2. Years ago the Jewish social justice group @uriltzedek initiated a "Tav HaYashar" campaign to certify kosher establishments that met halakhically mandated obligations towards their employers, specifically paying workers on time, paying min wage, and safe working conditions.
3. One criticism in response was that kashrut certifications should only be about the kashrut of the food to the exclusion of everything else lest it confuse the concept of kashrut certification.
4. However, there's a long track record of kashrut being suspended (or threatened to be suspended) for matters unrelated to food. E.g. "improper" entertainment at Catskills resorts, Mendy's holding a New Year's Friday Night dinner, or naming a restataunt, "Jezebel."
5. Also, even @uriltzedek was not entirely consistent when it came to enforcing halakhic obligations - either intrinsic to Jewish law or halakhic enforcement of civil law e.g. the hiring of illegal immigrants / undocumented workers.
6. Therefore, in kashrut, as in most matters relating to Torah, law, and ethics etc. people follow whatever rules are most convenient to their particular positions at the time and easily invoke an entirely different set of principles as the psychic need arises.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
1. Aren't tax returns supposed to be private? And shouldn't the release of personal information register as just a *little* bit concerning? 2. I see we're still having trouble understanding how private equity works. propublica.org/article/the-se…
2. The "wealth" being discussed isn't a Scrooge McDuck money bin, but the percentage of ownership in companies whose wealth is determined by the market. Which means this "wealth" 1. Is "on paper" 2. Has no theoretical ceiling 3. Isn't a collective resource such that others lost
3. If you don't want Buffet, Bezos, etc. to have so much wealth, simply convince people to sell their stock in the companies they own at a lower value (and ensure others don't start buying it up).
Opinion 1: @Likud_Party needs to take several seats (metaphorically, not electorally) and its social media team should reevaluate what it's doing and what it's trying to do.
In real democracies, it's possible for longtime leaders to lose elections legitimately.
Opinion 2: I don't have a problem complaining that a politician broke a campaign promise. I do have a problem when the complaint comes from a party that does so on the regular.
Opinion 3: All political parties, without exception, would be much better off if they approached political failures and losses by introspectively thinking about why they failed and what they can change to improve in the future rather than whining about the other side.
100% agreed. In its heyday, Aronson was responsible for publishing some wonderful volumes on Jewish scholarship, several of which I'm fortunate to own.
Other publishers have picked up some slack, but Aronson filled a particular niche that I don't think has been replicated.
One of my favorites is Who's Who in the Talmud. While it has some errors in citations, it's the most comprehensive single-volume I know of documenting the personalities of rabbinic Judaism amazon.com/Whos-Who-Talmu…
Another favorite is Shoshana Zolty's And All Your Children Shall Be Learned: Women and the Study of the Torah in Jewish Law and History amazon.com/All-Your-Child…
For another data point where antisemitism is lumped with other identity hate w/o standing on its own, compare Congress' recent resolution against antisemitism: congress.gov/bill/116th-con…
1. The rabbinic tradition explicitly excludes non-Jews from "neighbor" 2. Lorberbaum's link to tzelem elokim at *best* applies to R. Akiva exclusively and is by no means a universal 3. The actions of these Jews and those who have committed actual violence are still deplorable
Opinion: I'm very much not a fan of popular Jewish books that print the body in English and the footnotes in Hebrew.
On one hand, I appreciate the position that someone who can't read the Hebrew footnotes isn't in a position to double-check or judge the author. At the same time, I see this attitude more reflects an appeal to the author's authority rather than a desire to educate.
Furthermore, I've found that when religious figures target an audience knowing they cannot or will not double-check the sources in the original, it is much easier for them to engage in all sorts of intellectual dishonesty.