0

Recently, a question was asked which recommend "bypassing" some of the most important sanctifications in Judaism in favor of the exact inverse of what is in the spirit of the Torah. While there is nothing wrong with an innocent Halchic question, the OP seems to looking for simple and, frankly, frivolous solution to a "problem", a mere hindrance in life.

  1. Even if the question WAS legit - it is an extremely complex one with extremely serious consciences and not something that is appropriate for a Q&A site on the internet.
  2. At the very least, it is in violation of the rule "Your questions should be reasonably scoped. If you can imagine an entire book that answers your question, you’re asking too much."
  3. The question is totally not in the spirit of our mesorah, and quite to its contrary. Again, had it been a halcahic discourse maybe we can look at it differently. In this case, it is a slap in face to all that is sacred.
  4. Should any "halachic" decision be reached, they are subject to interpretation of all/any Googlers and may lead to grave mistakes and misconceptions based on the data provided in both the question and the answer.

In light of the above, I motion to have the question closed AND STRICKEN FROM THE RECORD, and implore the mod's to stand in favor.

2
  • 3
    To address (3) alone: Even if you are able to satisfactorily define "our mesorah", which I would be impressed with, it is certainly not against our mesorah to ask questions. From what I'm familiar with from a yeshiva background and from studying many Jewish texts, our tradition is to question everything, no matter how "traditional" a position or concept it might be. That said, I like the question you're referring to; I think it's an interesting topic and adds valuable content to the site.
    – jake
    Commented Feb 7, 2012 at 16:17
  • @Mbrevda Answering your insinuation against myself, the questioner, I can tell you that my question was very "legit". I have no agenda, no prejudice towards any particular answer. The question addresses a reality (for better or worse) in the frum world today. As jake mentions, Jewish tradition IS to question everything. Open up to any page of gemara, and you'll find several questions on all aspects of life.
    – user1095
    Commented Feb 7, 2012 at 16:33

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
7

I've added the following to the top of the question:

Moderator's note: As with all discussions of Jewish law on this site, any information included in this question or its answers is presented only for the purpose of understanding the relevant ideas, not as practical rabbinic advice. Especially with respect to marriage and divorce, consult your Rabbi about your situation for practical guidance.

You're asking for more heavy-handed censorship, which I don't think is appropriate here. The correct response to "May one do X?" where X is forbidden or otherwise problematic is to post an answer, quoting authoritative sources, explaining the problems with X. Why shouldn't that approach work here?

With respect to your numbered objections:

  1. We discuss issues relating to potentially capital offenses all the time, as do people in all sorts of other public fora. This is a serious issue in general, and we deal with it as best we can.

  2. (and the complexity point from 1) This question is certainly not too complex to answer something like "the following authorities forbade this or recommended against it, for the following reasons," preferably with links to the sources for those who want to learn more. The reasonable-scope restriction is not really for complex issues, which can be dealt with thus, but for unreasonably broad questions like "What rules does a Jewish business need to follow?"

  3. I don't see the distinction between the type of halachic discourse in which such a question would be allowed and the question at hand in this forum.

  4. No Halachic decisions are reached here. Information is presented. I agree that in this area of Halacha in particular, incorrect information, misused correct information, or any unilateral actions can be quite dangerous. That's why I took the extra step of inserting a special warning at the top of the question.

3
  • 1
    You don't need my endorsement or permission, of course, but FWIW; I thoroughly endorse the moderator's note that was added to the question, and I never intended anything different.
    – user1095
    Commented Feb 7, 2012 at 16:35
  • 1
    @Will, it is your question, so if you seriously objected to including the warning in its text, it'd be worthy of discussion (though I might still pull rank in this case). In any case, I do appreciate your endorsement of the including of the warning.
    – Isaac Moses Mod
    Commented Feb 7, 2012 at 16:38
  • /me grudgingly accepts
    – Mbrevda
    Commented Feb 7, 2012 at 19:00

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .