I don't have a strong opinion on the issue of the graves in Ashkelon and the building of the hospital. While the alternative solution is very expensive, that might be a cost worth paying. Also, the delay is hardly Litzman's fault - this has been an issue for over three years already.

Articles and news items I discussed on the topic were out of interest only, not because I ascribe to any particular side in the debate.

I do find it a bit disheartening how this has come about. The State has a mechanism in place for deciding halachic issues. The State has the Chief Rabbinate and the Rabbanut that is meant to make such halachic decisions and the State is meant to follow them. It is wrong for the State to start making its decisions base don private rabbis piskei halacha. I would have no problem if the Rabbanut consulted with a private rabbi and allowed that rabbi to influence their decision, and then the State follow that. But in this case, the Rabbanut issued a ruling, and the State ignored it and followed a conflicting opinion of a private rabbi.

It is unhealthy, in terms of the State, for the State to ignore its own bodies and institutions created for various functions and processes and to prefer alternates.

And then there is the very bright aspect of the debate - the whole country is debating halacha right now. The secular papers are non-stop bringing quotes form various rabbis and discussing which aspect of the halacha should override the other aspects.

It is not just fighting over money, though there is that too. It is not just fighting over power or a hospital or efficiency or anything else, though there is some of all that. The main focus of the debate has been regarding whether or not it is allowed, or what is allowed or not allowed, according to halacha.

I find that to be a nice aspect of the nationwide debate.