Posts from — July 2007

We do not eat giraffes. But could we if they were plentiful and cheap?

Let us compare the Orthodox Union article on giraffes to the Dark Light take. Note that Dark Light ripped off the topic from (the Orthodox Union’s organ) Jewish Action’s “What’s The Truth About…â€? column, a surprisingly and consistently decent column of Jewish Action magazine, and while they credited the author, Rabbi Ari Z. Zivotofsky Ph.D, and the title of the article in Jewish Action, they did not credit the publication itself, nor did they provide a link. That would give credence to the Orthodox Union, and that simply will not do. The Modern Orthodox must not be legitimized.

Anyway, before you look, guess which organization came up with the following reason to not eat a giraffe:

The halachic basis for not eating giraffe is because, in addition to needing the physical criteria for kosher animals to be met, the Torah may also require a continuous tradition of actually eating the specific animal in question.

Commenting on the verse “These are the creatures that you may eat� (Lev. 11:2), our Sages noted: We learn from this that the Holy One, blessed be He, grabbed hold of each and every variety and showed Moses, saying, ‘This you may eat, and this you may not eat.’ (Babylonian Talmud, Chullin 42a). Moses then passed the tradition on to the Israelites by taking hold of each creature, saying to them, “This you may eat, and this you may not eat. The following you shall abominate among the birds [he then showed them]: These you shall abominate, and these you shall not abominate. The following shall make you unclean [not kosher, and he then showed them]: These are unclean, and these are clean� (Sifra, Shemini 2).

According to most halachic authorities, the need for such a tradition is essential only in the case of birds; as Rabbi Isaac said, “Birds are eaten by tradition� (Babylonian Talmud, Chullin 63b). As for beasts and animals, it appears from Maimonides that merely recognizing them as being kosher is enough (Ma’achalot Asurot 1.8). However, some Ashkenazi halachic authorities have ruled that these animals also require a tradition. Therefore, the giraffe, despite its signs of being a kosher animal and its long, shecht-able neck, would still not be permitted to eat without an uninterrupted tradition of its being eaten.

In fact, the Orthodox Union disputes this, noting,

There is also an historical record of the giraffe being accepted as kosher. The zemer, listed among the ten types of kosher animals in Deuteronomy (14:5), is identified as the giraffe by Rav Saadia Gaon, Rabbenu Yona, Radak, the Septuagint, and many others.

Even in the near impossible, the Dark Light must find ways to be machmir.

Editor’s note: No giraffes were ritually slaughtered in this swipe at Dark Light.

Ostensibly, our progressive and liberal friends who support mass immigration of Muslims both here and wherever they seek to live should be heartened by this week’s op-ed in the Forward by Eric Frey. The title of the piece is, “A Racist Stench Rises Out of Cologne,� and the end warns European Jews that,

The future of Islamic life in Europe does not lend itself to simple answers. If Jews find themselves too close to demagogues who want to rid society of all minorities, they should know that they are on the wrong track.

So it appears that the Forward is giving voice to those who categorically reject “racism� against Muslim immigrants.

But is that what is happening?

Let’s look at some of the actual content of the essay itself, apart from the specific building of the mosque in question.

“Why would a man who survived the Holocaust by hiding in a cellar in Hamburg and who spoke out forcefully against racism and antisemitism by neo-Nazis in the early 1990s allow himself to be associated with such company? Giordano’s answer is that radical Islam and its totalitarian creed, not the remnants of European fascism, are the main threats to liberal democracy today.

He finds himself in a similar bind as French-Jewish philosopher Alain Finkielkraut, who was widely condemned as a racist when he told the Israeli daily Ha’aretz in November 2005 that the French Muslim community was itself to blame for the social and ethnic tensions that led to the riots in Paris’s suburbs earlier that year. Finkelkraut’s arguments echoed those of Nicolas Sarkozy, then-interior minister and now president, and even National Front leader Jean-Marie Le Pen. The mainstream leftist position, by stark contrast, was that French society had failed the immigrant youth because of a lack of integration and economic opportunity.

All across Europe, one can see liberal Jewish thinkers parting ways over the issue of Islam with their non-Jewish peers, among whom criticism of Islam is often frowned upon. Their willingness to speak out may have to do with a special Jewish abhorrence of totalitarian thinking, or concern over the widespread anti-Israel and antisemitic views among Europe’s Muslims, or (at least in Germany’s case) a feeling that Jews can speak out where others feel inhibited by their history.�

Emphasis added.

Schumer is moving to protect Wall Street. The NY Times reports,

Mr. Schumer has been busy with hedge fund and private equity managers, an important part of his constituency in New York. He has been reassuring them that he will resist an effort led by members of his own party to single out the industry with a plan that would more than double the taxes on the enormous profits reaped by its executives.

Mr. Schumer has considerable say on the issue. In addition to being the third-ranking Democrat in the Senate leadership, he is the only Democrat serving on both of the major committees, Banking and Finance, that have jurisdiction in the matter.

He has long been a pro-business Democrat and a fund-raising machine for the party, as well as a vociferous supporter of Wall Street issues in Washington, much the way Michigan lawmakers defend the auto industry and Iowa politicians work on behalf of corn farmers.

Let us be clear. Those singling out Wall Street — and Wall Street alone — are threatening New York’s supremacy as the international center of capitalism. The benefits of having such a center are desired by other world class cities. We in New York should have no interest in handing it to them. The ripples of wealth may not be felt as we prefer they be nationally, but the ripples of Wall Street are absolutely felt by local residents in any way connected to this industry. Shoe shine boys, taxis, lawyers, etc.

But in his conversations with Wall Street executives about the tax proposals, Mr. Schumer said, he has told them that he would oppose a tax increase as long as it did not also apply to other industries, like energy and real estate

And as Schumer himself explained, a tax that is ” consistent and it’s right, and it doesn’t single out New York,â€? he said.

This guy is so solid. Really one of the best senators. An embarrassing speaker, but a shrewed and nuanced legislator. Some of his moves are the kind I marvel over with Republican friends. They just nod uneasily, and say things like, “He’s a smart guy…no one’s doubting that.”

As some of you may be aware, I penned a popular essay discussing the issue of Ben Niddah, which was picked up by others. It appears Rabbi Shafran’s recent essay in the Jerusalem Post was a rebuttal of sorts, something others have detected as well.

I feel his defense is flawed, and have posted an essay on Jewschool explaining why.

Some chevra-man blogger named Jacob Da Jew doesn’t like the fact that some of us are trashing Touro College, NCSY’s favorite substitute for an actual college education.

He says it is an “outstanding institution.� Why? Because he and his wife and some other frummies went there.

This Jew says,

“Unfortunately, there always is the losers, the scumbags that have ruin it for us all.�

Well, there certainly is losers everywhere but you cannit blame Touro cuz a fews peoples dont take there English as a second language class serious.*

This Jacob Jew person also notes,

“Our community and way of life is substantially better than religious ultra-orthodox people living in Israel.�

And what a great selling point to liberal and secular Jewish parents this is. At least your kids will be less poor and ignorant that the right-wing ultra-Orthodox haredim in Israel. How moderate is that?

A debate about grammar and writing style ensues in the comments section, one of the truly saddest cases of the blind leading the blind I have seen since the haredi Internet ban took place.

To send your child to Touro, please contact your local JSU “cool advisor.â€? Because Touro is so competitive, but NCSY can make it happen. Oh, yes they can. Because it’s all in the relationship! Remember, for NCSY, all frum paths lead to Touro. Well, too many of them anyway.

Hat tip: Jewbiquitous

*Italics added so frummies, and not just secular and Modern Orthodox Jews, can get that this is satire.

Now that Tisha B’ Av is over, we can finally get back to food. And there has been all this talk about the controversy of pork products in Israel, and the attempt to ban them.

Y-Love supports a ban of pork products in Netanya, but his reasoning is off (remember, Y-Love is haredi). For instance, one of the reasons Y-Love attaches to the pork issue is that many of the Russian immigrants aren’t Jewish, and “One non-Jewish Russian IDF soldier was even found to be a Neo-Nazi, and Israeli neo-Nazi activity is on the rise.�

Well, it’s hard to go lower than one, now, isn’t it Y-Love? What if we find out that they (the Russians) drink borsht? Should we ban that too, if say, we find two Israeli-Russian neo-Nazi soldiers?

Also, Y-Love notes that, “Eight non-religious council members voted for this bill. Why is this? They obviously didn’t see it as “religious coercion.”

Maybe they were afraid to vote against the ban. After all, if 13 out of 25 members are religious, that’s a lot of frum voters! Not that they would EVER hold an anti-pork ban vote against them or anything like that.

“But you have to draw the line somewhere. Somewhere there has to be someone saying, “if we have a star of David on our flag, and Hebrew as our language, we’ve got to have some Judaism over here.”

And if the line can’t be drawn at pornography, can it at least be drawn at pork?â€?

Well, what’s wrong with where the lines were drawn? Anyway, I don’t really care, if I go to Israel, I can make it a couple of weeks without porn if I have to.

But as to the pork issue, isn’t there a middle ground between those who love pigs, and those who demand Jews should not consume pork?

Well, I went to the well, and found an old movie on Youtube that I think just might find the middle ground. Pro-pig, but also accommodating of Judaism’s restriction against eating pig. Because you can be a chazer at the shabbos table, you just can’t eat a chazer at the shabbos table.

Let’s take a look…

Isn’t Tisha B’ Av a bitch? For Failed Messiah’s latest news on the wonderful world of haredism, please go here instead!

Remember how we learned that rabbinic injunction of the extra seven days of niddah have caused women with a short fertility cycle to become infertile? Well, more good reason to thank rabbinic add-ons to Jewish Law. This one is just heart wrenchingly awful.

The New Jersey Jewish News reports,

Just why Orthodox communities show higher than usual incidences of spina bifida has not been established. Krul said the causes may include a lack of leafy greens in their diet due in part to problems of washing such food according to the rules of kosher preparation, which is concerned about bug infestation.

Failed Messiah notes,

The Torah forbids eating bugs. The normal amount of bug forbidden to eat would be a kezayit, the size of a very large olive and, in practice today, about one ounce. But rabbis long ago cut that amount in half. And they did something else, something that has made keeping kosher all the more difficult – they created a category called baria. A baria is, in effect, a whole bug. A baria can never be negated (battel)[…]

It used to be a thorough washing of the greens followed by a quick inspection done with the naked eye was enough to render greens edible. But Rabbi Blumenkrantz, may God rest his soul, and other rabbis entered into a competition of sorts to see who could be more restrictive. Soon it became necessary to have special training to check for bugs, special equipment was now “necessary,” three bugs found in 100 pounds of lettuce became an “infestation.” And leafy greens became rare in the haredi diet.

I realize that many of you may be tempted to say that people should just pay the extra money for the bug checking, and eat their greens. But realistically, that won’t happen consistently enough, as many haredim are poor. Others will say that we should ignore the advice of these recent rabbis, and return to simply washing the greens before eating. But that won’t happen either, as haredim aren’t ones to back off a new stringency, even if it’s five minutes old.

Instead, they must use supplements (which many won’t bother doing either, because it’s expensive and a pain in the ass), and not rely on the simple foods God gave us, like we did for thousands of years. Some will surely cast doubts as to the idea that we really need to eat leafy vegetables in the first place, a response quite typical whenever science conflicts with haredism. There will probably even be comments to that effect even on this post, despite this sentence and the previous one.

Haredism has produced ignorance, poverty, and languishing. Now it appears, we can add physical deformity to the long list of blessings.

To read about the very big kashrut dangers of lettuce and leaf vegatables (and why an implicit corresponding increased risk of spina bifida is better for your newborn’s neshama and probably the way to go) please go here. Remember, it’s just spina bifida, it’s not pakuach nefesh. And the scientists are probably just saying this because they hate Judaism.

Checking a field alone is insufficient, as we are required to look at the general conditions of the vegetable as it grows in that area, not just a specific field. Washing alone is insufficient, since no cleaning system has proven Halachically reliable for this purpose. Post-packaging inspection alone is not reliable, because the Halacha requires that each vegetable be checked if it has the status of a Miyut ha’Matzuy [...]
“Salads, as nutritious as they may be, must be approached with the same attention to Kashrus that we apply to all other foods. We may be tempted to take the easy way out [editor's note: oh, no, no. no. We wouldn't want to do that!!!!], but Shlomo ha’Melech has already, and poignantly, admonished us (Mishlei 6:6), לך ×?ל נמלה עצל, ור×?×” דרכיה וחכ×? – “Go to the ant, lazy one – see its ways and learn!â€?

Update: There is a school of thought that claims evidence that there is a Jewish genetic predisposition to this disease. Please do not assume that a child has spina bifida because his/her mother did not eat her vegetables. But please eat your vegetables!

TM of Jewlicious hits one out of the park with his headline, “19 Families control 34 percent of Israel’s income,” a disparity of serious concern to anyone to the left of Abdullah bin Abdul Aziz. And TM, a devout Zionist, deserves credit for tackling this issue, and it certainly demonstrates that he isn’t adverse to criticism of the medinah. But how do Zionists like TM expect Diasporists like myself to react, except to say, “Jesus Christ, what a third world shithole!”

This week’s Forward sports yet another article, “Activists Up Efforts To Cut Circumcision Out of Bris Ritual,” that is sensitive and respectful to the anti-circ camp, something which should be alarming to those who might expect a snide dismissal of the anti-circ camp from the nation’s most important Jewish newspaper.

Jacob Victor writes,

“While the United States is one of the few industrialized countries in which a majority of newborn boys are circumcised, recent surveys show that the American circumcision rate, which was close to 90% in the 1960s, is now at only 57%. But even though the national rate has declined, circumcision remains the norm in all major Jewish denominations; most newborn Jewish boys have either a traditional brit milah or have the procedure performed at a hospital.”

Why is this important? Because liberal and secular Jews – usually in-synch with the general American population, are now out of synch. When the circ rate is the minority, which it is fast becoming, the intensity of “rethinking” circ will increase dramatically.

Edgar Schoen, a pediatric endocrinologist,

“Argues that this decision [the equivocal 1999 American Academy of Pediatrics’ Task Force on Circumcision] was reached because of the influence of what he calls “anti-circ” activists. “These people are very good with the sound bites, and they get on all the talk shows and all over the Internet,” he said

This is the ultimate in chutzpah. The U.S. position of still practicing routine neonatal circumcision is contrary to all other Western nations, and this is in large part due to Jewish influence. As Eli Ungar-Sargon noted in his film “Cut,” the U.S. is the only nation to practice routine neonatal male circumcision except for one other. Guess which one? That’s right, the State of Israel. And the form of circumcision – that is, the amount of the penis removed – is the same as Jewish ritual circumcision.

Schoen notes,

“For young, trendy Jewish parents, everything has to be natural and organic. ‘Why would the foreskin be there if it wasn’t good?’ That resonates with a lot of young Jewish parents.”

This should “resonate�? with any thinking person. There should be no such thing as a secular pro-circ camp in the West, because when there aren’t Jews or Muslims (but mostly Jews) there usually isn’t one.

“At the end of the day, every couple has to make its own decision,” said Rabbi Donni Aaron [head of the Reform’s Berit Milah Board who gets pounded in “The Cut" ] head of program designed to train Reform mohels. But, she added, most of the parents she has encountered eventually choose to circumcise their sons, and that trend is unlikely to change any time soon. “If for thousands of years it was clear that the practice was harmful,” she said, “it would have gone away a while ago.”

This is absolute ethnocentric nonsense. Did FGM “go away?” Hardly. So what’s the difference? That we are Jews? That we are white? Both? Circular reasoning and complete drivel.