[Rama Set]

I simply wished halachic regulation to be fulfilled. I did not suggest doing it myself, although I admit that I am angry enough to want to. I made no threats. so, no, it isn't.

I never said that you threatened him or that you wanted to do it yourself did I?  I said you wished death on him, which you do, whether just or not, whereas he wished shame on you and perhaps some sort of ethical standard.  Does that seem equal to you?

[Yaakov ben Avraham]

I simply wished halachic regulation to be fulfilled. I did not suggest doing it myself, although I admit that I am angry enough to want to. I made no threats. so, no, it isn't.

I never said that you threatened him or that you wanted to do it yourself did I?  I said you wished death on him, which you do, whether just or not, whereas he wished shame on you and perhaps some sort of ethical standard.  Does that seem equal to you?

In Judaism, attempting to shame someone in public is akin to murder, as he should well know. And this forum is "in public", more or less. And I have an ethical standard. The fact that you do not agree with it, and that he might not, does not mean that I don't have one. But shaming someone in public or disgracing their character is a sin second only to outright murder, so yes, I think it is equal.

[EnigmaZV]

Regarding kashrus, as I am unable to obtain kosher meat in my city, there is certainly no need to keep separate kitchens.

I think the appropriate thing to do would be to abstain from meat if you cannot find anything kosher.
I think it'd be equivalent to buying pork tenderloin because they were all out of chicken when you went to the store, and you had to get something.

[Yaakov ben Avraham]

Regarding kashrus, as I am unable to obtain kosher meat in my city, there is certainly no need to keep separate kitchens.

I think the appropriate thing to do would be to abstain from meat if you cannot find anything kosher.
I think it'd be equivalent to buying pork tenderloin because they were all out of chicken when you went to the store, and you had to get something.

*GRIN* Kosher ham, huh? How entertaining! A lot of Jews do exactly what you are suggesting. My Rabbi I think does that. At this point, I am on the ladder of observance where I consume appropriate animals, and find kosher ones as often as I can. It is an interesting thing. Even when I was totally non-observant, I always found pork repulsive, except for pepperoni which I loved. I do miss that stuff. The rest of it I never had to miss, because I always thought it nasty.

My wife's family is big on pork, but they have learned to buy me something else for cookouts, and they at the very least keep it separate from the pork. Granted, the grill has been used for pork before, so its by NO means strictly kosher, but they do at least clean it, and keep the juices from mixing as much as possible. Well, one does what one can. Of course, Tom will call me a hypocrite. And I shall say that he should be killed.

[Tom]

I simply wished halachic regulation to be fulfilled. I did not suggest doing it myself, although I admit that I am angry enough to want to. I made no threats. so, no, it isn't.

I never said that you threatened him or that you wanted to do it yourself did I?  I said you wished death on him, which you do, whether just or not, whereas he wished shame on you and perhaps some sort of ethical standard.  Does that seem equal to you?

He did threaten me and make me feel ashamed as I don't obey his War God.

He has been insulting me all the time. It is unacceptable!

[Yaakov ben Avraham]

I simply wished halachic regulation to be fulfilled. I did not suggest doing it myself, although I admit that I am angry enough to want to. I made no threats. so, no, it isn't.

I never said that you threatened him or that you wanted to do it yourself did I?  I said you wished death on him, which you do, whether just or not, whereas he wished shame on you and perhaps some sort of ethical standard.  Does that seem equal to you?

He did threaten me and make me feel ashamed as I don't obey his War God.

He has been insulting me all the time. It is unacceptable!

I didn't threaten you at all. A threat involves me suggesting that I personally will hunt you down and exact personal vengeance upon you. Much as that would satisfy me, I won't, because I don't believe in vigilantism. Grow up.

And as I said, I didn't insult you any more than you have me. POT, MEET KETTLE.

[Yaakov ben Avraham]

Furthermore, if we killed everybody that pissed us off, there would be very few people alive in the world, since pretty much every human pisses somebody off at some point to the point such that that person wants to kill him or her. As responsible citizens, we do not engage in that practice for obvious reasons.

[Tom]

Understanding this as a reinterpretation, nevertheless, it is still deemed as appropriate.

What else is reinterpretable? Who decides what can and cannot be reinterpreted?

Fair question. To be honest, its up to the individual Jew. My personal practice is to not judge another practicing Jew. As disgusted as I am with people like Tom, who have rejected Judaism, and in my opinion, should be killed outright, I have a strict practice of not judging another Jew's practice of his Faith. I admit, when it comes to EXTREMELY Liberal Judaism, that practice slips a bit, as I find that form of the Faith to be rather distasteful. But personally, I can take just about anything, from Chabad (which most non-Jews would consider ultra-Orthodox) to Classical Reform (which to a Non-Jew looks almost like Lutheranism without Jesus) and consider it respectable. I may not agree with it, but I can respect it as at least an attempt at trying to be Jewish. It is the Jew who rejects his Faith, like Tom, that just flat pisses me off, and to be honest, makes me want to rip his throat out.

He has abandoned and disgraced his people. In his own way, he is worse than Hitler, because he would give Hitler a posthumous victory, by destroying Judaism from within. The self-hating Jew, the Jew who hates Judaism, is worthy of nothing but the lowest contempt.

Please delete this insulting post!

[Rushy]

Understanding this as a reinterpretation, nevertheless, it is still deemed as appropriate.

What else is reinterpretable? Who decides what can and cannot be reinterpreted?

Fair question. To be honest, its up to the individual Jew. My personal practice is to not judge another practicing Jew. As disgusted as I am with people like Tom, who have rejected Judaism, and in my opinion, should be killed outright, I have a strict practice of not judging another Jew's practice of his Faith. I admit, when it comes to EXTREMELY Liberal Judaism, that practice slips a bit, as I find that form of the Faith to be rather distasteful. But personally, I can take just about anything, from Chabad (which most non-Jews would consider ultra-Orthodox) to Classical Reform (which to a Non-Jew looks almost like Lutheranism without Jesus) and consider it respectable. I may not agree with it, but I can respect it as at least an attempt at trying to be Jewish. It is the Jew who rejects his Faith, like Tom, that just flat pisses me off, and to be honest, makes me want to rip his throat out.

He has abandoned and disgraced his people. In his own way, he is worse than Hitler, because he would give Hitler a posthumous victory, by destroying Judaism from within. The self-hating Jew, the Jew who hates Judaism, is worthy of nothing but the lowest contempt.

Please delete this insulting post!

You were warned and Yaakov was banned as he has been warned about insulting users numerous times. Do not continue to post these messages or you may have to join him.

[Tom]

Understanding this as a reinterpretation, nevertheless, it is still deemed as appropriate.

What else is reinterpretable? Who decides what can and cannot be reinterpreted?

Fair question. To be honest, its up to the individual Jew. My personal practice is to not judge another practicing Jew. As disgusted as I am with people like Tom, who have rejected Judaism, and in my opinion, should be killed outright, I have a strict practice of not judging another Jew's practice of his Faith. I admit, when it comes to EXTREMELY Liberal Judaism, that practice slips a bit, as I find that form of the Faith to be rather distasteful. But personally, I can take just about anything, from Chabad (which most non-Jews would consider ultra-Orthodox) to Classical Reform (which to a Non-Jew looks almost like Lutheranism without Jesus) and consider it respectable. I may not agree with it, but I can respect it as at least an attempt at trying to be Jewish. It is the Jew who rejects his Faith, like Tom, that just flat pisses me off, and to be honest, makes me want to rip his throat out.

He has abandoned and disgraced his people. In his own way, he is worse than Hitler, because he would give Hitler a posthumous victory, by destroying Judaism from within. The self-hating Jew, the Jew who hates Judaism, is worthy of nothing but the lowest contempt.

Please delete this insulting post!

You were warned and Yaakov was banned as he has been warned about insulting users numerous times. Do not continue to post these messages or you may have to join him.

Please delete account Tom!

[Rushy]

Please delete account Tom!

Message one of the admins (Blanko/Junker/Parsifal). I can't delete accounts.

[Pete Svarrior]

Message one of the admins (Blanko/Junker/Parsifal). I can't delete accounts.

For future reference, all users can delete their own accounts.

[Yonah ben Amittai]

Hey, piza. I just wanted you to know that for once, I understand and even agree with the fairness of the ban. See you all next week, ok?

[xasop]

Well, that escalated quickly.

To get back on topic, I see religious arguments against homosexuality as valid insofar as they justify non-recognition of same-sex marriage by religious institutions, not the state. This comes back to how I initially answered Tom Bishop's question:

Why should gay marriage be legal?

Because the state has no business regulating people's personal lives one way or another.

The government has no business telling gays they can't marry. It also has no business telling religious institutions they must recognise gay marriages.

[Tom Bishop]

Why should gay marriage be legal?

Because the state has no business regulating people's personal lives one way or another.

The government has no business telling gays they can't marry. It also has no business telling religious institutions they must recognise gay marriages.

Does your mother have business telling you that you cannot have sexual relations with your family dog?

[Saddam Hussein]

Animals can't consent to sex.  Neither can children.

[Tom Bishop]

Animals can't consent to sex.  Neither can children.

We're not talking about laws or legalities. In fact, pretend that written laws do not exist at all. Does your mother have business telling you whether you can have sexual relations with the dog or not?

[Saddam Hussein]

I didn't say anything about laws or legalities.  Having sex with animals is wrong because they can't agree to it, and so is abusive to them.  I suspect that what you asked is supposed to be some kind of loaded "have you stopped beating your wife?" trick question, so I'll just say that anyone has the moral right to stop anyone else from trying to have sex with an animal.

[Tom Bishop]

I didn't say anything about laws or legalities.  Having sex with animals is wrong because they can't agree to it, and so is abusive to them.  I suspect that what you asked is supposed to be some kind of loaded "have you stopped beating your wife?" trick question, so I'll just say that anyone has the moral right to stop anyone else from trying to have sex with an animal.

Animals initiate sex all the time.

Your mom has just walked in and caught you having consensual sex with the dog. You want it and the dog wants it. Does she have any business telling you that you cannot have sex with the dog?

[Rama Set]

I suppose if you are going to imagine that dogs are consenting to sex, then there is not much point to this parable since it won't compare to the world we actually live in.