Viktor Orbán sparks outrage with attack on ‘race mixing’ in Europe

 https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/jul/24/viktor-orban-against-race-mixing-europe-hungary

The Romanian MEP Alin Mituța also responded angrily to Orbán’s comments. “Speaking about race or ethnic ‘purity’, especially in such a mixed region such as central and eastern Europe, is purely delusional and dangerous. And so is Mr Orban,” he wrote on Twitter.

Far-right Hungarian PM Orban decries European ‘race-mixing,’ sparking outrage

 https://www.timesofisrael.com/far-right-hungarian-pm-orban-decries-european-race-mixing-sparking-outrage/

Hungary’s conservative leader Viktor Orban denounced the “mixing” of races in a controversial speech on Saturday that has generated backlash.

Speaking in Romania, the Hungarian prime minister defended his vision of an “unmixed Hungarian race” as he criticized “mixing” with non-Europeans, The Guardian reported.

“We [Hungarians] are not a mixed race, and we do not want to become a mixed race either,” Orban said.

Habituation

 

Habituation

 https://nafshi.org/mishlei-13-20-habituation/

Thus, after a period of repeated sinning, the process of habituation desensitizes him to the seriousness of the sin, and it is no longer a struggle. Mishlei describes the phenomenon of habituation in terms of being pursued by the evil that the person has created through his own sin. Something similar is happening when he becomes desensitized to the value of the good that he is doing. However, it is not quite the same.

Rav Moshe Tendler

 https://mishpacha.com/brilliant-mind-golden-heart/

 As a son-in-law of the posek hador, Rav Moshe Tendler quickly became a major figure in Rav Moshe Feinstein’s positions on Jewish law and bioethics, writing many articles in prominent medical and Torah journals alike.

 

 This was a major problem in the yeshiva world as he and his son would assert that a certain view was from Rav Moshe and it wasn't accepted as such.

I once net him at a simcha and said to him,"Since you are the main source of Rav Moshe's knowledge of scientific information Why did Rav Moshe state that Natural child birth  is merely a trick to convince the woman she is not experiencing pain?" He replied that he "was not Rav Moshe's main source and that though he was not aware of this particular tshuva which is in Igros Moshe he agreed fully with it."

 

When Rav Moshe was niftar I was told that a number of major poskim went to Rav Dovid and asked him to clarify the major disputes regarding Rav Moshe's true views. He replied "let them believe what they want but I refuse to get involved in a public dispute in these matters." I was also told that this was in fact Rav Moshe' own attitude toward public disputes. As a consequence there is still not a clear view on many issues.

HALACHIC ARBITER IN A MEDICAL MAZE

 https://mishpacha.com/halachic-arbiter-in-a-medical-maze/

Among the many burdens shouldered by Rav Moshe Feinstein was his role as halachic arbiter in the rapidly-developing field of medicine. An astounding number of innovations spawned an equal number of questions. No matter what that subject – be it hearing aids, cancer drugs, reproductive medicine, or end-of-life issues -- Rav Moshe ruled with clarity and authority. Three physicians who merited personal access to Rav Moshe recall the giant who served as the era’s halachic beacon

47 House Republicans vote to write same-sex marriage into law

https://www.politico.com/news/2022/07/19/house-republicans-same-sex-marriage-law-00046682

Attitudes concerning same-sex marriage have shifted rapidly in recent years. Republicans have largely moved on from their adamant opposition to same-sex marriage in cultural wars. A record 71 percent of people in the U.S. support gay marriage, according to a June poll from Gallup.

GOP freezes up on same-sex marriage

 https://www.politico.com/news/2022/07/20/gop-freezes-same-sex-marriage-00046924

The 47 House Republicans who supported the legislation represent what would’ve been an unthinkable number just a decade ago, but still a solid minority of the GOP conference. Explaining his vote for the bill, ultra-conservative House Freedom Caucus chair Rep. Scott Perry (R-Pa.) focused on its non-LGBTQ elements: “I don’t think that interracial marriages should be outlawed.”

Collins and Sen. Rob Portman (R-Ohio) are co-sponsoring Baldwin’s legislation, which aides say is identical to the House’s version. Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) said he’s likely to support it, and Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) said she’s “absolutely looking at how we can support marriage equality.”

Does The United States Have A Free Speech Problem?

Bannon Verdict Shows No Defense Sometimes Isn’t the Best Defense

 https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-07-23/bannon-verdict-shows-the-best-defense-sometimes-isn-t-no-defense

Steve Bannon’s lawyers chose not to call defense witnesses, submit evidence or let the jury hear directly from the longtime Donald Trump adviser in his contempt of Congress trial.

It was a gamble that didn’t pay off.

“Bannon talked a big game about his trial but could hardly have played it smaller,” said Lisa Griffin, a professor of criminal procedure at Duke University’s law school. “The arguments his counsel ultimately made were inconsistent with the evidence and focused on the most minute of technicalities.”

An Unsuccessful Defense of the Beit Din of Rabbi Emanuel Rackman: The Tears of The Oppressed by Aviad Hacohen

 https://www.torahmusings.com/wp-content/uploads/2005/08/4_2_Broyde.pdf

The Tears of the Oppressed was introduced at a press conference on October 22, 2004 as a solution to the agunah problem. It proposes that the doctrine of kiddushei ta`ut* (error in the creation of marriage) be expanded to include blemishes that arose after the marriage was entered into and that this doctrine then be used by rabbinical courts to solve the modern agunah problems related to recalcitrance. This review essay demonstrates that such an expansion is supported neither by Jewish law sources nor by the responsa cited in the book itself. This review essay also addresses the procedural pitfalls of the book as well as its impact on marriage theory, and explores other solutions to the agunah problems.

In 1997, Rabbi Emanuel Rackman and a small group of rabbis who were not widely recognized as rabbinic decisors (poseqim)1 formed a beit din (rabbinical court) that claimed to be freeing agunot2 without requiring that a get be given by the husband to the wife; this beit din is now called “The Rabbi Emanuel Rackman—Agunah International Beit Din L’Inyanei Agunot.”3 A great many rabbis denounced this beit din, which was defended in a text advertisement placed in the New York Jewish Week by Agunah International.4 Nearly no Orthodox rabbis accept the pronouncements of this beit din as valid; one of the consistent criticisms of this court over the last seven years has been the absence of a serious scholarly work to demonstrate that the theoretical legal underpinnings of the mechanisms employed by the bet din are consistent with generally accepted halakhic

Grappling With the Problem of Agunot, Flaws in the Proposal of Rabbi Emanuel Rackman

https://www.sefaria.org/Gray_Matter_I%2C_Grappling_With_the_Problem_of_Agunot%2C_Flaws_in_the_Proposal_of_Rabbi_Emanuel_Rackman.1?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en

Even if Rabbi Rackman's idea were acceptable in theory, its implementation contains a significant practical problem. It is often very difficult to formally produce incontrovertible evidence that someone physically abused his spouse (see Rama, E.H. 154:3). Proving that someone had an abuser personality is even more difficult, if not impossible. Similarly, it is exceedingly difficult to prove that one who denies his wife a get had a sadistic personality at the time of marriage. At the very least, the dayanim must see psychological records documenting these tendencies from before the marriage. In Rav Moshe's responsa regarding impotent and institutionalized husbands, official medical records proved the women's claims. On the other hand, The Jerusalem Report (August 3, 1998) disclosed that Rabbi Moses Morgenstern issues his rulings merely based on the woman's word, undoubtedly an unacceptable practice.3See, for example, Teshuvot Noda Biy'hudah (vol. 1, E.H. 54), cited in Pitchei Teshuvah (E.H. 157:9). Rabbis can rarely obtain private medical files in today's litigious society, for doctors do not generally release these records to clergy with the same ease that they may have done in Rav Moshe's time.

Why Not Give New Ideas a Fair Chance?

https://www.rabbirackman.com/why-not-give-new-ideas-a-fair-chance/

I repeat I do not know which is the better way. However, to give sanction to only one way, and to prohibit the other, is to add another divisive factor to Jewish life. And will there be no end to the issues that divide us? Or do the rabbis creating the issurim really crave divisiveness so that there will be no doubt in anyone’s mind as to who are the real guardians of the tradition? I prefer my father’s way to give a new idea that is clearly not prohibited a chance to prove itself before it is rejected.

The One Time Trump Couldn’t Lie His Way Out of a Crisis

https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2022/07/22/donald-trump-covid-panic-february-2020-00047177 

Trump had known for a while that COVID-19 was poised to spark a pandemic unlike the globe had seen in a hundred years. After he and other top aides, among them Mike Pence and Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar, initially downplayed warnings coming from elsewhere in the administration — including from national security aide Matt Pottinger and trade adviser Peter Navarro — the president had grown convinced of the danger posed by what he often dubbed “the plague.” He confided in the journalist Bob Woodward as far back as February 7 that he knew the virus was deadly.

But publicly, Trump lied.