[The publication of Mother Theresa's letters] created a scandal not, unfortunately, because of the circumstances by which they became public but because in them she confesses an almost complete lack of feeling of God's presence. She comes across as depressed, feeling abandoned by God and at times even questioning His existence.However, as Gil knows, yet purposely obscures, Mother Theresa didn't reject God. Not exactly. She rejected Jesus. That's a sloppy mistake, especially for a guy like Gil.
Thursday, September 06, 2007
Blurring the line between God and Jesus
What is it about frum people and their chronic inability to recognize Christian belief for what it is? I think the root of this phenomenon is that religious people become woefully uncritical when another person's faith is being discussed. We see it all the time at Cross-loving Currents, where a gay, hypocrite, Christian adulterer was lauded and praised by the very same people who routinely shove sticks into the eyes of left leaning Jews. And we saw it again today, from Gil Student:
How we know Gil Student is full of it
A few clues:
(1) For the last three years Gil has carefuly excluded most bloggers from his sidebar. I was never listed. Neither was GH, OrthoMom, RenReb, Shmarya, JewSchool, Jewlicious, and a host of other relevant, popular bloggers. Behind the scenes, Gil's always been friendly to me. Once, a long time ago, I asked him why I'm banned from his blogroll. I don't remember his exact words, but I believe he said something sanctimonoius about being unwilling to endorse the sort of freewheeling, occasionally-over-the-line discussion I do here. He may have mentioned pritzus and kfira, too. All well and good, and kol hakovod, only now Gil has climbed into bed with (a) a pornographer, (b) at least one hidden-in-plain-site kofer and (c) Ben Atlas.
[Update: SoccerDad has reminded me (in the comments) that a few years back Gil included this blog on his list of "Blogs a Rabbi Must Follow." Though it wasn't clear he necessarily meant it as a compliment, I viewed it generously and continue to view it generously and at the time I expressed sincere appreciation. However, the point remains that Gil has always kept me (and most other blogs) at arm's length and the reason he always gave was that our behavior and style couldn't be endorsed. So how does he justify joining up with Rishimu?]
(2) He is laboriously trying to convince his readers (and possibly his own good self) that an ordinary group blog/agregator is the cutting-edge-future of the Internet. Yet, we know he doesn't really believe this, because he's also said "If I don't close [Hirhurim] no one will go to Reshimu." Why would the next, best thing's success hinge on the disappearance of the competition?
(3) He has seems to have bought into the claim that Rishimo will be a place where all types of Jews will be able to talk to each other. This is asburd on the face. How can Jews talk to each other if they are going to be subjected to the chilling effect of registration and moderation?
Anyway, the place where contemporary Jews talk to each other already exists. The place is called DovBear. Here you'll find kofrim and maamin interacting, and not just on the comments but on the site itself. The commenting community includes a Conservative Apikorus, a witch, several avrechim from Lakewood, Ed, Yona Lazar, prim Jewish mothers, apikorsim, skeptics, Jews by choice, FFBs, and much, much more. The whole cholent of contemporary Judaism is here, welcomed, unmoderated and free to say their piece.
(1) For the last three years Gil has carefuly excluded most bloggers from his sidebar. I was never listed. Neither was GH, OrthoMom, RenReb, Shmarya, JewSchool, Jewlicious, and a host of other relevant, popular bloggers. Behind the scenes, Gil's always been friendly to me. Once, a long time ago, I asked him why I'm banned from his blogroll. I don't remember his exact words, but I believe he said something sanctimonoius about being unwilling to endorse the sort of freewheeling, occasionally-over-the-line discussion I do here. He may have mentioned pritzus and kfira, too. All well and good, and kol hakovod, only now Gil has climbed into bed with (a) a pornographer, (b) at least one hidden-in-plain-site kofer and (c) Ben Atlas.
[Update: SoccerDad has reminded me (in the comments) that a few years back Gil included this blog on his list of "Blogs a Rabbi Must Follow." Though it wasn't clear he necessarily meant it as a compliment, I viewed it generously and continue to view it generously and at the time I expressed sincere appreciation. However, the point remains that Gil has always kept me (and most other blogs) at arm's length and the reason he always gave was that our behavior and style couldn't be endorsed. So how does he justify joining up with Rishimu?]
(2) He is laboriously trying to convince his readers (and possibly his own good self) that an ordinary group blog/agregator is the cutting-edge-future of the Internet. Yet, we know he doesn't really believe this, because he's also said "If I don't close [Hirhurim] no one will go to Reshimu." Why would the next, best thing's success hinge on the disappearance of the competition?
(3) He has seems to have bought into the claim that Rishimo will be a place where all types of Jews will be able to talk to each other. This is asburd on the face. How can Jews talk to each other if they are going to be subjected to the chilling effect of registration and moderation?
Anyway, the place where contemporary Jews talk to each other already exists. The place is called DovBear. Here you'll find kofrim and maamin interacting, and not just on the comments but on the site itself. The commenting community includes a Conservative Apikorus, a witch, several avrechim from Lakewood, Ed, Yona Lazar, prim Jewish mothers, apikorsim, skeptics, Jews by choice, FFBs, and much, much more. The whole cholent of contemporary Judaism is here, welcomed, unmoderated and free to say their piece.
Wednesday, September 05, 2007
Two things
(1) Hitchens Takes on Mother Teresa
Apparently Mother T was a closet kofer. Wonder how many of our saints and Rabbis have experienced similar doubts?
(2) This happened in Texas, but it could have been Boro Park
Be honest: When your kids tell you that the moon was once-upon-a-time as large as the sun do you
(a) Roll your eyes?
(b) Make a large, appreciative donation to the kid's school?
(c) Mutter under your breath?
(d) Remind them that the Torah does not it fact say that; therefore, they aren't obligated to believe it?
Apparently Mother T was a closet kofer. Wonder how many of our saints and Rabbis have experienced similar doubts?
(2) This happened in Texas, but it could have been Boro Park
Be honest: When your kids tell you that the moon was once-upon-a-time as large as the sun do you
(a) Roll your eyes?
(b) Make a large, appreciative donation to the kid's school?
(c) Mutter under your breath?
(d) Remind them that the Torah does not it fact say that; therefore, they aren't obligated to believe it?
The DovBear Dialogues Part 2
The DovBear Dialogues continue
Part 1
Dear Bray,
Thank you for your letter. Your words clearly come from your heart and they have entered mine. I found your letter, both its content and style, to be deeply moving.
But, I don't care. As far as I am concerned, emotions have no place in evaluating the truth of Judaism. The huge and undeniable biases that plague all religious people renders any attempt to give an emotional argument for OJ completely absurd. I will therefore reply to your letter on a purely rational plane.
To me, it seems, that your letter can essentially be broken into three parts.
Point 1 – Strong and incontrovertible evidence for TMS does not exist, nor is not needed.
Point 2 – Judaism demonstrates a higher moral ethic than other faiths or atheism.
Point 3 – The higher ethical standard of Jews suggests TMS.
Space prohibits a thorough analysis of all these points, so I will limit myself to a brief sketch of what obstacles I believe your approach needs to overcome.
Point 1 – I must confess that to me the opposite of what you write seems true. I suggest that, for any given hypothesis, the standard of evidence we demand is dependent on three things:
i. how remarkable, a priori, the claim is. Every single observation we have ever recorded supports the supremacy of natural law, and so your hypothesis, which rejects natural law, is by definition the most remarkable claim possible.
ii. how much evidence, a priori, we expect the hypothesis to generate. To this your argument of "bechirah" is pertinent. You claim that the God hypothesis shouldn't produce evidence since God chooses to conceal himself. But, this runs entirely contrary to the OJ tradition which is of a God who seeks to reveal himself whenever possible. See for example Ex 7:5, 9:16, 14:4, 14:18, 16:6, 16:7, Nu 14:34, 16:30 Judges 6:17-19, 6:36-40, 7:14 I Kings 18:37 Ezekiel 6:13, 7:4, 7:9, 11:10, 11:12, 12:20, 13:9, 13:14. But, I must emphasize that the above is really a very very small subset of the these type of verses. Space & my time prevents a complete list. There are certainly hundreds of such verses in the O.T.
But, beyond that, the picture OJ paints is one of a God who interacts with the world in a way that should leave much evidence. He freely violates nature (I counted 38 times in Kings alone). He has many prophets (over 100 prophets in the generation of Elijah alone). He performed 10 miracles, some of them daily, in the temple in Jerusalem. He rewards the righteous, punishes the wicked and responds to prayer. He involves himself in nature in ways that should leave physical, geological, cosmological, chemical, biological, archeological, and historical evidence. All of the above suggests a God who leaves much evidence.
iii. I demand a higher standard of evidence when I am wary of trusting someone. All of us, myself included, have intense psychological, sociological, and emotional investments in OJ. We should thus be wary of trusting ourselves and demand a higher standard of evidence. The high correlation between religion of birth and chosen religion highlights the great need for evidence skepticism here.
Point 2 –Jews are morally superior to the other nations. To this you offer two proofs:
i. nationally, we are superior – no programs or genocide.
ii. the common folk are morally superior – they engage in tzedakah.
To i: As you yourself note, that the Jews didn't engage in genocide in the middle ages proves nothing since they had not the means to do so. That they didn't engage in genocide in the Biblical era isn't remotely true, at least according to the Bible (e.g. Deut 2:34 Josh 6:21 I Samuel 15:8 I Kings 11:15 and countless other verses). It is true that modern Israel has an exemplary human rights record, but so do most western liberal democracies since 1948. Moreover, Israel is a secular country and its human rights record has nothing to do with Judaism. The human rights record of the religious Zionist movement is appalling (at least in terms of what they advocate, thankfully, they don't have the political power to carry out what they advocate).
To ii: (and this applies to i as well). I won't disagree with you that the frum community has done some pretty remarkable things. But, so have many other faith communities. On what basis did you conclude that Jews are better than non Jews? Did you go around visiting all the Christian charities?
Point 3 – the moral superiority of the Jews implies the truth of OJ.
This is a total non sequitur. The truth of OJ is neither necessary nor sufficient to explain the behavior of OJ's. Suppose I tell you that there's a diamond buried in your backyard and you go dig for the diamond. Does your digging imply that the diamond exists? Of course not. Your actions are dictated by what you think is real, not by reality itself.
Sincerely,
Littlefoxling
Ocher Yisrael
Part 1
Dear Bray,
Thank you for your letter. Your words clearly come from your heart and they have entered mine. I found your letter, both its content and style, to be deeply moving.
But, I don't care. As far as I am concerned, emotions have no place in evaluating the truth of Judaism. The huge and undeniable biases that plague all religious people renders any attempt to give an emotional argument for OJ completely absurd. I will therefore reply to your letter on a purely rational plane.
To me, it seems, that your letter can essentially be broken into three parts.
Point 1 – Strong and incontrovertible evidence for TMS does not exist, nor is not needed.
Point 2 – Judaism demonstrates a higher moral ethic than other faiths or atheism.
Point 3 – The higher ethical standard of Jews suggests TMS.
Space prohibits a thorough analysis of all these points, so I will limit myself to a brief sketch of what obstacles I believe your approach needs to overcome.
Point 1 – I must confess that to me the opposite of what you write seems true. I suggest that, for any given hypothesis, the standard of evidence we demand is dependent on three things:
i. how remarkable, a priori, the claim is. Every single observation we have ever recorded supports the supremacy of natural law, and so your hypothesis, which rejects natural law, is by definition the most remarkable claim possible.
ii. how much evidence, a priori, we expect the hypothesis to generate. To this your argument of "bechirah" is pertinent. You claim that the God hypothesis shouldn't produce evidence since God chooses to conceal himself. But, this runs entirely contrary to the OJ tradition which is of a God who seeks to reveal himself whenever possible. See for example Ex 7:5, 9:16, 14:4, 14:18, 16:6, 16:7, Nu 14:34, 16:30 Judges 6:17-19, 6:36-40, 7:14 I Kings 18:37 Ezekiel 6:13, 7:4, 7:9, 11:10, 11:12, 12:20, 13:9, 13:14. But, I must emphasize that the above is really a very very small subset of the these type of verses. Space & my time prevents a complete list. There are certainly hundreds of such verses in the O.T.
But, beyond that, the picture OJ paints is one of a God who interacts with the world in a way that should leave much evidence. He freely violates nature (I counted 38 times in Kings alone). He has many prophets (over 100 prophets in the generation of Elijah alone). He performed 10 miracles, some of them daily, in the temple in Jerusalem. He rewards the righteous, punishes the wicked and responds to prayer. He involves himself in nature in ways that should leave physical, geological, cosmological, chemical, biological, archeological, and historical evidence. All of the above suggests a God who leaves much evidence.
iii. I demand a higher standard of evidence when I am wary of trusting someone. All of us, myself included, have intense psychological, sociological, and emotional investments in OJ. We should thus be wary of trusting ourselves and demand a higher standard of evidence. The high correlation between religion of birth and chosen religion highlights the great need for evidence skepticism here.
Point 2 –Jews are morally superior to the other nations. To this you offer two proofs:
i. nationally, we are superior – no programs or genocide.
ii. the common folk are morally superior – they engage in tzedakah.
To i: As you yourself note, that the Jews didn't engage in genocide in the middle ages proves nothing since they had not the means to do so. That they didn't engage in genocide in the Biblical era isn't remotely true, at least according to the Bible (e.g. Deut 2:34 Josh 6:21 I Samuel 15:8 I Kings 11:15 and countless other verses). It is true that modern Israel has an exemplary human rights record, but so do most western liberal democracies since 1948. Moreover, Israel is a secular country and its human rights record has nothing to do with Judaism. The human rights record of the religious Zionist movement is appalling (at least in terms of what they advocate, thankfully, they don't have the political power to carry out what they advocate).
To ii: (and this applies to i as well). I won't disagree with you that the frum community has done some pretty remarkable things. But, so have many other faith communities. On what basis did you conclude that Jews are better than non Jews? Did you go around visiting all the Christian charities?
Point 3 – the moral superiority of the Jews implies the truth of OJ.
This is a total non sequitur. The truth of OJ is neither necessary nor sufficient to explain the behavior of OJ's. Suppose I tell you that there's a diamond buried in your backyard and you go dig for the diamond. Does your digging imply that the diamond exists? Of course not. Your actions are dictated by what you think is real, not by reality itself.
Sincerely,
Littlefoxling
Ocher Yisrael
More on Gil and his big move
The following is an excerpt from an email exchange between me and a top blogger. Reprinted with permission.
---
First off, going into Reshimu brings certain benefits to Gil that he otherwise wouldn't have
1. He no longer has to blog every single day, as traffic is going to the main site, not to him.
So what? The very excellent OrthoMom no longer blogs every day, or anything close to it, and she kept her traffic.
2. He is looking for that more "professional" look. Not to be some "stam blogger. Of course that is very establishment and not Web 2.0 at all.
Bah.
3. (I think) he now writes his blog in large part not to promote his own ideas, but to promote himself, and his publishing house and books. I presume he sees this as a way of building a larger audience for that.
He's not right.
4. If it takes off and becomes a great big portal, then he was in on it at the beginning and will make money.
It might prove to be a successful blogging venture, but it won't explode because the audience simply isn't large enough. Blogs that make real money draw MILLIONS of hits per week. MILLIONS. The largest Jblogger gets about 20 thousand.
5. He no longer needs to censor and control the comments, as "they" will do it for him.
Yes, he's a big scardy-cat when it comes to that, and this helps.
Downsides:
1. He may no longer keep his readership as people may not be interested in the effort to move.
His own comments are running 99-1 against the move. Many of the protesters say they aren't going to follow him.
2. Reshimu (at the moment) looks and acts just like technorati and other blog aggregators.
Its also like half a dozen other Jewish sites that already exist.
Reshimu's advantage (for themselves) is that you have to close your blog to be included (and why is that a good thing?).
Its not a good thing for the blogger at all.
3. People may not be as interested in commenting if you have to sign up first and can't post anonymously. Where's the free flow of ideas?
Well, Gil's not really interested in the free flow of ideas. Not really. And again many of his own commenters have raised this objection. Registering sucks. Only a frightened, control freak would demand it.
4. Luke Ford!
You know, I don't have any problem with Luke. (click and scroll down)
5. People read group blogs because of the simple format, consistency, and that it is not a magazine. I can read the JP op-ed/blog sections if I want a bunch of different opinion pieces all on one page.
You can already use your mouse and click among different bloggers and writers if you want a variety of opinion, which is exactly what you'll do at Rishimu. What's the difference between clicking a mouse within a site and clicking a mouse between sites?
Now if they were doing head-to-heads that could be interesting. "Porn is Bad, but Luke is Great" by Gil vs. "Porn is Good, Gossip is Great" by Luke Ford. That would be Web 2.0.
See the DovBear Dialogues. Exactly what you describe is already happening on my non-cowardly, no registration required, old fashioned blog.
---
First off, going into Reshimu brings certain benefits to Gil that he otherwise wouldn't have
1. He no longer has to blog every single day, as traffic is going to the main site, not to him.
So what? The very excellent OrthoMom no longer blogs every day, or anything close to it, and she kept her traffic.
2. He is looking for that more "professional" look. Not to be some "stam blogger. Of course that is very establishment and not Web 2.0 at all.
Bah.
3. (I think) he now writes his blog in large part not to promote his own ideas, but to promote himself, and his publishing house and books. I presume he sees this as a way of building a larger audience for that.
He's not right.
4. If it takes off and becomes a great big portal, then he was in on it at the beginning and will make money.
It might prove to be a successful blogging venture, but it won't explode because the audience simply isn't large enough. Blogs that make real money draw MILLIONS of hits per week. MILLIONS. The largest Jblogger gets about 20 thousand.
5. He no longer needs to censor and control the comments, as "they" will do it for him.
Yes, he's a big scardy-cat when it comes to that, and this helps.
Downsides:
1. He may no longer keep his readership as people may not be interested in the effort to move.
His own comments are running 99-1 against the move. Many of the protesters say they aren't going to follow him.
2. Reshimu (at the moment) looks and acts just like technorati and other blog aggregators.
Its also like half a dozen other Jewish sites that already exist.
Reshimu's advantage (for themselves) is that you have to close your blog to be included (and why is that a good thing?).
Its not a good thing for the blogger at all.
3. People may not be as interested in commenting if you have to sign up first and can't post anonymously. Where's the free flow of ideas?
Well, Gil's not really interested in the free flow of ideas. Not really. And again many of his own commenters have raised this objection. Registering sucks. Only a frightened, control freak would demand it.
4. Luke Ford!
You know, I don't have any problem with Luke. (click and scroll down)
5. People read group blogs because of the simple format, consistency, and that it is not a magazine. I can read the JP op-ed/blog sections if I want a bunch of different opinion pieces all on one page.
You can already use your mouse and click among different bloggers and writers if you want a variety of opinion, which is exactly what you'll do at Rishimu. What's the difference between clicking a mouse within a site and clicking a mouse between sites?
Now if they were doing head-to-heads that could be interesting. "Porn is Bad, but Luke is Great" by Gil vs. "Porn is Good, Gossip is Great" by Luke Ford. That would be Web 2.0.
See the DovBear Dialogues. Exactly what you describe is already happening on my non-cowardly, no registration required, old fashioned blog.
Whats the difference between Rishimu and JewSchool?
Whats the difference between Rishimu and JewSchool?
Essentially nothing. I mean sure, the guy who owns JewSchool posseses non-offensive politics, manners, and a sense of fair play. And yes, that's a difference. But when it comes down to how the blogs are organized the new webmagazine Gil is lauding as the "thee next generation of the online Jewish conversation" is just another group blog.
MEANWHILE Gil's community continues to strongly oppose Hirhurim's change of venue. His readers don't like Luke Ford. They don't like Ben Atlas. They don't want to learn how to navigate a new blog. They hate the idea of registering. They know their comments will be moderated.
After this all blows over, here's the comment we'll be remembering in a few months time:
Who wants to host the Reshimu death pool? You can take sideline bets on when Gil scurries back. Six months is the long bet.
Anonymous 09.04.07 - 4:53 pm #
UPDATE: Does Gil really believe in Rishimu ior is it all about the Benjamins?
Here's his latest:
If I don't close this blog, no one will go to Reshimu.
Gil Homepage 09.05.07 - 10:53 am #
Now that's a KILLER argument for Reshimu being the unavoidable future of blogging! Its such a fabulous site that NO ONE WILL GO unless Gil submits.
And another excellent comment:
Gil: "I suggest that other bloggers get on board while they have the chance."
Oooh, sounds scary. Personally, I suggest that other bloggers give Reshimu a wide berth. Too many chabadskers and other bloggers of dubious origins. And a porn king too! Maybe they should call it 'Hirhurim', if you know what I mean.
Anon 09.05.07 - 12:09 pm #
Essentially nothing. I mean sure, the guy who owns JewSchool posseses non-offensive politics, manners, and a sense of fair play. And yes, that's a difference. But when it comes down to how the blogs are organized the new webmagazine Gil is lauding as the "thee next generation of the online Jewish conversation" is just another group blog.
MEANWHILE Gil's community continues to strongly oppose Hirhurim's change of venue. His readers don't like Luke Ford. They don't like Ben Atlas. They don't want to learn how to navigate a new blog. They hate the idea of registering. They know their comments will be moderated.
After this all blows over, here's the comment we'll be remembering in a few months time:
Who wants to host the Reshimu death pool? You can take sideline bets on when Gil scurries back. Six months is the long bet.
Anonymous 09.04.07 - 4:53 pm #
UPDATE: Does Gil really believe in Rishimu ior is it all about the Benjamins?
Here's his latest:
If I don't close this blog, no one will go to Reshimu.
Gil Homepage 09.05.07 - 10:53 am #
Now that's a KILLER argument for Reshimu being the unavoidable future of blogging! Its such a fabulous site that NO ONE WILL GO unless Gil submits.
And another excellent comment:
Gil: "I suggest that other bloggers get on board while they have the chance."
Oooh, sounds scary. Personally, I suggest that other bloggers give Reshimu a wide berth. Too many chabadskers and other bloggers of dubious origins. And a porn king too! Maybe they should call it 'Hirhurim', if you know what I mean.
Anon 09.05.07 - 12:09 pm #
Tuesday, September 04, 2007
Paper bag Jews
There is a popular belief that African Americans used to have clubs excluding blacks with skin darker than a brown paper bag. Jewish racism has a similar quality. It always ends up impacting other Jews, as we saw from the recent controversy over Yated Ne'eman's comments on Yemenite Jews.
Two weeks ago I needed something to read when waiting for my brother's mother-in-law at the airport, so I went to the library and grabbed a book--Melanie Kaye Kantrowitz's The Colors of Jews, about nonwhite Jews. I posted my thoughts about this book on my blog. Only a few days later, DB happened to post a video about an African American shul run by R' Capers Funnye, one of the people interviewed in the book.
Though the shul has a nominally Orthodox look and a basic Ashkenazic service, most of the congregants are so-called "Hebrew Israelites" who claim descent from a black Yaakov Avinu. I first heard about this group in a book called Black Zion, where one of the leaders expressed agnosticism about the Protocols for the Elders of Zion. I assumed they were simply an African American variant on the Christian Identity Movement. "We're more Jewish than the Jews" is an old anti-Semitic theme. It turns out that at least a few of them have converted to Judaism.
In the comments, Micha cited a Mishna alluding to the skin color of ancient Jews. Discussing the visibility of tzaraas, Negaim 2:1 suggests that Bnei Yisrael's skin was like that of a boxwood tree, neither black nor white but some shade in between. (I'm curious what boxwood looks like.) This Mishna seems to imply, further, that there were both black and white converts.
The discussion heated up when a guy named Baruch left the following comment: "How can someone who is black truly be Jewish?" Only after Miriam and I loudly protested did he start to back down, but not before telling a story about when he was in yeshiva thirty years ago and a teacher instructed a black custodian not to read from the Mahzor because it would "render our books unkosher." Hearing the story, a Christian poster named Jesse expressed surprise that Jews could be so racist. Well, he's got a lot to learn.
Is it unwise for me to discuss frum racism on a public forum? Forget about Noah Feldman for the moment. I'm not talking about theological discussions on the halachic status of goyim. I'm talking about anti-black attitudes that reflect far more the cloistered lifestyle of most frum people than anything in halacha. Ed will tell you that when he teaches his children "Don't be like the shvartzes," he isn't talking about skin color. He's talking about, say, men who have children with four different women. (So Yaakov Avinu was black after all!) Therefore, black Jews like Miriam need not get upset. I suppose that Ed would be perfectly okay with a Christian who taught his children "Don't be like the heebs," as long as he assured us he wasn't talking about Orthodox Jews but about the ones who run Hollywood.
This has very little to do with theology. It has to do with simple, backwards ignorance.
Two weeks ago I needed something to read when waiting for my brother's mother-in-law at the airport, so I went to the library and grabbed a book--Melanie Kaye Kantrowitz's The Colors of Jews, about nonwhite Jews. I posted my thoughts about this book on my blog. Only a few days later, DB happened to post a video about an African American shul run by R' Capers Funnye, one of the people interviewed in the book.
Though the shul has a nominally Orthodox look and a basic Ashkenazic service, most of the congregants are so-called "Hebrew Israelites" who claim descent from a black Yaakov Avinu. I first heard about this group in a book called Black Zion, where one of the leaders expressed agnosticism about the Protocols for the Elders of Zion. I assumed they were simply an African American variant on the Christian Identity Movement. "We're more Jewish than the Jews" is an old anti-Semitic theme. It turns out that at least a few of them have converted to Judaism.
In the comments, Micha cited a Mishna alluding to the skin color of ancient Jews. Discussing the visibility of tzaraas, Negaim 2:1 suggests that Bnei Yisrael's skin was like that of a boxwood tree, neither black nor white but some shade in between. (I'm curious what boxwood looks like.) This Mishna seems to imply, further, that there were both black and white converts.
The discussion heated up when a guy named Baruch left the following comment: "How can someone who is black truly be Jewish?" Only after Miriam and I loudly protested did he start to back down, but not before telling a story about when he was in yeshiva thirty years ago and a teacher instructed a black custodian not to read from the Mahzor because it would "render our books unkosher." Hearing the story, a Christian poster named Jesse expressed surprise that Jews could be so racist. Well, he's got a lot to learn.
Is it unwise for me to discuss frum racism on a public forum? Forget about Noah Feldman for the moment. I'm not talking about theological discussions on the halachic status of goyim. I'm talking about anti-black attitudes that reflect far more the cloistered lifestyle of most frum people than anything in halacha. Ed will tell you that when he teaches his children "Don't be like the shvartzes," he isn't talking about skin color. He's talking about, say, men who have children with four different women. (So Yaakov Avinu was black after all!) Therefore, black Jews like Miriam need not get upset. I suppose that Ed would be perfectly okay with a Christian who taught his children "Don't be like the heebs," as long as he assured us he wasn't talking about Orthodox Jews but about the ones who run Hollywood.
This has very little to do with theology. It has to do with simple, backwards ignorance.
Overheard
Friend of the blog (not Gil)(obviously) wrote to tell me he was at a little shinding recently where he heard the following story:
Unfortunately, this sort of theivery is now a way of life in too many Jewish neighborhoods.
How so? Because the would-be theif isn't ripping off the government. He's ripping off his Jewish neighbors. They are the ones who will be required to pay more to make up for the slacker with his make-believe-shul. [Note: Stealing from a gentile is forbidden by Jewish law.]Two men were arguing if it was mutar to pretend their house was a shul for the sake of avoiding taxes. First guy said "no way"; second guy said "Why not? Its only [gentiles] being defrauded."
So they went to [one of the great Rabbis of the previous generation] and asked him. He replied:
No. It isn't gezul akum. [stealing from a gentile] It's taaka gezul yisroel [stealing from a Jew.]
Unfortunately, this sort of theivery is now a way of life in too many Jewish neighborhoods.
Introducing the DovBear Dialogues
DovBear is one of the only blogs where kofrim and maamin talk to each other without moderation or interference. Now we're stepping it up. Beginning today, I plan to post a series of conversations between members of the DovBear community who sit on opposite sides of the issues. Our first two participants are Little Foxling and Chaim G. The first letter, written by Chaim F, follows. LF's reply will be posted tomorrow, and the correspondence will continue until we keel over from boredom or one of them switches sides:
September 3, 2007
Dear Little Foxling,
As you have taken up residence as the in-house kofer at the blog of our gracious (and mightily conflicted) host DovBear I’d like to share an idea as a ma’amin that I have found to be compelling. If you, DovBear and/or others find it so I will be blessed.
וְזֶה-הָיָה חֶלְקִי, מִכָּל-עֲמָלִי.
Let me preface the idea by saying that IMO the existence of G-d, the historicity of TMS and many of the other ikrei HaDas cannot be proven empirically. To borrow idioms from the two O J Simpson trials, while I believe that the “preponderance of evidence” points to the truth of much of our religious dogma there are no proofs “beyond a reasonable doubt”. Among other reasons I believe this is so because to say otherwise would rob us of our exercise of free will in believing them and hence of their identity as Mitzvahs.
Still, among the observable phenomena that strengthen my emunah is the tzidkus and superlative decency of much of Torah Observant Jewry and especially of the Gedolim that it has been my privilege to interact with “up close and personal”.
Borrowing from Linus (of “Peanuts”) Rabbi Berel Wein famously (IMO infamously) said “I love Judaism…its Jews that I can’t stand”. This was probably the arch observation of a pulpit Rabbi embittered by too many decades of rough-and-tumble Shul politics. In reality nothing could be further from the truth. For me the sages and Tzadikim produced by the Torah’s system are proof positive of the Torah’s divinity.
For the sake of contrast; while Christianity and Socialism both sound good on paper the former gave us (by us I mean humanity not only Jewry) the crusades, the inquisition forced conversion and pillaging of indigenous populations and many centuries of nearly uninterrupted war and sectarian bloodshed while the latter gave us the Gulags, suppression and oppression of indigenous populations, the Doctors trials, the Cultural revolution and the Killing Fields.
Torah Judaism sounds pretty harsh and even obtuse on paper. What with Khukim like Shatnez and Parah Adumah where’s the intellectual rigor, reason and rationale? And with a “Jealous angry G-d” and mitzvahs involving slavery, polygamy, arranged marriages, cruel and unusual (by constitutional standards) capital punishment and genocide where’s’ the high moral/ethical plateau? Yet Torah Judaism produced the high moral ethical plateaus and brilliant works of genius of Yeshaya, Hillel, Rebbe Akiva the Rambam, Rebee Akiva Eger and the Chofetz Chaim. The proof, as the old saw goes, is in the pudding.
You’re probably saying that this is only so because Jews have been landless and out of power for well over two thousand years and that given the kind of land and power that Christendom and the caliphates had would’ve evolved into something as dumb and ruthless. I think that the relative benign nature of the state of Israel (if not raishit tzmikhat geulatenu then at the very least an outgrowth of national yearnings grounded in Torah Judaism) belies this. Furthermore I say “so what”? There are no historical accidents. G-d the Lawgiver is one-and-the-same as G-d-the-puppet master-of-history. There are no alternative histories. G-d orchestrated history such that His am hanivkhar whom He chose from among all nations to receive and live by His Torah contributed great good and did miniscule damage.
Lest you accuse me of buying into Thomas Carlyle’s now discredited “Great Man Theory” let me disabuse you of this by saying that I find much sublime divinity in rank and file Jews. From the parents of large demanding families and from founders and members of various Bikur Cholims to those of Zakah, Hatzalah, Dor Yeshorim and countless G’makhs I’ve found people who don’t just talk the talk but walk the walk of living selfless lives. In the yawning bone-weary participants of daf-yomi shiurim, father-son-learning programs, Yarchei Kallahs, SEED programs kollelei boker and kollelei erev I’ve discerned an unparalleled dedication to learning for its own sake and not for how it translates into a lucrative career or social climbing.
I’ve been privileged to hear lectures delivered by RYBS and to see Rav Chaim Shmuelevitz cry at the funeral of a young sun stroke victim as if he’d lost an only son. I’ve been extended weeklong hachnosas orchim by complete strangers and seen Yeshiva bochurim volunteer to change the pus soaked bandages of street people. Yes, the hagiographical fluff pieces that have become the norm in Gedolim Biographies must be read with a grain of salt. (Still, consider the fact that they’re not exaggerating stories like that about you and me!). But the pristine midos and intellectual genius of living breathing exemplars of Torah scholarship and mitzvah observance cannot be denied… even by a denier.
Yours,
Chaim G.
The Bray of Fundie
September 3, 2007
Dear Little Foxling,
As you have taken up residence as the in-house kofer at the blog of our gracious (and mightily conflicted) host DovBear I’d like to share an idea as a ma’amin that I have found to be compelling. If you, DovBear and/or others find it so I will be blessed.
וְזֶה-הָיָה חֶלְקִי, מִכָּל-עֲמָלִי.
Let me preface the idea by saying that IMO the existence of G-d, the historicity of TMS and many of the other ikrei HaDas cannot be proven empirically. To borrow idioms from the two O J Simpson trials, while I believe that the “preponderance of evidence” points to the truth of much of our religious dogma there are no proofs “beyond a reasonable doubt”. Among other reasons I believe this is so because to say otherwise would rob us of our exercise of free will in believing them and hence of their identity as Mitzvahs.
Still, among the observable phenomena that strengthen my emunah is the tzidkus and superlative decency of much of Torah Observant Jewry and especially of the Gedolim that it has been my privilege to interact with “up close and personal”.
Borrowing from Linus (of “Peanuts”) Rabbi Berel Wein famously (IMO infamously) said “I love Judaism…its Jews that I can’t stand”. This was probably the arch observation of a pulpit Rabbi embittered by too many decades of rough-and-tumble Shul politics. In reality nothing could be further from the truth. For me the sages and Tzadikim produced by the Torah’s system are proof positive of the Torah’s divinity.
For the sake of contrast; while Christianity and Socialism both sound good on paper the former gave us (by us I mean humanity not only Jewry) the crusades, the inquisition forced conversion and pillaging of indigenous populations and many centuries of nearly uninterrupted war and sectarian bloodshed while the latter gave us the Gulags, suppression and oppression of indigenous populations, the Doctors trials, the Cultural revolution and the Killing Fields.
Torah Judaism sounds pretty harsh and even obtuse on paper. What with Khukim like Shatnez and Parah Adumah where’s the intellectual rigor, reason and rationale? And with a “Jealous angry G-d” and mitzvahs involving slavery, polygamy, arranged marriages, cruel and unusual (by constitutional standards) capital punishment and genocide where’s’ the high moral/ethical plateau? Yet Torah Judaism produced the high moral ethical plateaus and brilliant works of genius of Yeshaya, Hillel, Rebbe Akiva the Rambam, Rebee Akiva Eger and the Chofetz Chaim. The proof, as the old saw goes, is in the pudding.
You’re probably saying that this is only so because Jews have been landless and out of power for well over two thousand years and that given the kind of land and power that Christendom and the caliphates had would’ve evolved into something as dumb and ruthless. I think that the relative benign nature of the state of Israel (if not raishit tzmikhat geulatenu then at the very least an outgrowth of national yearnings grounded in Torah Judaism) belies this. Furthermore I say “so what”? There are no historical accidents. G-d the Lawgiver is one-and-the-same as G-d-the-puppet master-of-history. There are no alternative histories. G-d orchestrated history such that His am hanivkhar whom He chose from among all nations to receive and live by His Torah contributed great good and did miniscule damage.
Lest you accuse me of buying into Thomas Carlyle’s now discredited “Great Man Theory” let me disabuse you of this by saying that I find much sublime divinity in rank and file Jews. From the parents of large demanding families and from founders and members of various Bikur Cholims to those of Zakah, Hatzalah, Dor Yeshorim and countless G’makhs I’ve found people who don’t just talk the talk but walk the walk of living selfless lives. In the yawning bone-weary participants of daf-yomi shiurim, father-son-learning programs, Yarchei Kallahs, SEED programs kollelei boker and kollelei erev I’ve discerned an unparalleled dedication to learning for its own sake and not for how it translates into a lucrative career or social climbing.
I’ve been privileged to hear lectures delivered by RYBS and to see Rav Chaim Shmuelevitz cry at the funeral of a young sun stroke victim as if he’d lost an only son. I’ve been extended weeklong hachnosas orchim by complete strangers and seen Yeshiva bochurim volunteer to change the pus soaked bandages of street people. Yes, the hagiographical fluff pieces that have become the norm in Gedolim Biographies must be read with a grain of salt. (Still, consider the fact that they’re not exaggerating stories like that about you and me!). But the pristine midos and intellectual genius of living breathing exemplars of Torah scholarship and mitzvah observance cannot be denied… even by a denier.
Yours,
Chaim G.
The Bray of Fundie
[DB: How do I set up peekaboo posts? Anyone know? Thanks]
Gil Gives Up
It gives me no pleasure to announce that Gil of Hirhurim, one of our best and most consistent Jewish bloggers, has given up, thrown in the towel and jumped the shark. How else to describe his decision to shut down his blog, and move the content and archives to Rishimu?
Near as I can tell, Rishimu is just another content-aggregater, one of several sites (1, 2, 3) that attempt to build audiences, and raise advertising dollars, by bundling together other, more established bloggers. Gil compares Rishimu to the old-fashioned media, and claims that Hirhurim "will be featured on Reshimu, similar to the way a column is run in a newspaper." No doubt, that's true, but nowadays, the best newspapers all run like blogs. So what possible advantage is Gil offered by joining something as outdated as a newspaper?
More readers? Gil already has a large, and loyal audience, one of the largest in the J-blogosphere. (Note who's in fourth, or third, if you discount, "Jewish" group blogs that prefer evangelical Christians to 99 percent of the Jewish people) How many more readers can Rishimu provide? And
More comments? Hirhurim already averages close to 100 per post, and if anything Rishumu's system will inhibit the conversation. The new site requires commenters to register, and Gil hints that comments will be moderated (I don't know if this is true. I'm speculating) Still, I don't expect his comment numbers to improve dramatically, given the new obstacles to participating.
More money? I don't know if Rishimu if planning to pay its contributors, but that's something of a shaky business model. Jewish blogs aren't money makers. Our audiences aren't large enough. Our king, Luke Ford, delivers about 22,000 ad impressions per week. Sounds great, but in the real world, that's next to nothing. Profitable blogs like TalkingPointsMemo or Crooks and Liars deliver in the neighborhood of 2 million impressions per week. Kos, the king of them all, does more than FOUR million. For Rishimu, a fabulous success would be about 100,000 impressions per week. How much can you charge for an ad with that kind of audience? About $200 per week, according to this. According to this, Hirhurim's current rate is $40 per week. I can't imagine Gil made the jump for that kind of meager gain, a gain likely to be even more meager after it's shared with Rishimu's owners and other contributors. .
Now let's look at what Gil is giving up:
Readers. In the short term, anyway. Humans are creatures of habit. Not everyone is going to bother updating their readers, or remembering a new URL, and we bloggers aren't all going to change their blogrolls. In fact, if you consult my own sidebar, you will find links to discontinued and abandoned sites.
Hits Gil gets a lot of hits off the archive links he has posted on his sidebar. I know this is true, because I saw some gains myself when I added links to old posts. That's fine, and part of the game, but when Gil moves to Rishimu he'll be leaving that boost behind.
Independence Now Gil is just one of the boys in the band.
Credibility Can you trust a site that moderates comments? I don't. Only someone afraid of conversation does that. Moreover, Gil says that at Rishimu "commenters will have to... maintain a certain level of consistency and responsibility in their words. " How boring. Not to mention dry, inauthentic and cowardly. (But don't worry Hirhurim commenters. You'll be getting something delicious in exchange for registering, and subjecting yourself to moderation. A spell checker! Oooooh!!!! I'm all tingly!)
Anyway, at the end of the day I like Gil. He's always been a friend of the blog, and a straight-shooter. I think he's making a huge mistake, but I wish him luck all the same.
High Holy Day Box Seats in Belz: $50K
Crossposted at The Muqata.
(Great Belz Shul in Jerusalem)
YNET Reports today that a seat near the Belzer Rebbe for the High Holy Days in the Great Belz Shul in Yerushalayim costs 50 thousand dollars. Wow.
Shana Tova,
Jameel.
Wherever I am, my blog turns towards Eretz Yisrael
(Great Belz Shul in Jerusalem)YNET Reports today that a seat near the Belzer Rebbe for the High Holy Days in the Great Belz Shul in Yerushalayim costs 50 thousand dollars. Wow.
At synagogues of the hassidic rabbis' courts the prices vary according to how close they are to the admor (acronym for "our master, our teacher, and our rabbi). A reserved seat near the admor at the Belz (hassidic sect) synagogue can reach a whopping $50,000.My personal shul is 1300 NIS ($310) per family...how about you?
Synagogues are also charging for the right to read from the Torah, especially following the afternoon prayer session on Yom Kippur. Worshippers at the Vishnitz synagogue can purchase this right for no less than $50,000. A similar price will be charged from those wishing to take part in the opening of the Holy Arc ceremony at Rabbi Ovadia Yosef's Kol Nidre synagogue.
Kfar Chabad is charging NIS 60,000 ($14,500) for being the last person to be called up to the Torah and NIS 30,000 ($7,250) for being called up to the Torah for the opening prayer of the Eve of Atonement (Yom Kippur) service.
Shana Tova,
Jameel.
Wherever I am, my blog turns towards Eretz Yisrael
Monday, September 03, 2007
SchoolTime in Sderot
Its the second day of school in Sederot, and Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and Education Minister Yuli Tamir promised that it would be safe for Israeli schoolchildren to go to school.
This morning on their way to school, the "Color Red" missile warning system blared, sending children scampering to safety in the school building. The Palestinian Qassam rocket landed only 100 yards from the entrance to the school.
This video is being released on DovBear's blog (and the Muqata) -- the first showing in the JBlogosphere.
This morning on their way to school, the "Color Red" missile warning system blared, sending children scampering to safety in the school building. The Palestinian Qassam rocket landed only 100 yards from the entrance to the school.
This video is being released on DovBear's blog (and the Muqata) -- the first showing in the JBlogosphere.
Uploaded with permission by the Sderot Media Center
Wherever I am, my blog turns towards Eretz Yisrael
Cooking with DovBear
I make an excellent hamburger. I use the very best ground meat and after adding nothing that might overwhelm the flavor of the meat, I shape thick, round burgers. I don't pack the meat too firmly, and I don't pound the patties into those skinny, pancake abominations you find in the supermarket. My burgers are about half an inch thick, and I handle the meat gently so the juices stay in. Supermarket patties are overworked, and therefore dry.
Most people add insult to injury by putting a squeezed out pancake burger on an Arnold's or Freihoffer hamburger bun. This is the behavior of a masochist. Those buns are flabby and flavorless - a perfect match for the sort of flat and flavorless patty, favored by clueless cooks. Instead, follow my advice: Stay away from lean meat (fat = flavor) Keep the burger thick and lightly seasoned. Don't over handle it, don't squeeze out the juices by flattening it with your spatula when its on the grill, and, after letting it cook for five minutes per side, put it on a real roll, from an actual bakery (or the market's bakery section.)
Your guests and your taste buds will appreciate the difference.
Most people add insult to injury by putting a squeezed out pancake burger on an Arnold's or Freihoffer hamburger bun. This is the behavior of a masochist. Those buns are flabby and flavorless - a perfect match for the sort of flat and flavorless patty, favored by clueless cooks. Instead, follow my advice: Stay away from lean meat (fat = flavor) Keep the burger thick and lightly seasoned. Don't over handle it, don't squeeze out the juices by flattening it with your spatula when its on the grill, and, after letting it cook for five minutes per side, put it on a real roll, from an actual bakery (or the market's bakery section.)
Your guests and your taste buds will appreciate the difference.
PSA for DovBear Readers
Public Service Announcement Reminder for DovBear Readers:
It's Labor Day today -- PLEASE put your white straw hats away.
And go back to your black hats.
(You too cousin oliver!)
It's Labor Day today -- PLEASE put your white straw hats away.
And go back to your black hats.
(You too cousin oliver!)
Sunday, September 02, 2007
Refusing Orders
CrossPosted at the Muqata.
Points to ponder:
1. Mapai's intense hatred of religious soldiers and religion -- even at the expense of losing Jerusalem in 1948 to the Jordanians. Sixteen unarmed Jewish Etzel soldiers were killed while swimming to shore.
2. Religious soldiers don't need a Rabbi to dictate what's right or wrong -- and are perfectly capable of drawing their own conclusions.
Rashi writes on the pasuk, Yosef was thrown into a pit by his brothers that was "empty and had no water in it." Why the double language, obviously if the pit is empty, it has no water in it. Rashi answers, "there was no water in the pit...but there were snakes and scorpions in it." Nature abhors a vacuum -- if you don't fill a pit with it's natural filler (water), then it will be filled with other things. (hat-tip; R' Shlomo Riskin)
If Eretz Yisrael isn't filled with Jews who strive to observe the Torah and mitzvot (or at a minimum, love their fellow Jew as themselves), then it will be filled with others.
You too can be part of the solution.
Shana Tova,
Jameel @ The Muqata.
Wherever I am, my blog turns towards Eretz Yisrael
In the [Israeli 1948] War of Independence, I served as an infantry soldier in the religious platoon in the 22cnd division of the Carmeli Brigade. Our company commander assembled the company, and announced the that IDF and Hagana Chief of Staff had ordered us to squash an insurgence by the “Etzel” – a boat full of ammunition and Etzel soldiers was arriving. He threatened us that we needed to follow every single order, including opening fire, if so commanded. Insubordination would be dealt with extremely harshly.Printed in this past week's Makor Rishon by Chagai Segal -- a letter received from Ben Zion Abudi, an 80 year old Yerushalmi who served in the Hagana. The impetus for this letter was the refusal of IDF soldiers to evict Jewish families from Jewish owned property in Hevron. [The Hebrew article is not online yet, I translated it from the printed copy]
The religious platoon was the only one in the company, perhaps the only one in the Brigade. We inspired shock and awe. I will mention that our company, specifically our platoon were very battle experienced. We labored tirelessly, with unparalleled mesirut nefesh, and through the help of Hashem we had many successes -- the conquests of Haifa, Ako, Bazet, Ramat Yochanan, the Hula Valley, and more. Afterwards, we fought in the Jordan Valley, Jenin and others. We all served in the “Hagana” and were drafted in January 1948. Our platoon was the pride of the company and brigade, and we paid for that honor with the lives of our fighters and many wounded.
The orders about the “Altalena” reached us when we were up North, far away from Tel Aviv. Our platoon got on the bus in silence. There was no rabbi or spiritual leader that told us to refuse orders. The refusal was not as a collective, but each and every one individually, according to their conscience. I will note that Religious Zionism at the time (Mizrachi and Hapoel Mizrachi) was aligned with Mapai, specifically, “Red Haifa.” The leaders of the Religious Zionist movement saw eye to eye with Mapai on matters of security, settlement and social welfare.
During the ride on the bus to the Altalena, I contemplated the predicament, and deicded that I would not fight against my brothers, and if G-d forbid the time would arrive [and the order came] I would remove the firing pin from my rifle. Our luck improved and the drive from the North to Tel Aviv was drawn out, so that when we arrived at Tel Aviv, the Altalena was already burning. Every explosion [from the ship] flayed our skin, as we knew that the [destroyed] weapons and ammunition were desperately needed for the war [of Independence]. In the Hagana camp across from the Altalena, thousands of soldiers arrived from all battlefronts. There were fierce Palmach fighters, bearded and dirty, battle scarred “Negev Fighters” who arrived for this holy mission with rejoicing and merriment. The education they received from their mother’s womb was a hatred of religious Jews, the Etzel, the Lechi, and anything that had the fragrance of an international anthem: “The old world will be destroyed to its foundations.” Their faces beamed with happiness when they saw the boat explode and hundreds of Etzel soldiers taken captive and imprisoned in the camp. I saw the young innocence on the faces of the captives, scarred by fire -- they came with the ship to fight for the Jewish State. I heard that many of them died in battle after being conscripted into the IDF – thrown into battle without knowing the language and without appropriate training.
We returned back to our regular duties, and we didn’t discuss the subject, but our hearts were broken.
Points to ponder:
1. Mapai's intense hatred of religious soldiers and religion -- even at the expense of losing Jerusalem in 1948 to the Jordanians. Sixteen unarmed Jewish Etzel soldiers were killed while swimming to shore.
2. Religious soldiers don't need a Rabbi to dictate what's right or wrong -- and are perfectly capable of drawing their own conclusions.
Rashi writes on the pasuk, Yosef was thrown into a pit by his brothers that was "empty and had no water in it." Why the double language, obviously if the pit is empty, it has no water in it. Rashi answers, "there was no water in the pit...but there were snakes and scorpions in it." Nature abhors a vacuum -- if you don't fill a pit with it's natural filler (water), then it will be filled with other things. (hat-tip; R' Shlomo Riskin)
If Eretz Yisrael isn't filled with Jews who strive to observe the Torah and mitzvot (or at a minimum, love their fellow Jew as themselves), then it will be filled with others.
You too can be part of the solution.
Shana Tova,
Jameel @ The Muqata.
Wherever I am, my blog turns towards Eretz Yisrael
Mad Dogs and Englishmen
In Hollywood, Florida, a public school has opened which teaches Judaism. Except that it doesn’t, because that would interfere with the division between church and state. So this school teaches Hebrew, and Bible and other Jewish things in a secular way. Its great advantage is that it is free. If parents wish it then, for a small cost, their child can stay on after school and learn standard limmudei kodesh.
And the private Jewish schools are going nuts about it, on the basis that there is an infringement of the constitutional divide. Not, please note, on the basis that this is competition, although the cynical and not so cynical would be forgiven for feeling that this was the true reason. Of course, such an objection would be prohibited by halacha (as I understand it). As a result, the kids had their religious studies course shut down 3 days after term started by the local school board.
My sister-in-law has written about this in the local paper. She is a conservative Jew and I am not, so I do not rely on the religious opinion expressed in her piece. But I entirely agree with her anyway. That, however, is not the point of this post.
This issue ties into the one that Lurker has addressed below. I am a lawyer by profession, and being British I am also able to sit as a part time Judge. For most of my time I am engaged on my legal practice: for 5 weeks a year or thereabouts I am a Judge sitting on criminal and civil trials at what (in the USA) would be called District Level. So I get to see two sides of the legal process.
It is a peculiarly American thing to get worked up about Judicial power and to insist that it is somehow restrained by the Executive. Israel, deriving its judicial system from the British is far less bothered about it. In countries which lack a written constitution, the thought is that the Courts interpret the law on the basis of precedent and inherent judicial intelligence. In the UK and Israel, judicial bias is an irrelevance because the remedy for Judicial activism is for the legislature simply to legislate to overturn the decision. Consequently, judicial activism tends not to be marked in common-law systems or to be confined to areas where the government’s wish to deprive people of their liberties would not be supported by the vast majority of the populace.
In the US, it appears to me, the concern is greater because the Courts are the ultimate expositors of the law and how they interpret the Constitution is a key issue. If the government don’t like the decision there isn’t much they can do about it. Hence the need for Bush to appoint his cronies to the Supreme Court Bench. I appreciate that in the US this ‘accountability’ to the Executive is viewed with pride. To my ears it sounds like the compromising of the one branch of government which really ought to be politically neutral.
In the UK the school problem would be solved by a judicial review of the school board’s decision. A judge would decide whether the objection to the religious studies course was rational and the action taken was proportionate. If so then, unless it infringed the childrens’ human rights (unlikely) the school board would be permitted to take its own action. That decision would become a precedent for further cases but would not automatically be binding unless the further cases were on exactly the same facts.
The entire case would be conducted on the mundane facts of what particular people decided in a particular county about a particular school. No matter of general principle would be involved. No issue of whether the state should allow religion to intrude into the classroom of a state-run school would disturb the calm waters of a case. In the UK we would not care.
Would the US be better off if that was the case in Hollywood? I think so. The Constitution was framed by those dealing with 17th and 18th century problems. Those problems have evaporated and been replaced by others. The unwieldy task of ensuring that a 300 year old wish-list is fit for its current purpose is expensive and time-consuming. It permits grandstanding and the constant elevation of boringly personal local matters to great statements of principle. Junk it and replace it with something else. Please note, this is not an argument against a written constitution, but simply an argument about granting any secular document divinity.
PS. Any similarities which a reader might detect to arguments about Halacha are purely coincidental. Obviously we should all believe that our founding fathers (whoops – I mean Chazal) were gifted with permanent and faultless foresight and were equally able to address matters current today as they were to address the complexities of Babylonian life 3,000 years ago. Consequently, any attempts to argue that we may now be able to add something to their discussions which would logically require us to say they are wrong are simply the products of our own misguided interpretation of what they said. Glad to have made that clear.
And the private Jewish schools are going nuts about it, on the basis that there is an infringement of the constitutional divide. Not, please note, on the basis that this is competition, although the cynical and not so cynical would be forgiven for feeling that this was the true reason. Of course, such an objection would be prohibited by halacha (as I understand it). As a result, the kids had their religious studies course shut down 3 days after term started by the local school board.
My sister-in-law has written about this in the local paper. She is a conservative Jew and I am not, so I do not rely on the religious opinion expressed in her piece. But I entirely agree with her anyway. That, however, is not the point of this post.
This issue ties into the one that Lurker has addressed below. I am a lawyer by profession, and being British I am also able to sit as a part time Judge. For most of my time I am engaged on my legal practice: for 5 weeks a year or thereabouts I am a Judge sitting on criminal and civil trials at what (in the USA) would be called District Level. So I get to see two sides of the legal process.
It is a peculiarly American thing to get worked up about Judicial power and to insist that it is somehow restrained by the Executive. Israel, deriving its judicial system from the British is far less bothered about it. In countries which lack a written constitution, the thought is that the Courts interpret the law on the basis of precedent and inherent judicial intelligence. In the UK and Israel, judicial bias is an irrelevance because the remedy for Judicial activism is for the legislature simply to legislate to overturn the decision. Consequently, judicial activism tends not to be marked in common-law systems or to be confined to areas where the government’s wish to deprive people of their liberties would not be supported by the vast majority of the populace.
In the US, it appears to me, the concern is greater because the Courts are the ultimate expositors of the law and how they interpret the Constitution is a key issue. If the government don’t like the decision there isn’t much they can do about it. Hence the need for Bush to appoint his cronies to the Supreme Court Bench. I appreciate that in the US this ‘accountability’ to the Executive is viewed with pride. To my ears it sounds like the compromising of the one branch of government which really ought to be politically neutral.
In the UK the school problem would be solved by a judicial review of the school board’s decision. A judge would decide whether the objection to the religious studies course was rational and the action taken was proportionate. If so then, unless it infringed the childrens’ human rights (unlikely) the school board would be permitted to take its own action. That decision would become a precedent for further cases but would not automatically be binding unless the further cases were on exactly the same facts.
The entire case would be conducted on the mundane facts of what particular people decided in a particular county about a particular school. No matter of general principle would be involved. No issue of whether the state should allow religion to intrude into the classroom of a state-run school would disturb the calm waters of a case. In the UK we would not care.
Would the US be better off if that was the case in Hollywood? I think so. The Constitution was framed by those dealing with 17th and 18th century problems. Those problems have evaporated and been replaced by others. The unwieldy task of ensuring that a 300 year old wish-list is fit for its current purpose is expensive and time-consuming. It permits grandstanding and the constant elevation of boringly personal local matters to great statements of principle. Junk it and replace it with something else. Please note, this is not an argument against a written constitution, but simply an argument about granting any secular document divinity.
PS. Any similarities which a reader might detect to arguments about Halacha are purely coincidental. Obviously we should all believe that our founding fathers (whoops – I mean Chazal) were gifted with permanent and faultless foresight and were equally able to address matters current today as they were to address the complexities of Babylonian life 3,000 years ago. Consequently, any attempts to argue that we may now be able to add something to their discussions which would logically require us to say they are wrong are simply the products of our own misguided interpretation of what they said. Glad to have made that clear.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)