Monday, July 28, 2008

Factual Bull Crap Is At It Again

This Factual Bull Crap guy got his friend DK to vouch for him to me to stop calling him "Factual Bull Crap" on my blog roll. The problem is, Factual Basis is full of crap.

The post he wrote on his blog to answer my previous post is total nonsense.

It starts out with him whining about me calling him "Factual Bull Crap." Then as a publicity stunt, he links to 2 bloggers, me and DK, who he disagrees with. I am totally not impressed. Unless Factual Basis says that orthodox jews living in enclaves such as Lakewood, New Jersey, Kiryas Joel, New York and Mea Shearaim, Israel should at minimum be aware of the findings of science (and the proofs that science uses) on how the universe began and how life developed on Earth, Factual Basis' link to me and DK is a meaningless publicity stunt.

Its like, for Public Relations purposes, Factual Basis is like ya ok disagreements are cool, but behind the backs of people who Factual Basis would want to sway, Factual Basis is like, 'dang, science sucks. We can't let our sheeple know about science.'

Then Factual Basis compares the interpretive power that Judaism supposedly grants rabbis to interpret the Pentateauch, to the Supreme Court vis a vis the legislature.

I have two points to respond to that.

1) Sometimes in the Supreme Court, sometimes there's issues on whether or not the supreme court is playing legislature. A conservative in American politics may say that the Row vs. Wade decision is an example of that.

Orthodox Judaism has a similar problem in dietary laws and dress code rules. I feel that total separation of meat and dairy is so much of a stretch from don't cook a young goat in its mother's milk that it qualifies as creating a new religious rule (creating new religious rules are not allowed in the Pentateauch.) Also, not allowing jeans in yeshivas for sure qualifies as creating a new religious rule, again not allowed in the Pentateuch.

2) Does the Pentateuch or the oral law give the rabbis the sole power to interpret? Rabbinical Judaism started in 70 AD after the destruction of the Second Temple, over a thousand years after the giving of the Pentateuch, if one were to believe that the event happened. So, the answer is no. (The precursors of rabbinic judaism are the pharissee religious party, which began in 160 BC. as a response to the sadducees who did not even believe in an oral law)

After that, Factual Basis got his history all fucked up. He wrote "Since many non-Jews also accept the Bible as sacred the Oral Torah is the main thing that distinguishes Judaism and makes it unique. The Oral Torah could therefore not be written until the non-Jews had adopted their own religion based on the bible. G-d thus said, “if I would have written the majority of the Torah, [Israel] would be counted as the same as strangers (Hosea 8:12)"

This is wrong. The supposed oral law was written down into the Mishna and Talmud to try to avoid balkanization.

Finally, Factual Basis tries to respond to my post, but he responds to something I didn't say with arguments that are not even his own. Factual Basis responded as if I said that an oral law is impossible. It certainly is possible for God to have given Moses extra info that wasn't written down, if the giving of the Pentateuch did indeed happen. However, oral traditions are less reliable than written traditions because duh there's no physical evidence ... its ORAL. There's much more room for twisting it, getting it wrong, making it up, etc. in an oral tradition.

15 comments:

Freethinking Upstart said...

SJ,

I have to agree with the numerous accusations against you that you are immature and childish.

Factual Basis is full of crap....is total nonsense.

You keep repeating how full of crap and nonsense this man is. This is childish and immature.

It starts out with him whining about me

Again with the accusations and exaggerations. I did not find the tone of his post to be whining in any way.

Unless Factual Basis says that orthodox jews living in enclaves such as Lakewood,...should at minimum be aware of the findings of science (and the proofs that science uses) on how the universe began and how life developed on Earth, Factual Basis' link to me and DK is a meaningless publicity stunt.

You are accusing some unknown, new blogger of making publicity stunts. What, pray tell, would incite him to make publicity stunts? What public does he have and what motivates him to make these stunts? You seem to be taking this WAY too seriously and are forcing conspiracy theories about him.

ya ok disagreements are cool, but...dang, science sucks. We can't let our sheeple know about science.'

Your choice of language, again, is very childish.

I feel that total separation of meat and dairy is so much of a stretch ... that it qualifies as creating a new religious rule (creating new religious rules are not allowed in the Pentateauch.) Also, not allowing jeans in yeshivas for sure qualifies as creating a new religious rule, again not allowed in the Pentateuch.

The meat and milk prohibitions are largely Rabbinic and they interpret certain passages of the Torah as supportive of making such rulings. To make a categorical statement as you have is mis-representative of Rabbinic and Orthodox Judaism. Whether or not their interpretations of the Torah are acceptable is another matter.

As too wearing jeans, this is clearly a minhag and you are again making this "ruling" out to be much more then what Hareidi Judaism does. By way of analogy, many businesses have the custom to wear slacks and button down shirts. To make it seem like they are adding to the constitution by enforcing this rule is bordering on the ridiculous.

In summary, that which you accuse Factual Basis of, you are largely guilty of yourself.

If I may give you a bit of unasked for advice,

Grow the fuck up, and stop being a pompous asshole.

SJ said...

Freethinking upstart, it is funny how you reserve for yourself the right to call names if u think u have a good point, kinda like I do. XD

Secondly, if you can't understand my point about why him linking to me and DK is just a publicity stunt then honestly you are braindead.

Also you have two factual errors. One is that the separation of meat and dairy is based on that one particular verse in the Pentateuch about not cooking a young goat in its mothers milk, not "certain passages" as u may say.

Your next error is that orthodox judaism does indeed equate minhag with halacha.


Lastly you make a logical error. A company dress code is not enforced by the state, but the state requires everyone to go to school until high school is over more or less so a school dress code does in fact use state power.

Freethinking Upstart said...

>Secondly, if you can't understand my point about why him linking to me and DK is just a publicity stunt then honestly you are braindead.

Again, with the childish spoonful of name calling and insults. You are making yourself out to be a childish conspiracy theorist.

>Also you have two factual errors. One is that the separation of meat and dairy is based on that one particular verse in the Pentateuch about not cooking a young goat in its mothers milk, not "certain passages" as u may say.

You misunderstood me. I merely stated that Rabbinic Judaism interprets certain passages of the Torah as justification of Rabbinic "fences" and rulings based on Torah verses. You said "it qualifies as creating a new religious rule." Rabbinic Judaism feels it is completely justified make what you call "new religious rulings" within certain boundaries or when clearly stated as Rabbinic. I'm sure you are familiar with the "d'oraita" and "d'rabbanan" hock.

>Your next error is that orthodox judaism does indeed equate minhag with halacha.

Minhag Yisroel k'halacha. I never denied such a thing. However, you conflated minhagim as if they are mitzvot d'oraita. There are distinctions between mitzvot "d'oraita" and "d'rabbanan", halacha in general and particular and minhag. To bunch them all up as "religious rulings" is dishonest.

>Lastly you make a logical error. A company dress code is not enforced by the state, but the state requires everyone to go to school until high school is over more or less so a school dress code does in fact use state power.

I can't make heads or tails of that. I never said that a company dress code is enforced by the state and no Yeshiva's dress code is enforced by the state. They are both customs, enforced by the business and yeshiva respectively.

Do yourself a favor, and learn a little about critical thought before you start making accusations of "logical errors." Also, get your facts straight before making accusations of "factual errors."

SJ said...

>> Rabbinic Judaism interprets certain passages of the Torah as justification of Rabbinic "fences" and rulings based on Torah verses

and my point is the fences regarding dietary laws and dress code rules go too far.

>> However, you conflated minhagim as if they are mitzvot d'oraita

you are being dishonest. orthodox judaism views rules d'oraita and d'rabbanan as having equal force.

>> and no Yeshiva's dress code is enforced by the state.

that's not what i said u braindead idiot.

factualbasis said...

you are being dishonest. orthodox judaism views rules d'oraita and d'rabbanan as having equal force.

No you are either being dishonest or ignorant. They do NOT have the same force. There are plenty of times when violating a d'rabbanan is ok, while cases for being allowed to violate a d'oraita are few and far between


that's not what i said u braindead idiot.


Sorry freethinking, SJ didn't say that. What he DID say is that since people are being forced to get an education by the state the dress codes at these schools is equivalent to state school.
Too bad for SJ that's not true. Take it from the guy with a JD there has to be a LOT more action then that to be state action. Moreover since these schools are private and parents chose to send their kids there, they can impose any dress code they want within the bounds of the decency laws. (i.e. cant force people to come naked)

SJ said...

>> No you are either being dishonest or ignorant. They do NOT have the same force. There are plenty of times when violating a d'rabbanan is ok, while cases for being allowed to violate a d'oraita are few and far between

naa there's plenty of times when one is allowed al pi halacha to break a halacha d'orita so they are both the same. also, the instances of breaking both d'orita and d'rabbannan halachot are rare.


>> Take it from the guy with a JD there has to be a LOT more action then that to be state action.

I didn't say it was a state action.

>> Moreover since these schools are private and parents chose to send their kids there, they can impose any dress code they want

I wouldn't send my kids to a yeshiva in part because of the dress code. XD

factualbasis said...

Lastly you make a logical error. A company dress code is not enforced by the state, but the state requires everyone to go to school until high school is over more or less so a school dress code does in fact use state power.

so what did you mean by that?

naa there's plenty of times when one is allowed al pi halacha to break a halacha d'orita so they are both the same. also, the instances of breaking both d'orita and d'rabbannan halachot are rare.

again either ignorance or your are just plain wrong. For a d'orita there are very few examples of being allowed to violate them (the biggest one to save a life), while a d'rabanan has a lot more exceptions

Freethinking Upstart said...

>and my point is the fences regarding dietary laws and dress code rules go too far.

No, you said, "not allowing jeans in yeshivas for sure qualifies as creating a new religious rule, again not allowed in the Pentateuch." NOT that they merely went too far. What does "too far" mean? Are you a halachic authority to decide what is considered "too far?"

>you are being dishonest. orthodox judaism views rules d'oraita and d'rabbanan as having equal force.

Wrong. You clearly don't understand the Orthodox view on these things. If you are going to attack Orthodox Judaism, don't set up straw men. Please read this Also see here "לא תסור" אינו הופך דרבנן לדאורייתא"

>that's not what i said u braindead idiot.

You never tire of insults... Chaval. As I stated, I couldn't make heads or tails of the paragraph I quoted, so I tried to make the best of it. Your poor communication skills are no fault of mine.

If you want to contradict yourself, mis-represent, insult, and otherwise write dishonestly or poorly the right is yours. This is your blog after all. However, as any reader can clearly see, you are not interested in intelligent conversation.

SJ said...

>> so what did you mean by that?

u aint got no j.d.

>> again either ignorance or your are just plain wrong. For a d'orita there are very few examples of being allowed to violate them (the biggest one to save a life), while a d'rabanan has a lot more exceptions

Maybe there are just alot more d'rabanan rules but both d'rabanan rules and d'oritah rules have exceptions.


>> Are you a halachic authority to decide what is considered "too far?"

I am one person with an opinion. In the United States, this is actually allowed dickface.

>> Wrong. You clearly don't understand the Orthodox view on these things. If you are going to attack Orthodox Judaism, don't set up straw men.

Ok u fucking moron. You basically attempted to refute me saying that on orthodox judaism rules d'oritah and d'rabbanan have equal force by providing a link that says that rules d'oritah and d'rabbanan have equal force.

I quote from your aish article "Since the Talmud was accepted by all Israel, it is the final authority in all questions of Torah law. Since such universal acceptance is a manifestation of God's will, one who opposes the teachings of the Talmud is like one who opposes God and His Torah. All later codes and decisions are binding only insofar as they are derived from the Talmud."

factualbasis said...

Dude, u r contradicting your own arguments.

first you said also, the instances of breaking both d'orita and d'rabbannan halachot are rare.

but then you said
Maybe there are just a lot more d'rabanan rules but both d'rabanan rules and d'oritah rules have exceptions.


You changed your position once I showed you that you were wrong about the exceptions for d'rabanans. Get your story straight.

I love this argument. Lets follow your logic. Your explanation of what you meant by:

the state requires everyone to go to school until high school is over more or less so a school dress code does in fact use state power.

is u aint got no j.d.

after both freethinking and i prove you wrong (oh and btw I do have a JD and will be admitted to the bar very soon)

Then you said
I am one person with an opinion. In the United States, this is actually allowed


so let me get this straight. Because you are an American you know better then G-d? Or alternatively (since you don't agree with the Rabbi's power from G-d) you know better then a bunch of people who have studied Torah for their entire lives? With your great American opinion you must know better then teachers, supreme court justices and scientists! who cares how much better they know the subject matter.

You are entitled to an opinion on whatever subject you want, it just doesn't really count for as much as someone who knows something on the subject (which you have made pretty clear by your contraditions today you don't know much about Torah Judaism beyond milk and meat)

So what makes something "too far" in your opinion.

SJ said...

>> You changed your position once I showed you that you were wrong about the exceptions for d'rabanans. Get your story straight.

i did not change my position. I still hold that actual real life exceptions are rare.

>> so let me get this straight. Because you are an American you know better then G-d?

Really? God said no jeans in yeshivas?

>> So what makes something "too far" in your opinion.

I said already. It's not my fault if your reading comprehension sucks.

factualbasis said...

Really? God said no jeans in yeshivas?

Dude get over yourself. It's a dress code. They don't allow jeans in most private high schools: Jewish, Christian, Muslim...doesnt matter. Moreover you can't wear jeans in court. Are the courts trying to listen to G-d? No its about appearance and a respectful dress code and jeans just don't cut it. NO rabbi ever said that jeans are assur, its a dress code that NO ONE is forcing you to do. Its a private school, they can do what they want. Just because they want people to look put together and not like shlubs... you attack them.

And too far is based on what you believe? So if G-d himself appeared and told you to do something, if you don't like it...screw him?

SJ said...

>> Just because they want people to look put together and not like shlubs... you attack them.

This is absurd. One can wear jeans and be well groomed perfectly fine.

>> if G-d himself appeared and told you to do something, if you don't like it...screw him?

Last I checked, God (if he exists) did not appear in thousands of years.

factualbasis said...

This is absurd. One can wear jeans and be well groomed perfectly fine.

yeah, i remember the time the lawyer wore the pair of jeans to court, or when the president wore jeans or any other person who is trying to look presentable and respectable wore jeans. Dude you may not like it but society finds jeans unkempt and unprofessional. It has nothing to do with yeshivas or G-d, and NO ONE ever said it was. You just want to find a problem with religious Jews even where there is none

SJ said...

1) I see nothing unkempt about jeans unless the pair has holes in it.

2) school is school, not a profession.