Allow victim to suffer to prevent collateral damage to community?

Under what circumstances should I avoid saving a person from harm because of the collateral damage? Does it make a difference what type of colleteral damage would occur or how many people would suffer?

Is there a difference if the collateral damage is to a single individual, family, school or community. Sources?

If the rabbonim say that the saving the victim of abuse would mean that community's main yeshiva would be destroyed by lawsuits and as a result 90% of the kids would go off the derech. Does the victim have the right to insist on taking measures to protect himself from harm - even if collateral damage results?

Or what about the future. The molesting has stopped but the victim wants to punish perpetrator to deter other perpetrators in the future. Community says that they are not willing lose yeshiva for the sake of protecting against future acts. Does the victim have to go along with their decision. Sources?

Does the non compliance with the community wishes constitute a transgression of any specific mitzva? Or is it simply that the community has the right apply all types sanctions to achieves but there is no actual sin.

Another way of looking at it is that the community should have taken proactive measures to make sure this dilemna never arises - but since it didn't can they avoid the consequences?

Responsibility - absolved if case is reported to rabbi/police?

I need some sources regarding the question of whether a person is absolved of responsibility by going to a rabbi or police. For example we know that a person is obligated to try and save another from harm. If he sees another drowning or hears a plot against him he needs to either save him or have others save the person.

When I discover a case of abuse and report this information to a rabbi or the police - am I free from future obligation? Or should I view that I have merely delegated the task to another but that the primarily responsibility remains with me. This seems to be the issue of a shomer who hands his job over to another shomer. If there is any damage the first shomer is responsible.

שולחן ערוך (חושן משפט רצא:כו): שומר שמסר לשומר, חייב, אפילו אם הוא שומר חנם ומסר לשומר שכר, דאמר ליה: את מהימן לי בשבועה היאך לא מהימן לי בשבועה. אפילו אם ידוע לכל שהשני טוב וכשר יותר מראשון. הגה: מיהו שומר שמסר לשומר לפני המפקיד, ולא מיחה, פטור (מרדכי פרק המפקיד). לפיכך אם דרך הבעלים להפקיד תמיד דבר זה אצל השומר השני, הרי השומר הראשון פטור מלשלם, והוא שלא ימעט שמירתו; אבל אם מיעט שמירתו, כגון שהראשון היה שומר שכר והשני ש"ח, או שהראשון שואל והשני ש"ש, פושע הוא הראשון ומשלם, אע"פ ששאל או שכר בבעלים. ואם יש עדים ששמר השני כראוי, נפטר שומר ראשון. ואפילו לא היו שם עדים, אם השומר הראשון ראה ויכול הוא לישבע, הרי זה נשבע ונפטר (ועיין סימן ע"ב סעיף ל').

Is that true in the case of an obligation to protect another person from harm? In other words if I report a case of abuse do I need to do a follow up that the case is in fact being properly dealt with? Additional if I try once to help and fail - do I need to keep trying?

Children recant sex abuse charge after father serves 20 years

Associated Press

Former Vancouver police officer Clyde Ray Spencer spent nearly 20 years in prison after he was convicted of sexually molesting his son and daughter. Now, the children say it never happened.

Matthew Spencer and Kathryn Tetz, who live in Sacramento, Calif., each took the stand Friday in Clark County Superior Court to clear their father's name, The Columbian newspaper reported.

Matthew, now 33, was 9 years old at the time. He told a judge he made the allegation after months of insistent questioning by now-retired Clark County sheriff's detective Sharon Krause just so she would leave him alone.

Tetz, 30, said she doesn't remember what she told Krause back in 1985, but she remembers Krause buying her ice cream. She said that when she finally read the police reports she was "absolutely sure" the abuse never happened.

"I would have remembered something that graphic, that violent," Tetz said.

Spencer's sentence was commuted by then-Gov. Gary Locke in 2004 after questions arose about his conviction. Among other problems, prosecutors withheld medical exams that showed no evidence of abuse, even though Krause claimed the abuse was repeated and violent.

Despite the commutation, Spencer remains a convicted sex offender. He is hoping to have the convictions overturned. [...]

Rabbi Tropper apologizes!

I wish to thank Roni for the following:

Rav Sternbuch on the EJF

Posted by Rabbi Tropper Posted in EJF Posted on 11-07-2009

Tags: EJF, Rav Sternbuch

Rabbi Tropper:

Is it true that your blog claimed that Rav Sternbuch told someone that he was against nasty attacks on EJF?

Rabbi Tropper responds:

I was so told. Subseqently someone emailed me that what I reported on the blog was not true and that Rav Sternbuch had not spoken to anyone regarding the attacks on EJF. I thanked him for notifying me and told him That I would correct it ASAP.

That Person Emailed me again thanking me.

I then Removed it from the Blog immediatly and notified that person that it had been corrected.

I apologize for the mistake.

EJF - Making peace with R' Tropper

This Shabbos Rav Sternbuch told me about a telephone call he received this week. He said that someone had called him and said that it was time to make peace between R' Tropper and myself. That they were tired of being criticized. He told the caller that he was not getting involved in the matter. The rest of our conversation is not for publication.

The issue in fact is not between me and R' Tropper. It is between R' Tropper and Rav Sternbuch. All that we have been asking for the last two years is the halachic reasoning of their poskim for what they are doing. [The teshuva from Rav Reuven Feinstein is not adequate because it doesn't address their proselytizing efforts] Then Rav Sternbuch either agrees or disagrees with it. If R' Tropper is too shy to make an appointment I will be glad to make an appointment for him. It would be helpful if he would take Rav Reuven Feinstein along. Rav Sternbuch's views have simply served as the justification for me to raise questions and criticize the published descriptions of what R' Tropper is doing. If Rav Sternbuch is satisfied with what they are doing I will be too. If R' Tropper doesn't want to do that, teshuvos from Rav Eliashiv or Rav Reuven Feinstein could serve the same function. This is really the absurdity of the situation. The issue could have been resolved a long time ago with minimum effort.

Obama & his Russian diplomatic "successes"

Washington Post Charles Krauthammer

The signing ceremony in Moscow was a grand affair. For Barack Obama, foreign policy neophyte and "reset" man, the arms reduction agreement had a Kissingerian air. A fine feather in his cap. And our president likes his plumage.

Unfortunately for the United States, the country Obama represents, the prospective treaty is useless at best, detrimental at worst.

Useless because the level of offensive nuclear weaponry, the subject of the U.S.-Russia "Joint Understanding," is an irrelevance. We could today terminate all such negotiations, invite the Russians to build as many warheads as they want and profitably watch them spend themselves into penury, as did their Soviet predecessors, stockpiling weapons that do nothing more than, as Churchill put it, make the rubble bounce.

Obama says that his START will be a great boon, setting an example to enable us to better pressure North Korea and Iran to give up their nuclear programs. That a man of Obama's intelligence can believe such nonsense is beyond comprehension. There is not a shred of evidence that cuts by the great powers -- the INF treaty, START I, the Treaty of Moscow (2002) -- induced the curtailment of anyone's programs. Moammar Gaddafi gave up his nukes the week we pulled Saddam Hussein out of his spider hole. No treaty involved. The very notion that Kim Jong Il or Mahmoud Ahmadinejad will suddenly abjure nukes because of yet another U.S.-Russian treaty is comical.

The pursuit of such an offensive weapons treaty could nonetheless be detrimental to us. Why? Because Obama's hunger for a diplomatic success, such as it is, allowed the Russians to exact a price: linkage between offensive and defensive nuclear weapons.

This is important for Russia because of the huge American technological advantage in defensive weaponry. We can reliably shoot down an intercontinental ballistic missile. They cannot. And since defensive weaponry will be the decisive strategic factor of the 21st century, Russia has striven mightily for a quarter-century to halt its development. Gorbachev tried to swindle Reagan out of the Strategic Defense Initiative at Reykjavik in 1986. Reagan refused. As did his successors -- Bush I, Clinton, Bush II. [...]

Does R' Tropper view Rav Reuven Feinstein as a posek?

R' Tropper recently rejected the views of a prominent Midwestern Rav - who is opposed to EJF - as not being those of a posek but merely a talmid chachom. R' Tropper explcitly states that he views Rav Eliashiv and Rav Dovid Feinstein as poskim - but that he views most talmidei chachom as not being considered poskim - even those who answer halachic questions. Obviously he does not view himself as a posek. But this declaration - printed below - would imply that he does not view the head of his halachic committee - Rav Reuven Feinstein as a posek. That would mean that he is acknowledging the radical halachic changes of his organization are being certified by a prominent talmid chachom - but not someone that R' Tropper considers a posek! He also acknowledges that he has received words of encouragement from the great contemporary poskim - but does not mention a single letter explicitly supporting EJF halachic innovations.

If in fact he did not mean to imply that Rav Reuven Feinstein is not a posek - he should explicity state this and apologize for his unintentional slight to Rav Reuven's kavod.
=========================
Rabbi Tropper's blog

Rabbi Tropper I heard that there is a Rav who is a Posek in the Midwest, who is strongly opposed to the EJF. Are you aware of this opposition?

Answer: Rabbi Tropper says:

No I am not aware. I am sure that who ever this Rav is he must be a Talmid Chochom. However I am not aware of any Posek in the Midwest at all.

I heard from the Great Gaonim Maran Harav Yisroel Gustman, zt’l and Maran Harav Yitzchok Hutner, zt’l on different occasions that not every Rav is a Posek. A Posek is one who knows Bavli, yerushalmi, Michilta, Tur bais Yosef, 4 chelkei Shulchan aruch in great depth. One who could analyze a halachic issue and bring proof from various places in Shas to the issue at hand.

These words are similiar to the Daas Torah I heard from the great Posek, Harav Yosef Eliyahu Henkin, zt’l. Rav Henkin, then went on to tell me a story about the Maharsham, zt’l who would bring 8 proofs from shas to support his Psakim.

One who knows all of Mishne Berura albeit by heart is a Rav not a Posek!

One who memorizes all of the Piskei Chazon Ish or the Psakim of the Tshbiner Rav or the Igros Moshe is NOT a posek.

I am not aware of any POSEK in the midwest. I know of a few respected rabbonim in the Midwest. Even great Talmedei Chachomim, but not Poskim.

In Eretz Yisroel We have 3 or 4 SENIOR Poskim, Maran Harav Yosef Sholom Eliyashuv, shlit”a, Maran Harav Shmuel Wosner, shlit”a (The Chazon Ish said about Maran Harav Wosner, shlit”a that if Moshiach would arrive during his time, he would be a Member of the Sanhedrin). Maran Harav Ovadia Yosef, shlit”a whose knowledge in all aspects of Shas and Poskim is legendary.

In the U.S. many Bnei Torah refer to Hagaon Rav D. Feinstein, shlit”a as a great Posek.

Many of the newcomers to Yiddishkeit ask a Shaila to a Rav.

They Believe that the most simple question answered by a Rav is from a “Posek”. We should educate them properly.

The danger in this confusion is that when Maran Harav Wosner, shlit”a or Maran Harav Eliyashuv, shlit”a issue a Halachic decision and a Rav in the Midwest or in NY argues, it becomes in their mind a “Machlokes haposkim”. That is Dangerous!

A Rav in NY or in LA or in the Midwest who argues with the above mentioned Poskim is not classified as a “Machlokes Haposkim”.

Hence, the Gedoley Haposkim and the Gedoley Horoah, shlit”a who strongly endorse the efforts of EJF to stop fraudelent conversion amongst Klal Yisroel, speak to those who respect Daas Torah.

As much as a Moreh Horoah can say, his words are secondary next to the words of the Poskei Hador.

A hand written letter of support for Netzach Mishpachas Yisroel was written by Maran, the great Gaon Harav Chaim Kanievsky, shlit”a and read at the conference held recently in Yerushalayim. Another letter of elaborate support came from the Zkan Rosh Hayeshivos in Eretz Yisroel.

Rav Sternbuch - between a blessing & curse

41

Chareidi kids peacefully demonstrate for Shabbos

YNet JPost

Several thousands ultra-Orthodox children who attend the Haredi Community's elementary schools rallied on Wednesday near the Safra parking lot at the entrance to Jerusalem, in protest of what they view as the Shabbat desecration in the capital.

The rally began with a march from the Shabbat Square in the city towards Shiveti Tsrael Street. The children, some of them dressed in sackcloth, held up signs condemning the opening of the Karta parking lot on weekends. Several hundred adults accompanied the rally. [...]

British court rules Judaism is racist

Haaretz

Jewish schools are guilty of racial discrimination if they reject children on the grounds of their parentage, a British court has ruled.

In a decision that has shocked the country's 300,000-strong Jewish community, the Court of Appeal held that ongoing personal acts of faith, rather than birth or conversion, must define who is a Jew.

In doing so, the court overturned an earlier high court judgment upholding the decision of the JFS in London (the oldest and largest Jewish school in Britain) to deny a boy admission because it did not recognize his mother?s conversion.

The three judges, one of them Jewish, ruled that any selection criteria that gives ethnic priority to a Jew is showing racial discrimination. They cited the Race Relations Act 1976, which was introduced to prevent discrimination on the grounds of race.

The ruling means that Jewish schools of any denomination, whether privately or state funded, will be barred from giving priority to children who are born Jewish or who convert, and instead must consider how the children and their families practice their Judaism.

The move throws into disarray the admissions arrangements for Britain's 97 Orthodox schools and may force them to introduce "faith tests" - like church schools, which require fortnightly attendance at Sunday services. Such a radical intervention - unprecedented since the time of Oliver Cromwell - calls into question the relationship between church (or synagogue) and state. [...]

RaP - important conversion articles

"New rules have Diaspora converts waiting on Israel"

http://jta.org/news/article/2009/07/07/1006367/new-rules-have-diaspora-converts-waiting-on-israel

"Rabbi offers unorthodox solution to civil marriage debate"
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1098606.html
Religious Zionists war against Haredim on Conversions:

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull&cid=1245184921517

"Zionist rabbis break law for converts".

This is a really important article that covers the situation from the perspectives of the Haredim to the Religious Zionists in Israel, including mentioning EJF and responses to it. It is truly a Conversions War.

Rabbinate converts 60 active missionaries

Arutz Sheva

The Chief Rabbinate has been given a list of more than 60 recent converts to Judaism who continue to believe in Jesus – and are active missionaries.

Rabbi Shalom Dov Lifshitz, chairman and founder of the anti-missionary and anti-assimilation Yad L’Achim organization, met in recent days with Chief Rabbi Shlomo Amar and provided him with the list. Rabbi Amar was reportedly “shocked” at seeing that the Chief Rabbinate had authorized the conversions

An immediate solution was found for the future, however. Rabbi Lifshitz presented Rabbi Amar with a list of 17 questions that should be asked of any prospective convert. Under the assumption that the missionaries will either not lie straight out, or that the specific questions will help detect the lies, it is hoped that missionaries will be spotted and weeded out from the conversion rolls.

Yad L’Achim had prepared the list of names, ID numbers and addresses of more than 60 people who were active in missionary groups before, during and after their long conversion process to Judaism. The "converts" were then accepted as members of religious communities, and their children were accepted into religious schools. [...]

Proselytizing - Purpose of countermissionaries

JPost

I am completely misunderstood. As a countermissionary, people think that it's my goal in life to make people miserable, to persecute poor Christians living in our country and to tell people what they should believe. Nothing could be further from the truth. People think that a countermissionary's raison d'être is to destroy freedom of religion and to create within Israel a state similar to that of the Muslim countries that surround us, where no one has any freedom to believe anything other than those beliefs held by the thugs who hold power. Again, wrong. Some people think I hate Christians. Wrong also.

Believe it or not, the purpose of a countermissionary is ultimately to improve Jewish-Christian relations. As it says in Robert Frost's poem, "Mending Wall," good fences make good neighbors. By teaching Jews why we are not Christians and by teaching Christians to respect our boundaries, we improve relations between the two faiths. Blurring the lines between the two faiths doesn't serve to bridge the gap caused by fear and misunderstanding; it weakens Judaism and causes Christians to have less respect for the Jewish people. Breaking down the walls breaks down the distinctiveness and the different callings of each faith system, and only fosters more hatred and fear.

The purpose of the countermissionary is to strengthen the Jewish people and to teach Christians that we have reasons for choosing to reject their faith. When they can understand and accept this, we can progress to a level of rejecting their faith without rejecting them as people, and the two peoples can live side-by-side in mutual respect and understanding, agreeing to disagree.

WHEN WE say that it should be illegal to proselytize in Israel, we are not saying that a Christian doesn't have the right to believe as he wishes or even to worship God as he sees fit. What we are saying is that a Jew has the right to live in the Jewish state in freedom, without needing to worry about being harassed by someone trying to convince him that his faith is not good enough, that he needs to accept Christianity's concept of God to be able to even have a relationship with God in the first place, or that his child will be convinced to abandon the faith of his forefathers.[...]

Conversion - What is a Reform ger?

Ora asks the following:

What is the difference between no Giur and a non recognised Giur?

A young man is fascinated by some aspects of judaism. However, orthodox judaism poses some problems of philosphical and of practical nature. (e.g. He does not want to oppose homosexuality, his wife is not jewish and he does not want her to convert because of him, he lives far from the synagogue he wants to attend and would have to drive to go there, he does not really believe in "exclusivity" of religion, i.e. that all other religions but judaism are false)

But he considers a reform giur, since reform judaism is the religion he would like to choose for himself, because it addresses the problems he has with orthodox judaism.

Now: anyway, a reform Giur is not recognised. So it will be considered null and void by orthodox rabbinate. So there is no problem that the person will not be shomer mitzwoth. Is it therefore legitimate for him to convert (reform), knowing that his reform giur has "limited validity"? In other words: Is reform judaism a legitimate way of being mekaim 7 mitzwoth bney noach?