The Court comes up empty-handed

You may also like...

13 Responses

  1. toto says:

    I just love how people leave out certain facts such as there was a wall seperating the playground and lunchroom. The seperation wall is evidence by itself how the parents wanted to discriminate against the Sephardic children in the “chassidic track.

  2. Steve Brizel says:

    Can anyone imagine either a law review, federal or state court judge on any level attempting to stifle a legitimate critique of a controversial decision?

  3. Moshe says:

    Tol korah mbein einecha! The existence of anti-sefardi discrimination in wider Israeli society in no way justifies rampant discrimination in the Haredi sector. It was not just a question of numbers in the Emmanuel as is clear from the descision. It also clear from the decision that parents did not want their children exposed to sefardic minhagim and psak. When will right minded chareidim take a principled stand against anti sefardic discrimination?

  4. dovid 2 says:

    Why are we so coy about the “wall separating the playground and lunchroom” that toto brought about? Aren’t the Slonimers teaching their children that anyone whose religious practices are different than theirs are lepers?

  5. Simcha Younger says:

    This case has been compared by many to the way Israel has been treated in world media with regard to the Mavi Marmara.
    I think another prominent case it should be compared to is Rubashkin. (which I have not been following closely)

    The charges that Rubashkin was arrested for were dropped long ago, but the judge and prosecutors obviously cannot let go. They must find something he did wrong, and a much as possible he will have to pay for that something as much as he was expected to pay for the original charges.

    Here I see also many commenters who are desperate not to allow the Slonimer chassidim get a clean pass. Some people have resorted to accusing them of various minor charges, and others insist that any minor expression of self-identity is equivelant to Jim Crow.

    The prosecutors in Rubashkin’s case had a clear need to find him guilty of somehitng, as they caused a great deal of damage to Postville and to Agriprocessors, and it would be quite unseemly to walk away admitting it was all a mistake. I am not sure what compells people to see the negative side of the story in the Emanuel case. Why is it so necessary to see this in terms of racism, when it it so much easier to see it in terms of religion and tradition?

    As to the prevous commentors:
    toto: the wall is evidence that the parents wanted a seperate track. There was nothing about the wall that indicates anything about sepharadim.

    Moshe: What do you mean ‘it was not about numbers’?? that is the problem, not the excuse. The decision did not indicate AT ALL what it was about. Definitely not about numbers, though, as the numbers in no way indicate racism. Nothing about Sephardi minhag and psak is clear from the decision, except that if they wanted to keep them away from Sephardi minhag that would be legal. (The phrase you use [Tol korah mbein einecha!] means that the person you are responding to has the defect he himself accused others of. It would be a most appropiate phrase to use responding , eg, to the court. R’ Rosenblum has not shown any signs of racism, so this phrase is quite out of place.)

    dovid2: The wall teaches the children that people with different religious standards should have differrent religious educational settings. It does not teach them that anyone is a leper. Your comment also clearly acknowledges that it is a religious issue and not a racial issue, and there was no question that seperation for religious reasons is legitimate, so why should we not be coy about the wall?

  6. L. Oberstein says:

    I guess if you go to Law School you learn to emphasize the strengths of your client’s case and avoid mention of the weaknesses. Everyone was wrong here, and no one acted with enough understanding to prevent the blowup. Now , the leaders have to find a way back to a modus vivendi, some kind of solution. I feel sorry for the Sephardim who had to listen to blatant falsehood from Rav Efrati that anyone who studies the Rambam doesn’t discriminate. Is there a shred of truth in that statement, RebYonoson. Isn’t it hard for you to to be on the same side as this man. I knw that a Bais Yaakov in Sanhedria refused to allow girls who could have been your or my grandchildren to sit in the same class with pure blood chareidim. Does Rav Efrati also say that there is no discrimination against Americans and Baalei Teshuva? I would like to believe that the Gedolim truly oppose racism , not just court ordered integration. Is there a sliver of evidence that is the case.
    In Alabama they taught me that the War Between The States was not about slavery but a fight for state’s rights. Sure.

  7. Chaim Fisher says:

    Sigh. When will the supporters of medinat Yisrael finally admit that their idol has feet of clay?

    It should be perfectly obvious by now that the powers that rule in Eretz Yisrael are totally oblivious to what Jewish life is. Even if there was some bias against Sephardim in the Emmanuel situation, parents should still be allowed to choose their children’s education. Surely for the people who introduced the whole concept of education to the world.

    Why we keep blindly supporting our government and its courts I don’t know. This article also falls well short of the mark. This article pretends that the court decision against us was an aberration, worthy of lofty discourse in the salons of Jerusalem.

    Wrong. It was another knife in the heart of Jewish life. It was proof positive that we should have nothing to do with people who are the enemies of our life.

    Maybe we are all lemmings.

    It’s time to stop running into the sea with the government. Stand up against them before its too late!

  8. dovid 2 says:

    “… sit in the same class with pure blood chareidim.”

    L. Oberstein, if you keep the Shulchan Aruch, which I trust you do, you are a pure blood Chareidi in the Bais Din shel Maala. (even if you are a freshly minted guer tzedek or a baal tshuva).

  9. Tziki says:

    Simcha you certainly don’t understand rubishkan case…the first charges were dropped only because they had much more serious charges.

  10. Tal S. Benschar says:

    L. Oberstein:

    Excuse me for being harsh, but have you thought through what you are saying? In America, EVERY yeshiva and day school practices discrmination in that only Jews are admitted. That is at least religious discrimination, and since who is a Jew is usually defined by birth (who is the mother), that is probably racial discrimination as well. (Indeed, a Court in England recently made just such a ruling. Think about that — a court has held that Orthodox Judaism is racist.)

    What keeps the governemnt in America from shutting down every yeshiva and day school in America as discriminatory? The recognized rights of freedom of religion and the parental right to educate one’s children as you see fit, particularly in one’s own religion. You and every other Orthodox Jew in America are benefitting from the very rights you now wish to deny the Slonimer. (And, please, don’t repeat the silliness about the State paying for it. The Supreme Court order foreclosed the option of a privately funded school. That is what caused the uproar.)

    I must also protest your comparison of this situation to the American South. As I said on another thread here, blacks in America were treated poorly (very poorly) because of their racial background, regardless of how they acted. There was no option to “act white” and be accepted in a school (or job or restaurant). That is miles removed from what happened in Emmanuel.

  11. cvmay says:

    What keeps the government in America from shutting down every yeshiva and day school in America as discriminatory?

    Forget ‘DISCRIMINATION’, the main reason that the American government (particularly in New York State, where the majority of Yeshivos/Day Schools are found) does not shut down parochial schools is ECONOMICS. The public school budget (tax role) could not support taking these students into their system, overwhelming & overburdening the entire structure. The bottom line in most situations is the CASH outlay, and far from silliness of any government liability program.

  12. Sarah says:

    Mr. Oberstein, in New York they also taught me that the Civil War was about the right of states to secede from the Union (or not), not about slavery. Hey, maybe “they” were right? Or maybe they weren’t completely lying?

  13. J says:

    “Wrong. It was another knife in the heart of Jewish life. It was proof positive that we should have nothing to do with people who are the enemies of our life.”

    Chaim Fisher, if by “have nothing to do with” you mean stop taking money from these supposed enemies (stop taking money for schools, stop taking welfare and health care and police and fire services beyond what the community’s own tax base can afford), then I completely agree with you.

Pin It on Pinterest