1. When I was in the US and officiated weddings, I'd often try to get as many women involved as possible depending on the needs and wishes of the couple.
Here's a brief thread of a few things I did to integrate more women into the ceremony without compromising halakhah.
2. First, where relevant, I'd ask women to sign the civil marriage license. Although women cannot serve as halakhic witnesses, there is no problem for signing on as civil witnesses
3. If the chuppah required people to physically hold the poles, I'd include women among the "pole bearers."
(Yes, I explicitly call them, "pole bearers" and at one wedding someone even said, "Hey! That sounds like, 'pall bearers!'")
4. At the last wedding I performed in the US, we called up the reciters of the sheva berachot in pairs of a man and woman with the man reading the blessing and the woman reading a translation
5. I don't think there's any halakhic problem with this considering there's no halakhic obligation to read the ketuvah in the first place. Still, not many people feel comfortable reading Aramaic out loud in public and it might not be worth the fight.
6. I never spoke under the chuppah mostly bec no one asked and I didn't have any special insights into marriage to insist. However, there's no reason women can't speak under the chuppah to address the new couple.
7. While there's more that can be done halakhically, the examples I gave above can be done with minimal fighting or complaining in comparison,
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
General Rule: Anyone who makes grandiose claims like these without showing their work deserves to be ignored if not mocked and ridiculed.
Even more important is the complete lack of transparency and accountability of major global (or even national) programs that we're just supposed to support uncritically bec of a putative moral imperative
In all seriousness, I remember having conversations over 10 years ago with Conservative and Reform colleagues who were concerned with the internet making rabbis obsolete. Specifically, "Rabbi Google" came up often.
My take was (and is) that there is no shortage of information or access to information but people are also looking for *trust* in the validity or authority of that information. That not only requires a human but someone who demonstrates trustworthiness on a regular basis.
Consider how often people with "Rabbi" in their title make grand proclamations about Judaism on Twitter, and how often their grand proclamations are easily challenged if not completely debunked in a matter of seconds.
1. THREAD: After several recent conversations, I'd like to try articulating some ideas regarding social psychology and Orthodox Judaism. While I've amassed a long bibliography, I'll be omitting most academic citations here in the interests of clarity. 🧵
2. Let's stipulate that identity is important to individuals and that certain aspects of identity will be more important to an individual than others. Also, the ranking of these aspects of identity will vary from person to person.
3. For example, race can be an aspect of identity though more for some than others. The same can be true for one's gender, religion, occupation, or even the identity of being a good, upstanding, moral human being.
1. This is untrue, bordering on slander. There are certainly batei din that have little respect for what potential converts are going through and impose needless delays. However, most take a long time to fully acclimate a potential convert to the Jewish community
2. And I say this as having a long track record opposing certain political developments in Orthodox conversions.
3. Even before these changes, serious batei din would often have conversions be a year so that a potential convert could experience the entire Jewish calendar and become acclimated/integrated in the community
Article behind paywall, but IIRC this was one of the more astute observations re US intervention. Between Syria, Libya, and Iraq, US employed diff of doing nothing, military operation w/o occupation, and military operation w/occupation, and *all* were disasters in their own way.
We can only ever know the results of our actions or inactions. It's really easy to point to the failures and costs of what we've decided to do or not do, but it's impossible to predict what would have happened had another course of action been taken.
As I keep saying, foreign policy is often a choice between, "really, really bad" and "somehow even worse."
Both action and inaction have their own negative consequences and sometimes the best we can hope to do is mitigate those negative consequences to the best of our ability.
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.