Pacific Jewish Center | Rabbi » respect

Shame on Gizmodo | Shame on Us Too

rabbifink — Mon, 20 Jul 2009 03:21:20 +0000

One of my favorite gadget blogs ran a despicable headline for a post yesterday. Gizmodo is a great blog when it comes to getting information, reviews and opinions on the latest technology and gadgets. Unfortunately, yesterday they disgraced their reputation with a pretty offensive headline.

The headline garnered enough attention that they ultimately changed it to something less offensive.

There is a normal Orthodox Jewish couple who have a vacation home. Originally, the building did not have motion sensing lights but recently changed the system to a motion sensing system. On Shabbos the couple did not wish to be forced to walk in a hallway that would trigger the lights on. They requested the building swap the new system for the old one at their expense. The building refused. The couple sued.

Gizmodo posted the following headline: “Orthodox Couple Imprisoned By Superstition Blame Motion Sensing Light Instead”.

Proof:

Subsequently, the headline was changed to “Orthodox Jewish Couple Sues Over Motion Sensing Light“.

I posted the link on Facebook hoping to get some comments from my Facebook friends. I got a few interesting responses.

One commenter hit the two points that I want to discuss on this blog.

1 – The halachic ramifications of motion sensors and Shabbos for the Orthodox Jew.

2 – The reaction of a non-Jew to a halacha adherent Jew.

I do not want to get into a nitty gritty halachic discourse of motion sensors on Shabbos. Suffice to say, the issue is not black and white. On Shabbos one may not act in a way that will automatically produce a desired result that violates Shabbos. Completing a circuit to turn on a light is a violation of Shabbos. By activated the sensor, one automatically produced the desired result of turning on the light.

There is leeway when the result is not automatic or when the result is not desired.

I am all for striving to keep halacha. When I am met with a choice between what I want and what halacha demands I try my best to choose halacha. So for example, if I am driving late at night and I pull into a rest stop and they have a fast food joint serving burgers that are not kosher I have a choice. I want a burger but halacha demands that my burgers be kosher. I choose to leave the rest stop burgerless. I will not sue the restaurant for not providing kosher burgers. Right?

Now, I know this is a little different from the vacation home. But, it is the same principle. If halacha will not allow for me act a certain way, guess what? I am not going to act that way. Even if I really, really, really want to. So, I know that in the vacation home there are other factors, such as broken promises and flawed reasoning. However, if it were me, or anyone that I advise I would trade that place for a new one.

Adhering to halacha is about making a choice to allow halacha to control your life and not your whims and desires at any given moment. There will be times where the choice is hard or the alternative is very tempting, those are the times where you show your strength of character by making what you believe to be the right choice. Those are not the times to sue because you have been made uncomfortable in your adherence to halacha.

There may be great merit to the lawsuit. I find that all irrelevant. I think, avoiding a legal brouhaha over halacha is more important than the principle of who is right and who is wrong in this situation.

Second, the offensive headline that originally appeared on Gizmodo bothered me. I am NOT an overly sensitive person. I do not cry “Anti-Semitism at every opportunity I get (ala Uncle Leo). I don’t even call this “Anti-Semitism”, I call this insensitivity.

There is nothing against Jewish people, per se, when calling religion a superstition. But there is a tremendous breach of sensitivity.

Gizmodo writer, Jack Lofton doesn’t believe in religion in general and that’s okay. I am not going to call him names about his lack of faith or question his theology publicly. That is just not appropriate for a gadget blog. If he were writing on a religion blog, or even an anti-religion blog then Jack’s opinion about religion might be relevant. Here, it was not and inserting his bigoted opinion was insensitive.

I do not read the headline as an affront to Judaism or even religion in general. I read the headline as an affront to civility.

We live in a big world, with a lot of people. Not everyone is going to agree. You can try and convince everyone you are right or lash out against those who do not. But ultimately, we are not all going to agree. So let agree on this, let’s choose not to fight about our disagreements and otherwise be friends. I mantioned this revolutionary concept on this blog a little while ago. We have more in common than not. Let’s stop fighting about God, or anything else we feel strongly about and move on.

Also, Jack, Gizmodo is the wrong place to make your point about religion.

Time and place, Jack. Showing your prejudice against religion is ugly, it is especially ugly when it is not at all connected to the content of your post. I read Gizmodo for technology news and content. Just because you have a soapbox does not mean you can shout whatever you want whenever you want. Time and place.

Jack, please don’t make fun of other people’s beliefs on one of my favorite gadget blogs. Thanks.

Update: To his credit, the writer apologized.

I Am So Disturbed

rabbifink — Fri, 26 Jun 2009 01:19:34 +0000

UPDATE: Friday morning 6/25/09 I updated the post to more accurately reflect the protagonist’s personality.

I am so disturbed right now.

My wife and I have a summer camp for pre-school children in Monsey NY. That is why we left Los Angeles / Venice for the summer. We don’t own our own camp grounds so during the year we store everything in a shed at my in-laws’ home in Monsey.

Sometime before camp begins we need to get everything from the in-laws to our summer location. Today was moving day. What I heard during the move was disturbing enough to share with you.

We hired a fellow who runs a local moving outfit called B!ny@m!n the Shlepper (BTS). He’s been doing this for 20 years and he basically manages the move while he sits in his truck and his workers do the “Shlepping”, he pays them quite well for their work and then takes his profit. Much of his work is in the Frum community. BTS is not known as a cordial guy to most (he is not a jerk, just not the most personable guy) (AND I think they are wrong) and has had his share of run-ins (customers refusing to pay, customers yelling at him etc) with his customers.

Today, I made an error in my estimated items needing to be moved. Immediately his sensors go off – “is this another Frum guy trying to rip me off?”. Of course it was an honest mistake and I was willing to pay for the extra work.

I apologized profusely. He goes off on a (perfectly understandable) tirade, “you don’t think I am a person”, “you people always try to cheat me” etc. I continued to apologize and we began to talk.

BTS tells me horrible stories of externally observant Jews who have cheated him, spoken rudely with him and treated him like a second class citizen. He drives a large moving truck and when he drives and traffic is jammed, he notes that he gets cut off all the time. He also notes that he gets cut off all the time by religiously dressed Jews. “Why can’t they just let me go first?”.

Now, Binyamin is actually not Frum himself. Very spiritual and personal growth, but not religious. What he can’t understand is why people who claim to be religious and perform mitzvos all the time, very often lack common courtesy and decency.

As we talk I see past the outer crust of his personality and beyond the veneer he is truly a wonderful guy. We laughed together, told some great stories and even a little bit of Torah was discussed. We really had a great conversation and I was actually disappointed when the job was over and our shmooze had to end.

In response to his complaints about externally religious Jews, I remarked that they are so busy being religious they forget to be human! ©

The truth is, I was embarrassed that this Jewish guy had such a bad feeling about religious Jews.We spoke for a while and I tried to assure him that he doesn’t notice all the great things. I also tried to remind him that all the negative stuff he hears sticks out to him, but people don’t remember when others act appropriately.

Bottom line, it was damage control.

Folks, get your priorities straight!

Step One: Act like decent human being. – Derech Eretz Kadma L’Torah, common courtesy precedes Torah.

Step Two: Integrate Torah and Mitzvos into your life.

Rinse, wash, repeat.

If you dress like a religious Jew, you are expected to act like it. It boggles my mind how insensitive, unaware and obtuse some Torah observant Jews can be. The same Torah that says keep Kosher, lay Tefillin, observe Shabbos, study Torah, Shofar, Lulav, Yom Kippur ALSO says to treat people with respect, honor our planet, act humanely towards animals and love your neighbor. We need to work on keeping all of those.

Please, I beg you, realize that you are representing the Jewish people. Act like it.

Thanks.

Honor Thy Father & Mother | Connections 6/8/09

rabbifink — Wed, 10 Jun 2009 01:31:50 +0000

Another beautiful evening in Venice CA was highlighted by a wonderful Connections.

Everyone was all smiles and we had a great time socializing and learning.

Our Torah topic was the philosophy and moral implications of honoring one’s parents.

We discussed various theories and we ended with the Torah approach.

I recommend listening to this class as the questions and discussion were very interesting and thought provoking.

Click through to listen.

You can listen to the entire class below (35 minutes)

Clothes and the NBA

rabbifink — Fri, 13 Feb 2009 19:00:13 +0000

You thought I was done with clothes?

Not at all. The NBA had huge image issue a few years back. The image issue resulted from a few on the court incidents along with the perception that hip-hop culture was a) dangerous b) a major part of the NBA players lives’.

Commissioner David Stern sought to change the culture of the NBA as well as the public’s perception of the NBA. Stern enacted a dress code.

1. General Policy: Business Casual

Players are required to wear Business Casual attire whenever they are engaged in team or league business.

“Business Casual” attire means

•   A long or short-sleeved dress shirt (collared or turtleneck), and/or a sweater.
•   Dress slacks, khaki pants, or dress jeans.
•   Appropriate shoes and socks, including dress shoes, dress boots, or other presentable shoes, but not including sneakers, sandals, flip-flops, or work boots.

2. Exceptions to Business Casual

There are the following exceptions to the general policy of Business Casual attire:

a. Players In Attendance At Games But Not In Uniform

•   Sport Coat
•   Dress shoes or boots, and socks

b. Players Leaving the Arena

Players leaving the arena may wear either Business Casual attire or neat warm-up suits issued by their teams.

c. Special Events or Appearances

Teams can make exceptions to the Business Casual policy for special events or player appearances where other attire is appropriate — e.g., participation in a basketball clinic.

3. Excluded Items

The following is a list of items that players are not allowed to wear at any time while on team or league business:

•   Sleeveless shirts
•   Shorts
•   T-shirts, jerseys, or sports apparel (unless appropriate for the event (e.g., a basketball clinic), team-identified, and approved by the team)
•   Headgear of any kind while a player is sitting on the bench or in the stands at a game, during media interviews, or during a team or league event or appearance (unless appropriate for the event or appearance, team-identified, and approved by the team)
•   Chains, pendants, or medallions worn over the player’s clothes
•   Sunglasses while indoors
•   Headphones (other than on the team bus or plane, or in the team locker room)

This was met with serious opposition. Players claimed the dress code was racist. Others just thought David Stern was “out of touch”.

Well, vindication is sweet. ESPN columnist Ric Bucher writes the that effects of the dress code have carried over into the personal lives of the NBA players. Not only do players look more professional, they also act more professional. This has influenced the cars they drive, the food they eat and the way they dress even not while under the watchful eye of the NBA. I recommend reading all linked articles – especially this one!

Of course we would expect nothing else. When one is dressed professionally they are more likely to act professionally. The clothing influences our attitudes and our feelings. The NBA is another clear example of this phenomenon.

Clothing Round Up, Now with Lawyers

rabbifink — Thu, 05 Feb 2009 16:42:49 +0000

Over the last couple of weeks I have blogged about wearing shorts while playing basketball and then I blogged about the new dress code in the White House and then on Monday night I spoke about the power of clothes and Tzitzis. It makes me think I should blog exclusively about clothes. I was trying to avoid more clothes posts but for some reason I could not resist.

No, I am not searching the web for articles about how to dress. Yet, they keep on finding me. This time I was reading the Wall Street Journal and I found this article. The article is about a very shmanzty law firm called Bickel & Brewer.

Bickel & Brewer has a tradition of formal dress in the workplace. They believe that clothes do influence our attitudes. They believe that high-powered lawyers (whatever that means) should look like high-powered lawyers. Apparently, in times of economic uncertainty the first to go are the ones who dress casually. Interesting.

The Partners at the firm tutor the young associates on the finer aspects of dressing formally. Shiny shoes, starched dress shirts, dark suits and ties are the uniform of this law firm.

The idea of wearing casual clothes to work abhors the partners. One of the partners, Mr. Gardner says: “It’s actually a little offensive to my sense of style,”. Without a suit, he says, “I would feel like a football player who ran out on the field without his shoulder pads.”

The Wall Street Journal reports that business is good for formal clothiers. The White House won’t need to bail them out, but maybe they should check them out. We don’t want our president on the football field without his shoulder pads…

Our (more) Casual President

rabbifink — Mon, 02 Feb 2009 18:36:44 +0000

You may have noticed I steer clear of politics. This post is NOT about politics. It is about the last three presidents. It is more about their attitudes than anything else. Again, this is not about politics.

Even before this New York Times article hit the streets I had made the same observation. It seems that Presidents Obama and Bush differ on more than just politics. President Obama’s White House has a decidedly different feel.

The article mentions different dress codes and different schedules. I remember when President Bush took office there was much fanfare about his changes in the White House as well. In fact I was able to find a New York Times article from 2001 written shortly after President Bush took office. The article about President Bush lauds the new regime (at the time) for returning formality to the White House. Meetings ended on schedule, aides were well dressed formal rules of cordiality were expected and the atmosphere was a professional one. This was a stark contrast to the Clinton years where the Government reflected the freewheeling president. Bush sought to put respect back into the Presidency. He followed a president that many found it hard to respect. Bush used the dress code to symbolize that break.

President Obama is breaking off from President Bush’s formality. The dress code is gone and Mr. President himself is often at meetings with his jacket off. His day starts later and he is frequently seen wandering the halls of the White House. Very informal. Obama follows a president who many felt was too stubborn. Obama is trying to make a break from the Bush presidency. He too is using the dress code to symbolize that break.

I also find it fascinating that these 2 New York Times articles are so similar in their tone. They are excited about the change and think the new way is so great while the old way was ineffective. That is the power of the media. They know how to make good news bad news and bad news good news.

All this dress code talk has absolutely nothing to do with the success or failures of being a president. This has nothing to do with foreign policy, economics or size of the government. What we are noting here is the difference in office structure and atmosphere. I am all for casual; I prefer casual. However, I do think that the highest ranking civilian in our country should be more formal. I am little disappointed that the new president has changed the dress code and is now less formal. I remember feeling just the opposite when Bush reversed the Clinton dress code. My opinion is unrelated to any other area of his presidency. I just wish he would have kept the jeans wearing aides out.

The way we dress influences how we act. When you are dressed formally you are more likely to act formally. I want my president formal. Call me old-fashioned but that’s just me…

We Don't Get No R-E-S-P-E-C-T! How do you feel now?

rabbifink — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 22:29:26 +0000

Ravens use an old motivational ploy: lack of respect – Los Angeles Times.

I was in Yeshiva in Baltimore (I was still in High School actually) when the Ravens moved to Baltimore. They became a favorite team of mine right away and they still are today. They still play second fiddle to my favorite NFL team, the Buffalo Bills.

What strikes me about this article is the idea that multi-million dollar athletes need to use disrespect as motivation. Bill Belichik is famous for using this technique with the New England Patriots. There are 2 things that I notice with the whole “we don’t get no respect” routine.

First of all, is the reason these guys play football for respect? I thought they played for money or fame – I certainly did not think they played for r-e-s-p-e-c-t. Apparently they play for all three of these reasons. Interestingly enough the Rabbis teach us in Ethics of Our Fathers that desire for money, desire for honer (fame) and desire for respect are the 3 things which will take us out of this world. And by out of this world we mean one becomes obsessed with these things to the point that we neglect all other important parts of our lives – like spiritual growth. That’s fine for the Ravens, I guess – but we need to watch out for this in our lives.

The second thing that strikes me how much disrespect hurts. It is so painful that the Ravens as well as many other teams are able to feed off their disrespect and improve their physical and mental games! Pretty powerful how we crave respect and how much disrespect can motivate us. Disrespect always hurts but the pain only increases exponentially when we expect respect and we desire respect. I think this speaks volumes about the danger of craving respect – once we open that Pandora’s Box there’s no telling what we might do…