Comments on: Jewish Couple Sue Neighbors For “Imprisoning” Them With Automatic Hallway Light

By: Simone again, sry

Simone again, sry — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 15:40:36 +0000

…Er, that is, the orthodoxy _outside Israel_ feels justifiably alienated. In Israel they’re essentially a protected priest class. The majority of Israelis do not support this, and are getting fed up enough that it will phase out one of these decades.

By: SimoneSiSimonemone

SimoneSiSimonemone — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 15:27:41 +0000

It is fire in halakhic law. That is all that matters definition-wise to a very observant Jew following Shabbat traditions.

By: SimoneSimone

SimoneSimone — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 15:24:50 +0000

….Robert Green, for example, doesn’t grasp that even within its branches and sects within branches, Jewish life varies so tremendously that you can’t really lump our silly fundies in with other kinds of fundies… at least not completely. The Lubavitchers can be treated as one group to a fair extent because of their shared worldview… and in their case, yeah, they’re most assuredly NOT in the world with the rest of us. They’ll be the first to tell you that they do not want to live a secular life. They work together, they still matchmake to a certain extent, they think the rest of us are hedonistic sinners and all that. Same can be said of those asshats who can’t let the Arab natives of Hebron live in peace, and had to whip out their Uzis to “settle” the place, and eventually get removed by the surprisingly sane (in that moment) Israeli army. They killed people purely because Abraham is supposed to have his stupid irrelevant decayed remains in the ground there someplace.

But these are anomalies. Most Orthodox Jews feel justifiably alienated from the rest of society, and have a protectiveness that is sensible in that context. But they still just want to live out their lives without travail, and most of them leave the rest of the world alone to do the same thing. Like Mr Green I find myself vastly annoyed by their disconnection from reality, especially because they are so visible and I feel they misrepresent Jewry as a whole. To be fair though, the vast majority are to a large degree Regular Folks, or at least enough so that they don’t deserve special verbal attacks. Go ahead and pick on them, but you will be a dick if you do, just like you’d be a dick if you made fun of Zoroastrians or ancestor-worship Buddhists or any other religious group simply because they’re “weird” to you. That’s all.

By: Simone

Simone — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 15:09:07 +0000

In the Reform movement, we don’t mess with stuff that constricts our life to this great an extent. But the stuff we DO mess with is often very _culturally_ important. We feel uncomfortable _not_ doing certain things, if we are observant (and in the Reform movement there are roughly eleventy gazillion ways to “observe” one’s religion). A lot of this is upbringing. I grew up with bacon, because my grandparents, and them my mom and brother and I, just loved it too damn much. But other pigstuffs, they’re disgusting and I feel wrong and a littler grossed out if I eat them. So much of this is individualized by person or by family. My guess is that, if they are indeed modern Orthodox (and she appears to be, though that could be an exceptionally natural-looking wig) there are many folks in ther own synagogue who would never bother to make such a fuss.

The point is simply that this is not representative of Judaism, or even their particular level of Orthodoxy, as a whole. It is about them specifically. Just wanted to clarify.

By: Francesc

Francesc — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 10:08:23 +0000

oops, sorry
“It’s also curious that Paul’s vision WHERE -in some way- closer to what he probably had known”
means
“It’s also curious that Paul’s visionS WERE -in some way- closer to what he probably had known”

By: Francesc

Francesc — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 10:06:24 +0000

Sorry JC, I lost your comment.
You are still quoting Paul. Paul is not Jesus. You are not only thrusting the gospels when they say they are goddly inspired and that they are explaining the life of jesus, but you are thrusting the word of a man who said someone came to him in dreams and ordered him to do things, and that someone was Jesus. Would you believe me if I said God appeared to me and he was the noddly FSM? I suppose no, but indeed He appeared to Bobby Henderson in his Truly Form.

The point is still the same: you don’t have any evidence supporting Paul’s claims and Paul contradicts -or at least, he has a very particula interpretaion of- other gospels. Then I should conclude than God is not a very good writer, when he has to send another reinterpretation “only” around 50 years after Jesus.

It’s also curious that Paul’s vision where -in some way- closer to what he probably had known; they are closer to gnosticism. Mmm… maybe God was not only his only influence before writing those letters. But that would be impossible, wouldn’t it?

By: Jabster

Jabster — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 08:51:11 +0000

Do you not understand the phrases “clutching at straws” and “intellectual dishonesty” … this is all you seem to have done. Your whole argument stems from the fact that you believe Jewish law is correctly but as you can’t rationale explain this assertion you have included spurious arguments. You have claimed it’s tyranny, safer, good for your health and could lead to racist behaviour. The fact is that you would never make any of the arguments (as the are all very weak) if it wasn’t for you faith in Jewish law. If you were honest you would admit that.

Oh and using the US legal system as you basis because it’s what your familiar with is just plain arrogant. The situation is not covered by US law as I stated but you seem to have just ignored not fact and carried in. I’ll repeat it took place in the UK — you do realise that the internet is actaully used by more than just Americans don’t you?

By: ma

ma — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 16:45:28 +0000

Do you really not understand the usage of the term “tyrrany of the majority”?

And as I stated earlier, I’m using the US legal system as my basis because it’s what I’m more familiar with. I’d assume things are comparable in the UK, but even if not this case hypothetically could have happened in the US just as easily.

By: Jabster

Jabster — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 05:53:34 +0000

No your point was that this was tyranny when it’s obviously not. Stop trying to make excuses for what you really believe — it’s Jewish law and therefore it’s right however stupid it is. Let’s be honest here, if they were of a different religion you wouldn’t care less.

p.s. Stop saying out legal system unless you live in the UK.

By: ma

ma — Mon, 22 Jun 2009 05:35:13 +0000

Perhaps your particular crossing is especially hazardous, in which case I would not recommend that observant Jews cross it (in such a case their religion would in such a case forbid it!) In my experience, it is usually possible to choose crossings wisely. If people are crossing dangerously, it is not due to misplaced faith but rather missing judgment, a fairly common condition in those of all faiths (or lack thereof).

By: Kodie

Kodie — Mon, 22 Jun 2009 03:41:37 +0000

You’re speculating on the safety of a street crossing you’ve never seen. I guess in places where there are street crossings and Jews who will not push the button on Sabbath, there may be less dangerous and more dangerous crossings. But I have one crossing that I’m talking about, and you’re talking about it like it might not be that bad after all. That’s really nothing you can possibly be an expert about.

The light is green all the time and a regular traffic route such that cars will assume the right of way until someone turns the light to red. That is usually a person but I guess the occasional car coming out on the side street triggers it as well. One would assume they don’t just install these lights because traffic is light and it’s safe to just look both ways a majority of the time. Just because people do this doesn’t mean it’s not essentially hazardous to do so.

But you know everything about this crossing that I’ve mentioned. I’m sure you are thinking of somewhere else similar to other crossings even I have seen elsewhere in Boston.

By: ma

ma — Mon, 22 Jun 2009 02:50:10 +0000

And as you can see in my other comment, Deuteronomy 4:2 doesn’t support your claim.

By: ma

ma — Mon, 22 Jun 2009 02:49:24 +0000

Deuteronomy 4:2:
“Do not add to the word that I am commanding you, and do not subtract from it. You must keep all the commandments of God your Lord, which I am instructing you.”

By: ma

ma — Mon, 22 Jun 2009 02:47:38 +0000

Why would God give a rule which He didn’t want people to follow? That seems absurd to me.

By: ma

ma — Mon, 22 Jun 2009 02:46:34 +0000

I do think that Jews should follow their religion. I am not trying to hide that. But what you’re saying is tangential. My point was that our legal system doesn’t generally care whether an injustice is leveled against “the only people bothered by [it]“. Is that not true?