Changing entrenched attitudes

Yirmiahu wrote:

Recently, Rabbi Daniel Eidensohn mentioned that he was interesting in exploring "how to actually change entrenched attitudes which have no halachic basis." As it turns out I had recently been skimming a book from fifty or sixty years ago on Public Relations, called "Public Relations"* which addressed this issue (albeit without direct reference to ideas without halachic basis).

Public Opinion is not a mere collection of individual opinions. It has its own dynamic which should be taken into account if one hopes to be an influence. While we are interested in how these principles are applicable to a specific sociological group, we should bear in mind that they apply generally as well. Indeed as individuals these principles likely factor into our opinion making more than we would like to imagine, and almost certainly factor into how many who share our opinions reached their conclusion. Hopefully such a recognition will help us consider the role of these principles in Public Opinion without developing a spirit of condescension.

Initially we need to consider what we mean by "public", "A public is comprised of people who are engaged in a common enterprise with similar interests and are conscious of their mutual dependence" (page 26). Public Opinion is the position taken on a controversial issue by the public. In any given public there are members of various education, aptitude, and temperament. At times Public Opinion is driven by the higher, more reasoned opinions of the knowledgeable and educated. But even the knowledgeable and educated can be swayed by emotion or otherwise make poor judgments, and as a result direct Public Opinion, or allow it to be directed by those less equipped to make such decisions, in a less well thought out direction.

Now people display certain patterns of thought and behavior with respect to the "public" they identify with which influences how "Public Opinion" is developed: For the rest of the post click on this link

Abuse - reporting exempts from responsiblity?

R' Pinchos Yehoshua HaKohain wrote:

Dear Rabbi Eidensohn,

I would like to follow up on some Shakla v'Tarya from 13 July. (It is copied below). I would like to present 3 points:

1) Shomer SheMosar L'Shomer is not applicable here.

2) It is a case of Hashovas Aveida

3) What are the parameters of Hashovas Aveida and how they would apply in our context.

1) Shomer SheMosar LeShomer would not seem to be applicable here.

Either according to Abaye, that the reasoning is because "Ain Reztoni SheYehe Pikdoni b'Yad Acher" or whether according to Rovo that it is because of "At M'Hemnis Li b'Shevuoh, v'Haich Lo M'Hemnis Li", b oth reasons see that the underlying principle is a contractual agreement (a shibud) that binds the shomer, because of the contract undertaken, with the owner of the property. In our situation there has occurred no contractual arrangement between the victim and his erstwhile rescuer/interventionist.

Whether there is an Isur aspect of "Osur L'Shomer Limsor l'Shomer" is discussed in the Acharonim - please see Aruch haShulchon 291:45,46 and Pischei Choshen vol 2, 4:1:1). B ut even if there is an Isur aspect, it flows from being "Maavir Al Daas Baalim" - a Gezel/Gneiva parameter which would not be applicable in our scenario in a strictly Halocho legal sense. (Musar/ethical/moral considerations need to be considered separately)

The following sources and analysis, I believe,support this position: Click on this link for the rest of the posting

EJF - universally accepted conversions?

Anonymous comment on your post "EJF's Enhanced Web site":

I am converting through EFJ (monsey, NY) and I would like to know whether those beit dins are kosher and my conversion will be kosher. Thanks

Fair use vs copyright infringement

[[Friday update]] Matzav.com has so far refused to comply with my request to remove my translation. They have simply taken it off the main page and placed in the "Torah World" section. They insist that since they have credited me with the translation they can publish it on their site. This is clearly a copyright infringment. I responded that they can keep it on only if they remove half of the answer in the teshuva and publish a link to this blog.

=========================
Just noticed that one of my posts was published in full on another blog without even a link to the original. However I was given credit for the post. As far as I can ascertain - one should not publish a complete article without permission. How much of an article constitutes fair use is a matter of debate. I did request that the posting be removed.

This problem is discussed in a cogent article on JTA entitle "Steal this post!" by Daniel Sieradski

[...] One phenomenon that appears to be accelerating the decline of at least some Jewish news organizations is the rise of a group of Jewish news aggregation Web sites, predominantly serving the ultra-Orthodox community, which copy and republish in-full, without permission or payment, content from more prominent Jewish news sources, robbing them of both desperately needed licensing fees and revenue-generating Web site traffic. [...]

EJF's Enhanced Web site

Everything except written teshuvos justifying their approach

To accomplish their mission of education, the Eternal Jewish Family (EJF) has significantly updated the web site at www.eternaljewishfamily.org. This includes adding the Eternal Jewish Family e-News with regular updates on developments within the organization and geirus (conversion to Judaism). It is part of the first phase of a new comprehensive Web site that will be a comprehensive guide to universally accepted conversions in intermarriage. [...]

Obamacare & the great 'prevention" myth

Washington Post - Charles Krauthammer

In the 48 hours of June 15-16, President Obama lost the health-care debate. First, a letter from the Congressional Budget Office to Sen. Edward Kennedy reported that his health committee's reform bill would add $1 trillion in debt over the next decade. Then the CBO reported that the other Senate bill, being written by the Finance Committee, would add $1.6 trillion. The central contradiction of Obamacare was fatally exposed: From his first address to Congress, Obama insisted on the dire need for restructuring the health-care system because out-of-control costs were bankrupting the Treasury and wrecking the U.S. economy -- yet the Democrats' plans would make the problem worse.

Accordingly, Democrats have trotted out various tax proposals to close the gap. Obama's idea of limits on charitable and mortgage-interest deductions went nowhere. As did the House's income tax surcharge on millionaires. And Obama dare not tax employer-provided health insurance because of his campaign pledge of no middle-class tax hikes.

Desperation time. What do you do? Sprinkle fairy dust on every health-care plan, and present your deus ex machina: prevention. [...]

Jewish Law & copyright

JLaw R' Israel Schneider

In our highly advanced technological age, the duplication of original works of authorship has become almost effortless. While at one time, manuscripts or books had to be copied laboriously by hand, it is now possible within several minutes to produce high quality reproductions of entire works. Similarly, audio tapes, videos, and computer programs can all be reproduced quickly, effectively, and cheaply. The purpose of this essay is to explore the halachic implications of making or using unauthorized duplications and to inquire if there are precedents which could serve as grounds for the protection of an author's or creator's proprietary rights.

Halachic literature is rich in detailing the rights - and limitations - of an author to his original work. Not surprisingly, the People of the Book were constantly involved in determining what type of protection could be granted to an author or publisher. [...]

EJF proselytizes in Europe

Five Towns Jewish Times

[...] In a dramatic development that Rabbi Shlomo Baksht calls "nothing short of a miracle," a growing number of intermarried couples are seeking to complete a process that will lead to a universally accepted conversion. With the strong infrastructure of shuls, yeshivos, mikvaos, and kosher restaurants, these couples will be able to function as fully committed Torah Jews. More than 20 such couples, which includes a Jewish spouse who is "on the way to becoming a ba'al teshuvah," will participate in a seminar sponsored by EJF on September 6–8.

The Odessa seminar is modeled after the many successful similar seminars in the U.S., Canada, and Israel. A large percentage of participants eventually proceed to a halachic conversion, according to Rabbi Tropper. Like participants in other countries, many of these couples have at some point undergone a problematic conversion and eventually recognize that their conversion is not recognized by halachic authorities.

A similar seminar for couples is being planned for Munich in November. At each of the seminars, EJF's world-class lecturers present different aspects of Judaism. In addition to Rabbi Tropper, some of the lecturers include Rabbi Mordechai Neugroschel, Rabbi Doron Kornbluth, Rabbi Yonoson Rosenblum, Rabbi Shimon Grilius, and Rabbi Noach Hertz.[...]

Rav Sternbuch - Appreciating small mitzvos

51(2)

Priority 1 - Upcoming Events

Priority 1

Converts of San Nicandro Italy

Time Sep 15, 1947

All over the world next week, the ram's horns of Rosh Hashanah (beginning of the New Year) will call faithful Jews to the Ten Days of Penitence that end with Yom Kippur. No prayers will be more fervent than those from the 80-odd ex-Catholics of San Nicandro, Italy.

The conversion of San Nicandro began almost 20 years ago with dark-eyed, sallow Donato Manduzio. Invalided by shrapnel in World War I, Donato had lain for years on a miserable straw mattress in an attic room. At first he wept bitterly that he could not join in the daily life of his native San Nicandro Garganico (pop. 20,000). But gradually, the sounds of women singing as they carried water in copper vessels on their heads, the cries of the black-hatted mule-drivers, the hammering of cobblers in the tiny, dark shops (Donate had been a cobbler himself) lost their attraction for Donato. He heard them no more, because he was too busy reading the Bible.

Along with the sounds of workaday life, Donato also closed his ears to church bells. Bible study had led him to question the doctrines of the Roman Catholic Church.

On the day that Manduzio was able to leave his bed, a Protestant preacher happened to be addressing a meeting in San Nicandro's square. As the preacher attacked the dogmas of Catholicism, Donato suddenly lifted one of the two sticks on which he was leaning, and shouted: "You have demolished the Catholic Church for me. I am a Catholic no longer."[...]

Self-Converted Ugandan "Jews"

History of Ugandan "Jews" (click this link)

Obamacare - Myth & Facts /CBS News

Watch CBS Videos Online

Mary Robinson's Medal of Freedom

Wall Street Journal

Barack Obama's decision to award the Presidential Medal of Freedom to Mary Robinson has generated unexpected but emotionally charged opposition. Appointed by then-U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan as high commissioner for human rights in 1997-2002, Ms. Robinson had a controversial but ineffective tenure. (Previously, she was president of Ireland, a ceremonial position.)

Criticism of Mr. Obama's award, to be officially bestowed tomorrow, has centered on Ms. Robinson's central organizing role as secretary general of the 2001 "World Conference Against Racism" in Durban, South Africa. Instead of concentrating on its purported objectives, Durban was virulently anti-Semitic, anti-Israel, and at least implicitly anti-American.

So vile was the conference's draft declaration that Secretary of State Colin Powell correctly called it "a throwback to the days of 'Zionism equals racism,'" referring to the infamous 1975 U.N. General Assembly resolution to that effect. President George W. Bush (whose father led the 1991 campaign that repealed the U.N.'s "Zionism is a form of racism" resolution) unhesitatingly agreed when Mr. Powell recommended the U.S. delegation leave the Durban conference rather than legitimize the outcome.

Ms. Robinson didn't see it that way then, and she has shown no remorse since. In late 2002, she described Durban's outcome as "remarkably good, including on the issues of the Middle East." [...]