Your Answer Has to Apply to ALL Religions Equally

Atali

Thu, Mar 17 2011, 8:58 am

marina wrote:

Quote:

I think you can say it's the religion when people say they are doing it in the name of their religion, and when religious leaders and texts back them up. So for example, I could say of the Amish, or of hareidi Jews in Israel, that they have religious reasons for not enlisting in the army. I could say of polygamous Mormons that they have religious reasons for polygamy.

Quote:

I think that the question is not how the majority of a religious group behave, but whether the behavior of that majority (or significant minority) of a religious group or subgroup is based on something that the group believes.

Some frum people believe that "venishmartem es nafshoseichem" means that their children should not be vaccinated. Their rabbonim support them and they have a textual source and they are abstaining from vaccinations in the name of their religion. Do you think, Ora & Atali, that I could then say that "observant Jews do not vaccinate their children for religious reasons" and that would be an accurate statement? Would it be correct to say that Judaism discourages vaccinations and that these people's behaviors are based on their adherence to their religion? Percentage doesn't come into it at all? How large does the minority have to be before they are a "significant" minority?

Let's not turn this into a vaccine debate, btw, that was just an example.

In that case I think it would be fair to say that some religious Jews, or perhaps Jews who are followers of Rabbi X, do not vaccinate for religious reasons.

The minority would just have to be significant enough to be considered a group. The school example was a good example of that, they are not the majority but are enough to say that members of group X (or a subsection of group X, as the case may be) do not approve of teaching secular studies to children.

ora_43

Thu, Mar 17 2011, 9:05 am

marina wrote:

I addressed that in the rest of my post (don't tell me you skipped paragraphs 3-5 Twisted Evil

). No, it wouldn't be accurate, because they are in the minority (and it wouldn't be accurate even if they were in the majority - as per post 1 paragraph 2 - but it would be a less inaccurate inaccuracy).

saw50st8

Thu, Mar 17 2011, 9:16 am

shalhevet wrote:

saw50st8 wrote:

shalhevet wrote:

The way to say what religion x believes in is to look at their mitzvos (with or without "") and books and see what the religion teaches, not how individuals behave.

So if someone would like to show me widely accepted mussar seforim of other religions, telling you to be careful to be scrupulously honest, not get angry, do things besimcha etc, then I'd accept that it was part of their religion too, even if not everyone tried to put it into practice.

Similarly, if a religion has part of its teachings to kill the infidels, or offer people to convert or die, or worship idols, I would say that is part of their religion even if many thinking people don't practice it today.

Like amalek?

I knew someone was going to say that.

Yes, I believe Judaism has part of its religion to kill Amalek. Like Isramom said, we don't know who they are today. Maybe if we did we'd understand why. Maybe we'd see how evil they were.

Judaism believes in killing others too - like soldiers fighting against us, and someone who comes to kill you, and a rodef, even if that rodef is innocent (like a baby crying in a place where he will give away other people's hiding place).

We don't believe in killing people who don't agree with us.

All you are saying is that we don't murder out of ignorance. I doubt most Jews would kill an amalekite even if they knew that someone was one.

hadasa

Thu, Mar 17 2011, 10:24 am

saw50st8 wrote:

shalhevet wrote:

saw50st8 wrote:

shalhevet wrote:

Like amalek?

All you are saying is that we don't murder out of ignorance. I doubt most Jews would kill an amalekite even if they knew that someone was one.

It's not just ignorance, it's the fact that we currently do not have the power to do these things according to Jewish law. Honestly, though, if Moshiach comes today and tells me that a bunch of neo-Nazis somewhere are Amalek and need to be killed, I don't think it would bother me. But if he says it about non-Jews I know and work with personally, um, not something I'd want to contemplate. Let's hope they're all just Edomim.

BTW, I think this thread should be moved to a non-public forum.

marina

Thu, Mar 17 2011, 10:24 am

Quote:

I addressed that in the rest of my post (don't tell me you skipped paragraphs 3-5 ). No, it wouldn't be accurate, because they are in the minority (and it wouldn't be accurate even if they were in the majority - as per post 1 paragraph 2 - but it would be a less inaccurate inaccuracy).

I did read those paragraphs, but I guess I misunderstood them b/c I thought you were giving two options, one demarcation based on text and one demarcation based on percentages. Now I think you are not saying these are separate but that they have to both be considered. Is that right?

But still, where is the bright line? Is it 90%? That is the number that people are tossing around. Is that the number and anything short of that is inaccurate to generalize to the whole group and attribute to their religion? Is there a bright line?

Quote:

In that case I think it would be fair to say that some religious Jews, or perhaps Jews who are followers of Rabbi X, do not vaccinate for religious reasons.

But it would not be fair to say that Judaism discourages vaccinations? When can I say that? When 51% of all frum people stop vaccinating? Or 90% ? Or never? You are not a proponent of the numbers, from what I gather, so what bright line do you suggest? The group test? What is the minimum for a group then? two? ten?

Quote:

Very interesting thread, Marina!!!!

Thank you apple!

Tamiri, you are saying there is no bright line and it's all a matter of perspective?

hattie1

Thu, Mar 17 2011, 5:48 pm

in the scheme of things, do the biased thoughts and beliefs of individuals really matter? to me, their actions towards other races/religions are what matters. if my neighbors(of a different religion) think negatively of mine(and I know they do-they usually do..), it wont matter to me unless they act on it. as long as theyre cordial, even if its just a facade, im fine with that for now.
people of different religions are obviously outcomes of that particular faith-they cannot agree with my religion,or else theyd be of the same faith. racial generalizations may hold a lot of truth- because people of a certain race are also outcomes of that race throughout the ages.
if leaders preach hatred towards other religions(and the top ones,besides judaism do), its only a problem for us if the congregants act on it-whether its missionizing, or terrorism.
theres really no such thing as equality-its impossible for all peoples to b the same.
thats the beauty,and the ugliness of our world...

ora_43

Thu, Mar 17 2011, 6:36 pm

marina wrote:

Quote:

I was trying to say that there are different categories, as follows -

1. Most people in the religious group do a certain thing, and there's support for their actions in the religious tradition.
2. Most people in the religious group do a certain thing, but there's no religious support for it.
3. A minority in the religious group do it, and they claim support from tradition.

And the first case is the only one where you could get away with saying, "Jews do ... " or "Christians believe.... ", etc, even if it's not true 100% of the time.

Frum Jews who claim a Torah source for not vaccinating are in category 3.

A category one case would be something like "Religious Jews learn the Gemara," or "Israeli Druze enlist in the IDF." Both are far from universally true, but they are still common enough to be the rule, not the exception. It would still be more accurate to attach the word "Most," though.

ETA - in terms of percents, I'd say you need about 60% to put something into Category 1.

Last edited by ora_43 on Thu, Mar 17 2011, 6:45 pm; edited 1 time in total

Raizle

Thu, Mar 17 2011, 6:50 pm

marina wrote:

Quote:

Some frum people believe that "venishmartem es nafshoseichem" means that their children should not be vaccinated. Their rabbonim support them and they have a textual source and they are abstaining from vaccinations in the name of their religion. Do you think, Ora & Atali, that I could then say that "observant Jews do not vaccinate their children for religious reasons" and that would be an accurate statement? Would it be correct to say that Judaism discourages vaccinations and that these people's behaviors are based on their adherence to their religion? Percentage doesn't come into it at all? How large does the minority have to be before they are a "significant" minority?
Let's not turn this into a vaccine debate, btw, that was just an example.

I don't think you can say that, because those that do vaccinate will say the same thing, that they are protecting their children.
It's accurate to say we are doing the best we can with the information we have to protect our children and preserve life which our religion commands us.
But our religion doesn't discuss or debate vaccination. So I don't think it's accurate to put words in the Torah's mouth so to speak.

marina

Thu, Mar 17 2011, 9:10 pm

Quote:

I think this is a well thought out, reasonable answer. Thank you!

marina

Thu, Mar 17 2011, 9:12 pm

Raizle wrote:

Isramom8 wrote:

What about not smoking?

There is no debate there. Smoking is clearly detrimental to our health and puts our lives in danger even if not immediate.

There are no factions out there to my knowledge that claim that smoking is healthy

This is a good example, because my question also includes the question of when I can say that a religion is not against a certain practice.

Can we say that Judaism does not prohibit smoking?

amother

Thu, Mar 17 2011, 9:24 pm

To the best of my Knowledge there is somewhat of a debate amonst modern-day Pokim as to whether or not Judaism permits smoking or not, based upon the verse "vnishmartem meod lnafshoseichem".
Reb Moshe Feinstien has a Teshuva where he takes the position that while it is not prohibited per se to smoke it is however a foolish thing to do and falls in the category of "shomer pesuyim Hashem" Hashem watches over fools.
There are others who state that even according to the reasoning put forth by Reb Moshe zt'l in the above mentioned Responsa nowadys for various reasons it would be prohibited to begin smoking.
I beleive all those who "prohibit" make a distinction between those who began smoking without knowledge of its inherent harm and were already addicted by the time they were made aware of it and those who began smoking even with knowledge of it.

PinkFridge

Fri, Mar 18 2011, 8:54 am

marina wrote:

Raizle wrote:

Isramom8 wrote:

What about not smoking?

This is a good example, because my question also includes the question of when I can say that a religion is not against a certain practice.

Can we say that Judaism does not prohibit smoking?

Amother below made me think of something:
When one starts positing that Judaism does or does not allow or prohibit something that is not clear cut, we're on a slippery slope. I think that that first Rashi in Kedoshim gives us permission to say that Judaism does or doesn't ENDORSE something but for laypeople I'm not so sure if we can talk so strongly. Now if someone of serious stature uses such terminology that could be a different story.

princessleah

Fri, Mar 18 2011, 10:38 am

marina wrote:

Quote:

I think this is a well thought out, reasonable answer. Thank you!

I'll throw another wrench in. The majority of Jews in the US (and the world for that matter) are NOT OBSERVANT. So technically, I can say "Most Jews eat unkosher beef." That's my example. Now I wouldn't say, "Jews eat unkosher beef" because the Torah talks about keeping kashrut. However, this large majority may ALSO claim support from the religion, because according to Reform Judaism there is no need. So if a Reform Jew were asked why they don't eat only kosher meat, he/she may say, "because I don't have to according to my tradition."

So... Most Jews don't eat kosher certified meat! Would I say, "Jews don't have to eat kosher meat"? I wouldn't say that, but maybe many more people than our numbers would!