https://www.bbc.com/news/health-62286093
A study showing depression isn't caused by low levels of the "happy hormone" serotonin has become one of the most widely shared medical articles.
Friday, August 5, 2022
Josh Hawley's Speech Rejecting Sweden, Finland's NATO Bids Goes Viral
The Senate voted 95-1 on Wednesday to ratify the Scandinavian countries' bid for membership. Hawley, a Republican from Missouri, was the sole "no" vote.
Hawley delivered a speech in the chamber, explaining his opposition to NATO expansion. A snippet from his comments, posted on Twitter, has been watched more than 775,000 times in less than 24 hours.
Greeting strangers at night
Sanhedrin (44a) Rabbi Yoḥanan say: It is prohibited for a person to greet another whom he does not recognize at night, as we are concerned that perhaps the one he doesn’t recognize is a demon?
‘We’re all human’: Rabbis, commanders defend officer who raped 70-year-old cleaner
Court records show support for officer Priel Klimi, 33, sentenced last week; rabbi casts doubt on his guilt, saying he’d managed to withstand ‘greater temptations’
Thursday, August 4, 2022
Fight him, shun him ... embrace him? Mastriano's relationship with GOP leaders mirrors Trump's rise.
https://www.politico.com/news/2022/08/04/mastriano-trump-gop-leaders-00049879
In an election season in which inflation and high gas prices have given most Republicans an edge, Mastriano has spent the past few weeks under fire for his ties to a far-right social media platform. He had an account this year on Gab, the site where Robert Bowers made violent antisemitic comments before the shooting at the Tree of Life synagogue in Pittsburgh. Mastriano also told Gab CEO Andrew Torba in an interview, “Thank God for what you’ve done,” and paid the site $5,000 for “consulting” services.
Alex Jones Defamation Trial: Key Takeaways on Sandy Hook, Infowars and More
https://www.newsweek.com/alex-jones-defamation-trial-key-takeaways-sandy-hook-infowars-more-1730679
During the same episode, Jones also suggested that Judge Maya Guerra Gamble and attorneys for the Lewis family were "demonically possessed" and claimed that they were adherents to "the new world order."
"It's demonic," said Jones. "They all act demonically possessed. The judge, the lawyers. It's surreal to be around them. And it makes you feel sorry for them because these people are committed to occult ideology of the new world order."
Mark Bankston, a lawyer for the family, played an additional clip of Jones blasting the jury in court on Wednesday. In the video clip, which Bankston said aired last Friday, Jones accused the jury of being full of people who "don't know what planet they're on."
Herschel Walker Says There Are 52 U.S. States While Slamming Stacey Abrams
https://www.newsweek.com/herschel-walker-says-there-are-52-us-states-while-slamming-stacey-abrams-1718306
"If you don't believe in the country, leave and go somewhere else," he added. "If it's the worst state, why are you here? Why don't you leave? Go to another—there's what, 51 more other states you can go to, you don't have to be here."
Why Did It Take the GOP So Long to Panic About Herschel Walker?
https://www.newsweek.com/why-did-it-take-gop-so-long-panic-about-herschel-walker-1709248
Part of the reluctance is that Walker's troubled past is central to what his friends and political allies call his "transformation story." Walker doesn't deny the allegations about his past. Some, after all, are a matter of public record. He also brought some of them to the public's attention himself, in a 2008 book entitled "Breaking Free: my life with Dissociative Identity Disorder." In the book he discussed his history of mental illness, dealing with multiple personalities that he developed as a coping mechanism to deal with the teasing and bullying he endured as a young child with a stutter. The National Alliance on Mental Illness describes the disorder as "alternating between multiple identities, leaving a person with gaps in memory of everyday events." It notes men with the disorder "can occasionally exhibit more violent behavior rather than amnesia."
אחרי המעצרים: אחד החשודים בהיעדרות קליינרמן שוחרר
https://www.kikar.co.il/424400.html
שעות אחרי המעצרים, הורה בית המשפט לשחרר את אחד החשודים במעורבות בהיעדרות מוישי קליינרמן בן ה-16 שנעדר לפני 130 יום. עורך דינו: "אין לו כל קשר לפרשה"
Aligning Jewish Values With Philanthropy and Investing
https://www.morganstanley.com/articles/jewish-values-philanthropy-and-investing
While faith-based philanthropy may seem more familiar given its prevalence in Judaism and other faith traditions, faith-based investing can require more explanation.
The Torah offers guidance on aligning capital with Jewish values through a number of commandments and mitzvot, the Hebrew word for good deeds. Below are four ways investors can bring their faith to investing:
Three American Companies that Shamelessly Supported Nazi Germany
During World War II, Germany was largely viewed by the American public as a pariah on the world stage — but that didn’t stop American companies from doing business with the Nazi regime. Perhaps American companies should have known better, but the German economy presented a business opportunity some corporations saw as too good to pass up. As a result, several American companies did business in Germany and some actually assisted the German war effort, at least until America itself was engaged in war with Germany.
How Nazi Germany benefitted America’s corporations
https://www.globalvillagespace.com/how-nazi-germany-benefitted-americas-corporations/
In October 1936, the US Ambassador to Nazi Germany, William Dodd, who was previously a history professor, wrote a letter to president Franklin Roosevelt elaborating on US-Nazi business collaboration. In the letter, Ambassador Dodd revealed that “more than a hundred American corporations have subsidiaries here [in Nazi Germany] or cooperative understandings”. Dodd noted that the US chemical corporation, DuPont, has links to German companies “that are aiding in the armament business”. DuPont’s chief partner was the German chemical corporation IG Farben, which was centrally involved in strengthening the Nazi war machine. IG Farben was later implicated in slave labour practices and the Holocaust.
Wednesday, August 3, 2022
Lauren Boebert’s husband did jail time for "lewd exposure" in a bowling alley. She was there
Jayson Steven Boebert, the husband of Rep. Lauren Boebert, R-Colo., has complicated his wife's political career recently, after reports that the right-wing congresswoman failed to disclose Jayson's highly-paid work in the natural gas industry while she was serving on the House Natural Resources Committee, which directly oversees regulation of that business.
It appears that might not be the only thing about Jayson that Rep. Boebert doesn't want the public to know. In January 2004, when Jayson Boebert was 24, he was arrested for exposing himself to two young women at a Colorado bowling alley. His future wife Lauren Roberts (as she was then known), who was 17 at the time, was also present and was told she was no longer welcome at the bowling alley.
Jayson Boebert pled guilty to "public indecency and lewd exposure" after that incident, according to The New York Post, and was sentenced to four days in jail with a subsequent two years on probation.
Not long after that incident, Jayson Boebert found himself in trouble with the law again after a domestic violence incident (which has already been widely publicized) involving Lauren Roberts, his then-girlfriend and future wife. In February 2004, Jayson Boebert was arrested and charged with harassing and physically assaulting Lauren, and was convicted on those charges in November. He "did unlawfully strike, shove or kick ... and subjected her to physical contact," a Garfield County court clerk spokesman told The New York Post in January of 2021. Lauren Roberts had her first child later that year; it is unclear whether she was pregnant at the time of the assault.
GOP Rep. Lauren Boebert and husband racked up arrests in home district
https://nypost.com/2021/01/16/gop-rep-lauren-boebert-and-husband-have-racked-up-arrests/
Rep. Lauren Boebert, the gun-toting freshman Republican Colorado congresswoman who ran on a law-and-order platform, has had several dust-ups with police, starting as a teenager.
The 34-year-old lawmaker, who beat her district’s very conservative Rep. Scott Tipton in a primary upset last June, has a rap sheet unusually long for a member of Congress.
And her track record of thumbing her nose at the law continued this week after she tussled with Capitol Police officers over her refusal to walk through newly installed House metal detectors.
Lauren Boebert Says Venezuelans Eat Dogs Because They Have No Guns
While speaking to Newsmax's Sebastian Gorka on Monday, Boebert, a far-right Republican, reflected on her confrontation with 2020 Democrat presidential candidate Beto O'Rourke.
Before Boebert had taken office, she confronted O'Rourke during an event in Aurora, Colorado in September 2019 after he announced his commitment to taking citizens' AR-15s.
Speaking about the importance of guns in America, Boebert told Gorka Americans would begin eating dogs, like in Venezuela, if guns are taken away from citizens.
Lauren Boebert: Venezuela dog eating 'started because they do not have firearms'
https://www.rawstory.com/lauren-boebert-dog-eating/
“In Venezuela, they eat the dogs and it started because they do not have firearms to protect themselves, to defend themselves against a tyrannical government,” she added.
As 'Woke' Businesses Face Right-Wing Wrath, Culture War Capitalists Cash In
The issue has taken center stage recently as a number of high-profile companies—including Disney, J.P. Morgan, Levi Strauss and Microsoft—announced plans to cover travel expenses for employees seeking an abortion in the wake of the Supreme Court's reversal of Roe v. Wade. That followed other headline-making cases of businesses speaking out on social issues, such as Disney taking a stance on legislation in Florida restricting classroom instruction on sexual orientation and gender identity and dozens of companies from Silicon Valley to Wall Street pledging to fight racial injustice after George Floyd's death in 2020.
Presidents and the US Economy: An Econometric Exploration
https://www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=10.1257/aer.20140913
The US economy has performed better when the president of the United States is a Democrat rather than a Republican, almost regardless of how one measures performance. For many measures, including real GDP growth (our focus), the performance gap is large and significant. This paper asks why. The answer is not found in technical time series matters nor in systematically more expansionary monetary or fiscal policy under Democrats. Rather, it appears that the Democratic edge stems mainly from more benign oil shocks, superior total factor productivity (TFP) performance, a more favorable international environment, and perhaps more optimistic consumer expectations about the near-term future. (JEL D72, E23, E32, E65, N12, N42)
Why Are Republican Presidents So Bad for the Economy?
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/02/opinion/sunday/democrats-economy.html
A president has only limited control over the economy. And yet there has been a stark pattern in the United States for nearly a century. The economy has grown significantly faster under Democratic presidents than Republican ones.
It’s true about almost any major indicator: gross domestic product, employment, incomes, productivity, even stock prices. It’s true if you examine only the precise period when a president is in office, or instead assume that a president’s policies affect the economy only after a lag and don’t start his economic clock until months after he takes office. The gap “holds almost regardless of how you define success,” two economics professors at Princeton, Alan Blinder and Mark Watson, write. They describe it as “startlingly large.”
The Republican War on Economics
https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2017/12/the-republican-war-on-economics.html
On Meet the Press Sunday, Chuck Todd asked Susan Collins how she could support a huge tax cut after having complained about excessive debt. “Economic growth produces more revenue and that will help to offset this tax cut and actually lower the debt,” she calmly replied. An incredulous Todd asked Collins how she could defend such a claim when every study has concluded the opposite. She cited Glenn Hubbard, Larry Lindsey, and Douglas Holtz-Eakin.
Jennifer Rubin got ahold of two of the three, Hubbard and Holtz-Eakin. Both economists denied having ever claimed the Republican tax cuts would produce enough growth to recoup the lost revenue.
Graduate sues uni after essay is failed because it didn’t blame Israel
Danielle Greyman claims her essay about crimes committed by Hamas against Palestinians was failed because it did not pin blame on the Jewish state.
After a review, an external examiner recommended that her assignment mark be improved, giving it a passing grade instead of a fail.
Ms Greyman, who had never before failed an essay at university, was forced last year to resit the module, which she subsequently passed.
However, because she had to wait almost a year for the result of her appeal, the student was unable to take up a place on a Master’s course at Glasgow University.
Her lawyers have now issued a legal claim against Leeds University for negligence, discrimination and victimisation.
Are Economic Forecasters Worth Listening To?
https://hbr.org/1984/09/are-economic-forecasters-worth-listening-to
We argue that economic forecasts deserve to be taken seriously, not necessarily because they promise to be accurate but because they are so much more useful than having no forecasts at all. We do not say that managers should listen to all forecasts or to all forecasters; that is the sure road to total confusion. Rather, we say that forecasts properly used and understood will lead to better business decisions than forecasts ignored or naively used.
Tuesday, August 2, 2022
Psychotherapist convicted of sexually abusing patients sentenced to 39 months
Jerusalem-based psychotherapist Yuval Carmi was sentenced Tuesday to three years and three months behind bars by the Jerusalem Magistrate’s Court after pleading guilty to charges of sexual assault against two of his patients.
He was ordered to pay NIS 100,000 ($30,000) in compensation to Kim Ariel Arad, the first plaintiff to come forward, and NIS 30,000 to a second victim whose name has not been made public.
“I’m full of regret for what I did,” Carmi, 67, said after his sentencing, according to a Channel 12 report. “I’m sorry I caused harm and hope such cases don’t happen again,” he added.
Fox News is incoherently mad about Manchin striking a deal
https://www.mediamatters.org/fox-news/fox-news-incoherently-mad-about-manchin-striking-deal
Fox News hates this bill. The network’s propagandists and their GOP guests were clearly reeling from the surprise announcement that Manchin had reached an agreement after repeatedly putting negotiations on ice. But even on short notice, they came up with a slew of reasons — at times contradictory — to oppose the nascent legislation.
Top economists say Democrats' health care and climate package will put 'downward pressure on inflation'
Congressional Democrats' climate and health care package is getting a boost from a group of top economists, who wrote in a new letter that the so-called Inflation Reduction Act will lower prices for American consumers amid high inflation.
"This historic legislation makes crucial investments in energy, health care, and in shoring up the nation's tax system. These investments will fight inflation and lower costs for American families while setting the stage for strong, stable, and broadly-shared long-term economic growth," 126 economists said in a letter sent to congressional leadership Tuesday, which was first obtained by CNN.
Here's how the Senate reconciliation bill would actually affect inflation
The package counters inflation in three ways, former Treasury Secretary Lawrence Summers told CNN's John Berman. It reduces budget deficits, and therefore, the level of demand in the economy. Also, it cuts prices on prescription drugs, while increasing supply by stimulating energy production and subsidizing the transition to renewable energy.
"Less demand, more supply and direct, better bargaining for lower prices -- those are the things that are involved in reducing inflation," said Summers, who last year had warned that rising inflation was not transitory. "This bill is fighting inflation, and it's got a whole set of collateral benefits, as well. It's fair to call it the Inflation Reduction Act."
Nobel Prize-winning economist Joseph Stiglitz said a key driver of inflation is high energy costs, which the bill seeks to address through environmental investments.
"There is a simmering debate on the causes of inflation, but whatever side one takes in that debate, this bill is a step forward," said Stiglitz, a professor at Columbia University.
Marjorie Taylor Greene Rips Biden's 'Victory Lap' in al-Zawahiri Killing
https://www.newsweek.com/marjorie-taylor-greene-rips-bidens-victory-lap-al-zawahiri-killing-1729845
Greene quickly took to Twitter to lash out at Biden for attempting to "act tough on TV" by speaking on the death, arguing that "most Americans" were either unaware of the leader or had "forgotten" about Al-Qaeda and al-Zawahiri, despite the group being behind 9/11—the largest-ever terrorist attack in U.S. history. She suggested that Biden should have instead focused on issues including the botched U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan, a so-called "proxy war with Russia" and high inflation rates.
The Senate passed a bill to help sick veterans. Then 25 Republicans reversed course
https://www.npr.org/2022/07/29/1114417097/veterans-burn-pit-bill-republican-senators
The bill — like many issues related to veterans' health — had amassed deep bipartisan support, and easily passed the Senate by an 84-14 vote in June. But a technical error required another vote, and this time, more than two dozen Republicans switched sides. The final tally was 55-42 (with three senators abstaining), falling short of the 60 votes needed to overcome a filibuster.
Senate Republicans burned a bill that would have helped veterans — here’s why
https://www.vox.com/2022/7/30/23284976/senate-republicans-pact-act-veterans
The question remains why more than two dozen Republicans, many veterans themselves, voted for it last month but flipped this week. According to some Democrats, the bill was blocked for political benefit.
Sen. Chris Murphy (D-CT) alternatively argues that Republicans took out their anger over a separate bill on the PACT Act. Democrats are attempting to pass the Inflation Reduction Act, which includes a historic $369 billion to be spent over the next 10 years to address climate change, health care, inflation, and taxes.
“The less charitable explanation is this,” Murphy said, about why so many Republicans flipped, “Republicans are mad that Democrats are on the verge of passing climate change legislation and have decided to take out their anger on vulnerable veterans. Because that’s the other thing that’s changed in the last three weeks. Republicans thought that Democrats weren’t going to be able to pass a bill asking corporations to pay a little bit more, tackling climate change. Yesterday, news emerged that there is an agreement that makes it likely that a climate change bill is going to proceed on the Senate floor, and magically 30 votes flip.”
New method to improve visual perception of people with autism developed in TAU
https://www.jpost.com/health-and-wellness/mind-and-spirit/article-713636
A new Tel Aviv University (TAU) study suggests a new learning method for people with autism spectrum disorders (ASD) that could speed up their learning processes and even significantly improve capabilities in terms of visual perception.
Improving the perceptual capabilities of people with ASD is a difficult challenge, requiring long and tedious training. The new study used a new learning method based on “memory flashes” lasting just a few seconds. Using it could significantly improve the achievements of people with autism who also manage to generalize learning to other situations.
Monday, August 1, 2022
Actually, the Russian Economy Is Imploding
https://foreignpolicy.com/2022/07/22/russia-economy-sanctions-myths-ruble-business/
Five months into the Russian invasion of Ukraine, there remains a startling lack of understanding by many Western policymakers and commentators of the economic dimensions of President Vladimir Putin’s invasion and what it has meant for Russia’s economic positioning both domestically and globally.
Far from being ineffective or disappointing, as many have argued, international sanctions and voluntary business retreats have exerted a devastating effect over Russia’s economy. The deteriorating economy has served as a powerful if underappreciated complement to the deteriorating political landscape facing Putin.
Sanctions 'catastrophically crippling' Russian economy, study finds
https://www.euronews.com/2022/07/28/sanctions-catastrophically-crippling-russian-economy-study-finds
Russia's economy has been "catastrophically crippled" by western sanctions and the mass exodus of international companies, according to a Yale University study.
The research -- which the authors say is the "first comprehensive" analysis of the Russian economy -- found that since the start of the Ukraine war, Russia has taken a devastating hit across multiple metrics.
"Russia has lost companies representing ~40% of its GDP, reversing nearly all of three decades worth of foreign investment," write researchers at the Yale School of Management, adding that this situation has been worsened by an "unprecedented" capital and population flight.
Women Rabbis?
https://hakirah.org/vol%2011%20schachter.pdf
In the printed notes of Rav Soloveitchik’s shiurim on Shulchan Aruch, Yoreh De’ah, 1 prepared for publication by Rabbi Eliyakim Koenigsberg, in the very first essay, the Rav is quoted as having said that a woman may not serve as a rabbi. The Tanna’im understood the pasuk in Chumash as implying that women may not be appointed to the position of King.2 The Talmud points out3 that the repetition of the verb in the pasuk “som tasim alecha melech”4 implies that this principle applies not only to the position of King, but to all positions of serarah and authority. Hence it would follow5 that a woman may not be appointed president of a synagogue or as rabbi, since these are also positions of serarah. 6 The reason the Rav brought up this topic in the beginning of Yoreh De’ah is because the Rama7 quotes the practice of not appointing a woman as the town shochet. The Beis Yosef quotes the Kol Bo who seems to say8 that although a woman may shecht privately, she may not be appointed as the town shochet. If indeed this was the intention of the Kol Bo it could be understood that this appointment would constitute a form of serarah. Indeed in Europe before the war, the town shochet was, in a certain sense, the assistant rabbi. The shochet knew sections of Shulchan Aruch, Yoreh De’ah, and often when the rabbi would be on vacation, the shochet would paskin the she’eilos.
Sunday, July 31, 2022
10K Christians Rip Greene's Christian Nationalism: 'Betrayal of Our Faith'
https://www.newsweek.com/10k-christians-rip-greenes-christian-nationalism-betrayal-our-faith-1729377
"Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) just essentially declared that America has no place for Jews, Muslims, or the LGBTQ community when she explicitly stated 'we should be Christian nationalists,'" the introduction to the petition said. "Now she's even selling 'Proud Christian Nationalist' t-shirts with an ad that says 'Stand Against the Godless Left' and shows her fists violently raised. (So much for loving your neighbor or following the Prince of Peace.)"
Ukraine drone strike hits Russia Black Sea fleet HQ 'spoiling Navy Day' - so sad!
https://www.jpost.com/international/article-713523
A senior official in Russian-annexed Crimea accused Ukraine on Sunday of carrying out a drone attack ahead of planned celebrations to mark Navy Day, injuring five and forcing the cancellation of festivities.
Friday, July 29, 2022
The New Proliferation of Female Pseudo-Orthodox “Rabbis” and More
https://yated.com/the-new-proliferation-of-female-pseudo-orthodox-rabbis-and-more/
However, there is one notable exception to this trend: the ordination of female “Orthodox rabbis”. In contrast with an acute decrease in the ordination of male Open Orthodox clergy, the female side of this enterprise has quietly mushroomed both in Eretz Yisroel and in the US, as two seminaries and a network of pseudo-Orthodox congregations have been involved in trying to radically change the Orthodox landscape and its future leadership profile.
What Happens to the Brain in Alzheimer's Disease?
https://www.nia.nih.gov/health/what-happens-brain-alzheimers-disease
Amyloid plaques
The beta-amyloid protein involved in Alzheimer’s comes in several different molecular forms that collect between neurons. It is formed from the breakdown of a larger protein, called amyloid precursor protein. One form, beta-amyloid 42, is thought to be especially toxic. In the Alzheimer’s brain, abnormal levels of this naturally occurring protein clump together to form plaques that collect between neurons and disrupt cell function. Research is ongoing to better understand how, and at what stage of the disease, the various forms of beta-amyloid influence Alzheimer’s.
Thursday, July 28, 2022
Dynamic shifts between Fox News, Donald Trump
https://thehill.com/homenews/3577133-dynamic-shifts-between-fox-news-donald-trump/
Trump in a statement on Tuesday complained that Fox, the Journal and the Post “have always been against me, until I won.”
Settlers claim road terror in fatal West Bank car crash
https://www.ynetnews.com/article/by4cp9y65
"We were driving along Route 60 on the way to a family meeting in the Ariel settlement," Rivka Zinman said.
"Suddenly a white Palestinian car appeared, driving fast from the opposite lane, I slowed down the car, but the Palestinian vehicle accelerated. I realized it was going to hit me head-on and I couldn't stop. The collision was at an enormous speed. I lost my son to Palestinian road terror," she said.
The Palestinians involved in the crash were moderately wounded and were evacuated to the hospital as well.
Trump Threatens To Sue CNN And Other Outlets For Dismissing His Voter Fraud Claims
Trump released a 282-page letter that his attorney, Jim Trusty, sent last week to CNN CEO Chris Licht demanding the network "immediately take down the false and defamatory publications" and issue retraction statements.
Trusty argued in the letter that CNN rushed to label Trump a liar for his unproven voter fraud allegations and "consistently fed a narrative that denounced President Trump's legitimacy and competency," among other claims he said constitute defamation.
Trump threatens CNN with lawsuit over ‘defamatory’ reporting
Former President Trump on Wednesday said he planned to file a lawsuit against CNN, alleging the network has repeatedly defamed him dating back to his 2016 campaign for the presidency.
“I have notified CNN of my intent to file a lawsuit over their repeated defamatory statements against me,” Trump said in a statement. “I will also be commencing actions against other media outlets who have defamed me and defrauded the public regarding the overwhelming evidence of fraud throughout the 2020 Election. I will never stop fighting for the truth and for the future of our Country!”
The 282-page letter from Trump’s attorneys to CNN executives, dated July 21, calls for the network to retract or correct numerous on-air statements and published articles about Trump that the lawyers allege are false and defamatory.
The letter goes on to cite dozens of examples, many of which relate to the network’s coverage of Trump’s repeated claims that the 2020 presidential election was fraudulent. CNN coverage frequently referred to those claims as “lies,” “false narratives” and “baseless theories,” among other terms.
Decades of Alzheimer’s research may have been fabricated
https://www.wkbn.com/news/national-world/decades-of-alzheimers-research-may-have-been-fabricated/
Years of crucial research into Alzheimer’s disease may have been tainted by made-up scientific findings, a new whistleblower report says.
Vanderbilt University neurologist Matthew Schrag, in a bombshell interview with Science, laid out findings he made that showed over a decade of industrywide Alzheimer’s research may have been based on fabricated pieces of evidence involving a plaque protein found in the brain.
Shrag alerted his findings to the National Institute of Health and the Food and Drug Administration but also went public in the media with findings he believes will have a big impact on Alzheimer’s research, a branch of science that gets millions of dollars in funding every year.
“You can cheat to get a paper. You can cheat to get a degree. You can cheat to get a grant. You can’t cheat to cure a disease,” Shrag told Science. “Biology doesn’t care.”
Jewish communities grapple with addiction as fentanyl crisis ravages US
There is no reliable data on Jewish drug use, since official sources don’t track religion, and many people in the community hide their abuse, but treatment providers said rates are similar to other groups. Amudim has had over 2,100 opioid cases since 2014, said its CEO, Zvi Gluck. A UJA-Federation of New York survey on the impact of COVID-19 on Jews in New York City and its suburbs found that 10% of Jewish households reported a substance abuse problem. Nine out of ten of those households said they were not seeking help for the problem.
CUNY sued over failing to deal with antisemitic instances on campuses
https://www.jpost.com/diaspora/antisemitism/article-713076
The American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ) has filed a Title VI complaint last week to the US Department of Education, alleging that the City University of New York (CUNY) has ignored a sustained pattern of antisemitic activity.
While the Department of Education is already dealing with complaints regarding individual instances of antisemitism, ACLJ “is focused on the overall environment at the University, and not just at one or more schools,” the complaint read.
Wednesday, July 27, 2022
Marjorie Taylor Greene's words on Christian nationalism are a wake-up call
Republican Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene explicitly labeled herself a Christian nationalist on Saturday. This shocking statement by a sitting member of Congress should serve as a wake-up call to everyone, and particularly, I believe, to Christians.
We all have work to do because it's not just the relatively few self-proclaimed Christian nationalists we have to worry about; it's the way the ideology infects so much of American politics and American Christianity often without us even realizing it.
US cardiologist falsely promotes Covid-19 vaccine recall
https://factcheck.afp.com/doc.afp.com.32EZ82K
Covid-19 vaccines are safe and effective at preventing serious illness, hospitalization and death. But a widely circulated video on social media claims the shots have been recalled due to more than 40,000 deaths worldwide. This is false; neither public health agencies nor manufacturers have recalled Covid-19 vaccines authorized in the US, and verified deaths resulting from the shots are exceptionally rare.
Another rabbi ignores halacha: "Withholding a Gett: Unjewish and Evil "
Update: Please read this lenient teshuva. I will be adding others which clearly indicate the complexity of the matter. Contrary to what Rabbi Brackman writes - that it is a clear cut moral issue - Rav Yosef says it is justified for some cases and some times in history - especially when there is a reasonable possibility that she will commit adultery. That is the view of the Tzitz Eliezar also. Other contemporary poskim don't accept the view that the husband can be forced to give a get to save her from committing adultery [to be continued]
Update Jan 17: Rav Sternbuch states that if it is clear to the beis din that there are objective reasons why the woman can't stand her husband and they paskened that the husband should give a Get - he says it is cruel and sinful for the husband to not divorce his wife out of spite and hatred. This is clearly not saying that a woman has the right to leave the marriage for any reason and that the husband must give a get immediately when the Get is request as R Brackman mistakenly states. If the husband is refusing to give a Get because issues have not been resolved - and not because of cruelty and spite - Rav Sternbuch,. Rav Ovadiah Yosef and Rav Eliashiv are not condemning such a person.
Force husband to prevent wife from committing adultery - not as a right to get on demand or because it is immoral to withhold a Get and only if he is objectively repulsive
Rav Ovadiya Yosef (Yabiya Omer 8:2.2): In previous generations the husband was given permission to take an additional wife if his first wife was declared to a moredes (rebellious wife). The first wife would remain an agunah for the rest of her life until she became an old lady with white hair as punishment for rebelling against her husband. An example of this is found in Shut Mishpat v’ Tzedaka b’Yaakov (2:36).... Similar cases are found in other Achronim. Nevertheless our contemporary society has weakened and there is now a strong possibility that the agunah will deviate from religious observance because of her aguna status. This is a dissolute generation and people do not obey authority. And if the woman makes up her mind later to accept the get from her husband there is a clear concern that her husband will refuse to give her a get out of spite because he is already married to another woman and it is impossible to force him to give a get to his first wife and therefore she will just reject religion and go on a bad path. Because she is still married however, any children she subsequently has with another man will increase the number of mamzerim in the world. A possible solution is that before he can remarry he needs permission from the beis din and thus it is relatively easy to use that to influence him to deposit a get for his first wife with beis din. Only when he has deposited a get then can we give him permission to remarry according to halacha. After I thought of this, I saw that Rav Masas wrote in his sefer Tevuos Shemesh (E.H. 30), “Even though in all the seforim of the Achronim concerning previous rabbinic courts (beis din), the beis din ruled that in the case of moredes she remained an agunah her entire life until she became an old lady with grey hair and the husband was allowed to marry another woman if he wanted – without first divorcing her. This was a common ruling and the first wife remained unable to remarry until the day that she died. However this approach was appropriate in previous generations when the spirit of Judaism permeated the people and there was no one who would dare do a serious sin – in particular not to openly transgress the serious sexual sins. But it is no longer true true in our day which to our great sorrow the spirit of individual freedom has become dominant and faith has weakened. We no longer have the power to have people properly comply with religious rulings and there is a great concern that people will go off the path of religious observance. There is no question that all our rabbis acknowledge that all efforts need to be made to have the get deposited with beis din...He concludes his words by saying that in the year 1950, all the rabbis of Morocco gather together and they made a decree through the official rabbinical confederation – that no man could remarry until he divorced his first wife who was a moredes and had declared that she couldn’t stand living with him (ma’os alei). This decree was accepted and it became a regular occurrence for the beis din to rule accordingly. This get that the husband was required to give before remarrying was not considered get me’usa ( a coerced get). That is because he had the choice of not remarrying and therefore he didn’t have to give the get. However with a moredes who simply wanted to afflict him and torture him and consequently refused to accept the get – there was no choice but to require that the get be deposited in beis din as we mentioned before....Click link for rest of the teshuva
See Rav Ovadia Yosef 3:20
Rav Ovadiya Yosef (Yabia Omer E.H. 3:18.13) : And in truth even according to the view of the poskim who hold that one does not force the husband to give a get when she claims ma'us alei, nevertheless there is a view that says there is a mitzva for the husband to divorce her and surely when there is a concern that because of the delay in get a get she will go off the derech. As we find in Shita Mekubetes (Kesubos 64)," Rabbeinu Yona wrote, "Even though we don't force a man to give a get when the wife says he is ma'us alei (disgusting to me) - that is only referring to forcing him by beating him with staffs. However beis din informs him that he has a mitzva to divorce her and they advise him to divorce her. And if he doesn't not in fact divorce her then this is a case of when a person transgresses the words of the rabbis that it is permitted to call him a sinner. However Rabbeinu Tam disagreed and said that even this we don't say to him but if he should come to ask whether he should divorce her without her getting the kesuba then beis din gives him the advice that he should divorce her immediately." Furthermore the Rema (Y.D. 248:20) writes that when the wife says ma'us alei the husband is obligated to divorce her. The Taz notes that the Rema here is only reporting the view of the Rambam but the Rema's true view is recorded in E.H. 77 where he doesn't mention that the husband should be forced to divorce her. But according to what we have said the words of the Rema (Y.D. 248.20) has a solid basis and that is the words of Rabbeinu Yonah. This is also noted by my friend the Tzitz Eliezar (5:26.4) based on the Noda B'Yehuda Kama (YD 68) who brings the words of the Rema as halacha l'maaseh and foundation principle. He notes that there is a basis to utilize this view at times of need according to the specific facts and needs of the time and appropriateness - depending on the evaluation of the beis din. I also say that in contemporary society with the degradation of the generations in free countries where every man does what he thinks is correct and there is a great increase in arrogance in the world and experience has taught that when a woman leaves her husband with the claim of ma'us alei and she is in limbo without receiving a get - that she will go and live with other men without the slightest shame or sense of embarrassment. As a result there is an increase in mamzerim in the world. In such a case we say that their degradation is to their benefit. This is expressed by the Ramban (Kesubos 63b), "Chas V'Shalom I am not arguing against the decree of the Gaonim to force him to divorce his wife and not only that but I strongly criticize those who say that it is not correct to follow their decrees but only the law as stated in the Talmud. In fact it is correct to listen to the Gaonim and to follow their decrees. Nevertheless now it is best to be very concern not to follow their decree because it has been abrogated because of the immorality of the generation." In other words in the time of the Ramban, even though women then had the brazenness to claim ma'us alei but they did not reach the extreme of chutpza to live with another man without receiving a get as we find in our days. But in the days before Moshiach as we are in now it is extremely relevant to considering returning to the decree of the Gaonim. And this is surely true when she is young and there is a real concern that she will go off the derech and there isn't much chance that she will return to her husband. Therefore it would appear that those who want to do something to force the husband to give a get have a solid basis for that decision. That is because the concerns that existed at the time of the Gaonim that the woman might go off the derech have returned. [In the time of the Gaonim the concern was that the woman would convert to Christianity for Islam rather than face end her days as an aguna]. Thus we see that whether the get should be forced or not is dependent on the particular time and era. And thus I have seen the gedol hador - Rav Chaim Palaggi in his Chaim v'Shalom (2:35) where he writes regarding forcing the husband that the view of a number of poskim including the Beis Yosef that the husband should not be forced to give a get. He writes, "Nevertheless according to everyone agrees that the woman is not forced to live with the husband. Therefore after a year or two after the time that they have separated from each other it would appear that he should be forced to divorce her. That is because there are two factors. The man is not able to exist without a wife and the wife herself is not able to be without a husband. And this is surely true where she is young that we have to be concerned for disastrous results when she is chained as an aguna. Just look at how lenient the poskim are concerning preventing agunos in particular when she is young until they even go the extreme of relying on a minority opinion. And surely the obligation lies on every dayan to be lenient is this manner in order to avoid trouble for both the man and the woman." Rav Chaim Palaggi is a great tree that one can rely on and surely in our day. And it is the same thing in cases where it is possible to combine various disputes of the poskim besides the claim of ma'us alei to be lenient. Also study Chaim V' Shalom (2:112), If there is a dispute between a husband and wife and the wife wants to be divorced and the husband refuses - one should establish a limited time for the matter to be resolved. And if we wait until 18 months and we have despaired of reconciliation and it appears to beis din that there is nothing more than can be done for the marriage - they should separate the couple and force the husband to give a get until he proclaim,I want to give it.All of this that I have written is for the honor of G-d and His Torah." It is possible that Rav Palaggi is not talking about forcing with clubs but rather just calling him a sinner or similar techniques which is in accord with the view of Rabbeinu Yona and the Rema which we mentioned before.
Update Jan 17: Rav Sternbuch states that if it is clear to the beis din that there are objective reasons why the woman can't stand her husband and they paskened that the husband should give a Get - he says it is cruel and sinful for the husband to not divorce his wife out of spite and hatred. This is clearly not saying that a woman has the right to leave the marriage for any reason and that the husband must give a get immediately when the Get is request as R Brackman mistakenly states. If the husband is refusing to give a Get because issues have not been resolved - and not because of cruelty and spite - Rav Sternbuch,. Rav Ovadiah Yosef and Rav Eliashiv are not condemning such a person.
Force husband to prevent wife from committing adultery - not as a right to get on demand or because it is immoral to withhold a Get and only if he is objectively repulsive
Rav Ovadiya Yosef (Yabiya Omer 8:2.2): In previous generations the husband was given permission to take an additional wife if his first wife was declared to a moredes (rebellious wife). The first wife would remain an agunah for the rest of her life until she became an old lady with white hair as punishment for rebelling against her husband. An example of this is found in Shut Mishpat v’ Tzedaka b’Yaakov (2:36).... Similar cases are found in other Achronim. Nevertheless our contemporary society has weakened and there is now a strong possibility that the agunah will deviate from religious observance because of her aguna status. This is a dissolute generation and people do not obey authority. And if the woman makes up her mind later to accept the get from her husband there is a clear concern that her husband will refuse to give her a get out of spite because he is already married to another woman and it is impossible to force him to give a get to his first wife and therefore she will just reject religion and go on a bad path. Because she is still married however, any children she subsequently has with another man will increase the number of mamzerim in the world. A possible solution is that before he can remarry he needs permission from the beis din and thus it is relatively easy to use that to influence him to deposit a get for his first wife with beis din. Only when he has deposited a get then can we give him permission to remarry according to halacha. After I thought of this, I saw that Rav Masas wrote in his sefer Tevuos Shemesh (E.H. 30), “Even though in all the seforim of the Achronim concerning previous rabbinic courts (beis din), the beis din ruled that in the case of moredes she remained an agunah her entire life until she became an old lady with grey hair and the husband was allowed to marry another woman if he wanted – without first divorcing her. This was a common ruling and the first wife remained unable to remarry until the day that she died. However this approach was appropriate in previous generations when the spirit of Judaism permeated the people and there was no one who would dare do a serious sin – in particular not to openly transgress the serious sexual sins. But it is no longer true true in our day which to our great sorrow the spirit of individual freedom has become dominant and faith has weakened. We no longer have the power to have people properly comply with religious rulings and there is a great concern that people will go off the path of religious observance. There is no question that all our rabbis acknowledge that all efforts need to be made to have the get deposited with beis din...He concludes his words by saying that in the year 1950, all the rabbis of Morocco gather together and they made a decree through the official rabbinical confederation – that no man could remarry until he divorced his first wife who was a moredes and had declared that she couldn’t stand living with him (ma’os alei). This decree was accepted and it became a regular occurrence for the beis din to rule accordingly. This get that the husband was required to give before remarrying was not considered get me’usa ( a coerced get). That is because he had the choice of not remarrying and therefore he didn’t have to give the get. However with a moredes who simply wanted to afflict him and torture him and consequently refused to accept the get – there was no choice but to require that the get be deposited in beis din as we mentioned before....Click link for rest of the teshuva
See Rav Ovadia Yosef 3:20
Rav Ovadiya Yosef (Yabia Omer E.H. 3:18.13) : And in truth even according to the view of the poskim who hold that one does not force the husband to give a get when she claims ma'us alei, nevertheless there is a view that says there is a mitzva for the husband to divorce her and surely when there is a concern that because of the delay in get a get she will go off the derech. As we find in Shita Mekubetes (Kesubos 64)," Rabbeinu Yona wrote, "Even though we don't force a man to give a get when the wife says he is ma'us alei (disgusting to me) - that is only referring to forcing him by beating him with staffs. However beis din informs him that he has a mitzva to divorce her and they advise him to divorce her. And if he doesn't not in fact divorce her then this is a case of when a person transgresses the words of the rabbis that it is permitted to call him a sinner. However Rabbeinu Tam disagreed and said that even this we don't say to him but if he should come to ask whether he should divorce her without her getting the kesuba then beis din gives him the advice that he should divorce her immediately." Furthermore the Rema (Y.D. 248:20) writes that when the wife says ma'us alei the husband is obligated to divorce her. The Taz notes that the Rema here is only reporting the view of the Rambam but the Rema's true view is recorded in E.H. 77 where he doesn't mention that the husband should be forced to divorce her. But according to what we have said the words of the Rema (Y.D. 248.20) has a solid basis and that is the words of Rabbeinu Yonah. This is also noted by my friend the Tzitz Eliezar (5:26.4) based on the Noda B'Yehuda Kama (YD 68) who brings the words of the Rema as halacha l'maaseh and foundation principle. He notes that there is a basis to utilize this view at times of need according to the specific facts and needs of the time and appropriateness - depending on the evaluation of the beis din. I also say that in contemporary society with the degradation of the generations in free countries where every man does what he thinks is correct and there is a great increase in arrogance in the world and experience has taught that when a woman leaves her husband with the claim of ma'us alei and she is in limbo without receiving a get - that she will go and live with other men without the slightest shame or sense of embarrassment. As a result there is an increase in mamzerim in the world. In such a case we say that their degradation is to their benefit. This is expressed by the Ramban (Kesubos 63b), "Chas V'Shalom I am not arguing against the decree of the Gaonim to force him to divorce his wife and not only that but I strongly criticize those who say that it is not correct to follow their decrees but only the law as stated in the Talmud. In fact it is correct to listen to the Gaonim and to follow their decrees. Nevertheless now it is best to be very concern not to follow their decree because it has been abrogated because of the immorality of the generation." In other words in the time of the Ramban, even though women then had the brazenness to claim ma'us alei but they did not reach the extreme of chutpza to live with another man without receiving a get as we find in our days. But in the days before Moshiach as we are in now it is extremely relevant to considering returning to the decree of the Gaonim. And this is surely true when she is young and there is a real concern that she will go off the derech and there isn't much chance that she will return to her husband. Therefore it would appear that those who want to do something to force the husband to give a get have a solid basis for that decision. That is because the concerns that existed at the time of the Gaonim that the woman might go off the derech have returned. [In the time of the Gaonim the concern was that the woman would convert to Christianity for Islam rather than face end her days as an aguna]. Thus we see that whether the get should be forced or not is dependent on the particular time and era. And thus I have seen the gedol hador - Rav Chaim Palaggi in his Chaim v'Shalom (2:35) where he writes regarding forcing the husband that the view of a number of poskim including the Beis Yosef that the husband should not be forced to give a get. He writes, "Nevertheless according to everyone agrees that the woman is not forced to live with the husband. Therefore after a year or two after the time that they have separated from each other it would appear that he should be forced to divorce her. That is because there are two factors. The man is not able to exist without a wife and the wife herself is not able to be without a husband. And this is surely true where she is young that we have to be concerned for disastrous results when she is chained as an aguna. Just look at how lenient the poskim are concerning preventing agunos in particular when she is young until they even go the extreme of relying on a minority opinion. And surely the obligation lies on every dayan to be lenient is this manner in order to avoid trouble for both the man and the woman." Rav Chaim Palaggi is a great tree that one can rely on and surely in our day. And it is the same thing in cases where it is possible to combine various disputes of the poskim besides the claim of ma'us alei to be lenient. Also study Chaim V' Shalom (2:112), If there is a dispute between a husband and wife and the wife wants to be divorced and the husband refuses - one should establish a limited time for the matter to be resolved. And if we wait until 18 months and we have despaired of reconciliation and it appears to beis din that there is nothing more than can be done for the marriage - they should separate the couple and force the husband to give a get until he proclaim,I want to give it.All of this that I have written is for the honor of G-d and His Torah." It is possible that Rav Palaggi is not talking about forcing with clubs but rather just calling him a sinner or similar techniques which is in accord with the view of Rabbeinu Yona and the Rema which we mentioned before.
Husband is not forced to give get when wife demands one- even if wife might commit adultery
Rav Eliashiv (Kovetz Teshuvos 174): Question: We are dealing with a case in which it apparently has been shown that the wife hates her husband – heart and soul – because of his behavior which is simply abnormal. The woman therefore has the claim of ma’us alei with a clear basis. This couple has lived separately for over 6 years. The question is whether the beis din will comply with the request of the wife and require him to give her a get. Answer: Even if you grant that this woman has the status of one who says ma’us alei with a clear justification, that in itself does not require that the husband give her a get. Look at Shut HaRashba (# 135 - attributed to Ramban), Question: When a woman claims ma’us alei... is the husband obligated to divorce her....? Answer: ... You should know that she is not able to force her husband to divorce her since a woman goes out of the marriage sometimes according to her desires and sometimes not according to her desires. On the other hand the man only leaves the marriage only when he want to leave it... From all these you see that when a woman claims ma’us alei we do not force the husband to give a divorce... Even though the Rambam writes that when a woman says ma’us alei the husband is forced to divorce her – the Rambam is not correct in this matter... Concerning the kesuba and dowry that she brought him – according to the din she does not lose anything unless she insists on being a moredes for 12 months and all these 12 months she is not forced... However if she remains a moredes for 12 months and her husband wants to divorce her – she loses everything.... That is her din when her husband divorces her according to his wishes after 12 months. But if the desire to divorce comes from her – as we said before – he is not forced to divorce her. The words of the Rashba imply not only is the husband not forced to divorce her when she claims ma’us alei but that he has no obligation to give her a get! This is also apparent from the words of Tosfos(Kesubos 63).... Shulchan Aruch (E.H. 77:2): If she says that he disgusts me and I can not have relations with him – if the husband wants to divorce her she does not get any money from the Kesuba at all. Rema (E.H. 77:2)... All of this is only when she doesn’t give a reason and justification for her words as to why she finds him repulsive. But if she does give a reason for her words... And we don’t force him to divorce her nor do we force her to remain with him. And if you want to claim that he must divorce her – it is obvious that since we don’t force her to remain with him then of necessity that there can’t be an obligation of the husband to give her a get. It is the same thing.
update Jan 17
Rav Sternbuch(5:345): Question: A woman who has been separated from her husband for a number of years and she claims ma’us alei and there is a clear basis for this claim which has been verified. It is clear that there is no chance that they will reconcile. The husband is close to one of the chassidic rebbes who gives him great honor. The beis din has met with the couple many times and is firmly convinced that there is no possibility of reconciliation. Therefore they asked the husband to give his wife a get. However the husband has acted cruelly and refused. Even though I am presently traveling but since this is an emergency situation I will answer briefly. You should know that many of the Rishonim including the Rambam and Rashi ruled that in a case of ma’us alei we force the husband to give a get. And some say that we force the get because of a decree of the Geonim. In contrast, Rabbeinu Tam and the Ri as well as other Rishonim disagreed and they held that a get can not be forced in a case of ma’us alei. The Rosh writes (43:6) that since there is a major dispute as to what the halacha is we don’t stick our heads between the great mountains. He also writes that whoever is lenient and forces a get results in an increase in mamzerim. The Shulchan Aruch (E.H. 77:2) also says not to force the get. So even though we agree that the halacha is that the get can not be forced when there is a claim of ma’us alei, nevertheless such a husband should not be given honor. Therefore it is necessary to inform the rebbe who is honoring him that he is giving the husband help to torment his wife which is a severe sin.
However prior to putting pressure on him through the rebbe, this the couple should be given 12 months during which efforts should be made to convince them to reconcile and expert marriage therapists should be used to deal with their issues. However when the beis din is convinced that there is no chance that they will reconcile and they paskened that it it appropriate for him to divorce his wife and not leave her an agunah – and nevertheless the husband refuses to divorce her. If we see there is no hope that he will give her a get – then his rebbe should be contacted and requested to stop honoring him. If he will listen to daas Torah he will not lose anything and one who observes mitzva will not know harm.
Rav Sternbuch (4:301): Question: I received a question from America where - due to our many sins - it is common that women rebel against their husbands and afterwards go to secular courts - Gd forbid! The secular court makes a judgment in her favor - through coercion and not in accord with the law of the Torah. The judgment obligates the husband to pay very high support payments and carries a penalty of prison for failure to comply. In addition she is typically awarded custody of the children. The husband is asking for a heter of meah rabbonim to be able to remarry without giving her a get since she is a moredes and has transgressed the religious laws. On the other hand she claims that the heter of meah rabbonim is not relevant since she in fact is willing to accept the get. She also claims that there are rabbis who support her position. So she wants to benefit twice by obtaining a get according to the Torah and also a judgment from civil court which steals money from from her husband even after the get. Answer: In my humble opinion there is no validity to her claims and therefore the husband should be given a heter so he can marry another woman. The only limitation is that he needs to deposit the get with beis din as is the established practice. The reason for this is complex. 1) first of all since they are coercing him financially not in accord with the halacha regarding the support payments which are much higher than the halacha - that constitutes theft. Thus the get itself is a forced get. The gedolei poskim are worried about get me'usa. Thus the get is not actually valid and we have the problem that she is still a married woman who thinks she can remarry. Therefore it is necessary to exempt him from all financial obligations that were done against his will in order that the get itself be valid. Furthermore if the wife refuses to go to beis din, then that itself gives her the halachic status of moredes as is clear from Divrei Chaim (E.H. 51) and he cites the Chavas Daas who ruled that a woman who refused to go to beis din was a moredes and the gedolim agreed with him. ... According to this if she goes with him only to beis din then he is obligated to give her a get. However when she goes to secular court in addition to make monetary claims - she is not able hold on to both sides. In other words she can't go to the secular court with monetary claims and at the same demand that he give her a get in beis din. If she forces him to accept the rulings of the secular court in marriage matters he has no obligation to give her a get. We need to state in addition that the essence of the Decree of Rabbeinu Gershom was for the benefit of the wife. However this benefit is only available when she doesn't abrogate her halachic obligations. But in the present case she has created serious devastation in the marriage in that she has rebelled against him and went to secular court where she received excessive judgements concerning maintenance and also the custody of the children. Her husband must give her a get in beis din so that she can remarry. So in the case of moredes the decree of Rabbeinu Gershom which was meant to benefit women was not intended and the husband can remarry with the heter of 100 Rabbis and he deposits the get with beis din until the judgment of the secular court is nullified. When that happens- if he has not yet remarried - then it is prohibited for him to do so until he gives his first wife a get.
In reality your question is a local issue of America and it is the job of American rabbis to decide. However my view is in agreement with the rabbis there who permit the husband to remarry without any difficulty and he needs to deposit a get with beis din. But when the judgment of the secular courts has been nullified then it is prohibited for the husband to remarry until he has properly divorced the first wife.
You should be aware that we are obligated to fight against her going to secular courts and we prevent her from remarrying if she does and if the get is given under these circumstances there is a suspicion that it was coerced (me'usa). Nevertheless in a case where she claims she can't stand him (ma'us alei) and there is no reason to believe they can be reconciled and the man is simply being cruel to her and is being spiteful by not to giving her a divorce - then even though it is prohibited for us to exert any force- G-d forbid! - nevertheless it is correct to notify the husband that the view of many of the gedolim (e.g., Rambam, Ravad, Behag, Rashbam, Rashi etc) is that he is sinning and they would encourage him to give her a get. Because even these poskim are concerned about creating [an invalid get] which would leave her as a married woman even bedieved - so G-d forbid that we should use any type of coercion. Regarding the issue of tormenting her and leaving her an aguna - it is correct for him to be concerned for her claim that she finds him revolting (ma'os alei) and it is prohibited for him to leave her as an aguna - even if she is not correct. But we are not to coerce him G-d forbid with any type of coercion that would possibly bring about a get me'usa. Rather [once we have informed him that it is wrong for him to withhold the get] he needs to come the the realization himself that he must conduct himself like a descendant of Avraham and the verse says that the ways of Torah are ways of pleasantness and all its paths are peace and that he will find happiness with someone else.
All of this we need to explain to the husband. That leaving her as an aguna is a transgression of a severe sin of onas devarim - not to torment his wife. That refusing to divorce her serves no purpose except to get revenge against her. He doesn't want to live with her and he shouldn't think her life is worthless and he should be fully aware that in Heaven there is judgment and there is a Judge. He should also be informed that to many of the early gedolim it is correct even to force him to divorce. Unfortunately there are many beis dins that when they see that the husband doesn't want to divorce his wife they simply remain silent. But that is not acceptable. They must inform him that he is unjustifiably tormenting her and this is not correct. This of course is assuming that the beis din is convinced that there is no hope for reconciliation....
===========================
Rav Moshe Sternbuch (Teshuvos v'Hanhagos 1:389): Question: A woman has suffered for a number of years from her husband who refuses to divorce her - how can he be forced to give a get?
Answer: It is an established halacha that if the wife refuses to live with her husband because she claims he is disgusting to her (ma'os alei) that it is impossible to force him to divorce her. This is explicitly stated by the Rema (E.H. 77:3). And even if it has been a number of years that they have separated and he is being spiteful and cruel in refusing to divorce her it is clearly stated by the Teshuvos haRosh (43:6) that if we force him to give the get there is the concern that it is a get me'usa and therefore invalid and it only serves to increase mamzerim. However while it is stated in the Rema (E.H. 154:21) that nidoi (cherem) is considered force and is prohibited, nevertheless he says it is permitted to decree that no Jew should do him a favor or should do business with him or even to circumcize his sons or to bury them - until he divorces his wife. But the Pischei Teshuva (E.H. 154:30) says there these shunnings (harhakos) are equivalent to nidoi (cherem) and are not permitted to be imposed today and the only recourse is to tell him that it is permitted to call him a sinner and he says it is best to be strict according to this opinion. This is agreed to by the Chazon Ish (E.H. 105:12). He concludes in the name of the Rashba that it is not permitted to humiliate the husband or to torment him - examine this well.
However it appears that what is prohibited is to humiliate him and to shun him in a manner similar to cherem - i.e, not to do business with him and not to do him a favor - and that is not done today. (Chazon Ish understands the Pischei Teshuva differently). But when he is not actively humiliated but that he is only not given honors for example he is notified that he will not receive an aliyah in his shul or any other shul and that he will not be allowed to be the shliach tzibor - then this is not like cherem at all even though it causes some humiliation. The only pressure permitted is that he should know that the community does not approve of his conduct of being cruel to his wife - but this is not called force at all.
I recall witnessing an incident involving Rav Yechiel Weinberg (Seridei Aish) concerning a husband who spitefully refused to divorce his wife after a number of years and he directed that it be known and publicized that this husband was not to get an aliya in the shul. That is in accord with what I have written that this type of pressure is not called force. It is also done here in Yerushalayim to publicize notices in the street that a particular person is a sinner and has made his wife an aguna. In my opinion 1) if she has solid justification for her desire to be divorced then it would be possible and appropriate to force him actively with humiliations to give her a get. We learn from Kesubos (71a) if it is clear that he hates her then he is obligated to divorce her. 2) On the other hand if there is no apparent reason for her being repelled by him we can distance him. I am inclined to permit humiliation in such cases but it is necessary for beis din first to be very careful and thorough in evaluating the situation as to whether it is appropriate. Similarly one should not spare any efforts to encourage that she live with him when she requests a divorce and there is no clear reason except she says she doesn't like him. 3) But if there is a clear reason - then even if we don't force him with a beating we are accustomed to be lenient to pressure him with notices in shuls as I mentioned above.
This that the wife creates pressure with the claim that he is tormenting her and she can not stand the situation any more and that she is ready to go to "rabbis" who are lenient in divorce - that is still not justification for us to make rulings against the Torah. The ways of G-d are hidden and some suffer physically while other suffering financially and some suffer in their marriage. We need to hope to G-d that the end of suffering has arrived and that he will divorce her. On the other hand, to force him with high payments for food or to humiliate him when it is not permitted - it doesn't help because this pressure only produces a get me'usa - G-d forbid - which has no validity. But concerning cruelty and spite which is characteristic of Sedom - only Heaven can punish him.
Yachin uVoaz(1:124):[15th Century Algeria] You should know that there are two different types of moredes and they have different laws. There is a moredes who despises her husband and she asserts that he is disgusting to her. On the other hand there is a moredes who says she wants her husband but she wants to torment him In the case of ma'us alei the view of the Rambam is that the husband is forced to divorce her immediately and he learns this from a deduction from the gemora as the Rosh writes. The Rambam states in Hilchos Ishus (14:8) that if a wife refuses sexual relations that the husband is forced to give a a get since she is not like a prisoner who can be forced to have relations with someone she hates. However there has long been an outcry against the ruling of the Rambam by all the commentators and poskim such as Rabbein Tam, Ramban, Rosh, Rashba and many others. They agree concerning forcing the husband to divorce. Whoever forces the husband to divorce in accordance to the ruling of the Rambam increases mamzerim in the world. And they reject the view of the Rambam with clear proofs from the Talmud as the Rosh does. And many proofs are brought to refute and reject the words of the Rambam. And even the Magid Mishna who normally devotes himself in all places to justify the words of the Rambam and to firmly establish their validity with clear proofs - in this case he refutes the Rambam and goes into detail with proofs to contradict the Rambam's reasoning and to reject it. It is unnecessary to repeat them here. The halachic view that has become univeral is that one does not force the husband to give a get when she claim ma'us alei and we do not rely on the ruling of the Rambam nor others who agree with him in this matter. And furthermore that even if the halacha was in accord with the Rambam it would be correct to make a protective fence in this matter to prevent immorality amongst the woman because of the degradation of the contemporary generation. Because woman have become haughty and arrogant in their immorality. We are therefore concerned that a wife might have become interested in another man and she wants to discard her husband by declaring he is disgusting to me (ma'us alei). If it became known that that would be sufficient to have her husband forced to give her a get then it would surely cause problems. But in fact the Rambam is not the halacha because of the proofs that the opponents of the Rambam bring [And even in Algeria where they always follow the Rambam there are three exceptions and this is one of them and not those who agree with the Rambam...]. However I saw in the Rosh who writes that if in fact the psak of the Rambam was followed and the woman was divorced by force and she remarried - we don't force her leave the second marriage. However many others disagree with the Rosh and they say that if she remarries after a forced get - she must leave the second marriage.
==========================================update: added my rebuttal in yellow
I don't have time now to write a rebuttal of this article. Hopefully next week - but I thought it would be helpful to read this well written - though mistaken - piece. One of the comments summarizes the problem well.
Rivka Gornall Leiner · Top Commenter · Graphologist and Counselor at Self-Employed
Adds nothing but one more snowball in the avanche of one sided articles written by those who sleep quietly while female get refusal, child alienation, false abuse accusations, monetary extortion (on both sides) and cruelty play out because of the woman's spite or greed. This might help your rabbi points in feminist pc Denver but it ignores reality.
============================
Times of Israel by Rabbi Levi Brackman
In my fourteen years of practicing as a rabbi I have been asked numerous times to offer counsel and support to couples in failing marriages. Despite the fact that it takes two to tango, often the breakdown of a marriage is more the fault of one party than the other. Yet, no matter how the marriage ends and who is at fault, if the husband does not actively agree to give a Gett (Jewish religious divorce) immediately after the wife requests it he is always in the wrong no matter what.
Why? That is clearly not the view of the Torah. See Shulchan Aruch (E.H. 77:2-3). So what is meant by wrong no matter what? Does that mean that the husband should not request marriage counseling first? Does that mean a mistaken belief that the Torah requires a Get on demand? What if the wife takes the kids and moves to another state. He is simply supposed to give a Get and forget about his children? Or perhaps it mean that if all issues are settled, the is no basis for reconciliation and yet the husband out of spite refuses to give a Get that he is wrong? If it is the latter than I agree totally but if the former conditions - I disagree strongly.
Why? That is clearly not the view of the Torah. See Shulchan Aruch (E.H. 77:2-3). So what is meant by wrong no matter what? Does that mean that the husband should not request marriage counseling first? Does that mean a mistaken belief that the Torah requires a Get on demand? What if the wife takes the kids and moves to another state. He is simply supposed to give a Get and forget about his children? Or perhaps it mean that if all issues are settled, the is no basis for reconciliation and yet the husband out of spite refuses to give a Get that he is wrong? If it is the latter than I agree totally but if the former conditions - I disagree strongly.
Subscribe to:
Comments
(
Atom
)