to pay the judgement anyways. The big money is at the institutions. So they’ll sue the school into bankruptcy. For something that allegedly happened 40 years ago under a different administration, faculty and student body. And the victims will be the kinderlach in the school today who will lose their school.
2. It is assur to sue in arkois.
Milhouse: Beis Din didn’t order him to give a Get, in the description of the case given. Additionally, even had they done so, they’d have to additionally rule that utilizing Goyim is permissible, otherwise it still results in a Get Me’usa. Furthermore, even if the husband is merely pressured to give a Get outside the authorization of Beis Din, and not forced to, it results in a Get Me’usa. All of this is delineated in Shulchan Aruch. The preceding is all true even if he signed a contract “I will give a Get” and doesn’t do so, followed by a secular court “merely enforcing the contract”.
The most tzniusdik and yiddishe and traditional and holiest job is that of wife, mother and housewife.
I had a husband who refused to make the appointment for the Get as agreed in the Civil Divorce (I represented the wife) I hauled him back before the divorce judge on a contempt motion. The judge told him that if the terms of the divorce were not complied with the now ex-husband would be held in contempt, fined and jailed. The judge did not consider this a religious issue which could violate First Amendment rights, but a contract issue. The Get was just one required step for which there had been an offer, acceptance and consideration making the contract biinding on the parties. The appointment for a Get was made within 48 hours and one issued in 10 days.
CTL: I pray this wife who was your client didn’t remarry and certainly didn’t have more children. As the scenario you just described unquestionably, lchol hadeios, constitutes a Get Me’usa, an invalid Get under Halacha as clearly described in Shulchan Aruch. Leaving her remaining married to her first husband. As such and future offspring are illegitimate in the eyes of Jewish Law.
TLIK: A Get requires neither a rabbi nor a Beis Din. All a Get requires is a Sofer and two eidim.
Does your wife agree with you and she wants a Get?
“Their filing has little or nothing to do with money.”
Whose filing? Anyone filing a lawsuit under the look-back provision of the new law is *only* demanding money from the defendents. Nothing more and nothing less.
It seems to me (I may be wrong) that Chabad is by far the largest successful recruiter of baalei teshuva these days.
I donโt think itโs usually the money theyโre after.
This new law (the lookback window for cases that are many many decades old) is all about the money. And only about the money.
What took you so long?
Irrelevant. Seeking financial compensation through a non-Jewish court based on non-Jewish laws are strictly and severely prohibited by Jewish law.
“We” have a Torah and Halacha. That is what guides us. That is all that guides us. The laws created by the gentiles is inapplicable in how we Jews govern ourselves in our interpersonal relations, including financial compensation and/or courts which render such judgements.
Also, which part of a woman wanting to feel โlike Cinderellaโ is inherently not โYiddish or right.โ
Please tell me your kidding when asking that question.
Joseph, wearing any lavish party dress and shoes at work or when shopping will cause heads to turn, it doesnโt particularly have to be gown length.
And if a bunch of your neighbors and friends from the bungalow colony showed up to your chasuna in lavish party dresses or gowns that is better? It will turn the same heads you refer to. Just because they’re family doesn’t make heads not turn. (To use your terminology.)
AJ: Stop being motzi shem ra holy Jewish mosdos. The problem has always been a tiny one confined to a very small number of places and individuals. Over the last 75 years there were not more than a few handful of real cases.
Aside from the above point, even if there were hundreds of cases, that it irrelevent to the issur gamur of using arkois. Do you have even the slightest inkling of the severity of the issur of arkois?
And as was pointed out, the non-Jewish courts are full of corruption and injustices. It is a travesty for any cases to be put to the whims of potentially 12 homeless drunkard jurors who can get selected from the lowest dredges of society.
Why isn’t a simple smartphone with the appropriate app sufficient without the above gadgets?
Only if the citizen puts into irrevocable escrow 10 years worth of living expenses, at the current cost of living in New York, for the immigrant and his entire family.
Mammele: Thank you for explaining it well.
Would anyone not agree that if a woman showed up to work in an office or supermarket in a gown, that is a gross violation of tznius.
AJ: I have no idea about the background of the Williamsburg lawsuit you and Syag refer to but the only time it is permissible to engage in arkois is when a Beis Din first issues a Heter Arkois. That’s generally only possible if the other party failed to respond to a B”D hazmana. Presumably this is what occurred in that case.
Nevertheless, the idea that a Jew may civilly sue another Jew in non-Jewish courts without first seeking to resolve the case in Beis Din has no basis in Halacha and is unquestionably prohibited m’doraisa. So the idea that it is okay to initiate a lawsuit in secular court clearly indicates that person is irreligious/non-Orthodox even if they claim otherwise, no less so than if they eat pork.
Anyone who supports the use of arkois in a civil lawsuit by a Jew against other Jews, cannot be considered to be religious or Orthodox or a Ben/Bas Torah.
Phil wouldn’t judge a woman wearing a miniskirt to a wedding either. He’d be admonishing everyone speaking out against pritzus that that it’s totally kosher to choose such a skirt.
Syag: It would be bad because suing for financial compensation in secular court is assur al pi Torah lchol hadeios as arkois.
laughing: I agree with you but the main problem is that it isn’t tznius for family members to go in a gown.
I would just repeal the Second Amendment.
I have been there. Why haven’t you questioned the assertion that GG-L is the busiest?
The women can learn from the men who have no problem whatever wearing the same suit to five consecutive weddings. Or even every Shabbos.
Moishe: KRM is the country’s busiest kosher supermarket.
Is a ืืื on a higher madreiga than a ืืฉืจืื? Yes. Inherently.
If it is okay to say yes to the above question, why should you shy away from answering Yes to the equivalent question of whether a man is inherently on a higher madreiga than a woman?
That’s the point Coffee Addict was making.
No, you shouldn’t expect to see or feel stars and dazzles in your future spouse.
It should be discontinued because it isn’t tzniusdik.
How well is GG doing in Lakewood?
The net effect of anyoneโs specific presence in the elevator is negligible.
Define “negligible” in this context.
The attitudes and thought habits characteristic of the learning tradition are as evident in the street and market place as the yeshiva. The popular picture of the Jew in Eastern Europe, held by Jew and Gentile alike, is true to the Talmudic tradition. The picture includes the tendency to examine, analyze and re-analyze, to seek meanings behind meanings and for implications and secondary consequences. It includes also a dependence on deductive logic as a basis for practical conclusions and actions. In life, as in the Torah, it is assumed that everything has deeper and secondary meanings, which must be probed. All subjects have implications and ramifications. Moreover, the person who makes a statement must have a reason, and this too must be probed. Often a comment will evoke an answer to the assumed reason behind it or to the meaning believed to lie beneath it, or to the remote consequences to which it leads. The process that produces such a responseโoften with lightning speedโis a modest reproduction of the pilpul process.
Life is With People: The Culture of the Shtetl by Mark Zborowski and Elizabeth Herzog. 1962 edition.
You think it is okay to take a train on Shabbos?
philosopher, women are scared of bears? You’re confusing me with Batman or someone. I’ve never made any comments about women and bears. Are you sure you didn’t see that comment on another site?
Regarding your statement that “we can argue with your interpretation of daas”, I answer absolutely! And I’m more than willing to entertain any argument you proffer. But so far you’ve only objected to the mere idea of discussing this Chazal, as it it is somehow verboten to even discuss.
Indeed I’ll take up your offer to have a discussion on the differences between men and women’s intellectual abilities by again asking for your interpretation of Rambam’s statement of โืฉืจืื ืื ืฉืื ืืื ืืขืชื ืืืืื ืช ืืืชืืื. ืืื ืื ืืืฆืืืืช ืืืจื ืชืืจื ืืืืจื ืืืื ืืคื ืขื ืืืช ืืขืชื.โ (“most women have no set mind to be instructed on studies, but, on the contrary, are apt to divert matters of the Torah to nonsensical matters.”)
Coffee Addict: What did that Mishpacha article advocate?
As to the argument a few posters made that there’s no cognitive or intellectual differences between men and women, explain ืืฉื ื ืชืืจื ืืืืืช ืชืืืื ืชืืจื ื:ืื where the Rambam states “ืฉืจืื ืื ืฉืื ืืื ืืขืชื ืืืืื ืช ืืืชืืื. ืืื ืื ืืืฆืืืืช ืืืจื ืชืืจื ืืืืจื ืืืื ืืคื ืขื ืืืช ืืขืชื.”
Syag, There have been older threads than this revived. If a six year old cholent recipe thread was bounced, would you also have gotten all bent out of shape? Of course not. It was only because you didn’t like the topic of this Chazal that you are behaving the way you are.
It may be that the reason many people cry the hardest during the kinnos written by the Gedolim who survived the holocaust and wrote the kinnus on the Churban Europe in the post-WWII period (Rav Michael Dov Weissmandel, Bobover Rebbe, Rav Shimon Schwab, etc.) is because we are able to most identify with the Gedolim we saw with out own eyes and the survivors who are our grandparents and the victims who are our great-grandparents and great uncles and aunts.