HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: de@moscom.com (David Esan)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Re: sexism
Date: 15 Oct 92 13:56:33 GMT
Organization: Moscom Corp., Pittsford NY

In article <XVRRBDYX@cc.swarthmore.edu> mwertz1@cc.swarthmore.edu (Melanie Wertz) writes:
>to "inherit Gehinum."  I wince when I hear Lot tell the crowd to "do with
>his daughters as they please."  

Of course, Lot is living in Sodom, and is roundly condemned for his actions.

> I wince when I hear that my menstrual cycle, a facet of female biology which
> enables humans to reproduce, causes me to be treated like a leper for five
> days a month...

Oooh, nidah.  First of all, it is more like 12 days a month.  Second of all,
any issue of blood or pus, from a many or a woman, should make that person 
'tameh'.  The law is the same for the two.

>also written for a time when idolatry was considered mainstream;
>nevertheless, the Torah insisted that Jews abandon it.  Why didn't the
>Torah insist that Jews abandon sexism as well?  Is it asking too much to
>insist that a nation treat half of its people as something more than sexual
>property and domestic labor?  Is it asking too much to insist that God
>treat women as equally important, too?  

Actually, the Torah abandoned most of the sexism that was prevelant in those
days.  Women were not chattel under Jewish law, a woman had to agree to marry
her husband.  Women could inherit.  Women could own property.  Religion
descends through the woman, not the husband.  

The first case of women asserting themselves is the case of the daughters of
Tzlophchad.  When they realized that the land promised to their father would
be lost when they married, Moses made an accomodation for them and for others
in their situation.  This is the answer to your question of when will Judaism
deal with sexism.  When the women of Judaism stand up and say: we want this 
changed!  It has happened in the Conservative and Reform movements.  It is
happening the Orthodox movement, but slowly.  

-- 
 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 -->     David Esan      de@moscom.com  
 
 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: dic5340@hertz.njit.edu (David Charlap)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Re: Heroes in the Hebrew Bible
Date: 15 Oct 92 19:03:51 GMT
Organization: New Jersey Institute of Technology, Newark, N.J.

In article <1992Oct13.212136.5563@leland.Stanford.EDU> miriah@loro-next.Stanford.EDU (Claire Bacher) writes:
>The heroes and heroines of the Hebrew Bible (eg., Abraham, Moses, Samuel,  
>David, Ruth, Deborah) although noble in various ways, are also flawed.   
>What does this suggest about the moral values of the Hebrews and their  
>concept of heroes ?

They're human.  They do good, they do bad.  They get rewarded for
good, they get punished for bad.  Just like the rest of us.  It
teaches me (personally) that we all have ability for greatness, just
like them.

In the Greek and Roman mythos, the heros were so far above ordinary
men that nobody could possibly be like them.  As a matter of fact, to
attempt to be like one was considered hubris, and was punnishable
quite severely by their gods.

You find the same thing in Christianity.  Jesus and the saints and
apostles are so amazingly great that nobody could ever be like them.
Sure, they're perfect role-models, but it must be difficult to have a
role model that is so perfect that no mortal man could achieve equal
(or even near-equal) status.

-- 
David Charlap         |"there aren't 50,000 things for which it's worth writing
dic5340@hertz.njit.edu| software; and the computer industry doesn't have enough
----------------------+ programmers to create that much good software.
Therefore, most of it must be worthless" -- Boris Beizer "The Frozen Keyboard"
From: sutin@helios.ucsc.edu (Brian Sutin)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Re: Attending a More Traditional Service
Date: 9 Oct 1992 00:01:44 GMT
Organization: Lick Observatory UCSC
NNTP-Posting-Host: helios.ucsc.edu

In article <1992Oct8.214158.25497@umbc3.umbc.edu> shimoff@umbc4.umbc.edu (Eliot Shimoff) writes:
>
>Laura, I think that the use of the term "treif" was unfortunate.

Why?  Since a religious service of any kind is not listed in the Torah as
one of the foods kosher to eat, it is clearly treif.

Brian Sutin				sutin@lick.ucsc.edu
Lick Observatory, UCSC			Santa Cruz, CA 95064
    Fred:   "May I rescue you?"
    Ginger: "No, thank you.  I prefer being in distress."
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: gertler@ptms_dev.sbi.com (User - Don Gertler)
Subject: Re: A Rosh HaShana sermon
Originator: scj@israel.nysernet.org
Reply-To: <gertler@ptms_dev.sbi.com (User - Don Gertler)>
Organization: Nysernet
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 14:45:17 GMT

warren@itexjct.jct.ac.il (Warren Burstein) writes:
>I agree with it all, aside from the part about the plant reacting to a
>researcher's thoughts - to the best of my knowledge plants are *not*
>telepathic (a tree told me, but it wasn't connected to a polygraph, so
>it could have been lying).  If anyone would care for more info, post
>that part (and that part only, leave out that it was mentioned in a
                                ^^^^^
>sermon or the conclusions about how people ought to behave) to
>sci.skeptic.

Ha!

-Don Gertler
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: pasward@maytag.uwaterloo.ca (Paul A.S. Ward)
Subject: Re: Perot Halts Engagement
Organization: University of Waterloo
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 12:57:16 GMT

In article <1992Oct13.214414.27894@Princeton.EDU> roger@astro.princeton.edu (Roger Lustig) writes:
>In article <1992Oct13.203331.2290@njitgw.njit.edu> dic5340@hertz.njit.edu (David Charlap) writes:
>
>>You have a wonderful double-standard here.  If Judaism doesn't want to
>>allow intermarriage, why is it wrong for a Christian to insist on his
>>daughter marrying another Christian?
>
>a) Because Christianity has no such standards, per se.

They most certainly do!  Not all Christians enforce it, but there is
a very clear passage in the New Testament that indicates that Christians
should only marry other Christians.
From: aaron@kesher.UUCP (Aaron Schmiedel)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Re: On Polish Anti-semitism
Date: 11 Oct 92 05:13:40 GMT
Organization: KESHERnet International - Dallas, TX

FREEDOM IS THE RIGHT TO BE WRONG, NOT THE RIGHT TO DO WRONG!



-- 
| Aaron D. Schmiedel            |  All my opinions represent what is right  |
| KESHERnet International       |  and true.  Just ask me....               |
| The Jewish Computer Network   |         <aaron@kesher.lerctr.org>         |
| Voice: (214) 239-1941         |    ..!utacfd.uta.edu!lerami!kesher!aaron  |
From: goldberg@techunix.technion.ac.il (Jacques Goldberg)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Re: Kosher Honey
Date: 16 Oct 92 13:12:47 GMT
Organization: Technion, Israel Institute of Technology

chips@eskimo.celestial.com (:crp:) writes:

>Why is honey kosher?
>Is there any other food that comes from something treif that is kosher?
>Does honey need a hechsher?

Honey is Kosher like milk is Kosher, even if some here will argue about
which honey does Torah talk. Just give Torah a chance, go and study all
occurrences of ERETZ ZAVAT HALAV UDVASH. And don't forget ERETZ if you want
to understand anything about this.

HAG SAMEACH - Yaaqov Goldberg, Haifa, Eretz Zavat Halav UDVASH.
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: friedenb@emerald.egr.msu.edu (Gedaliah Friedenberg)
Subject: JOKE
Reply-To: friedenb@emerald.egr.msu.edu (Gedaliah Friedenberg)
Organization: College of Engineering, Michigan State University
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 92 02:10:25 GMT


A Jewish mother goes to the airport to greet her daughter.  The
daughter gets off of the plane accompanied by a 6'9" Zulu
warrior with a bone through his nose and a spear in his hand.

The mother cried "I told you to marry a RICH doctor!"

;^)




DISCLAIMER:  In these days of hyper-sensitive political correctness
one must be careful with jokes.  This joke was not meant to be 
racist, anti-Zulu, (or pro-African Nat'l Congress), or otherwise 
offensive.  If it was, please accept my apologies.  

Gedaliah Friedenberg
-=-Department of Mechanical Engineering
-=-Department of Metallurgy, Mechanics and Materials Science
-=-Michigan State University

                   
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish,soc.culture.polish
From: roger@crux.Princeton.EDU (Roger Lustig)
Subject: Re: On Polish Anti-semitism
Originator: news@nimaster
Reply-To: roger@astro.princeton.edu (Roger Lustig)
Organization: Princeton University
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1992 06:51:38 GMT

In article <matthew.718778305@mugga> matthew@stats.mu.oz.au (Maciek Blasikiewicz) writes:
>roger@crux.Princeton.EDU (Roger Lustig) writes:

>>Some things remained closed to them, e.g., the officers' corps;

>There were jewish generals among Pilsudski's cronies in the polish
>army.

I may be misinformed of this.  Before we go further: were they practising,
or of Jewish origin but converted?  Just asking.

>>i.e., lack of access to institutions related to Christianity and the like.

>If you don't want to engage in stamp-collecting, why complain about
>not belonging to a stamp-collecting club?

Not the point.  If a labor union or cultural society is church-sponsored,
or affiliates itself wtih the church, it makes access for non-believers
more difficult, even when the goals ofthe organization are not specifically
religious.

>>Assimilation doesn't mean
>>"having the culture of the majority imposed [on the minority]."

>Agreed. This is forced assimilation.

>>It means
>>the *choice* to live under different cultural conditions.

>This is multiculturalism. To assimilate means (in this context) to
>become like the majority in respect of culture etc.

Fine -- but one may choose the *level* of one's assimilation: does
one convert?  Does one dress like everyone else?  Does one send one's
children to the public schools?  This is the choice I mean, not a
choice among many different cultures.

Roger

Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: A5711DAA@vm.univie.ac.at
Subject: Re: 73 Re: literature like chaim potok
Organization: University of Vienna
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 12:04:03 GMT

------------------------- Original Article -------------------------
In article <2643@israel.nysernet.org> warren@nysernet.org writes:
>> Did anyone see Hillel Halkin's review of Potok's latest book?  It was
>> in the Jerusalem Report.  Not long ago.  It talked about his writing
>> style.  How it was appropriate for Hemmingway.  But Jews don't talk
>> that way.  Hemmingway's men of action used short sentences.  Since
>> Shammai no Jew has.

> Yes, but Chaim Potok is really writing about Jews for the benefit of
> non-Jews, since non-Jews will not know about Judaism, whereas Jews will,
> and so he must use short sentences since that is necessary for the benefit
> of the gentile reader, while Jews are perfectly capable of understanding
> long sentences such as this.  :-)

It is really a pity that such a bright person did not mention his/her
name, I would have liked to read anything of him/her, because I always
like to learn of someone whom the world looks at even if I am a gentile
reader and have terrible difficulties to read a sentence like the
one above, which was unfortunatly not written by Potok and luckilly not
written by Hemingway, whom I read for the first time this summer and did
not like very much.

However I want to thank all of you who gave me some advice for further
reading. In one aspect I think s/he (above) was right: Potok gives me
a picture of jewish culture. Do you think it is an appropriate one?

Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: hayim@locus.com (Hayim Hendeles)
Subject: Re: Heroes in the Hebrew Bible
Organization: Locus Computing Corporation, Los Angeles, California
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 20:09:35 GMT

In article <1992Oct13.212136.5563@leland.Stanford.EDU> miriah@loro-next.Stanford.EDU (Claire Bacher) writes:
>The heroes and heroines of the Hebrew Bible (eg., Abraham, Moses, Samuel,  
>David, Ruth, Deborah) although noble in various ways, are also flawed.   
>What does this suggest about the moral values of the Hebrews and their  
>concept of heroes ?

It suggests that they were human. Furthermore, it also suggests that
the Bible intended to give an accurate picture of these men/women.
IF the Bible were a ficticious piece of literature ch"v, as some would
have you believe, you might expect all the heroes to be flawless ---
or at the very least, Moses the Lawgiver should have been perfect.

By the way, I am aware of the Talmudic comments about Abraham, Moses
and David describing their "flaws", but offhand, I cannot think of any
flaws mentioned either in the text or in the Talmud about the heroines
Ruth and Deborah.

To what in particular are you referring to?

Hayim Hendeles
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: <none>
From: news@skitzo.dseg.ti.com
Date: 9 Oct 92 14:03:51 CDT
From: janiceg@marvin.Eng.Sun.COM (Janice Gelb)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Frookie Cracker Kashrut?
Date: 8 Oct 1992 17:11:17 GMT
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc.
Distribution: world
Reply-To: janiceg@marvin.Eng.Sun.COM
NNTP-Posting-Host: marvin

I saw in the market some crackers made by the R.W. Frookie company that 
were marked O-U D but had grape juice in them.  Anyone out there in 
net-land know anything about this?


********************************************************************************
Janice Gelb                  | (415) 336-7075     
janiceg@marvin.eng.sun.com   | "A silly message but mine own" (not Sun's!) 
********************************************************************************

Xref: sparky soc.culture.jewish:17361 soc.culture.polish:3073
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Inter*RACIAL*, or Inter*FAITH*? (Re: Intermarriage)
From: Yaakov Kayman <YZKCU@CUNYVM.BITNET>
Date: Thursday, 8 Oct 1992 12:59:16 EDT
Organization: City University of New York/ University Computer Center

Interracial relationships? I see no problems with inter*RACIAL*
marriages. I recall one particular Orthodox couple: The husband
was white, and the wife, African-American. I don't recall anyone
having any problems about them.

Now, inter*FAITH* marriages is a different matter, one
expressly forbidden by Jewish Law.

Yaakov K.
--------
Yaakov Kayman      (212) 903-3666       City University of New York

BITNET:   YZKCU@CUNYVM        "Lucky is the shepherd, and lucky his flock
Internet: YZKCU@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU     about whom the wolves complain"
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: solovay@netcom.com (Andrew Solovay)
Subject: Re: sexism
Organization: International Irony League -- Death before smileys!
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1992 22:27:33 GMT

In article <CFMRBYYR@cc.swarthmore.edu> mwertz1@cc.swarthmore.edu (Melanie Wertz) writes:
>I was born Jewish and I had an Orthodox Jewish education.  I have abandoned
>Judaism because I came to recognize that it is sexist to the core.  The
>Tanach is a patriarchal body of literature which completely invalidates the
>history, experience, and contribution of women.  Jewish law, at least
>Orthodox Jewish law, is degrading to women.  Is there anyone out there who
>feels the same way?

Nope.
-- 
Andrew M. Solovay       "Work is the curse of the drinking class."
solovay@netcom.com			--Wilde

#include <disclaimer.h>
From: dic5340@hertz.njit.edu (David Charlap)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Re: Cross-dressing
Date: 9 Oct 92 19:57:37 GMT
Organization: New Jersey Institute of Technology, Newark, N.J.

In article <9210051338.AA07807@helix.nih.gov> <norm@helix.nih.gov> writes:
>>Same for blue jeans.  Only very recently has any form of slacks or
>>pants been acceptible women's attire.  To this date, many religious
>>(or simply traditional) families (non-Jewish ones, too) don't consider
>>pants a man's garment.
>>
>Sorry David, I think you must have gotten it backward.  Today all frum Jews
>consider pants to BE a man's garment and not for women.  You would not find
>strict orthodox women wearing "jeans" or any other type of pants, even in
>the privacy of their own homes.

Shame on you!  First, you did something and lost the attribution to my
quote, so you had to leave my signature in the post, which is IMO a
waste of space.

Second of all, I made a typo.  I meant to say that many religious
families consider pants a man's garment.  The "don't" was in error,
and I made a followup post stating that fact.
-- 
David Charlap         |"there aren't 50,000 things for which it's worth writing
dic5340@hertz.njit.edu| software; and the computer industry doesn't have enough
----------------------+ programmers to create that much good software.
Therefore, most of it must be worthless" -- Boris Beizer "The Frozen Keyboard"
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: lms@TorreyPinesCA.ncr.com (Max Stern 310-524-6152)
Subject: Re: Shul name
Organization: NCR (Torrey Pines Development Center)
Disclaimer: This posting does not neccessarily reflect the opinions of NCR.
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 92 19:03:42 GMT

In article <ld11d7INN60e@appserv.Eng.Sun.COM> janiceg@marvin.Eng.Sun.COM writes:
>
>My favorite shul name is "Shaarei Zahav" ("Golden Gate")
>in San Francisco.
>

Hi, Janice!

I'm trying to remember the name of the synagogue in Lancaster,
California (on the edge of the Mojave Desert) -- it's <something>
BaMidbar.  Maybe Kehillath BaMidbar?
-- 

 |\/|  /_\  \/
 |  | /   \ /\                      Max.Stern@TorreyPinesCA.ncr.com
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: bai@msiadmin.cit.cornell.edu (Dov Bai-MSI Visitor)
Subject: Re: sexism
Organization: /usr/local/lib/news/organization
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 20:39:48 GMT

In article <3871@bcstec.ca.boeing.com> silverm@bcstec.ca.boeing.com (Jeff Silverman) writes:

>I happen to believe in Aristotelian logic, even if I can't spell it.
>I also believe in a Reform Judaism.  Both of these belief systems feel right
>for me.  

No, you cannt believe in an Aristotelian logic. Logic is a tool, method, for
removing contradiction. You can either use it or ignore it. If you ignore
it then your thinking will most probably include contradictions.

>Unfortunately, you will probably not find such a path in this forum: people
>who use computers are sometimes inordinately logical.  It is appropriate for
>computer systems.  Computers love logic.  It is in appropriate, sometimes, for
>people.

Why do you find it useful to remove contradictions in computer programs or
in a Talmudic study, but not in one's value system ?

Dov

>
>Jeff Silverman
>Boeing Commercial Airplane
>


Xref: sparky soc.culture.jewish:17816 soc.culture.polish:3220
From: roman@hri.com (Roman Budzianowski)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish,soc.culture.polish
Subject: Re: A personal experience in Poland
Date: 16 Oct 92 16:11:26 GMT
Followup-To: soc.culture.jewish
Organization: Horizon Research, Inc.

In article <isaac.719191944@etrog>, isaac@etrog.se.citri.edu.au (Isaac Balbin) writes:

> (2) The fact that those Poles who did save us, and set out to do so, at one
>     stage decided that they would snitch on us to the Germans, does not mean
>     that we should not send presents to their offspring. Think about it.

Every Pole during wwii new that the penalty for hiding Jews was death. Why would anybody
report to Germans about him hiding Jews is beyond any logic. There must be more in this story.
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: Bradley Somer <somer@aecom.yu.edu>
Subject: Re: sexism
Originator: scj@israel.nysernet.org
Reply-To: <Bradley Somer <somer@aecom.yu.edu>>
Organization: Nysernet
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 15:55:45 GMT



On Thu, 15 Oct 1992, User - Don Gertler wrote:

> fy@lucid.com (Frank Yellin) writes:
> >dic5340@hertz.njit.edu (David Charlap) writes:
> 
> >>  5) Separate seating is done because it is a disturbance to
> >>  concentration.  I know from my own experience that it is difficult
> >>  to concentrate on prayers when a beautiful woman is seated in my
> >>  line-of-sight.  The Rabbis knew this also.  The same probably also
> >>  goes for women trying to pray while looking at a good-looking man.
> 
> >Gosh.  I wonder where I'm supposed to sit.
> >
> >I shouldn't sit on the men's side of the mechitza because I might be
> >distracted by the good-looking men.
> >
> >I shouldn't sit on the women's side because I might be a distraction to
> >some of the women.
> >
> >I certainly shouldn't be put into a separate section with other gay men.
> >I'd both distract and be distracted!
> 
> I guess this proves that a homosexual shul is problematic.
> 
> -Don Gertler
> 

The only solution for a homosexual shul is mixed seating.  Seat people
boy,girl,boy,girl,boy,girl...   No distractions.
The most frum homosexual shuls should have a mechiza around each person.
Then there is the shuls for the beastiality lovers with a mechizah between
them and their pet dogs.  So, I guess then they can say Kaddish for their
pets. And how 'bout the Pediphiles?
Obviously, these examples are far fetched examples.  Frum homosexual is an
oxymoron.  The Torah obviously makes it clear that these kinds of things
are abominations and certainly should not be made into an institution. 
Certainly, this act should not profane the synagogues, which should embody
a sense of kedushah, not Toevah. 
                     BGS


Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: roger@crux.Princeton.EDU (Roger Lustig)
Subject: Re: The Holocaust (was Please! I need your help etc.)
Originator: news@nimaster
Reply-To: roger@astro.princeton.edu (Roger Lustig)
Organization: Princeton University
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 20:54:41 GMT

In article <1992Oct14.083443.626@vms.huji.ac.il> backon@vms.huji.ac.il writes:
[...]
>There is a Talmudic dictum: AL TADUN ET CHAVRECHA AD SHETAGIA BIMKOMO (don't
>pre-judge anyone until you yourself have been through what he's been through).
[...]
and  also writes:

>kosher. I hope secular Israelis with their minimal lack of Jewish self-respect
>enjoy their ham and cheese sandwich on Pesach when reading this book by Oshry.
>

Josh, it's a two-way street.  Why not respect these folks, too, until
you know why they do what they do?

Roger

PS to Michael: 82?
>backon@VMS.HUJI.AC.IL
>
>


Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: emc@doe.carleton.ca (Eli Chiprout)
Subject: Re: * jesus ? *
Organization: Dept. of Electronics, Carleton University
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 18:53:17 GMT

In <1992Oct8.143145.5216@midway.uchicago.edu> pab1@quads.uchicago.edu (paul andrew braier) writes:

>> emc@doe.carleton.ca (Eli Chiprout) writes:
>> But many Jews DID see enough in Jesus to proclaim him
>> Messiah in the first century.

>This is not quite true. In fact, very few Jews accepted him as moshiach.
>This is why Paul of Tarsus and his cohorts changed the basic tenets and
>started proseletyzing among the gentiles; they just couldn't get a
>respectable number of adherents from the Jews.

Are we going to start debating about numbers?  I say many.  You say
few.  What do I mean by many? 100, 1000?  What do you mean by few?
1000, 100?  I don't have the exact numbers, do you?

The point is that enough Jews followed Jesus for the 
movement to be significant, long before Paul came on the scene.  You
are correct about Paul, but when he did bring in gentiles into the
"Church" (it was not called Church, as Jews were attending synagogue
and believing in Jesus) there is a big debate about whether to
circumcise these gentiles or not.  That is certainly not a gentile
debate.

And how do you explain Shabtai Zvi?  Was it a "few" Jews once again?

The most popular mistake is to look at Christianity today and extrapolate
it historically.  Christianity was not the same before Paul, it was
not the same after Paul, and it was not the same after Paul died.

>-----------------------
>Paul A. Braier
>pab1@quads.uchicago.edu
--
Eli Chiprout
Dept. of Electronics
Carleton University	
emc@doe.carleton.ca