Volume 32: Number 82
Sun, 11 May 2014
Subjects Discussed In This Issue:
Message: 1
From: Kenneth Miller
Date: Fri, 9 May 2014 03:08:10 GMT
Subject: Re: [Avodah] The O Therapist and the Suicidally Depressed Gay
R' Harry Maryles wrote:
> I once asked Rav Sternbuch about the permissibly of therapy
> with a couple that did not keep taharas mishpacha. He cited the
> Chazon Ish as the source of a principle that if the discord
> reduces their sinning that it would be prohibited to provide
> them with therapy. However he noted that it is not unusual for
> couples today to commit adultery. Thus in fact there would be
> no reduction in sinning if there were marital discord and thus
> he said that therapy was permitted.
I have read this several times, in orer to try to figure out Rav Sternbuch's logic. If anyone can find a flaw in the following, please let me know.
1) His conclusion is that the therapy is permitted.
2A) If marital discord would result in reduced sinning. then therapy would
be forbidden. But in this case, marital discord would not reduce the
sinning, so the therapy is permitted.
another way of phrasing 2A would be:
2B) If therapy would result in increased sinning. then therapy would be
forbidden. But in this case, therapy would not increase the sinning, so the
therapy is permitted.
3) Someone might think that because this couple does not keep hilchos nida,
then marital discord DOES reduce the sinning, because the marital discord
lowers the frequency that they'll violate hilchos nida.
4) Someone *else* might think that, but not Rav Sternbuch. He feels that
there would NOT be a reduction in sinning. If the discord means that they
won't violate hilchos nida, they'll make up for it with violations of
adultery.
5) Therefore, there is nothing to be gained by forbidding the therapy.
I sure hope I was wrong somewhere in there, because I am incensed by the implications of Step 4.
When I first read this assertion that "it is not unusual for couples today
to commit adultery", my first interpretation was that he was referring to
ALL couples. But now that I have worked through the logic, I see that he
may have been referring only to those couples who don't keep hilchos nida.
But that does not really quell my anger. Even if he feels that a person who
violates nida has a bechira-point which allows him to violate adultery as
well, does Rav Sternbuch really think that he would do the adultery JUST AS
OFTEN as violating nida?
In other words, Rav Sternbuch seems to feel the following: If this couple
would get their marital discord resolved, then they would violate nida a
certain number of times during a given duration; But if the therapy would
be withheld, and their discord would continue, then the sum total of nida
violations and adultery violations would be just as many.
If that is indeed what Rav Sternbuch thinks, then I'd love to know where he
thinks people find these partners for their adultery. I know that the
morals of the non-frum world are supposedly looser than ours, but there
certain practical considerations that Rav Sternbuch seems to be ignoring.
Prostitutes aren't so cheap, and friends aren't so easy. I cannot imagine a
case where such a person would be having sexual relations just as often
without therapy as with it. Unless he already had a harem of some sort. And
even then.
(Some may think that I want Rav Sternbuch to pasken that the therapist
should not do the therapy. But I am emphatically NOT saying that. I am
merely questioning one critical step in Rav Sternbuch's logic.)
Akiva Miller
____________________________________________________________
The #1 Worst Carb Ever?
Click to Learn #1 Carb that Kills Your Blood Sugar (Don't Eat This!)
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3131/536c46f0a83f746f0722cst04vuc
Go to top.
Message: 2
From: Micha Berger
Date: Fri, 9 May 2014 05:48:06 -0400
Subject: Re: [Avodah] The O Therapist and the Suicidally Depressed Gay
On Fri, May 09, 2014 at 03:08:10AM +0000, Kenneth Miller via Avodah wrote:
: But that does not really quell my anger. Even if he feels that a person
: who violates nida has a bechira-point which allows him to violate adultery
: as well, does Rav Sternbuch really think that he would do the adultery
: JUST AS OFTEN as violating nida?
I am not sure why one would be angry over this statement, but...
Perhaps many violations of hilkhos niddah is a valid price to pay to avoid
increating the likelihood of even one act of adultery. Who said the two
sins are equal, and the only difference is in quantity?
Or (and perhaps more likely), does avoiding the prohibition of mesayei'ah
require that acting must cause fewer sins than inaction? Maybe it's not
mesayei'ah simply because there is increased likelihood of sin either way,
and which is more is not a calculus we're asked to make? And then,,
once it's not mesayei'ah, then increasing shalom becomes the driving
concern.
Skipping back a bit:
: 2A) If marital discord would result in reduced sinning. then therapy
: would be forbidden. But in this case, marital discord would not reduce
: the sinning, so the therapy is permitted.
A pious Jew is not one who worries about his fellow
man's soul and his own stomach; a pious Jew worries
about his own soul and his fellow man's stomach.
- Rav Yisrael Salanter
And although this started by RYS, this is an idiom I heard first from the
chassidic rebbe whose shtiebl I attended as a child. A rav with an accent
from the opposite end of the pale of settlement, who only had the shtiebl
because his wife, children, and hundreds of chassidim were murdered. So
the thought had "legs" well beyond Tenuas haMussar and Litta.
But lifnei iver and mesayei'ah in general, not this pesaq, will at times
indeed place the other's soul ahead of their happiness in my own own
religious priority system.
It is, indeed, highlighted here.
:-)BBii!
-Micha
--
Micha Berger Today is the 24th day, which is
mi...@aishdas.org 3 weeks and 3 days in/toward the omer.
http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Netzach: When does domination or
Fax: (270) 514-1507 taking control result in balance and harmony?
Go to top.
Message: 3
From: menucha
Date: Fri, 09 May 2014 14:13:18 +0300
Subject: Re: [Avodah] Women wearing Tefillin
> But ultimately it shouldn't be about "what do I want?" but
"What does He want?"
[Email #2]
Even when there is no long term negative consequence to fasting at all,
just having a woman be strong for one day so she can have the koach to
deal pleasantly with her children is desirable. I understand that there
are both halachic and hashkafic aspects to this question, and I am not
paskening for anyone. I'm just saying that "healthy women who are not
pregnant or nursing not fasting because they were/will be pregnant"
is NOT a non sequitur.
--Toby Katz
_______________________________________________
It is not a non sequitur, it is antithetical to Halacha. We cannot drop
Halachot because they make us "unpleasant", especially when we are
talking about the fasts of the Churban who are supposed to make us mournful.
There are those Mitzvot from which all women are exempt, regardless of
family status. With fasts the Halacha specifies meubarot and menikot
(however you qualify that) as exempt and all other healthy women as
obligated.
If I would be asked to choose a derabbanan to exempt women from so that
they could have koach to deal pleasantly with their children, it would
be Pesach cleaning. Deoraita, bitul bealma sagi.
shabbat shalom
menucha
Go to top.
Message: 4
From: Micha Berger
Date: Fri, 9 May 2014 12:29:14 -0400
Subject: [Avodah] Admin: What's with "From: ... via Avodah"?
You may have noticed a recent change to Areivim/Avodah single emails.
(Digest mode people were less impacted.)
An email from me to Avodah used to say:
From: Micha Berger <mi...@aishdas.org>
To: The Avodah Torah Discussion Group <avo...@lists.aishdas.org>
Reply-To: The Avodah Torah Discussion Group <avo...@lists.aishdas.org>
But now it's:
From: Micha Berger
Reply-To: Micha Berger <mi...@aishdas.org>,
The Avodah Torah Discussion Group <avo...@lists.aishdas.org>
This is because Yahoo changed their policy in late April that they will
not deliver mail whose "From:" line says ther sender is at some well-known
email server when in reality it came from a different computer.
So, email from "cha...@gmail.com" wouldn't but was forwarded by our
emaiol list server wouldn't reach Yahoo users in single-email mode.
(Digests are made by and sent from @aishdas.org, so that wasn't a problem.)
Now all email is "From: ..."
and so it all flows. The Reply-to was changed to contain the real address,
so that a reply will go to the real author in addition to the list. (You can
then delete either, depending on who you want to send to.
We also had a few long-suffering AOL/AIM substribers who had intermittant
gaps in reception the page year or two; this appears to solve their problem
as well.
:-BBii!
-Micha
--
Micha Berger Today is the 24th day, which is
mi...@aishdas.org 3 weeks and 3 days in/toward the omer.
http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Netzach: When does domination or
Fax: (270) 514-1507 taking control result in balance and harmony?
Go to top.
Message: 5
From: Kenneth Miller
Date: Fri, 9 May 2014 16:21:45 GMT
Subject: Re: [Avodah] The O Therapist and the Suicidally Depressed Gay
I wrote:
> But that does not really quell my anger. Even if he feels that a
> person who violates nida has a bechira-point which allows him to
> violate adultery as well, does Rav Sternbuch really think that
> he would do the adultery JUST AS OFTEN as violating nida?
R' Micha Berger responded:
> I am not sure why one would be angry over this statement, but...
>
> Perhaps many violations of hilkhos niddah is a valid price
> to pay to avoid increasing the likelihood of even one act of
> adultery. Who said the two sins are equal, and the only
> difference is in quantity?
I am quite ready to accept that there is some sort of calculation involved,
even if it is only an internal shikul hadaas of the posek, and not
quantifiable on paper. I guess I put too much emphasis on my words "just as
often". So I'll explain differently:
If the two eventualities are marital discord with few violations of hilchos
nidda, vs. a good marital relationship with more violations, then my brain
can understand that a posek would recommend a continuation of the discord,
in order to save them from future violations. (My *heart* is not fully at
ease with that, but that's a different issue.)
But that's NOT how Rav Sternbuch framed it, at least not according to R'
Harry Maryles' post: "However he noted that it is not unusual for couples
today to commit adultery." So he is actually comparing the net total of
nidah and adultery violations when there is discord, to the net total of
nidah and adultery violations in a good relationship, and he concludes that
the therapist does not need to stay out of it, because a continuation of
the discord would NOT save the couple from future violations.
I do not care how much weight Rav Sternbuch gives to each nidda violation
as compared to each adultery violation. What bothers me is his presumption
that "it is not unusual for couples today to commit adultery."
Please allow me to rephrase that to get rid of the double negative: He presumes that it IS USUAL for couples today to commit adultery.
What do you think he means by this, in percentages? How rampant does he
think this adultery is? To answer this, we do not need a number; we can
describe it in halachic terms: He clearly feels that adultery is so common
that (in RHM's words) "in fact there would be no reduction in sinning if
there were marital discord".
We have a couple who admittedly does not follow hilchos nidda, and they
have enough marital discord that they seek out a therapist. Rav Sternbuch's
logic seems to be: "I wish they would keep hilchos nida. But they don't. We
could save them from future nidda violations by refraining from giving them
therapy. But it is so common for couples today to commit adultery, they we
would really *not* be saving them. So you might as well help their marital
problems."
As I see it, Rav Sternbuch seems to be presuming that such a couple WILL
commit adultery, or that they will PROBABLY commit adultery. And I concede
RMB's point that the quantity of violations may not be relevant, because it
is possible that even one adultery violation is worse than several nidda
violations. But as I see it, Rav Sternbuch *IS* presuming that there will
probably be at least that one violation of adultery, because without it,
his whole heter for therapy falls apart. Please tell me which part I got
wrong.
It is this presumption that upsets me. The presumption that a non-frum couple who is having marital problems will probably engage in adultery.
R"n Lisa Liel wrote how she cried over R' Daniel Eidensohn's presumptions about gays. This post is a lot longer, but otherwise not much different.
Akiva Miller
____________________________________________________________
Do THIS before eating carbs (every time)
1 EASY tip to increase fat-burning, lower blood sugar & decrease fat storage
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3131/536d00bee1462be421bst01vuc
Go to top.
Message: 6
From: Micha Berger
Date: Fri, 9 May 2014 15:40:11 -0400
Subject: Re: [Avodah] The O Therapist and the Suicidally Depressed Gay
On Fri, May 09, 2014 at 04:21:45PM +0000, Kenneth Miller via Avodah wrote:
: But that's NOT how Rav Sternbuch framed it, at least not according to R'
: Harry Maryles' post: "However he noted that it is not unusual for couples
: today to commit adultery." So he is actually comparing the net total of
...
: Please allow me to rephrase that to get rid of the double negative:
: He presumes that it IS USUAL for couples today to commit adultery.
This is a law of logic that doesn't work without the Law of Excluded Middle.
For example, "she is not ugly" doesn't mean "she is beautiful" -- there is
plenty of middle ground.
What did RMS say, and in which language? Maybe he was just saying
the mi'ut is too big to be milsa delo shekhicha? Who knows? Can you
really judge from some n-th party's "not unusual"?
FWIW, I think RMS's words were more likly that among couples that are
facing enough discord for one partner to drag the other to therapy (as
opposed to mutual desire to get help), it is not rare (note my rephrasing)
for someone to end up committing adultery?
So, you're relying on a diyuq halashon in RHM's presentation of RMS's
position. No one in question was there, nor do you know from a few
sentences without tone of voice what exactly was meant. Hole off on
the self-inflicted aggrevation!
Wouldn't your duty here be to suspend judgment, and not get upset over
something you have no proof was intended meaning?
:-)BBii!
-Micha
--
Micha Berger Today is the 24th day, which is
mi...@aishdas.org 3 weeks and 3 days in/toward the omer.
http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Netzach: When does domination or
Fax: (270) 514-1507 taking control result in balance and harmony?
Go to top.
Message: 7
From: Lisa Liel
Date: Fri, 09 May 2014 14:59:13 -0500
Subject: Re: [Avodah] The O Therapist and the Suicidally Depressed Gay
On 5/9/2014 11:21 AM, Kenneth Miller via Avodah wrote:
> What bothers me is his presumption that "it is not unusual for couples
> today to commit adultery." Please allow me to rephrase that to get rid
> of the double negative: He presumes that it IS USUAL for couples today
> to commit adultery.
I would like to think that he is saying this, not because of any
concrete knowledge, but because he has a shtikl rachmanus inside him
that wants to help two people in pain, and is willing to make a perhaps
unjustified assumption in order to achieve that end. I would like to
think that. In all honesty, though, I'm not sure that I do think that.
Are there cases in which an entire group is maligned for the sake of
shalom bayit? Or chesed? I mean... suicides aren't allowed to be
buried in Jewish cemetaries, but don't we often assume mental illness,
even without solid evidence (other than the suicide itself) in order to
give such a person a Jewish burial? The re-evaluation of cheresh in
modern times, casting all charashim of the past as true imbeciles, again
without any evidence for it, allows deaf and deaf-mute Jews to be
removed from the category that shotim are placed in.
My concern is that mima nafshach. If that's what he's doing, it creates
a danger of an overgeneralization that can harm people in a way that the
other cases don't. Charashim of the past and those who died by suicide
can no longer be hurt in this world, so labeling them isn't as
potentially dangerous as labeling living people as muchzak avaryanim,
even if it's for a kind purpose. And if that *isn't* what he's doing, I
can only repeat: Oy lanu.
Lisa
Go to top.
Message: 8
From: Micha Berger
Date: Fri, 9 May 2014 16:25:20 -0400
Subject: Re: [Avodah] The O Therapist and the Suicidally Depressed Gay
On Fri, May 09, 2014 at 02:59:13PM -0500, Lisa Liel via Avodah wrote:
: I would like to think that he is saying this, not because of any
: concrete knowledge, but because he has a shtikl rachmanus inside him
: that wants to help two people in pain, and is willing to make a
: perhaps unjustified assumption in order to achieve that end. I
: would like to think that. In all honesty, though, I'm not sure that
: I do think that.
So you would like to think he would permit something he would consider
assur if he were more honest about the metzi'us?
And if so, why aren't you believing that? Why think less of somebody
because of assumptions about them rather than the facts?
: Are there cases in which an entire group is maligned for the sake of
: shalom bayit? Or chesed? ...
Shalom is one of the cases where it is permitted leshanos es ha'emes,
although not outright sheqer.
: buried in Jewish cemetaries, but don't we often assume mental
: illness, even without solid evidence (other than the suicide itself)
: in order to give such a person a Jewish burial? ...
Parenthetic is kind of important. Most suicides are indeed ill. The
question isn't on the current pesaq, but on the old norms. And besides,
it is mutar to bury an avaryan in a cemetary; the problem is minhag,
not din
: of cheresh in modern times, casting all charashim of the past as
: true imbeciles, again without any evidence for it, allows deaf and
: deaf-mute Jews to be removed from the category that shotim are
: placed in.
Actually, there is plenty of evidence that shereshim in the past were
not educable, and then once we figured out how to teach sign language
and lip reading, that all changed.
: My concern is that mima nafshach. If that's what he's doing, it
: creates a danger of an overgeneralization that can harm people in a
: way that the other cases don't....
I think the real problem is a lack of first-hand awareness of how telecom
has changed the world. A therapist asked him a question, he gave an answer.
There is no indication RMS thought he was making a public statement from
which someone else might take offense, derive a general rule, etc...
:-)BBii!
-Micha
--
Micha Berger Today is the 24th day, which is
mi...@aishdas.org 3 weeks and 3 days in/toward the omer.
http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Netzach: When does domination or
Fax: (270) 514-1507 taking control result in balance and harmony?
Go to top.
Message: 9
From: Zev Sero
Date: Fri, 09 May 2014 16:33:29 -0400
Subject: Re: [Avodah] The O Therapist and the Suicidally Depressed Gay
On 9/05/2014 4:25 PM, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote:
> : of cheresh in modern times, casting all charashim of the past as
> : true imbeciles, again without any evidence for it, allows deaf and
> : deaf-mute Jews to be removed from the category that shotim are
> : placed in.
>
> Actually, there is plenty of evidence that shereshim in the past were
> not educable, and then once we figured out how to teach sign language
> and lip reading, that all changed.
What about a person who was normal and became a cheresh, and communicates
fluently in writing? Such a person is a cheresh, despite his demonstrated
competence. So how can we honestly claim that the state of cheresh depends
on incompetence?
--
Zev Sero Sufficiently advanced incompetence is indistinguishable
z...@sero.name from malice.
- Eric Raymond
Go to top.
Message: 10
From: Micha Berger
Date: Fri, 9 May 2014 16:41:59 -0400
Subject: Re: [Avodah] The O Therapist and the Suicidally Depressed Gay
On Fri, May 09, 2014 at 04:33:29PM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote:
:> Actually, there is plenty of evidence that shereshim in the past were
:> not educable, and then once we figured out how to teach sign language
:> and lip reading, that all changed.
: What about a person who was normal and became a cheresh, and communicates
: fluently in writing? Such a person is a cheresh, despite his demonstrated
: competence. So how can we honestly claim that the state of cheresh depends
: on incompetence?
I didn't say anying about mental competence. I said something about
whether or not you could now educate him.
It could also be about inevitably feeling relatively cut off from
humanity, and in particular BY.
I'm just saying that even if you rejected the explicitly tated umdena (par
1) your problem inheres in your alternative assumption, and isn't a given.
:-)BBii!
-Micha
--
Micha Berger Today is the 24th day, which is
mi...@aishdas.org 3 weeks and 3 days in/toward the omer.
http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Netzach: When does domination or
Fax: (270) 514-1507 taking control result in balance and harmony?
Go to top.
Message: 11
From: Lisa Liel
Date: Fri, 09 May 2014 15:38:09 -0500
Subject: Re: [Avodah] The O Therapist and the Suicidally Depressed Gay
On 5/9/2014 3:25 PM, Micha Berger wrote:
> On Fri, May 09, 2014 at 02:59:13PM -0500, Lisa Liel via Avodah wrote:
> : I would like to think that he is saying this, not because of any
> : concrete knowledge, but because he has a shtikl rachmanus inside him
> : that wants to help two people in pain, and is willing to make a
> : perhaps unjustified assumption in order to achieve that end. I
> : would like to think that. In all honesty, though, I'm not sure that
> : I do think that.
>
> So you would like to think he would permit something he would consider
> assur if he were more honest about the metzi'us?
Pretty much. It would make me feel more positively towards him.
> And if so, why aren't you believing that? Why think less of somebody
> because of assumptions about them rather than the facts?
Because if I was capable of changing what I think is true because it
makes me happier, I wouldn't be frum.
Lisa
Go to top.
Message: 12
From: Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer
Date: Fri, 09 May 2014 16:27:48 -0400
Subject: Re: [Avodah] silk-screened sifrei torah (STAM) and megillot
On 05/08/2014 04:27 PM, Saul Mashbaum via Avodah wrote:
> Rav Asher Weiss in Minchat Asher Dvarim siman 59 discusses this topic.
> He cites a rishon, R[' Chasdai Crescas] to Gittin 9a, who explicitly
> forbids 'shficha' for a get "she-ein zu derech ktiva'.
...
> It is clear from RAW's t'shuva that he considers the silk-screen
> technique shficha.
Rabbi Abadi designed the process specifically to address the issue of
shefichah. They don't spill the ink on the sink screen. They apply it
with koach gavra.
KT,
YGB
Go to top.
Message: 13
From: Kenneth Miller
Date: Fri, 9 May 2014 21:59:23 GMT
Subject: Re: [Avodah] The O Therapist and the Suicidally Depressed Gay
R' Micha Berger wrote:
> What did RMS say, and in which language? Maybe he was just
> saying the mi'ut is too big to be milsa delo shekhicha? Who
> knows? Can you really judge from some n-th party's "not
> unusual"?
"The mi'ut is too big to be milsa delo shekhicha" is a very good argument
for being machmir. But here he would be using it as an argument for the
therapist to be meikil. If that's how Rav Sternbuch paskens, then okay. But
this explains why he might NOT mean that.
> So, you're relying on a diyuq halashon in RHM's presentation of
> RMS's position. No one in question was there, nor do you know
> from a few sentences without tone of voice what exactly was meant.
> ...
> Wouldn't your duty here be to suspend judgment, and not get upset
> over something you have no proof was intended meaning?
No, I'm not relying on a diyuq halashon. Rather, this is the essential point of Rav Sternbuch's logic.
The *only* way he can allow the therapist to restore shalom, is by showing
that this will not cause a significant increase in the sinning. And the
*only* way he can do that is by presuming that the sinning while they're
apart will be *at least* similar to the sinning while they're together. And
the *only* way he can do that is by coming up with some other aveirah which
may occur in lieu of nidda. And the one he came up with is adultery.
I responded to your previous post by backing down on the number of times
that this will occur, and even on the probability that it will occur. But
it still needs to be significant, or else the therapist loses his heter.
This *IS* Rav Sternbuch's logic, is it not?
> FWIW, I think RMS's words were more likly that among couples
> that are facing enough discord for one partner to drag the other
> to therapy (as opposed to mutual desire to get help), it is not
> rare (note my rephrasing) for someone to end up committing
> adultery?
I did consider this possibility. But there's a practical problem of finding
someone to commit adultery with, and I did mention this problem in my first
post. I am willing to accept the idea (for the sake of argument) that
adultery is a worse aveira than nidda, and this means that -- for the
calculation of whether or not the therapist should do therapy -- one act of
adultery can be as bad as a number of acts of nidda.
But still, there needs to be a significant chance of the adultery occurring
at least once. The operative words here are "significant chance" and "at
least once". My initial presumption was that he meant "will definitely
happen, as many times as the violations of nidda would've happened." I
accept the possibility that he might have much less than that, but that
would mean either of two things: Either the likelihood of adultery is much
worse than I imagine it to be, or violations of nidda are not nearly as
terrible as I understand it to be. And that's what I have so much trouble
with.
Akiva Miller
____________________________________________________________
The #1 Worst Carb Ever?
Click to Learn #1 Carb that Kills Your Blood Sugar (Don't Eat This!)
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3131/536d5007c421950070e9cst03vuc
Go to top.
Message: 14
From: Zev Sero
Date: Sat, 10 May 2014 21:51:02 -0400
Subject: Re: [Avodah] silk-screened sifrei torah (STAM) and megillot
On 9/05/2014 4:27 PM, Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer via Avodah wrote:
> Rabbi Abadi designed the process specifically to address the issue of
> shefichah. They don't spill the ink on the sink screen. They apply it
> with koach gavra.
But koach gavra isn't the issue, is it? Spilling is also koach gavra,
after all. That's what we use lechatchila for netilas yodayim, after all!
--
Zev Sero Sufficiently advanced incompetence is indistinguishable
z...@sero.name from malice.
- Eric Raymond
Go to top.
Message: 15
From: Zev Sero
Date: Sat, 10 May 2014 21:53:09 -0400
Subject: Re: [Avodah] The O Therapist and the Suicidally Depressed Gay
On 9/05/2014 5:59 PM, Kenneth Miller via Avodah wrote:
> The*only* way he can allow the therapist to restore shalom, is by
> showing that this will not cause a significant increase in the
> sinning. And the*only* way he can do that is by presuming that the
> sinning while they're apart will be*at least* similar to the sinning
> while they're together. And the*only* way he can do that is by
> coming up with some other aveirah which may occur in lieu of nidda.
> And the one he came up with is adultery.
Actually, for the man the issur is likely to *be* nidah. His adultery is
likely to be with a penuyah, so the point is that he's going to be doing the
same issurim, whether with his wife or with someone else.
--
Zev Sero Sufficiently advanced incompetence is indistinguishable
z...@sero.name from malice.
- Eric Raymond
Go to top.
Message: 16
From: Lisa Liel
Date: Sat, 10 May 2014 21:46:58 -0500
Subject: Re: [Avodah] The O Therapist and the Suicidally Depressed Gay
On 5/9/2014 6:41 PM, Harry Maryles wrote:
> Being a Cheresh does not mean being only a deaf-mute. It is a mental
> disorder.
>
That may be what it means now. It isn't what it always meant.
Lisa
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Avodah mailing list
Avo...@lists.aishdas.org
http://www.aishdas.org/avodah
http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org
------------------------------
**************************************
Send Avodah mailing list submissions to
avodah@lists.aishdas.org
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
avodah-request@lists.aishdas.org
You can reach the person managing the list at
avodah-owner@lists.aishdas.org
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Avodah digest..."
A list of common acronyms is available at
http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/acronyms.cgi
(They are also visible in the web archive copy of each digest.)