Pacific Jewish Center | Rabbi » NBC

Innocent or Guilty, Jerry Sandusky is a Very Strange Man

rabbifink — Tue, 15 Nov 2011 13:48:32 +0000

In a mind boggling decision, Jerry Sandusky ~~agreed~~ offered to be interviewed by the great Bob Costas. This was curious. But some of Sandusky’s responses were even more curious.

Costas asked all the tough questions and I recommend reading the transcript and / or watching the video.

The thing that caught my eye the most was a Sandusky response to a very provocative Costas question.

Towards the end of the interview Costas asked Sandusky:

Are you sexually attracted to young boys, to underage boys?

To which Sandusky, in classic Talmudic fashion, responds with a question:

Am I sexually attracted to underage boys?

At this point every single normal human being is thinking this:

DID YOU NOT UNDERSTAND THE QUESTION? HOW IS YOUR IMMEDIATE ANSWER “HECK NO!”? WHAT ARE YOU THINKING ABOUT?

Being the nice guy (at least on Camera) that he is, Costas offers him a second chance and answers Sandusky’s ridiculous question. So Costas says:

Yes.

Sandusky realizes he better answer the question so he replies:

Sexually attracted, you know, I enjoy young people. I love to be around them. But no I’m not sexually attracted to young boys.

WHAT?! It took him three prefatory phrases to get to the word “No”. To me, this indicates something very significant.

Like most predators, Sandusky is oblivious to the peculiarity of his behavior. He thinks it is normal. He is not phased by the fact that someone just asked him about being sexually attracted to young boys. This is not normal.

At this point it is fair to say that whether Sandusky is guilty or innocent, he is a very strange man.

If someone would ask me or almost any of you reading this blog post the question that Bob Costas asked Jerry Sandusky I am confident that 99.99% of the group would react strongly and assertively that we are not attracted to young boys. Sandusky didn’t.

I believe that this fits the pathology of sexual predators. They don’t see themselves as doing anything wrong. They see their acts as normal. Perhaps at one time it was normal. I have heard of historical societies that did not frown upon this kind of behavior. That does not make it right, it just makes it less objectionable. But in our society it is considered abuse and a crime to do the things Sandusky is alleged to have done. It is objectionable. And it is up to us to be vigilant in protected our children and those who are dependent on us from predators.

Penn State failed the victims. Society failed the victims. But it is even more disturbing to get a peek into a twisted mind and see what is so patently obvious now but was ignored far too long.

That is, Mr. Sandusky is a sick man. Sick men will do harmful things to people.

Video here:

With a slight tip of the hat to Colin Cowherd.

Links: Transcript

Andrew Bynum Parks in an Illegal Spot and Teaches Us About Secular Laws vs. Religious Laws

rabbifink — Thu, 21 Jul 2011 22:19:54 +0000

Lakers center Andrew Bynum found himself on the local and national news for the wrong reasons this week. It seems that Bynum makes the news every off-season for some reason or another.

This is the second time he made news in a shopping mall parking lot. Last time it was Kobe Bryant saying to ship him out on video while in a parking lot. This time, Bynum was caught on camera parking his car in a handicapped spot.

In the grand scheme of things, it is not a big deal. People do it all the time. Who could forget the time George Costanza needed a parking spot in a pinch so he pulled into the handicapped spot?

Of course, the Bynum haters have used this to prove how immature Bynum is. It’s hard to take such criticism seriously because Andrew Bynum is only 23 years old. At that age, being immature is normal.

The incident resonated with me for a completely different reason.

Laws in secular countries, like the USA, are man made rules. For every rule there is a reaction, punishment, fine and stigma associated with the breaking of the rule. Commit murder and the punishment may be the death penalty, or life without possibility of parole (ie death in prison). Get caught speeding, you get a fine for a few hundred dollars. Skip out on paying your taxes, risk jailtime and a heavy fine.

The punishments may be deterrents, forms of retribution, attempts to rehabilitate or simply incapacitation. If you are willing to pay the price, there’s nothing really stopping you from breaking the law. It’s a risk / reward analysis.

If someone is able to afford speeding tickets, they can choose to speed and pay the fine is they get caught. For Andrew Bynum the risk of getting a ticket (he didn’t) did not outweigh the reward of parking up close. Is this immature? Sure. Is it a reasonable way of thinking within our system? I think so.

But when contrasted with a system of religious law, like Jewish law, another possibility enters the picture.

In Jewish law, there is a moral imperative to follow the law. This means that even if you want to break the law and take your punches and suffer the eternal punishment, you have acted immorally. In fact, the rabbis teach us that if someone says “I will sin and then repent, even the forgiveness attained on Yom Kippur won’t forgive that sin”. In religious law, the act is wrong. The punishment is incentive to do the right thing. But the law represents the right thing.

Now, I am not advocated a system of religious law in any free country. That would be a terrible idea. How can there be freedom when there is a system of law that only works for some people? (And calls non-believers heretics / infidels etc.?)

But if I had all the money in the world, there would still be an imperative for me not to take that handicap spot. Jewish law requires giving up a seat (or in this case, parking spot) for anyone elderly or infirm. Parking in the spot might be okay, but if someone who needs the spot comes by and is forced to take a different spot, I (may) have violated the law. Religious law superimposed on top of secular law can work very well. In this case, there would be no risk / reward analysis. It would not matter if I was willing to pay the price. If it is wrong, I cannot do it. Driving recklessly would fall under the same category. In Jewish law, one is not permitted to put their life in danger. Driving too fast is dangerous. Even if I am willing to pay the fine, I can’t drive so fast that it would dangerous because it is wrong to do so.

Andrew Bynum acted in a way that is consistent with how secular law works. Having a religious law to superimpose on those laws could go a long way to not rationalizing breaking the law.

How timely are the words of the Chief Rabbi of the UK, Rabbi Jonathan Sacks on this week’s Torah portion:

The Torah sets forth a… way, in which people obey the law because they have voluntarily undertaken to do so. This is a society based not on power or the pursuit of self-interest but on freely embraced moral obligation.

Link: NBA

HT (Rabbi Sacks quote): @howielb

Matisyahu, NBC and The Olympic Winter Games Make A Great Team

rabbifink — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 23:25:57 +0000

I first heard of Matisyahu while working as a Campus Rabbi at USC. The Jewish students on campus were really into his music (this was ~5 years ago) and some of my students invited me to join them at a Matisyahu concert.

He was performing at the Knitting Factory in Hollywood which was right near my home. I went and it was really cool. The music was great, the message was equally wholesome and the connection that I got to build with my students was profound.

I liked it enough that I took my wife to a Matisyahu show at the American Jewish University a few weeks later. It was a bad venue for a concert. It was more like a movie theater than the right venue for a reggae concert. Still, we enjoyed the music.

I knew that Matisyahu had made it, when I was listening to my then favorite sports radio show, “The Loose Canons” on AM 570 in Los Angeles (oh how I miss those guys…) and they played Chop ‘em Down as their bumper music. That was an epiphany for me. At that point, Matisyahu has “made it” in my books.

If that wasn’t sufficient proof that Matisyahu had “made it”, I received another clue a few weeks ago. I was playing the NBA 2K10 video game and the background music was… Matisyahu!

I found a video of the NBA 2K10 playlist so you can see for yourself.

I thought that was pretty cool.

But today around the blogosphere and on Twitter the latest Matisyahu news is regarding the new NBC advertisement for the 2010 Vancouver Winter Olympics.

This is, by far, the best exposure that Matisyahu has seen in the public eye. The commercial is perfect. The content, the timing of the cuts, the slow – motion, the music and the message are woven together to create a really perfect ad. The emotion that the 30 second spot exudes are exactly what NBC wants you to feel.

I like NBC as a network and I hope that they can mount a comeback and become relevant again. This ad is a great start.

I am sure Matisyahu is proud to be part of such a great ad. I am proud to share it with you.