HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: jlove@ivrit.ra.itd.umich.edu (Jack Love)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Re: Jewish Charities, Round II
Date: 31 Dec 1992 16:19:49 GMT
Organization: /usr/local/trn/lib/organization
NNTP-Posting-Host: ivrit.ra.itd.umich.edu

In article <1992Dec31.142832.2204@cbnewsh.cb.att.com> sg@cbnewsh.cb.att.com (stephan.gross) writes:


>> -Telephone the Chairperson of the UJA (or similar) fundraising effort and
>>outline for him or her your concerns in clear terms.  Try not to make
>>generalizations you cannot support with some facts.  If you *need* facts,
>>ask the Chairperson to provide them.  (If they want you to contribute, let
>>me assure you, they will get you the facts).  Listen to his or her
>
>  Rob, I tried this once.  I called the UJA office in NY in a vain attempt
>to get a financial statement of any kind.  I spent a half hour being
>shuttled from office to office, only to wind up back where I started from.

The mail feed gremlins must be afflicting me again because I haven't
seen the exchange for which this article was a part. But I find the
quote above fascinating. It is my understanding that *every* charity
larger than $20,000 per annum gross receipts *must* make its Federal
990 return available to anyone who asks. There may be some ridiculous
"gotchas" (I think that at one time the charity could require you
to come in person to get it, but most respectable operations wouldn't
insist on this and I don't think that they can get away with it
any longer). There are significant penalties associated with 
declining to provide the information. So I find it quite remarkable
that you were unable to get the UJA to cooperate in this way.

The more interesting question (at least to me) is how useful this
information actually is. My experience with form 990 is that the
numbers can be aggregated in such a way that the data is basically
useless.

-- 
________________________________________
Jack F. Love	| 	Opinions expressed are mine alone.
		|	(Unless you happen to agree.)
From: jls@mbunix.mitre.org (Segal)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Chanuka Sa-mei-ach?
Date: 23 Dec 92 16:31:52 GMT
Organization: The MITRE Corp., Bedford, Ma.


In article <1992Dec22.161013.10974@linus.mitre.org> jls@mbunix.mitre.org (Segal) writes:
>>Assuming that sa-mei-ach is being used as a stative verb, we note that
>>Chanuka is a feminine noun!!
>>
>>Chanuka Sameiach can't be correct!! -- maybe se-mei-cha!

Jonathan B. Horen writes: 
> Well, it's like this -- the "correct" greeting is `Chag Channukah Sameach',
> in which `Channukah' is used as an adjective modifying `chag' (which `chag'?
> `Channukah'). Thus, `sameach' is in gender-agreement with the subject,
> `chag'.

I suspect you are correct.  It is still unusual that the dropped word is 
the one modified by the adjective.  The only other example of that 
which comes to mind is in the Gates of Prayer (Reform): there is a reference
to "She-ma u-vir-cho-te-ha" which has the same grammatical problem.  The
missing word of course is "ke-ri-at".

Are there other common examples of the dropping of the noun while 
maintaining the adjectives?

Joshua L. Segal <jls@mbunix.mitre.org>
From: kahn@troi.cc.rochester.edu (James Kahn)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Re: A self-confessed silly thread: Jewi
Date: 3 Jan 93 16:13:02 GMT
Organization: University of Rochester (Rochester, NY)

In article <1473600019@igc.apc.org> sdubin@igc.apc.org (Stephen Dubin) writes:
>
>Perhaps it is also appropriate to list people who, although they have
>Jewish names; have a non-Jewish mother e.g. Howard Stern.
>I remember the joy expressed by my Bubba when she learned that Haldeman
>and Erlichman were not Jewish!

Sounds like a good idea to me.  Here are a few well-known cases for starters:

 Cap Weinberger
 Diane Feinstein
 Michael Landon
 Sharon Stone

JK
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: colten@cbnewsb.cb.att.com (marc.colten)
Subject: Re: ACLU/AJC Menorah Police?
Summary: KKK in Cincinnati
Organization: AT&T
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 18:57:59 GMT

In article <1992Dec22.001320.28917@netcom.com>, strnlght@netcom.com (David Sternlight) writes:
> In article <1992Dec21.215319.29462@starbase.trincoll.edu> nmiller@starbase.trincoll.edu (norman miller) writes:
> 
> >
> >If they're in a public park then the state is obviously involved.
> >There's the problem.
> 
> I disagree. A public park is one of the few state-provided places that's
> a haven for free speech. It is not a place where the state expresses
> state political policy, but rather is a State-maintained public place.

I just saw an article in the New York Times (it may be few days old
as I get them by mail) about Cincinnati.  The Lubavitch organization
there fought for 5 years to have the right to post a menorah in 
Fountain Square. They won their case - now the KKK wants to erect
a cross using the same right.  Great victory, huh?  Lets face it,
if we let religious displays go up in public and government areas
you know as well as I do that 99.999% of them will be "in your face"
Christian.  Who is more likely to put them up?  Who is more likely
to put several of them up?  Who is more likely to put them up week
after week?  I think it's a bad idea.


marc colten

Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: mark@fenris.albany.edu (Mark Steinberger)
Subject: Re: ACLU/AJC Menorah Police?
Organization: State University of New York at Albany
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 92 05:45:19 GMT

In article <1992Dec22.154857.4511@galileo.cc.rochester.edu> bfoo_ltd@uhura.cc.rochester.edu (Brian E. Foont) writes:
>Similarly, I am not sure that I would
>want menorahs combined with Christmas trees, since I really do not want
>them associated together.

Neither would I. No one said they should be displayed together.

The point is that since display of cultural symbols seems to be an
American thing, we should make sure that some of our cultural symbols
get displayed, _separately_, too.


>Particularly in these times of high intermarriage it would seem that
>making the distinction between Jews and non-Jews more distinctive. 

And display of menorahs is, indeed, a distinction. It is a symbol of
Jewish pride.


>It seems to me that the only reason that such a big deal is made out of
>Chanukah (which is a minor festival) is that it happens to fall at about
>the same times as Chirstmas.  

So what would you choose to display? Hamantashen? A lamb bone? Your
grandfather's phylacteries? :-)

A shofar makes a nice symbol. Nothing wrong with displaying them in
season. And menorahs do, too. Seems to me I've seen menorahs used as
secular decoration by the Israeli government, for instance, and not
necessarily in season.


--Mark
Xref: sparky soc.culture.jewish:23762 talk.politics.mideast:23953
From: tjm@hrt213.brooks.af.mil (Tim Miller)
Subject: Re: Andy the Canadian twat
Organization: AL/HRTI, Brooks AFB
	<1992Dec19.194406.1@vxdesy.desy.de> <BzIx1H.CJH@watdragon.uwaterloo.ca>
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 15:01:05 GMT

On Sat, 19 Dec 1992 20:32:04 GMT, pasward@maytag.uwaterloo.ca (Paul A.S. Ward) said:

 P> Hey, now wait a minute; both David Skoll and I come from Canada.  (Besides 
 P> which, we're certainly not mediocre in Baseball - yes (and here we really 
 P> rub it in!) CANADA won the WORLD SERIES!  HA!  Yes the American national
 P> pastime is now no longer in American hands!

	Yeah right.  You can count the Canadians that play for the Jays
on one hand.

-- Cerebus <tjm@hrt213.brooks.af.mil>
"Canadian team, my butt."
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: tjm@hrt213.brooks.af.mil (Tim Miller)
Subject: Re: Christianity vs. the Jews
Organization: AL/HRTI, Brooks AFB
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 21:09:11 GMT

On 21 Dec 1992 09:51:19 GMT, jtauber@tartarus.uwa.edu.au (James Tauber) said:

J> This is based on the false belief that Rabbinical Judaism = OT Judaism.

	You got something closer?

J> :    To begin, there is much about how Christians worship that Jews
J> : regard as idol-worship.

J> There is much about how "Christians" worship that God regards as
J> idol-worship!

	Well, since the Jewish definition of idolatry comes from G-d
Hisself, isn't that what he said?

J> Why does it follow that if the messiah is a man, he cannot be born, die
J> and be resurrected?

	Well, he'll get resurrected with the rest of the righteous in
the World to Come, but you  know that's not what he meant.

J> :    And finally, the concept of God crucifying his own son for the
J> : sins of any other person, let alone all of humanity, is, from the 
J> : Jewish point of view, totally unacceptable.  It flies in the face
J> : of everything that is important in Judasim.

J> It doesn't seem to fly in the face of Torah!

	How about HaShem ending the practice of human sacrifice with
Avraham?  Or how about the idea that each person atones for his own sin?
Sounds like it does to me, whatchoo say?

J> : Judaism teaches that
J> : salvation is achievable by how one behaves.  In Judaism, even the
J> : atheist who behaves in a decent and kind manner will have a place
J> : in the world to come.  Since people of any creed have the ability
J> : to behave in a holy and humane manner, Jews beleive that ANY good
J> : person can go to heaven.  As the old ad slogan for the kosher rye
J> : bread claimed, you don't have to be Jewish...

J> The Tanakh doesn't teach this. How can a holy God allow an atheist
J> a place in the world to come?

	"Would that Man would forsake Me and keep my mitvot."  HaShem
said this, can someone provide a source?

J> I agree with you that any good person can go to heaven. The problem is,
J> there are no good people without teshuvah and atonement.

	Says who?  I know plenty of good athiests, agnostics, Chritians,
Hindus, Muslims, Taoists, Buddhists...  A World to Come without some of
the good people I've known would be unthinkable.

J> I can understand why Jews are so deeply offended by Christian proselytising.
J> But understand - Christians take the judgements of the prophets a little
J> more seriously than most Jews and as far as I'm concerned,
J> no Jew fulfills the obligation of Torah. 

	Well, no one can fulfill *all* the mitvot.  But you seem to be
implying that *no* Jew fulfills *any* mitzvot.  Care to prove that
allegation?  Or would you rather apologize now and save us all a lot of
trouble? 

J>					Teshuvah and Atonement. Where are
J> they?

	I (attempt to) atone during Yom Kippur.  What about you?

J> It might be wise to flame me by e-mail rather than here.

	Nah.

J> In His Majesty's Service
J> James Tauber
J> jtauber@tartarus.uwa.edu.au

Working for Bill
Tim Miller
tjm@hrt213.brooks.af.mil
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: Murray Kahl <kahl@cybernet.cse.fau.edu>
Subject: Arens whines
Originator: scj@israel.nysernet.org
Reply-To: <Murray Kahl <kahl@cybernet.cse.fau.edu>>
Organization: Nysernet
Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1992 02:08:29 GMT

 
Why are you forced to lie, Mr. Ehrlich?  Don't you believe you can get 
by with the truth? 
-- 
Yigal Arens 
USC/ISI                                                TV made me do it! 
arens@isi.edu 
 

>From you, a past master of the art. I understand you give lessons.
From: sg04@gte.com (Yechezkal Shimon Gutfreund)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Re: Refuting Xian Missionaries (README)
Date: 28 Dec 92 16:13:37 GMT
Reply-To: sg04@gte.com
Organization: GTE Laboratories, Inc.

In article 3106@israel.nysernet.org, warren@nysernet.org (Warren Burstein) writes:
]bg = billg@bony1.bony.com (Bill Gripp)
]gf = friedenb@silver.egr.msu.edu (Gedaliah Friedenberg)
]
]gf: If a Christian missionary solemnly warns you that you will burn
]gf: in hell forever unless you accept Jesus, or if they try any other
]gf: type of psychological trick, calmly ask them for a logical proof
]gf: of their beliefs.  Insist on intellectual reasoning.
]
]bg: This is like asking a Jew why they believe the Tanakh.  Yes, it is based
]bg: upon the writtings accepted as scripture by the particular religion, but
]bg: whether you accept only the Tanakh or the "Old" and "New" Testaments is
]bg: ultimately a matter of faith, which is not subject to logic.
]
]I agree that this would be a reasonable question to ask of a
]hypothetical Jewish missionary.  Gedaliah did not suggest asking
]annoying questions of random Christians, only of Christian
]missionaries.

In general, I agree with conducting debates and discussion on a logical,
intellectual basis. However, those who attempt to do this with missionaries
should be aware of the following:

They find intellectualizaion and logical reasoning humerous when applied
to religion. In generally, X-tanity tends to sneer at Mishna, Gemorrah,
etc. as "mixing in intellectualism" into the beauty of "pure faith". There
are strong anti-intellectual tendancies in Xtianity. If one tries to use
such an approach on missionaries, they smile at you as some sort of poor
lost soul who cannot appreciate pure emotianal love. Anyone who has tried
to deal with Jews who have been captured with such cults verify these
observations for you.


---
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Yechezkal Shimon Gutfreund		 		  sgutfreund@gte.com
GTE Laboratories, Waltham MA			    harvard!bunny!sgutfreund
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Organization: The American University - University Computing Center
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1992 18:09:41 EST
From: <CARIAN@auvm.american.edu>
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Re: Conversion Question

In article <9212282105.AA19834@cyclone.sbi.com>, gertler@cyclone.sbi.com (Don
Gertler) says:
>
>CARIAN@auvm.american.edu writes:
>>
>> The status quo accepts all converts. This was reaffirmed by the Israeli
>> Supreme Court in 1988 or 1989 (the Shoshana Miller case). It is the
>> Orthodox parties, and especially Chabad, that seeks to change the status
>> quo. After all, the whole argument whenever it is raised is about amending
>> the LoR to *exclude* non-O converts, not about amending it to *include*
>> them.
>
>I understand the way the Law is currently implemented.  What I was
>meant in my (possibly erroneous) posting was that, originally, the
>application of the LoR with respect to converts was de facto deferred
>to the Israeli (Orthodox) Rabbinate.  I did not mean to imply that this
>was a requirement of the law, and certainly not that it was included
>in the law's text.  Just that this was the status quo.
>
Fair enough explanation. I honestly don't know the history here so I can't
help out. Zalman Abramov's book "The Perpetual Dilemma" might be of some help
in this question.

>Was the Shoshana Miller case the first in which a non-Orthodox conversion
>was at issue?  If not, what happened in all other cases?  And if so, were
>no other non-O convert naturalizations ever attempted?
>
It was the first that went all the way to the Supreme Court for a final
judgment. There was the Zeidman case in the early 70s but that one was made
moot when then-Chief Rabbi Goren persuaded the claimant in that suit to
undergo a quickie Orthodox conversion before the Court handed down its
judgment.

Subsequent to the Miller case there have been others. For a while when Rabbi
Peretz was the Interior Minister he claimed the Miller case applied only to
her and tried to force each and every non-O convert to go to the Supreme
Court, but the Court issued a declaratory judgment and made him cut it out.
As far as I know the LoR is being implemented as written for the moment.

>-Don Gertler

Rabbi Charles Arian
CARIAN@american.edu
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: kevink@samsara.tv.tek.com (Kevin Karth)
Subject: Re: Refuting Xian Missionaries (README)
Organization: Tektronix TV Products
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1992 08:24:15 GMT

In article <3106@israel.nysernet.org> warren@nysernet.org writes:
>
>gf: If a Christian missionary solemnly warns you that you will burn
>gf: in hell forever unless you accept Jesus, or if they try any other
>gf: type of psychological trick, calmly ask them for a logical proof
>gf: of their beliefs.  Insist on intellectual reasoning.
>
k2: Interestingly enough, if a "Christian" missionary warns you that you
k2: that you will burn in hell forever, "he/she" is misstaken to begin
k2: with since the "doctrine" of hellfire and the like is not really
k2: taught in the Torah or the "Christian" Bible.  God is NOT an 
k2: extortioner.  He gives us a choice between LIFE and DEATH, not
k2: life in a good place and life in a bad place.  Contrary to popular
k2: opinion the soul is not inherently immortal.  This mortal must
k2: put on immortality...  The Word of God if interpreted correctly
k2: does not contradict itself, is cohesive and consistant.  It is a
k2: message of life from death, not death from life.
From: ad980@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Paul S. Wolf)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Re: Jewish Christmas Carol Hits
Date: 25 Dec 1992 17:26:00 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (USA)
Reply-To: ad980@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Paul S. Wolf)
NNTP-Posting-Host: slc10.ins.cwru.edu


In a previous article, strnlght@netcom.com (David Sternlight) says:

>
>Peter, Paul, and Mary (are any of them Jewish?) did a Christmas show
>containing Chanukah songs as well. Both sets of material were very
>movingly arranged and performed.
>
>Peter Yarrow is Jewish and wrote "Light One Candle" which is based on 
a Hannukah theme.
  


Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: gertler@cyclone.sbi.com (Don Gertler)
Subject: Re: Conversion Question
Originator: scj@israel.nysernet.org
Reply-To: <gertler@cyclone.sbi.com (Don Gertler)>
Organization: Nysernet
Date: Fri, 1 Jan 1993 01:49:00 GMT

cohen@quartz.ciw.edu (Ronald Cohen) writes:
> <gertler@cyclone.sbi.com (Don Gertler)> writes:

> >Nevertheless, where did you invent that nonsense that I feel that
> >most of the Jews in Israel aren't real Jews?  I wish you (and others)
> >would stop resorting to such ridiculous arguments.  If you disagree
> >with something I have said, then say so.  If you disagree with
> >something I *haven't* said, please realize that *I* may disagree
> >with it as well.  If you feel the need to have me fulfill your
> >biased stereotypes of the Orthodox, please have the decency to
> >trap me into them first, then flame me.  Thank you.
> 
> Because no one can demonstrate direct lineage back to Abraham
> (who was a convert himself!) or to the 12 tribes for that
> matter.  So they cannot be proved to be Jews.

I never said anything about proving one's Jewishness!  Please!!!
I beg you.  Stop attributing your assumptions to me.  What we were
discussing was a conversion taking place.  What were the circumstances
surrounding that conversion?  Was it a proper conversion?  The fact
that 265 million Americans *may* be Jews is completely irrelevant to
this discussion.  We have someone who went through *some* procedure,
guided and supervised by *some* individual.  What I asked is what would
render that procedure invalid under a particular set of guidelines,
and whether those guidelines themselves are valid.

If condition A is prescribed in the guidelines, and Rabbis X, Y and Z
are on the Beit Din, is it inappropriate to expect Rabbis X, Y and Z
themselves to subscribe to condition A?  If so, what restrictions can
we put on condition A?  How far must X, Y and Z go in accepting A?

How much more abecedarian must I get?

> Interestingly, on the other hand, with the number of generations
> that have gone by, by the halachic definition of a Jew being
> anyone with a Jew in the maternal line, there must be many Jews
> running around who have no idea they are Jewish!  I guess Elijah
> will have to sort all of that out.

That's another interesting subject.  Want to start it?

-Don Gertler
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: aa324@yfn.ysu.edu (Marlene Miller)
Subject: Re: Mezuzah question
Originator: scj@israel.nysernet.org
Reply-To: <aa324@yfn.ysu.edu (Marlene Miller)>
Organization: Nysernet
Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1992 14:57:18 GMT





Peter Cohen asks three questions.  Although I'm not an "expert", I
offer these answers:

>     1. Is there a B'rucha for putting up mezuzot ?

Yes:

Baruch ata adonai elohainu melech ha-olam asher kidshanu b'mitzvotav
v'tzivanu likboa mezuzah.

Blessed art Thou, Lord our G-d, King of the universe who has sanctified
us with His commandments and commanded us to affix a mezuzah.

>     2. Should I ask a Rabbi to put them up ?

No, there's no need to ask a rabbi to put them up for you, unless you
feel you cannot do it 'correctly'.  Any member of the household can 
affix the mezuzah... let me qualify that... any member who understands  
the nature and significance of this mitzvah can/may affix it.

>     3. I notice that most homes have the mezuzah placed on the right
>        doorway, slightly tilted at the top towards the house, what
>        is the significance of this ?

The mezuzah is tilted at an angle of any degree, with the upper part
slanting inward towards the house or room, and the lower part slanted
away from the room or house.  I read somewhere, the reason for this
is because rabbis couldn't decide if it should be erected horizontally
so they compromised.

The mezuzah is to be nailed, screwed, or glued to the right side of the
door, as you enter the house or room.  

It must be put in the upper third of the doorpost.  To calculate this 
height, I took a piece of string, folded it in thirds... and affixed 
my mezuzah in the area of the doorposts which fit in the upper third 
section of my string.

>I realize I could ask my Rabbi these questions but I thought it would be more
>interesting to see the response I get from this newsgroup. 

I agree.   8-)

Marlene

--
       No nation can survive without pride in its traditions.
       Marlene J. Miller   aa324@yfn.ysu.edu
From: organic@mgr.hjf.org (Miriam Organic)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Re: A self-confessed silly thread: Jewish Rock/Pop Stars
Date: 30 Dec 92 16:53:06 GMT
Organization: HJF AIDS Research Project, Washington DC

In article <1hkqh3INN4q2@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu> bc744@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Mark Ira Kaufman) writes:
>
>Simon and Garfunkle
>Donald Fagen and Walter becker (Steely Dan)
>Carole King
>Mama Cass
>
>
>   If this thread ever shifts from pop to jazz, I'll be able to
>go crazy with names!!!

Mark Knophler (spelling??) 

 (or so I think)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: waldo@cybernet.cse.fau.edu (Todd J. Dicker)
Subject: Re: Ascii Chanukah symbols?
Organization: Cybernet BBS, Boca Raton, Florida
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1992 07:17:11 GMT

eva@Apocalypse.CAD.UCLA.EDU (Eva) writes:

> Does anyone have any ascii pictures of a dreidle or a chanukia?
> (If you send one of latkes I might be tempted to put sour cream on it and
>  take a bite out of the screen)
----
Yuch!  Does anyone else eat latkes with sour cream?  I thought the only 
way to eat them was with apple sauce.
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: nusbache@epas.utoronto.ca (Aryk Nusbacher)
Subject: Re: Assembly line
Organization: University of Toronto - Office of the Provost
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 20:07:41 GMT

In article <1992Dec19.053000.23169@midway.uchicago.edu>, thf2@ellis (Ted Frank) writes:
>I got shanghaied by the Lubavitch two-three years ago in New York.  They
>had set up a "mitzvah van" on the street in the Village, approached me as
>I walked by, got me to go into the van and put on t'fillin, say the prayer,
>and ushered me back out.  They were only stopping Jews, as far as I could
>tell -- I guess I'm fairly obvious.  I couldn't help but be amused by the
>assembly line nature of the process.

Once at the Kotel ha-Ma'aravi, I was accosted by some Chabadniks who
were trying to get me to put on tefillin.  "Thanks, but I have my
own," I said in Hebrew.  This fellow persisted, and I said, "I have my
own, thank you," in Yiddish.  He just wouldn't let me alone, and I
said, "Look, I have my own tefillin" in English and waved my tefillin
bag in his face ...  In the end I just had to run for it.  Caught my
breath as I was putting on tefillin.

Cheers, and chag sameyach,

Aryk