
Steve Plotnicki
legacy participant-
Posts
5,258 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Store
Help Articles
Everything posted by Steve Plotnicki
-
Gavin - Jewish law makes exception for sickness and health. So you could eat a bacon lettuce and tomato sandwich rather then starve to death because god values life more then he values the rules. But change the situation from life and death to one that is optional they will throw you out of the religion for it.
-
Wilfrid - But this takes us full circle. Because the way they co-exist yet stay unreconciled is that neither pushes the envelope to the extremes. And the way they keep from doing that is not to take the original writings of their bibles literally. It becomes a matter of interpertation. In the case of Jews, their inability to keep pace with the rest of society in a predominantly Christian and modern world caused them to invent both reformed and conservative Judaism. But at the same time that a reformation was taking place, extreme forms of orthodoxy in the manner of Hassidic cults tightened the noose around their congregations.
-
Macrosan - So that is settled. The best evidence you have of god is circumstantial. So that brings us to question number 2. What other things govern your life based on circumstantial evidence?
-
To both Macrosan & Cakewalk - If you believe that god does exist, please show us some physical evidence. And if you can't, and you can only point to circumstantial evidence, please show me another example of something you are willing to believe in without seeing any physical evidence. And if you have no physical evidence, but have faith that there is a god, please explain to me how fashioning your behavior in terms of your diet based on "god's words" is different then being a suicide bomber because of "god's words?" Wilfrid - Are you trying to say the following? Because religion is based in theology that often has no root in logic, then conflicts between existing religions cannot be reconciled peacefully. But disputes between secular beliefs can because one belief can prevail over the other as a matter of logic. If that is the case, I agree with you. And it is also the reason that the notion of seperation of church and state came about. Giving religion absolute power when their assertions could only be reconciled in a violent manner was impetus for man to uproot religion and to push it into a role that is inferior to the civil rights of the population at large.
-
Fat Guy - As far as I recall, there are explanations for many if not most Jewish rituals. From lighting sabbath candles to having your son bar mitzvahed. The purpose of those acts are well explained and logical. That they chose 13 years of age instead of 12, or Friday night and not Tuesday night is not significant. There is no detriment to either of those choices. But not eating pork etc. defies logic. And your explanation of "ya gotta believe" is where assimilation begins because it is hypocraphal (sp?) But it isn't hypocritical to say that a boy becomes a man at the age of 13 or that a women should start visiting a mikvah (ritual bath) when she hits puberty. Of course if once upon a time there was a risk to eating pork for health reasons, then it would make sense. But that the rabbinate doesn't clairfy this situation as being temporary and outmoded only exacerbates the situation and causes skepticism. Macrosan - Praying is not segregationist. It promotes seperateness and religious and cultural identity. There is a big difference between the being seperate and segregated. It is one thing for you to take 10 minutes out of your day three times a day and seperate yourself to be among people who believe in the same things you believe in. It is another to create rules that eliminate you from being social with non-Jews and forcing you to live in communities where only Jews live. And to eat in restaurants where only Jews eat. And to bath where only Jews bath. And to educate your children where only Jews are educated. And to be buried where only Jews are buried. Those things are not about being seperate, they about being segregated and they are intended to promote exlusion. The rest of your post is nonsensical. If you read these threads, you would see that the discussion is being held from the vantage point of people who want to be associated to religion but do not believe in god. To say that these laws were "made by god" is not responsive to the original question which implies that the whole thing is made up to control people politically. And if you really believe that god made dietary laws, I have a bridge I'd like to sell you. No make that 10 bridges.
-
If you want to be amazed, put Jews and Pork in Google. Here are some links from that search. If you want to see how people abuse and misrepresent this dietary law, read some of these links or the ones on the search. The Issue of Eating Pork Great Facts on Pork Dispute over pork splits Israeli town
-
You are describing truth for the purpose of people following a stated path or goal. I am describing truth not in the absolute but as giving a recount of events so people have freedom of choice. That is the difference between theology and eGullet. Theology is backwards. It justifies its goal by proclaiming that god or one of his subjects has spoken the truth. The net effect of doing that is to eliminate the market of ideas. It is inherently non-democratic which is why ulitmately religion is authoritarian. eGullet has no collective goal other then to offer various truths which people are free to use anyway they want.
-
First of all, you stilll need the basis for impurity to define "unclean to you" or else it is ambiguous. So you would still need to probe why they chose animals without clovenly hooves. Or fish without fins and gills? I defy you to find me yeshiva or Jewish afterschool programs anywhere in the world that make the distinction between dirty and unclean. If there is any distinction left after you get to the source of what "unclean" means. Regardless of what the torah says in specific (which is ambiguous at best,) from my own yeshiva and talmud torah experience, it is taught as dirty. And they encourage you to look down on people who eat pork and shellfish or mix milk with meat. The issue isn't freedom or no freedom, the issue is doing things based on the truth instead of it based on theology. Nobody is forced to go to Jewel Bakko or to like it. And if you don't go, or if you go and don't like it, nobody is turning you into a pillar of salt.
-
What she said.
-
Actually this is the issue I've been trying to deal with. I think it's even worse then what you write. I think that if you look at the original writings that these laws were based on, and their original intent, you will find that they were from among abhorant when taken on a literal basis, to promoting things that we would like to eliminate from the world like prejudice and segregation. For example, for the Jewish bible to say that pigs are dirty, which implies that people who eat pork are dirty, is almost on par with the type of myth that says that Jews killed Jesus. So while it is all well and good for someone to announce that they have decided to keep kosher in a benign way, i.e., to carry on a tradition, you can't divorce that they are to some extent continuing something that once upon a time stood for many things we are against today. It is sort of like someone wanting to fly a Confederate flag in the south not because they believe in slavery, but because they want a connection to their ancestors. It doesn't work because the flag will never be symbolic of anything good for blacks so by nature it is exclusionary. I don't think that as hard as you can try, you can come up with a secular reason for keeping kosher. The answer to the question will always be that pigs are dirty and by implication so are the people who eat them. In my opinion that is the test. I wish that Judaism would teach that pigs aren't dirty but we choose not to eat them because............ Well that's the problem isn't it? It doesn't work as a matter of sheer logic. Unless you are like my rabbi and excuse the original intent while adopting the tradition. At least that attempts to straddle some difficult issues. Of course someone like Fat Guy is going to come along now and say Steve P. you're nuts for equating kashruth with slavery. Well that's not what I'm doing. I'm just pointing out that they are both discriminatory in their own ways. Just because the practice of kashruth might encourage a mild form of discrimination doesn't exclude it from criticism of what it ultimately promotes.
-
Let's see, I can get you at least 8 cases in the morning at $86.85 a bottle. But they are in London and it will cost $7 a bottle to get them here and to clear the three tier system. How is $93.85 a bottle? Or I can get you 1996 Cristal for $98 a bottle befoew shipping so that would be $105. Except so far I can only get 6 bottles but probably can get more if I ask. There are other gems too just for the asking.
-
Too bad, I had '90 Dom three times in the last two weeks and it was great. I guess you won't drink the '90 Dom I am bringing to dinner on Monday.
-
Actually Dom is very reasonably priced. You can still buy the 1990 in this country for $100 and in the U.K for $70. Most champagnes are more expensive then that. Krug is $100 in Europe and over $125 here.
-
I'm not a fan of Bollinger so I can't tell you. And most non-vintage champagne tastes like, well, non-vintage champagne. I haven't been able to find one that tastes as good as vintage champagne. You know they keep the vintages seperate for a reason. Actually that Jacque Selosse Substance is good non-vintage champagne. But the other ones that people rave about like Egly-Ouriet and Billecart-Salmon, good but not great in my book.
-
Serves you right for getting rid of OTC. First of all it's Cristal. Second, can you buy some old wine please? 1973 Cristal, now that's great wine. Or even the 1990. Sheesh.
-
But you don't have to offer people structure through limitation. The promise of a good afterlife seems to have worked better then the structure that comes from not eating veal parmegian.
-
One would think that the less restrictions there are the easier it would be for people to convert.
-
Why do you say that Islam is successful other then counting the size of the Islamic population? The average GDP for the Islamic world is ridiculously low when compared to the GDP of the Judao-Christian world.
-
Jason - I understand how you feel but food as a means of political, behavioral and moral control over people is a valid topic. It is unfortunate that the thread (and site) is dominated by Jews and that this discussion is happening through the context of kashruth. I wish there were people of other faiths who were participating such as Muslims and Hindus because I am sure they would have a lot to say about the topic. Maybe that will happen tomorrow if Suvir and Monica are around. But I don't know of many Muslim posters which is a sign of management's failure to attract Islamic posters . Actually Hopleaf is Muslim and maybe he will see the thread and comment.
-
It's also vintage sensitive and varies from vintage to vintage. It's hard to find a bone-dry wine in a vintage like 1990 when the wines are so ripe. Easier to do in a year like 1988 when the vintage is classic.
-
Fat Guy - I don't purport to have it figured out. But what I will say is that we are fearful of walking away from it completely and in a way that is just as irrational as believing in god. Considering how I feel, or somebody elses professed aetheism, it makes no sense that we cling to traditions based on laws that if looked at closely are offensive for numerous reasons including ones I raised. So you are right when you say that each person finds their own balance. But I think you would have a hard time disagreeing with me that as a matter of sheer logic we should just walk away. Part of the problem with doing that is something that Shonfeld raised. The world has a funny way of identifying us as Jews. My need to identify with the religion and the culture stems more from that aspect of my families history then from anything else. But it pisses me off that the theologians try to take advantage of that and sell the religion at the same time.
-
Everyone got a double chop from a rack that was coated in cornmeal, dijon mustard and rosemary, and one from a rack that was coated with honey, dijon mustard, garlic and crushed pistachios. The pistachio crusted one seemed to be the overwhelmoing favorite though I preferred the cornmeal. Though I must say they were both delicious. We drank a 1968 Castillo Ygay Rioja Gran Reserva with them that was terrific.
-
Fat Guy - But you are conveniently overlooking the obvious. People don't choose to keep kosher, to any degree, out of thin air. They do it because it's part of a Jewish tradition. But if originally that tradition was formed for the purpose of segregating Jews from the rest of the world, if you follow the tradition you end up reinforcing that aspect of it whether you like it or not. Now maybe you can come up with another purpose but as yet I haven't heard a valid one. That is why in my estimation, laws like kashruth should evaporate as a matter of assimilation. But the ritual of lighting candles on the sabbath need not evaporate because it is done on the privacy of ones home and I can see no negative societal impact. Nina - No blintzes for this wheat allergic guy. And no vodka either. You're going to have to settle for pastrami at Katz's and a black cherry soda.
-
Nina - Read the words in the torah that the people you described believe in and get back to me about that one. They are the biggest contradiction in the world. They promote the worst type of segregationism imagineable. The concept that the people you know are accepting and to say that they believe in those words is an unbelieveable conflict. You might be willing to live with that but I see no reason to. I don't need to be that connected that I have to fool myself about the words, or the people who believe them. I can disassociate myself from those words and still feel like a Jew.
-
The reason I have a bone to pick is that their theology is full of shit and is intended to promote segregationism. Those are the orthodox Jews I grew up with. Do you know any different ones? While I respect their right to practice their religion in the way they see fit, I also know how they speak about me behind my back when I can't hear them. And the reason that it is personal is that they tried to teach me all the wrong things about life. To think poorly of people who were not as religious as they are, to look down on minorities, to think of non-Jews as being less then Jews. Do you know of an orthodox Jewish school that doesn't teach that? If you do, it is in the vast minority of orthodoxy. You know I hate being lied to. Especially by someone who is making believe that god is on their side. Go stand in front of the pyramids in Cairo and you tell me that it is believable that they let the slaves go for the reasons stated in the bible. How silly it is that they couldn't relate the story as a matter of truths, instead of as a matter of lies intended to scare and deceive in order that people would "obey." Fat Guy seems to think there is a strain of orthodoxy that is tolerant. And while that night be the case, I think he is describing such a minute portion of the orthodoxy that it doesn't matter. The vast majority are the equivelent of Christians in the bible belt and they have about the same level of tolerancy.