I probably should have qualified that statement or perhaps not even speculated. Extreme hand wringing is to be expected.
Dual Loyalty smear from WaPo
1 Like
OT, but it seems a good-enough segueâŚ
Despite my genetic heritage, I was not raised Jewish, so I have huge gaps in my knowledge. Much is made of Ivanka and Jared Kushner being so devout that they will not do any work â including things like tweeting or texting â on the Sabbath. But she never covers her hair in any way. Is there a version of Orthodox/Conservative/whatever Judaism that justifies this one omission, or is it just vanity (or cherry-picking)?
1 Like
Questioning the observance or slighting a convert is a huge no no in the Torah so I wonât comment on that at all.
So youâre saying there isnât a particular sect where this combination is the norm? Itâs a personal thing, not driven by the religious community theyâre part of?
âModern Orthodoxâ is a term that I have heard thrown around by my Jewish friends - it implies observance of what many non-Jews would consider âJewishâ things (keeping kosher, men wearing kippot, observing the sabbath & all holidays, etc.) but with looser observances of things like dressing modestly and hair covering for women.
I also gather that it kind of depends on the Jewish community one is in and what your rabbi has to say about it.
/not an expert
5 Likes
No, more that this is a specific case where I shouldnât comment.
I donât know how to parse that, but thank you for answering my question.
2 Likes
The more general issue of Modern Orthodoxy and the halacha (laws) of modesty which include hair covering is a complicated issue. Something that is not so easy to explain without going into a variety of legal rulings and customs which can or can not balance against legal rulings.
Since this is a specific and high profile case regarding a convert I should not comment at all.
Does that help?
2 Likes
The answer @katherinelives gave I found more helpful, if that helps you. But as I said, I do appreciate your continued effort to answer my question.
4 Likes
I think I see where you are coming from: more âitâs not my place to sayâ than trying to obfuscate or be oblique. The rules specifically enjoin you not to comment or criticise. Kind of like if someone is under an NDA (an NJD? Non-judgement decree?)
Please do correct me if I am wrong.
3 Likes
I sincerely hope that my outsider POV isnât too awful. I hesitated to respond, as I do want to be respectful, but I also thought I had some semi-relevant information.
3 Likes
That and because of the specifics involved Iâm forbidden to even appear to criticize
No problems at all!
5 Likes
1 Like
3 Likes
The big question I have is Texas A&M actually doing something about these posters or just looking the other way now that 45 is in office?
5 Likes
2 Likes
Read elsewhere but lost the link that this one too has been debunked.
Unfortunately these days I always have to double check The Forward.
To be fair, we should probably be double and triple checking almost everything, as even reputable news outlets can get a hold of bad info and then not do their homework on it, passing it on as reliable, when itâs not.
Here is the forward, doubling down on their claim:
And the counter came from The Federalist (as far as I know, a pretty right wing site - but Iâm not a regular reader):
And they note Redstate (another right wing site) as saying it wasnât true.
And international business times (which I donât know much about, so, take it with a grain of salt, I guess) also is talking about this:
I guess take away from that what you will.
4 Likes
