Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I don't. I think that you have made your position quite clear. You dislike whom you dislike, and I do not share your aversions. i doubt that anyone on this forum does.
It's not so much "whom" as "what" I dislike.
Short answer - hypocrisy - breaking the law in spirit without breaking the law in letter. And the complexity that causes it.
I think old religions (Judaism, Hinduism) fall into this trap more often simply because most of the things have been said and done and the rules pile upon rules to the point that you have to break them to lead a normal life. But you don't want to be seen as breaking them, so you have to invent loopholes. When people see through this ruse, it breeds resentment or contempt towards the religion itself. Better to be simpler like Christianity and Islam. Muslims have it right, they call the book-smart religious scholars ahl-e-kalam (people of the pen) and it is used as a pejorative.
Nothing simple about Christianity in regards to laws. Half of us Christians walk around with a serious guilt complex and the ones who dont are lying to themselves imo. In Christianity a person commits immoral sex everyday if he is honest with himself, he is a continual murderer, adultery, fornicator and homosexual all without leaving the house or seeing a real person. How messed up is that? Christianity is way more legalistic than Judaism, only Christians make up their own laws having nothing written down and their laws can vary from denomination to denomination. It is so confusing especially when you have a people who are against the law and the prophets while still claiming to be in the biblical religion, and without the law and the prophets, there is no Christianity.
Judaism is straight forward, they have a written law, an appointed worship system they follow and you can't get more simple than that, but Christianity has to rationalise why their religion comes from Judaism to then explain why Judaism was not valid anymore, and so Christianity is self defeating because they cancel out their foundation and are then left in confusion.
Nothing simple about Christianity in regards to laws. Half of us Christians walk around with a serious guilt complex and the ones who dont are lying to themselves imo. In Christianity a person commits immoral sex everyday if he is honest with himself, he is a continual murderer, adultery, fornicator and homosexual all without leaving the house or seeing a real person. How messed up is that? Christianity is way more legalistic than Judaism, only Christians make up their own laws having nothing written down and their laws can vary from denomination to denomination. It is so confusing especially when you have a people who are against the law and the prophets while still claiming to be in the biblical religion, and without the law and the prophets, there is no Christianity.
Judaism is straight forward, they have a written law, an appointed worship system they follow and you can't get more simple than that, but Christianity has to rationalise why their religion comes from Judaism to then explain why Judaism was not valid anymore, and so Christianity is self defeating because they cancel out their foundation and are then left in confusion.
It's not so much "whom" as "what" I dislike.
Short answer - hypocrisy - breaking the law in spirit without breaking the law in letter. And the complexity that causes it.
I think old religions (Judaism, Hinduism) fall into this trap more often simply because most of the things have been said and done and the rules pile upon rules to the point that you have to break them to lead a normal life. But you don't want to be seen as breaking them, so you have to invent loopholes. When people see through this ruse, it breeds resentment or contempt towards the religion itself. Better to be simpler like Christianity and Islam. Muslims have it right, they call the book-smart religious scholars ahl-e-kalam (people of the pen) and it is used as a pejorative.
I'm understanding a lot of what you are saying, but not the resentment/contempt part.
And btw, “ultra-Orthodox” is a pejorative term. The word “ultra” connotates the Jews as extreme or having gone too far. Jews either follow the 613 commandments of the Torah, or they do not. But to observe them all does not make a Jew “ultra.”
Coming back to this post. When I have seen the term ultra-Orthodox, it was in reference to extremity, taking things too far. Like not allowing planes to take off because people won't segregate by gender for them. Are you saying all Orthodox should be following the rule of gender segregation to the point of disrupting society? That isn't 'ultra', it's just following their law?
Coming back to this post. When I have seen the term ultra-Orthodox, it was in reference to extremity, taking things too far. Like not allowing planes to take off because people won't segregate by gender for them. Are you saying all Orthodox should be following the rule of gender segregation to the point of disrupting society? That isn't 'ultra', it's just following their law?
There is no location in the Torah that say's to do so. They are basing it on Talmudic commentary. It's not Ultra, it's extremist.
Coming back to this post. When I have seen the term ultra-Orthodox, it was in reference to extremity, taking things too far. Like not allowing planes to take off because people won't segregate by gender for them. Are you saying all Orthodox should be following the rule of gender segregation to the point of disrupting society? That isn't 'ultra', it's just following their law?
Clearly your news and information sources are anti-Torah and anti-Jewish. The term ultra is only used by people critical of Torah Obervance. Not one single Torah Observant, G-d fearing Jew would ever use that term. To malign an entire segment of the Jewish people because a handful of Jewish men were less than tactful in executing their Torah obligation not to touch a member of the opposite sex who is not a close relation, is well... a form of anti-semitism.
Clearly your news and information sources are anti-Torah and anti-Jewish. The term ultra is only used by people critical of Torah Obervance. Not one single Torah Observant, G-d fearing Jew would ever use that term. To malign an entire segment of the Jewish people because a handful of Jewish men were less than tactful in executing their Torah obligation not to touch a member of the opposite sex who is not a close relation, is well... a form of anti-semitism.
No one is broadbrushing anyone. I am trying to discuss the terms. One poster said that example is extremism, which is what I think too, I am just saying that no article I have read calls them extremists, they call them ultra-orthodox.
To me it sounds the opposite of what you are saying. That they are avoiding the 'extremist' term due to the connotations that has. (Extremist Muslim, for instance, brings terrorism to mind).
So what do you call it? You are saying they were 'less than tactful'. Extreme understatement. Also putting women on the back of the bus. This is 'merely' being observant?
To me it sounds the opposite of what you are saying. That they are avoiding the 'extremist' term due to the connotations that has. (Extremist Muslim, for instance, brings terrorism to mind).
...
Extremist Muslims look to annihilate, Extremist Jews look to remove Jews who are not them and to remove non-Jews from their areas. Comprehend the difference?
No one is broadbrushing anyone. I am trying to discuss the terms. One poster said that example is extremism, which is what I think too, I am just saying that no article I have read calls them extremists, they call them ultra-orthodox.
To me it sounds the opposite of what you are saying. That they are avoiding the 'extremist' term due to the connotations that has. (Extremist Muslim, for instance, brings terrorism to mind).
So what do you call it? You are saying they were 'less than tactful'. Extreme understatement. Also putting women on the back of the bus. This is 'merely' being observant?
The terms ultra and extremest are predjudicial terms and therefore not useful. If 20 Orthodox men per year make a scene on airplanes, the whole of the Orthodox community is now extreme? I fly dozens of times per year, and I always get stressed when sat next to a female. And I’ve never once made a scene, yet I’m still ultra or extremest? Outside of airplane demeanor, there are precious few differences between me and them.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
