JTF.ORG Forum
General Category => General Discussion => Topic started by: mord on November 04, 2010, 07:32:15 AM
-
now 2 conservatives in the house :) and 3 leftist gays the only openly gays in the house are Jews :o >:(
-
A major reason why Nan Hayworth was able to defeat Democrat Incumbent John Hall is that Hayworth had comparable campaign funds. Most Republican Challengers in New York were at a huge disadvantage in terms of campaign funds:
http://www.opensecrets.org/races/summary.php?id=NY19&cycle=2010
-
now 2 conservatives in the house :) and 3 leftist gays the only openly gays in the house are Jews :o >:(
I dont know how anyone with a brain could have voted for that absolute horror, Barney Frank, YSV. I mean this animal precipitated the housing crisis by forcing Banks to give loans to unqualified persons.
-
Nice!
-
בס''ד
A "Jew"?
She was born and raised as a Gentile Lutheran but intermarried with a Jew. So she now calls herself a "Jew by choice". What makes her Jewish? Nothing, she just decided to call herself "Jewish" after intermarrying with an assimilated Jew.
My position is that I always oppose the Jewish candidate because Jews are not allowed to live in the Galut (Exile), and so they certainly are not allowed to serve in political office outside of Israel. Jews getting elected to political office is a chillul Hashem (defiling of G-d's name).
In this case, we see someone who is the ultimate symbol of what has happened to the assimilated, intermarried, self-hating Jews of the Galut.
-
Is she of any relation to J.D. Hayworth?
-
בס''ד
A "Jew"?
She was born and raised as a Gentile Lutheran but intermarried with a Jew. So she now calls herself a "Jew by choice". What makes her Jewish? Nothing, she just decided to call herself "Jewish" after intermarrying with an assimilated Jew.
My position is that I always oppose the Jewish candidate because Jews are not allowed to live in the Galut (Exile), and so they certainly are not allowed to serve in political office outside of Israel. Jews getting elected to political office is a chillul Hashem (defiling of G-d's name).
In this case, we see someone who is the ultimate symbol of what has happened to the assimilated, intermarried, self-hating Jews of the Galut.
Chaim,
I understand your position and I agree. But I have not heard your explanation of the case of Joseph HaTzadik. Joseph was sold into slavery in Mitzrayim and through his ability to interpret the dreams of Pharoah he became the SECOND MOST POWERFUL ruler in the land of Egypt. In this case it seems that the Torah allows the Jew to have political power in Galut.
-
now 2 conservatives in the house :) and 3 leftist gays the only openly gays in the house are Jews :o >:(
I dont know how anyone with a brain could have voted for that absolute horror, Barney Frank, YSV. I mean this animal precipitated the housing crisis by forcing Banks to give loans to unqualified persons.
Frank must have one h-ll of a radical constituency ... I would have thought he was finished...The filthy story twister really has managed to deflect most of his problems on to the former Bush Administration while all the while he and his wife over at Fannie Mae were at the root of the evil..
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,432501,00.html
-
Good grief, I can't believe I voted for a person who pretends to be Jewish! Well, on the bright side, at least I didn't vote for a Jew.
-
בס''ד
A "Jew"?
She was born and raised as a Gentile Lutheran but intermarried with a Jew. So she now calls herself a "Jew by choice". What makes her Jewish? Nothing, she just decided to call herself "Jewish" after intermarrying with an assimilated Jew.
My position is that I always oppose the Jewish candidate because Jews are not allowed to live in the Galut (Exile), and so they certainly are not allowed to serve in political office outside of Israel. Jews getting elected to political office is a chillul Hashem (defiling of G-d's name).
In this case, we see someone who is the ultimate symbol of what has happened to the assimilated, intermarried, self-hating Jews of the Galut.
Chaim,
I understand your position and I agree. But I have not heard your explanation of the case of Joseph HaTzadik. Joseph was sold into slavery in Mitzrayim and through his ability to interpret the dreams of Pharoah he became the SECOND MOST POWERFUL ruler in the land of Egypt. In this case it seems that the Torah allows the Jew to have political power in Galut.
Also during the Babylonian exile, Daniel was in a very powerful position, even after the Jews returned to Israel.
So was Mordecai. And...well... Esther. I don't think that's the point, however.
-
I was hoping that J.D. Hayworth would beat McCain. McCain doesn't really count as a republican.
-
I was hoping that J.D. Hayworth would beat McCain. McCain doesn't really count as a republican.
The real nail in his coffin was when that slut Sarah Palin supported her slut ticket mate McCain.
-
I did some research on Nan Hayworth's Jewish background. Apparently, she's a member of 'Temple Shaaray Tefila of Northern Westchester' ,
"A Reform Congregation with a traditional soul" . This is a concern:
http://www.shaaraytefila.org/
http://www.mhvperspective.com/?AllLtrs=2010-09-10#20100910903
Hayworth is strong supporter of Israel
Nan Hayworth is running for Congress in the 19th Congressional District. She is a strong supporter of Israel. She believes in Israel's right to exist as a Jewish state and also believes that the Arab states and Iran must renounce violence and terrorism before peace can be achieved in the region.
As a member of Congress, Nan Hayworth will support Israel as our ally and only democracy in the region. She will uphold Israel's right to defend itself against terrorism and their state sponsors.
Nan Hayworth feels that the U.S should act decisively to prevent Iran from further developing nuclear weapons. Her political beliefs are enhanced by her strong religious faith. Nan Hayworth was born and raised in the Lutheran faith, her husband is Jewish and their two sons were raised in the Jewish religion. They are members of Temple Shaaray Tefila in Bedford Corners.
Nan Hayworth has the political knowledge and the strong political beliefs to make decisions on legislation in Congress which will protect and be in the best interests of both the U.S. and Israel.
Edward Dubin and Linda Dubin
Florida
N.Y.
-
leftist gay jews? that's an oxymoron, those are no Jews.
-
This lady sounds like another pseudo-rightist joke, another Sarah Palin or Michelle Bachmann.
-
בס''ד
A "Jew"?
She was born and raised as a Gentile Lutheran but intermarried with a Jew. So she now calls herself a "Jew by choice". What makes her Jewish? Nothing, she just decided to call herself "Jewish" after intermarrying with an assimilated Jew.
My position is that I always oppose the Jewish candidate because Jews are not allowed to live in the Galut (Exile), and so they certainly are not allowed to serve in political office outside of Israel. Jews getting elected to political office is a chillul Hashem (defiling of G-d's name).
In this case, we see someone who is the ultimate symbol of what has happened to the assimilated, intermarried, self-hating Jews of the Galut.
Chaim,
I understand your position and I agree. But I have not heard your explanation of the case of Joseph HaTzadik. Joseph was sold into slavery in Mitzrayim and through his ability to interpret the dreams of Pharoah he became the SECOND MOST POWERFUL ruler in the land of Egypt. In this case it seems that the Torah allows the Jew to have political power in Galut.
Muman,
I'm going to try to answer this with something my rabbi mentioned about women rabbis. According to him, a Rabbi is not defined directly in the torah, however, Smicha equates to a respectable level of leadership for people to follow. Traditionally women did not hold this type of responsibility, however, exceptions did exist.
Since a Rabbi is not defined in the torah, it would hypothetically not violate any torah laws for a woman to achieve genuine(not the fake type) smicha, however, it would show great disrespect towards traditions which Jewish faith is based on. For a woman to become a real Rabbi, Hashem would have to decide he wanted her to be and that would have to come from a prophet.
Given that orthodox Jews do run for office here, I am assuming that this is a similar scenario. Hashem wanted Joseph rule in Galut and that is why he did.
-
Why do some women insist on wearing yarmulkes? I used to think this was a lesbian thing, but lately I see many women with long hair, holding hands with their bfs/husbands sporting a male kippah. Can someone explain this phenomenon with some substance or knowledge of this phenomenon?
-
בס''ד
A "Jew"?
She was born and raised as a Gentile Lutheran but intermarried with a Jew. So she now calls herself a "Jew by choice". What makes her Jewish? Nothing, she just decided to call herself "Jewish" after intermarrying with an assimilated Jew.
My position is that I always oppose the Jewish candidate because Jews are not allowed to live in the Galut (Exile), and so they certainly are not allowed to serve in political office outside of Israel. Jews getting elected to political office is a chillul Hashem (defiling of G-d's name).
In this case, we see someone who is the ultimate symbol of what has happened to the assimilated, intermarried, self-hating Jews of the Galut.
Chaim,
I understand your position and I agree. But I have not heard your explanation of the case of Joseph HaTzadik. Joseph was sold into slavery in Mitzrayim and through his ability to interpret the dreams of Pharoah he became the SECOND MOST POWERFUL ruler in the land of Egypt. In this case it seems that the Torah allows the Jew to have political power in Galut.
Muman,
I'm going to try to answer this with something my rabbi mentioned about women rabbis. According to him, a Rabbi is not defined directly in the torah, however, Smicha equates to a respectable level of leadership for people to follow. Traditionally women did not hold this type of responsibility, however, exceptions did exist.
Since a Rabbi is not defined in the torah, it would hypothetically not violate any torah laws for a woman to achieve genuine(not the fake type) smicha, however, it would show great disrespect towards traditions which Jewish faith is based on. For a woman to become a real Rabbi, Hashem would have to decide he wanted her to be and that would have to come from a prophet.
Given that orthodox Jews do run for office here, I am assuming that this is a similar scenario. Hashem wanted Joseph rule in Galut and that is why he did.
First of all, no one has REAL smicha today. But for the rabinical smicha that is available today, women are not eligible. The reason is that the halacha forbids women to be rabbis. So saying it "disrespects tradition" is a gross understatement. It is something that is forbidden. You are trying to grant legitimacy to an illegal act. This is similar to the Shabtai Tzvi heresy. You cannot excuse an avera by saying that God willed for that to happen. We have free choice and that underlies all of Judaism.
Is your rabbi by any chance R. Avi Weiss? He is the one who tried to break halacha to appoint a woman rabbi and even he admits that it is not permitted! Rabbi Saul Lieberman was against it. Rabbi HaLivni is against it. Even the most leftwing and open-minded of liberal Orthodox rabbis is against breaking halacha in this manner!
-
Why do some women insist on wearing yarmulkes? I used to think this was a lesbian thing, but lately I see many women with long hair, holding hands with their bfs/husbands sporting a male kippah. Can someone explain this phenomenon with some substance or knowledge of this phenomenon?
Totally agree - It's insane! Like men wearing dresses.
-
Btw I asked Chaim in Ask JTF this week about this issue of Jews running for office in galuth.
-
First of all, no one has REAL smicha today. But for the rabinical smicha that is available today, women are not eligible. The reason is that the halacha forbids women to be rabbis. So saying it "disrespects tradition" is a gross understatement. It is something that is forbidden. You are trying to grant legitimacy to an illegal act.
There is no need to attack me because you disagree. Especially when I'm commenting on what I heard from my rabbi. If I'm wrong, just prove me wrong and I will respect your torah knowledge.
I'm in no way granting legitimacy to the disgusting acts that the conservative and deformed practice. I'm not degrading tradition either. By no means can anyone, including men just call themselves a Rabbi without the proper training and practice. Proper training and practice for a women does not exist and probably never will, however, that is a decision that Hashem can make.
The point that I was making is that Hashem can establish laws through tradition with some flexibility to make exceptions under extraordinary conditions. A woman could have a role of leadership that goes far beyond what is expected from a woman. Whether that equates to her being a "Rabbi" is a different question, but Jewish history does have many cases of matriarchs. What I was saying is that this might apply to Jews holding office outside of Israel.
When you say halacha forbids women to be rabbis, are you referring to the "tradition" component or do you have a specific text to refer to?
-
Why are two good, religious Jews fighting?
-
Why are two good, religious Jews fighting?
I didn't think we were fighting. We can't have a conversation ?
-
First of all, no one has REAL smicha today. But for the rabinical smicha that is available today, women are not eligible. The reason is that the halacha forbids women to be rabbis. So saying it "disrespects tradition" is a gross understatement. It is something that is forbidden. You are trying to grant legitimacy to an illegal act.
There is no need to attack me because you disagree.
I really didn't intend an attack at all. Perhaps my disagreement is really with your rabbi and not with you in particular. I'm attacking the idea of the "woman rabbi."
I'm in no way granting legitimacy to the disgusting acts that the conservative and deformed practice.
I hear that. On the other hand, this is one of their innovations that has been copied by some supposedly Orthodox rabbis (or actually, one supposedly orthodox rabbi). Not saying that their innovations are always wrong by default, but the halacha in this case is against it.
I'm not degrading tradition either.
No, I did not think you were. When I said " saying it 'disrespects tradition' is a gross understatement" - I was referring to what you had said:
"Since a Rabbi is not defined in the torah, it would hypothetically not violate any torah laws for a woman to achieve genuine(not the fake type) smicha, however, it would show great disrespect towards traditions which Jewish faith is based on."
So I'm just saying it's even more than a disregard for tradition, it's actually discarding the halacha too.
By no means can anyone, including men just call themselves a Rabbi without the proper training and practice. Proper training and practice for a women does not exist and probably never will, however, that is a decision that Hashem can make.
I guess this part is really what I don't get. How can Hashem decide that? Hasn't our law already been decided by Hashem and the sages who interpreted it?
A woman could have a role of leadership that goes far beyond what is expected from a woman.
This I don't disagree with at all. Women can definitely take on major roles in the community and even quasi-rabbinic role, but simply not a rabbi.
Whether that equates to her being a "Rabbi" is a different question, but Jewish history does have many cases of matriarchs. What I was saying is that this might apply to Jews holding office outside of Israel.
No one said women can't be leaders or have leadership positions. I fail to understand any parallel with the question of Jews holding office in galut though.
When you say halacha forbids women to be rabbis, are you referring to the "tradition" component or do you have a specific text to refer to?
There is a Jewish law, dealing with qualifications for a "dayan" (a rabbinical judge), and one of the laws is that a woman cannot be a dayan. This is in standard halacha. The title and position of "rabbi" today is a type of dayan. So most everyone in the orthodox world draws the simple conclusion from that - a woman can't be a rabbi.
It does not preclude other types of leadership.
But there was a controversy when R. Avi Weiss decided he was going to discard that halacha and elect his "rabbanit" or "maharit" (the 'official' name of his 'woman-rabbi' has changed several times now). The RCA wrote against his decision saying it was beyond the pale. From what I remember, he later admitted that the halacha is against him but he's doing it anyway.
-
Why do some women insist on wearing yarmulkes? I used to think this was a lesbian thing, but lately I see many women with long hair, holding hands with their bfs/husbands sporting a male kippah. Can someone explain this phenomenon with some substance or knowledge of this phenomenon?
Totally agree - It's insane! Like men wearing dresses.
Yes, but I can't even begin to wrap my head around why a heterosexual woman would do that. If she were a lesbian, it wouldn't be right, but it might be understandable. This phenomenon is just completely strange to me
-
I guess this part is really what I don't get. How can Hashem decide that? Hasn't our law already been decided by Hashem and the sages who interpreted it?
Hashem knows what the future will be, but we still have free choice so we can merit the mitzvas that we do. With the exception of maybe a few prophets, the sages did not and still do not know what the future will bring. This is why certain laws such as how to handle electricity on Shabbat took time to figure out. Certain traditions such as allowing females to study torah have also changed over time.
I fail to understand any parallel with the question of Jews holding office in galut though.
The point is that if there times when no torah law exists for something, but a right and a wrong thing still exist. In most cases the right thing is clear and consistent, however exceptions from the norm may exists where what is usually the wrong thing to do is actually the right thing. Even though Joseph had ruled in Egypt, it was for Hashem and was the right thing in that case.
-
I guess this part is really what I don't get. How can Hashem decide that? Hasn't our law already been decided by Hashem and the sages who interpreted it?
Hashem knows what the future will be, but we still have free choice so we can merit the mitzvas that we do. With the exception of maybe a few prophets, the sages did not and still do not know what the future will bring. This is why certain laws such as how to handle electricity on Shabbat took time to figure out. Certain traditions such as allowing females to study torah have also changed over time.
I still don't understand what you are saying. Electricity was a new invention. Women have been around since Eve, and they are still here. I never said the sages predicted the future. I did say that they laid out the halacha, and this halacha is pretty crystal clear. A woman cannot serve as a dayan.
I fail to understand any parallel with the question of Jews holding office in galut though.
The point is that if there times when no torah law exists for something, but a right and a wrong thing still exist. In most cases the right thing is clear and consistent, however exceptions from the norm may exists where what is usually the wrong thing to do is actually the right thing. Even though Joseph had ruled in Egypt, it was for Hashem and was the right thing in that case.
[/quote]
But like I said, there DOES exist a law about women not being qualified to be rabbis.
-
I still don't understand what you are saying. Electricity was a new invention. Women have been around since Eve, and they are still here. I never said the sages predicted the future. I did say that they laid out the halacha, and this halacha is pretty crystal clear. A woman cannot serve as a dayan.
But like I said, there DOES exist a law about women not being qualified to be rabbis.
I think that you are stuck too much on my side point about hashem having the ability to appoint a woman as a rabbi. The probability of this happening is much less than 1% and would probably have to be triggered by something major. Such an event probably would not create a floodgate of them either. I am still interested in knowing what text makes the probability 0%, but the main point I wanted to make is that sometimes exceptions to the general rule apply for good reasons, so if you want to claim victory on the woman rabbi point, I can switch my example to hashem asking Abraham to kill his son.
-
I still don't understand what you are saying. Electricity was a new invention. Women have been around since Eve, and they are still here. I never said the sages predicted the future. I did say that they laid out the halacha, and this halacha is pretty crystal clear. A woman cannot serve as a dayan.
But like I said, there DOES exist a law about women not being qualified to be rabbis.
I think that you are stuck too much on my side point about hashem having the ability to appoint a woman as a rabbi. The probability of this happening is much less than 1% and would probably have to be triggered by something major. Such an event probably would not create a floodgate of them either. I am still interested in knowing what text makes the probability 0%, but the main point I wanted to make is that sometimes exceptions to the general rule apply for good reasons, so if you want to claim victory on the woman rabbi point, I can switch my example to hashem asking Abraham to kill his son.
I didn't understand what you meant by Hashem appointing one... You mean after we have prophecy again?
Or a new Sanhedrin?
It's just that some people will claim that when some guy makes up a new title for women and it's a historical innovation, that this is really God doing it behind the scenes. I thought maybe you meant that. That's insane! But I guess that's not what you meant, right?
-
You mean after we have prophecy again?
Yes. That is what would have to happen. Even then, the prophets would probably not appoint any women rabbis. They probably will on the other hand present things that are out of the norm from time to time.
-
You mean after we have prophecy again?
Yes. That is what would have to happen. Even then, the prophets would probably not appoint any women rabbis. They probably will on the other hand present things that are out of the norm from time to time.
I apologize, I may have misunderstood what you were saying. I had thought that your rabbi was trying to say that recent events or if they happen soon it will be a reflection that that's God's will and it was supposed to happen.... I didn't realize you meant he was talking about when prophecy is restored things may change.
Still it's a big discussion whether the halacha would be challenged in that case, but a Sanhedrin according to one view WOULD have that power to overturn halachot and establish new ones (and of course when prophecy is restored we certainly will have a reconstituted sanhedrin, if not before then).