SodaStream (Soda-Club) USA. . 250 X 250 .

Jun 20, 2010

Emannuel saga seems to be over

They have come to an agreement in Emannuel. Baruch Hashem.

After Rav Yaakov Yosef pulled out of the fight, after he was threatened, and then Rav Ovadia spoke out against going to the secular courts, Yoav Lalum came to an agreement with the parents and the Slonimers.

They agreed to arbitration by beis din. Lalum agreed to withdraw all his suits and complaints. In exchange they agreed that there would only be one school and one track and everybody would learn together. In case of a specific need, any specific girl or family in question would be evaluated and decided on separately by the beis din.

I don't get it. This is basically what Lalum wanted in the first place. So in the end he got everything, the parents get out of jail (I assume), and there will be a beis din dealing with specific questions and individual questions.

So why did they have to go through all this drama of the past weeks? Why couldn't they agree to this from the start? What happened to the insistence that the fight was lshem shamayim and there was no way they could let their girls learn wth other girls at such a low level of observance? What happened to the big kiddush hashem of going to jail over taharas ha'chinuch?

17 comments:

  1. Its a big defeat for Israel's leftist elite, which showed all the tolerance of Russia's Bolsheviks and the Israel Supreme Court which egged on Attorney General Weinstein to investigate religious MKs for the crime of disagreeing with the Court's Stalinist edict to jail parents for the crime of raising their children as they saw fit.

    ReplyDelete
  2. you mean raise their children as they saw fit to be narrow uncivilized racist bigots, don't you?

    ReplyDelete
  3. No, NormanF. The haredi leadership got their public all riled up. That there was no alternative and this issue was yehareg ve-al yaavor. The parents said they would happily go to jail, and everyone supported them. Until it came time to actually go to jail. They encouraged the women to elude jail. Then, after all that, the leadership backed down and agreed that the children could all learn together, after all.
    What about tolerance for the sephardi families? I haven't seen much compassion for them and their children.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Anon,

    It's the parents' prerogative to raise their kids however they want, even if that means they become narrow uncivilized bigots, even if you don't like it. (I would draw a line at raising them to participate in unlawful or directly dangerous behavior).

    --------------------
    Rafi,

    I'm not sure that this would get the parents out of jail. They were jailed for contempt of court. Withdrawal of the original suit shouldn't affect that.

    ReplyDelete
  5. yoni - I was wondering about that. But if not, then what do they gain by signing such an agreement now after they are already suffering by not agreeing to this before, if it wont rectify what has already been done?

    ReplyDelete
  6. mother in Israel - you mean having 30% of the school Sephardi (as the 'hasidic' track is now = discrimination? please.

    as per the psak BD - one would need to see what it actually says - can the school force the 'takanon machmira of R' Vozner' or not.

    The fact that the media is trumpeting this as NOW the "sephardim" can come in is not necessarily the case. They were always allowed in as evidenced by the 30% of the track which is sephardi. the real question is the takanon.

    THis is not to say that no discrimination exists in Haredi schools - just this was the wrong case to pick.

    I still find it amazing how people are so naive and willingly stupid (i.e. motivated by pure unadulterated hatred) when it comes to how the media reports thigns.

    oh well, mother in israel serves a perfect example of how Communism, Nazism, and all other Orwellian movements came to be.

    Just rile up the masses by stirring there inner hatreds. And no the Haredi leadership did not rile anybody up - the Haredi public correctly saw an infringement on their rights to independent education and protested accordingly. If you have a problem with that you would have probably one of the people hosing down the blacks in Alabama and you think Ghandi was a rabble rouser. There was nothing illegitimate about the protest and to claim so exposes you as a robotic bigot.

    Just another stupid brick in the wall.

    DO you agree with this law - that it is llegal to criticize the supreme court? you probably do. as they represent all that is holy for you.

    ReplyDelete
  7. 30% sfardi does not mean there is no discrimination. if they have a quota that they have to allow in 30%, so anybody who is appropriate that is above and beyond the 30% that they do not let in (because they already reached the quota) is still discrimination.

    They say about Rav Shach that he would tell mosdos to take in sfardim equally as ashkenazim. His quota of 30% was a minimum quota, while today the mosdos that take 30% sfardim use the 30% as a maximum.
    dont know if its true (about what rav shach said), but thats what they say

    ReplyDelete
  8. garfield, name-calling isn't going to swing anyone around to your point of view.
    For the others who might be interested in an answer, discrimination is when sephardim and ashkenazim don't have an equal chance at getting in. Either there are higher standards for the sephardim, or the standards are designed specifically to eliminate most of the sephardim. That is what happened when the Bet Yaakov Hasidi opened. They looked at the children they didn't want (all of whom were sephardim, they let a small number of "good ones" in) and wrote a takanon that they knew the rest of the parents wouldn't sign.
    Whatever the ruling of the beit din actually says, it instructs the Slonim chassidim to have their daughters learn with everyone. So I guess the beit din is also a Communist, Orwellian tool, etc.

    ReplyDelete
  9. of course you did read what I said oh vain mother of Israel. What is being reported is missing the whole point. Is the takanon being enforced. this is the nekuda? Should I spell it out for you more clearly?

    And yes, rafi, the Supreme court admitted that that there was a behavior takanon in place which was the source of the rejections, but claimed that in any case "R' Wosner's takanon was not an acceptable criterion." i.e. they are not interested the truth just in butting in to someone else's business. and making hay at the haredim's expense.

    And more tho the point, while actual sephardi/ashkenazy discrimantion per se is not acceptable a court has no right to force a parent to go to a particualr school. SO your original point Rafi should be directed to Lalum not to the Slonimer - Why did he not go to BD in the first place?

    Of course it might be pointless writing all this since I do not beleive you are actually readign it with an open mind anyway since you poeple love to pat yourself on the backs for being so progressive and just use these issues to pat yourselves some more (of course the reality is - you are just the 2010 model of Lenin's useful idiots when the next demagogue comes around - you know most stalininsts thought they were very progressive, and maoists etc.(i.e. the holiness of the state of Israel was not your kodesh kodoshim - and even to numbskulls like yourself some things canot be reconciled you would no doubt be ObamaBots and thnk you were progressive for it. Now you are just RUle of Law Bots. )

    but I still feel that the other side must be told just show that shtika should be a hoda'a.

    HAha I just saw now on kikar shabbat that this BD never said what is being reported.

    And R' Ovadia condemned the BD - I am not sure why.

    So you all have egg on your faces.

    ReplyDelete
  10. And if you are already name calling.

    YOu poeple are way to square. lighten up a bit.

    You gotta watch Latma.co.il a bit and learn to laugh at yourselves/hypocrisy - maybe this cn cure yours.

    And yes, I do not like being diplomatic. I prefer the King David/Solomon approach - see Sam. 2 ch. 10 I think for KD's treatment of Moav AFTER thier defeat. and Mishlei - "with a jerk, be a bigger Jerk, with the twisted, twist things even more than they" (my free translation)

    Chazal - "no mercy on fools"

    but the door is always open for you to do teshuva. until you kick the bucket.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Hey, I am on a roll.

    Oh FOolish Mothe rin Israel:

    YOu are in favor of innocent nursing mothers going to jail with thier babies?

    SHame on you.

    The depths of your vicious hatred konws no bounds.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Lalum supposedly (who knows what to believe anymore) did go to beis din first and when the slonimers refused to appear his beis din gave him a hetter for erchaos. basic halacha that this is the process. they could have offered another beis din, and I dont know the details of the refusal, but he says he had a hetter to go to court from the beis din.

    Yes, it looks like the deal fell through. Lalum seems to not have withdrawn his suit as he said he would. I dont know why and have not had time to read all the information yet.

    ReplyDelete
  13. and garfield, please stop with the insults and name calling.
    we are all grownups and can discuss things, even if people disagree with each other, and there is no need to get down to insults and personal attacks. nobody here is gaining anything and nobody here has a personal stake, so there is no need for that.

    ReplyDelete
  14. it seems that Lalum has not yet withdrawn his suit because not all the parents of the Slonim side have signed yet.
    As well, Rav Yosef says the beis din, chosen by the Slonimers, is pasusl because the father of one of the parents is a member of the beis din and is nogeia b'davar, yet has not been willing to recuse himself. He is now demanding from the beis din that they switch to the format of zabl"a

    until all the parents sign, there is nothing for them to do.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Had a creative solution been implemented for the remaining two weeks of the semester wherein all the girls would be involved in some kind of chesed project, a great hillul Hashem would have been averted. As Judge Levy said, the summer months would have given everybody time to negotiate something that would satisfy all parties. As we enter into the weeks before Tisha B'Av, this would have given all of us hope that sin'at chinam will never again cause us to relive this tragic chapter in our history.
    To one and all --use these weeks to practice ahavat chinam.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Had a creative solution been implemented for the remaining two weeks of the semester wherein all the girls would be involved in some kind of chesed project, a great hillul Hashem would have been averted. As Judge Levy said, the summer months would have given everybody time to negotiate something that would satisfy all parties. As we enter into the weeks before Tisha B'Av, this would have given all of us hope that sin'at chinam will never again cause us to relive this tragic chapter in our history.
    To one and all --use these weeks to practice ahavat chinam.

    ReplyDelete
  17. This battle served the interests of both the Charedim and the Secularists, so it was fought. The court wanted to find a case of Charedi racial bias, and took the only one that came its way (albeit a weak one, though Chinuch Atzmai did throw them a juicy bone with the "they must daven like an ashkenazi" taknon). The askanim and hanger-ons needed an issue to make them relevant after the embarrassing Barzilai affair (and why should Asra Kadisha get all the press), and nothing gets out the crowds like "the Czarists are invading Veluzhin". Besides, who wants to actually deal with the uncomfortable and endemic problem of Chareidi institutional bias - that's introspective and oh-so-boring!

    ReplyDelete

Related Posts

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...