what will Hamodia do if Hillary becomes President?

[Super Speed]

Please show me the source of how PSing out fully clothed women and delaying planes because you were too cheap to buy a 2nd seat is the right thing.

I said I'm not getting involved in specific cases just addressing your point that you keep saying that if it's gonna cause an uproar that = a CH and that's not the case.

[aygart]

Please show me the halachic source of how PSing out fully clothed women and delaying planes because you were too cheap to buy a 2nd seat is the right thing.

There are definitely better ways than Photoshop. Just leave out the picture. Note that the paper involved there was NOT a aminstream one.

[Emkay]

How's halacha as a geder?

So its that simple.
Ok, so can you please tell me in a couple sentences the definite halacha as to what is ok and what is not. Please be very specific.

[Menachem613]

If you are ok with PS woman out you should have no issue with woman choosing to wear a burqa. Hopefully it catches on as well.

[mgarfin]

Dan, you have a huge misconception of what a CH is. You think as long as the world looks at it in a bad way it's a CH, well that is not the case. If it's the right thing then it doesn't make a difference how big of an uproar it causes.
 (I'm not taking sides on the Hillary issues, I just keep seeing stupidity written about CH)

+100
It a very common mistake.

In regarding the mesiras nefesh  to go to times square, I read a  Teshuvah from R' Sherlo  permitting shaking a womans hands שלא בדרך חיבה. His bases is, nigah is a machlokes if it is דאורייתא or Derabononand, embarrassing a person is defiantly a דאורייתא . 
לשיטתו נל"ל you can eat chicken in milk served by a person that will get embarrassed if you dont eat it.


Also see this for lots of mamrei chazal http://www.aspaklaria.info/090_TSADI/%D7%A6%D7%A0%D7%99%D7%A2%D7%95%D7%AA.htm

דתניא לא יהלך אדם אחורי אשה בדרך ואפילו היא אשתו, נזדמנה על הגשר יסלקנה לצדדין, וכל העובר אחורי אשה בנהר אין לו חלק לעולם הבא. תנו רבנן המרצה מעות לאשה מידו לידה או מידה לידו בשביל שיסתכל בה, אפילו דומה למשה רבינו שקיבל תורה מהר סיני לא ינקה מדינה של גיהנם, ועליו הכתוב אומר יד ליד לא ינקה רע, לא ינקה מדינה של גיהנם. אמר רב נחמן מנוח עם הארץ היה, שנאמר ויקם וילך מנוח אחרי אשתו... אמר רב אשי ולמאי דאמר רב נחמן מנוח עם הארץ היה אפילו בי רב נמי לא קרא, דכתיב ותקם רבקה ונערותיה ותרכבנה על הגמלים ותלכנה אחרי האיש, ולא לפני האיש, אמר רבי יוחנן אחרי ארי ולא אחרי אשה, אחרי אשה ולא אחרי עבודת כוכבים... (עירובין יח ב)

ועוצם עיניו מראות ברע, א"ר חייא בר אבא זה שאין מסתכל בנשים בשעה שעומדות על הכביסה, היכי דמי אי דאיכא דרכא אחרינא רשע הוא, אי דליכא דרכא אחריתא אנוס הוא, לעולם דליכא דרכא אחריתא, ואפילו הכי מיבעי ליה למינס נפשיה. בעא מיניה ר' יוחנן מרבי בנאה חלוק של תלמיד חכם כיצד, כל שאין בשרו נראה מתחתיו. (שם נז ב)

[mgarfin]

They already do that in the Yiddish newspapers. She exists only as "פרוי קלינטאן" .

Hebrew Hamodia too.

[aygart]

So its that simple.
Ok, so can you please tell me in a couple sentences the definite halacha as to what is ok and what is not. Please be very specific.

Until you have clear guidelines of the definite halacha what should your rule be as to what you willl publish?

[jj1000]

+100
It a very common mistake.

In regarding the mesiras nefesh  to go to times square, I read a  Teshuvah from R' Sherlo  permitting shaking a womans hands שלא בדרך חיבה. His bases is, nigah is a machlokes if it is דאורייתא or Derabononand, embarrassing a person is defiantly a דאורייתא . 
לשיטתו נל"ל you can eat chicken in milk served by a person that will get embarrassed if you dont eat it.


Also see this for lots of mamrei chazal http://www.aspaklaria.info/090_TSADI/%D7%A6%D7%A0%D7%99%D7%A2%D7%95%D7%AA.htm

דתניא לא יהלך אדם אחורי אשה בדרך ואפילו היא אשתו, נזדמנה על הגשר יסלקנה לצדדין, וכל העובר אחורי אשה בנהר אין לו חלק לעולם הבא. תנו רבנן המרצה מעות לאשה מידו לידה או מידה לידו בשביל שיסתכל בה, אפילו דומה למשה רבינו שקיבל תורה מהר סיני לא ינקה מדינה של גיהנם, ועליו הכתוב אומר יד ליד לא ינקה רע, לא ינקה מדינה של גיהנם. אמר רב נחמן מנוח עם הארץ היה, שנאמר ויקם וילך מנוח אחרי אשתו... אמר רב אשי ולמאי דאמר רב נחמן מנוח עם הארץ היה אפילו בי רב נמי לא קרא, דכתיב ותקם רבקה ונערותיה ותרכבנה על הגמלים ותלכנה אחרי האיש, ולא לפני האיש, אמר רבי יוחנן אחרי ארי ולא אחרי אשה, אחרי אשה ולא אחרי עבודת כוכבים... (עירובין יח ב)

ועוצם עיניו מראות ברע, א"ר חייא בר אבא זה שאין מסתכל בנשים בשעה שעומדות על הכביסה, היכי דמי אי דאיכא דרכא אחרינא רשע הוא, אי דליכא דרכא אחריתא אנוס הוא, לעולם דליכא דרכא אחריתא, ואפילו הכי מיבעי ליה למינס נפשיה. בעא מיניה ר' יוחנן מרבי בנאה חלוק של תלמיד חכם כיצד, כל שאין בשרו נראה מתחתיו. (שם נז ב)

Is embarrassing a goy dioraysa?

Time to take this thread OT

[Dan]

I said I'm not getting involved in specific cases just addressing your point that you keep saying that if it's gonna cause an uproar that = a CH and that's not the case.

And my point is that if there's halachic basis, fine. No argument.
But without basis then PS and plane delays does fall into CH.

[Emkay]

Until you have clear guidelines of the definite halacha what should your rule be as to what you willl publish?

With that clientele? No ladies. Just like they do.

[grodnoking]

I'm sure that whoever runs the some of these newspapers jave a ruv that he asks questions to.


And we need a popcorn emoji.

[stbaum]

Photoshopping Hillary out of that picture was an undeniably brainless thing to do. If you have a problem showing women, don't publish the picture at all, simple as that.

At the end of the day though, "the Prophet exists to sell itself, you silly girl". Whether it's right or wrong, printing pictures of Hillary will unquestionably tick off a large amount of readers; ergo it won't be published.


They already do that in the Yiddish newspapers. She exists only as "פרוי קלינטאן" .

i have no stance on the issue. i just love that you quoted HP 

[mgarfin]

Is embarrassing a goy dioraysa?

Time to take this thread OT

He learned from יהודה ותמר

[aygart]

With that clientele? No ladies. Just like they do.

There you have it

[jj1000]

He learned from יהודה ותמר

Sounds very weak to me. I'm no expert but I don't think we rule of what's a halacha dioraysa in regards to embarrassing  goyim based on that story. And unless he has some source other than that, which says that the we have a biblical prohibition from embarrassing goyim he definitely has a flawed argument.

[koplonko]

Dan, with all due respect you lack knowledge in halacha. Tznius is a halachic topic not a CH topic. Yes there are halachos regarding looking at (even!!) pictures of woman. The fact that you are not aware of them does not change them. The fact that certain people photoshopped instead of cutting it out does not change the halacha. Certain things are assur.
As a lubavitcher it's easy for you to pull out "mivtzoim" as a blanket rule that everything is muttar, those that actually do mivtzoim can attest as to how bad it is. They only fo it because they say the lubavitcher rebbe said he  took responsibility.
Regarding pictures there is a back and forth between rav gavriel tzinner and the Lubavitcher rebbe.
The rebbe allowed:
1) black and white
2) photo
3) of the Rebbitzin ,
3) whom nobody really knew
Still it is מדת חסידות להחמיר however in this case we could print it,
4) because it can add to והחי יתן אל לבו

[jj1000]

Dan, with all due respect you lack knowledge in halacha. Tznius is a halachic topic not a CH topic. Yes there are halachos regarding looking at (even!!) pictures of woman. The fact that you are not aware of them does not change them. The fact that certain people photoshopped instead of cutting it out does not change the halacha. Certain things are assur.
As a lubavitcher it's easy for you to pull out "mivtzoim" as a blanket rule that everything is muttar, those that actually do mivtzoim can attest as to how bad it is. They only fo it because they say the lubavitcher rebbe said he  took responsibility.
Regarding pictures there is a back and forth between rav gavriel tzinner and the Lubavitcher rebbe.
The rebbe allowed:
1) black and white
2) photo
3) of the Rebbitzin ,
3) whom nobody really knew
Still it is מדת חסידות להחמיר however in this case we could print it,
4) because it can add to והחי יתן אל לבו

And that's why the beis din of CH came out with a psak that COL is assur due to pics of women?

Oh wait they didn't do that? Maybe what's halacha and what's minhag are different.

[koplonko]

And that's why the beis din of CH came out with a psak that COL is assur due to pics of women?

Oh wait they didn't do that? Maybe what's halacha and what's minhag are different.

1. There is a letter signed by chabad Rabbonim in EY that it is assur
2. I quoted halacha. Same halacha as cholov akum and beard. But in chabad you pick and choose?

[jj1000]

1. There is a letter signed by chabad Rabbonim in EY that it is assur
2. I quoted halacha. Same halacha as cholov akum and beard. But in chabad you pick and choose?

1. And why didn't the beis din ch write one?
2. Not everything is so simple. I didn't see a quote from halacha though fwiw.

Why do the vast majority of lubavitchers visit COL are you accusing them all of choosing to not be chabad and breaking halacha?

ETA:

those that actually do mivtzoim can attest as to how bad it is.

I'm not sure why you worded it as those that actually do mivtzoim it sounds like you are talking down to someone, as if they never did mivtzoim... I personally never found it so "bad".

[Aaaron]

Dan, you have a huge misconception of what a CH is. You think as long as the world looks at it in a bad way it's a CH, well that is not the case. If it's the right thing then it doesn't make a difference how big of an uproar it causes.
 (I'm not taking sides on the Hillary issues, I just keep seeing stupidity written about CH)

I said I'm not getting involved in specific cases just addressing your point that you keep saying that if it's gonna cause an uproar that = a CH and that's not the case.

-.5

Taken from OU.org:

The third category is what we typically mean when we talk about chillul Hashem: when someone who should know better acts in a fashion that is perceived to be beneath him. In a Talmudic discussion of what would constitute a chillul Hashem, Rav said it would be if he didn’t pay his butcher on time (Yoma 86a). That’s not such a grievous thing but coming from Rav, it reflects badly on Torah scholars. Each of us at our own level is responsible to strive to act upward and not stoop down.

The reason for this mitzvah is gratitude to God. He created us and gave us everything. How horrible would we be to act in a fashion that makes Him look bad and causes people to say, “That’s how Jews act?” or “That’s how religious people act?

As was mentioned by Zale in the ethical thread:

For some reason the more yeshivish people I've discussed CH with always leave that part out, and try to assert that CH is either solely for Jews, or only regarding violating halacha.