"Given the two choices, I would rather side with the little girl recognizing the chance, however remote, that I may be wrong. She knows exactly what happened....

Steve Karro Police Mugshot

Steve Karro: One accusation, one arrest, two perspectives

 

 Earlier this month, an eleven year old girl reported to the Miami Beach Police Department that Rabbi Steve Karro touched her inappropriately, sat her on his lap and kissed her on the neck. Within a short time, to the surprise of many who knew him, Karro was arrested and charged with lewd and lascivious molestation of a child. As with almost all cases involving child sexual abuse, controversy has erupted and emotions are running wild. Despite the charges, many continue to support Karro insisting that we must withhold judgment while others steadfastly disagree. 

By and large, the opinions of individuals on both sides of the issue are held by sensible, intelligent and caring people who want to do the right thing. 

How is it that two groups of reasonable people can come to such different conclusions? What is the real source of the disagreement? Even more so, how is it that the vast majority of those expressing their opinions have difficulty relating to or understanding the position of the other?

We have on the one side the supporters of Steve Karro. They insist that it is impossible to know with one hundred precent certainty what he did and (assuming it makes any difference) what his real intentions were. Although statistically very few children who claim abuse have been found to be lying, there is always the small possibility that she is, Karro’s supporters reason. While the Police Department assign trained professionals to determine which party is being truthful, they are human and most definitely fallible. Despite the fact that there is a rigorous system of checks and balances within our judicial system, innocent people have been arrested before.

The supporters of Steve Karro will continue to insist that we must withhold judgement as ‘innocent until proven guilty’ is a bedrock of morality. What if we are wrong and Karro is innocent, they say. What about the possibility that an innocent person is being accused and his reputation destroyed indefinitely, they remind us. As a result, they stand in the corner of Karro and nothing short of absolute proof will suffice to change their opinion.

These concerns are tremendously important and the very real probability, as small as it may be, that they are valid should preoccupy each one of us. Imagine we find out someone we accused of wrongdoing is innocent — it would surely devastate us forever.

On the other side stand the supporters of the eleven year old girl. They insist that we must support her without question, despite the fact that we were not witness to it, as the risks of re-traumatization are formidable and lifelong. They remind us of the scores of victims of sexual abuse who were not believed when they came forward and the lifelong suffering they endured as a result. If this really happened to her and we demonstrate any doubt whatsoever as to the veracity of her claims, it may damage her even worse than the abuse itself. (Here are some worthwhile tips on how to talk to a victim of sexual abuse.)

Additionally, if Steve Karro indeed abused the young girl, we must warn the rest of the community, they insist. Imagine we hear that he abused someone else after one girl accused him and because we were not one hundred percent sure, as is almost always the case, and were so concerned about the possibility of hurting his reputation, we put other children in harms way. Surely, this too would devastate us forever. As a result, they stand in the corner of the alleged victim and nothing short of absolute proof that she is lying will sway them.

Explained in this way, it is easy to see how intelligent and caring people end up viewing the same situation so differently. They both clearly see the reality that there are no witnesses and we don’t have absolute, incontrovertible proof. Yet, they approach the story from very different angles with each one fully cognizant of one or the other devastating possibilities of being wrong.

One group, when learning of the story, hears only of a Rabbi who was accused of molesting a child. 

Consumed by the possibility that he may be innocent, they rush to his defense. The other group when learning of the same story, hear only of a young girl who was molested by an adult. Consumed by the possibility that she may be further damaged or there may be other victims, past and potential, they rush to her defense.

How can we reconcile these positions? Is there an opportunity for both sides to understand each other yet come to a similar conclusion?

Perhaps if we take a step back and avoid looking at these issues as black or white, we may be able to bridge some of the gap between the two sides. Some who defend Karro insist that he is an angel or they know him well and these actions are not consistent with who they know him to be. Essentially, their position is that he can’t be an angel to some and the devil to others. This position however is inconsistent with what we know about human nature. Decent people can do horrible things. If we can shake the belief that anyone who abuses a child is an absolute monster, we can also persuade those who know him not to be an absolute monster that the accusations are at the very least possible.

In other words, while well intended, advocates who paint all abusers with the same broad brush of “evil unrepentant irredeemable sociopath with zero good qualities” are very possibly doing a disservice to those they purport to defend. Not all abusers fit neatly into this bucket and some will rush to support an abuser simply because they don’t quite fit.

The truth though is that child sexual abuse is a lot more common than we’d like to admit. If everyone who ever abused a child was known to the public, we would not be able to maintain that every abuser fits the aforementioned sociopathic and irredeemable definition. We’d have to place way too many people we know, like and respect into this category. When we talk about the accusations destroying someone’s reputation indefinitely, we are saying that all abusers deserve to be branded a pariah. If we can lift some of the shame and replace it with clear accountability, we may find a middle ground more agreeable to both factions.

I realize that many in the advocacy community may disagree with not heaping unending shame and disgust on anyone who has harmed a child and many who instinctively rush to support abusers may cringe at holding someone accountable without incontrovertible proof. Perhaps though, the compromise on each side is one each can live with because it will achieve the end goal of making the world safer for children – something we can all agree on.

Reaching this level of accord between two groups very far apart is most likely not realistic in the short term. It will almost certainly not be accomplished before the verdict is in on Karro.

Until then, a side must be picked. Given the two choices, I would rather side with the little girl recognizing the chance, however remote, that I may be wrong. She knows exactly what happened. If she somehow fabricated the story and fooled the many trained professionals she interacted with along the difficult process leading up to his arrest, it is she (and the trained professionals) who bear the burden of an innocent person’s reputation being irreparably damaged.If, however, he is guilty and we have chosen to side with him, it is we who bear the burden of ignoring the cries of an eleven year old innocent girl and the trained professionals who all told you she is saying the truth.

Knowing what I do about the horrific ordeals victims of sexual abuse who are not believed and not supported go through, I cannot bear that burden.

Knowing what I do about how difficult it is for a child who is abused to speak up and how rarely they lie about it, I can not bear that burden.

Knowing what I do about the obscenely high recidivism rate of offenders and their uncanny ability to avoid detection and minimize responsibility, I can not bear that burden.

Can you?

http://blogs.timesofisrael.com/steve-karro-one-accusation-one-arrest-two-perspectives/

Congregants divided on Rabbi Jonathan Rosenblatt’s invitations to young men to join him in sauna....The Congregants That Kept This Weirdo On The Payroll For Decades Need Help As Well!

Jonathan Rosenblatt

Riverdale’s ‘Open Secret’ Goes Public

Three years ago several prominent members of the Riverdale Jewish Center (RJC), the 700-member Modern Orthodox congregation, met privately with their longtime rabbi, Jonathan Rosenblatt, and offered to arrange a generous buyout for him.


They told him that the persistent rumors about his allegedly inappropriate behavior with boys and young men were bound to become public at some point and it would be in his and his family’s best interest, and for the congregation as well, if he accepted an offer to resign quietly.

If he didn’t, he was told, “this could all end badly,” according to a member of the congregation with knowledge of the meeting.

“It was not meant as a threat, but rather that it would hit the press eventually and no one would see things as he did,” the person explained this weekend.

“Unfortunately, he refused, and now it’s all out there,” the person said, referring to The New York Times May 31 report on Rabbi Rosenblatt’s “unusual” behavior that included inviting young men to discuss personal matters while sitting naked in the sauna with him.

The rabbi insisted, in the meeting, that he had done nothing wrong and had complied with previous requests from shul officials that he limit his gym invitations to young men rather than boys. His wife, Tzipporah, an attorney, who was present at the meeting, was said to have asserted that any action by RJC against the rabbi would result in a lawsuit.

Now, as the board of directors is faced with next steps, there is an air of sadness, frustration and confusion among congregants, some of whom, including supporters, are hoping the rabbi will resign and spare them more public scrutiny. Others seem prepared to rally around the rabbi and hope the negative attention will soon blow over. And it seems the rabbi is not prepared to step down.

In response to a Jewish Week request this week for an interview, he sent a brief “official” statement through his “adviser,” Adam Friedman. It does not defend against or even mention the specific accusations against him, but rather frames the controversy as one over ideology.

Rabbi Rosenblatt wrote that as a rabbi he has served “with devotion, guided by high standards — religious and professional.

“My career in leadership has not been without ideological contentiousness,” he continued. “There is significant reason to believe that the attack on my reputation is being promoted by those whose real attack is on my beliefs and principles. The respected rabbi of an important congregation would, for some, represent a significant trophy in the predatory quest to discredit his ideas and, possibly, an opportunity to change the nature of the community he leads.”

But those close to the situation see the response as an attempt to divert attention away from the rabbi’s behavior with young men. And there is puzzlement over his reference to an “ideological” struggle, since Rabbi Rosenblatt is seen as a centrist within Modern Orthodoxy.

“Bottom line, he had a chance to avoid embarrassment for himself, his family and the shul,” said the person who knew of the settlement offer. “But he brought this on himself.”

Open Secret
For most of the rabbi’s more than three decades at RJC, his habit of inviting young men to play squash or racquetball, followed by a shower and sauna with them, was an open secret in the congregation.

“It was a joke among the teenage boys and young men,” one congregant recalled. “We’d ask each other, ‘did you go to the shvitz with the rabbi?’”

But times have changed, as have societal norms. There is more awareness of and less tolerance for behavior viewed as sexually predatory, even if it is not invasive — especially when initiated by figures of authority and spiritual leaders.

Rabbi Rosenblatt (no relation to this reporter) is the scion of a prominent family — his great-grandfather was famed cantor Yossele Rosenblatt and his grandfather, Samuel Rosenblatt, was the rabbi of a major Baltimore synagogue for more than 50 years. Even some congregants urging for his resignation now note that he is a man of many talents and attributes — a brilliant scholar of English literature as well as Judaic texts, with a gift for eloquent oratory, a strong voice for Modern Orthodoxy when many of his colleagues have moved to the right, and a caring and compassionate pastor, always there for families in times of need.

But even some of his biggest defenders say his lack of self-awareness, or arrogance, in denying the disturbing quality of his behavior, and his inability or unwillingness to curb it, contributed mightily to his current difficulties.

“He has this blind spot,” said one RJC member of several decades. “He thought he could get away with this behavior.”

Samuel Klagsbrun, a prominent local psychiatrist, described Rabbi Rosenblatt’s behavior as “a classic case of disassociation, where one separates the reality of his actions from his belief system.” It makes for a particularly strong divide when the person is a public figure with a reputation for good works, said Klagsbrun, who noted that he does not know Rabbi Rosenblatt.

“If he was warned and continued his actions — a rabbi risking being chastised — it’s obvious that his need for that connection with the young people was significant,” he added.

But Debbie Jonas, an RJC member and mother of Rabbi Davidi Jonas, who grew up in Riverdale, said her son was one of many young teenagers who went to the gym with the rabbi, and that “it was like any health club or locker room,” with people wrapped in towels. Jonas was one of several people that Rabbi Rosenblatt’s adviser, Adam Friedman, recommended The Jewish Week contact for comment. She said the rabbi “takes himself seriously as a mentor, and I give him tremendous credit for my Davidi’s spiritual development.” And she said that more than two dozen rabbis who served as rabbinic interns at RJC were sending letters to the shul in support of Rabbi Rosenblatt.

One member of the congregation for more than 20 years said that sitting through services at RJC this past Shabbat was a particularly painful experience.

“Nothing was said publicly” about the Times article, he said, noting that in Rabbi Rosenblatt’s absence, there was an expectation that the president or other official would address the problem from the pulpit. But that did not occur. (Rabbi Rosenblatt is nearing the end of a six-month sabbatical, spending much of his time in Boston and doing research at Harvard University.)

On Shabbat morning there was much private discussion among fellow worshippers, said the congregant, who like more than a dozen people interviewed for this article, requested anonymity because of personal connections to the synagogue.

The conversation ranged from labeling the Times story “character assassination” to hopes that the rabbi step down and spare the synagogue further shame, to talk of preparing for a difficult, and perhaps legal, battle over the rabbi’s future.

‘Unanswered Questions’
The publicity over Rabbi Rosenblatt comes at a difficult time for RJC, which has lost some of the energy, and membership, it once had and as it is looking to revitalize itself. It appears that older members of the synagogue, who have been the beneficiary for decades of Rabbi Rosenblatt’s soaring sermons, thoughtful teachings and compassionate pastoral care, are more inclined to have the rabbi stay on than younger members who have reacted most critically to the allegations, perhaps envisioning their sons being at risk of the rabbi’s outreach.

It should also be noted that over the years, some members left RJC for other synagogues. So those who stayed may have made their peace with the rabbi’s questionable behavior.

One young professional, an RJC member for less than two years, said he was shocked by the revelations in the Times article and was particularly upset at the synagogue’s lay leadership’s refusal to comment publicly on Shabbat.

“People are confused and upset,” he said. “There are so many unanswered questions.”

Chief among them, particularly for outsiders, is how could the congregation’s lay leaders have allowed the rabbi to remain in his position of authority decades after learning of his sauna sessions with boys and young men?

Several former leaders acknowledged that, as one said, “It’s easy to look back now” and recognize that mistakes were made in handling the situation. But he stressed that it was more complicated than it appears.
He and others interviewed noted that the rabbi performed his primary congregational responsibilities masterfully. The complaints came most directly from Sura Jesselson, a member whose zealous pursuit of this case led some to describe her as the rabbi’s Javert, a reference to the “Les Miserables” villain who devoted his life to tracking down a minor thief.

“In a bizarre way she helped the rabbi’s case” because she was seen as inordinately devoted to bringing him down, one member observed.

There were never reported allegations of sexual touching or criminal complaints, and there were practical concerns that any attempt to force the rabbi out could result in a painful legal suit.

Perhaps most significant is the serious confusion over the “gray area” of the rabbi’s actions — not illegal but widely considered inappropriate — that led feelings of loyalty toward him to trump taking more forceful action.

“People would say ‘I support the rabbi, but I wouldn’t let my son go to the shvitz with him,’” one congregant noted. “Isn’t that crazy?”

In a sense, the rabbi’s insistence that none of his behavior was problematic led to the congregation’s “gift” of allowing it to continue.

The rabbi’s critics tend to view the situation in a more direct way — that he had a problem, whether he acknowledged it or not, and that he had compromised his ability to serve his community.

Those who informed the rabbi that their sons were reluctant to accept his gym invitations were told that the problem was not his but their sons.’

Going Public
What changed the dynamic was that Yehuda Kurtzer, who heads the American branch of the Shalom Hartman Institute, approached The New York Times some months ago with his story. He recounted how as a Columbia University student at 19, he was “horrified and embarrassed” when the rabbi, unclothed, invited him into the sauna.

After Rabbi Rosenblatt was invited to speak to the students at the SAR Academy in Riverdale last fall, Kurtzer, whose young son attends the school, complained to the principal. He later wrote of his concerns about Rabbi Rosenblatt on a listserv of alumni of Wexner Foundation programs. That prompted a response from other participants with similar stories of their encounters with the rabbi going back a number of years, and the campaign took on renewed urgency.

[The Jewish Week has made reference to the rabbi’s unusual behavior several times over the last 15 years, without naming him. Most recently, in January 2013, this reporter’s column posed this question: “What, if anything, should be done about a synagogue rabbi who has a long history of inviting teenage boys and young men in their 20s to go to the gym with him, shower together, and share intimate talk in the sauna, making at least some of them feel deeply uncomfortable? No allegations have come to light about the rabbi crossing the line, but is this normal socializing or inappropriate behavior?”

The reason for not naming Rabbi Rosenblatt, or writing a full story, was that none of the young men who made allegations against him were willing to speak “on the record,” for attribution. Kurtzer is the first and only to do so.]

Lessons Learned?
Some stories about rabbinic impropriety are black and white, from physical and sexual abuse to spying on women in a state of undress.

  This one is not, and it is difficult to find the right words even to describe Rabbi Rosenblatt’s behavior with young men. The same invitation to play squash, shower and talk in the sauna resulted in some young men bonding with the rabbi and expressing gratitude for a mentoring relationship; others called it “predatory” and “outrageous.” The New York Times labeled it “unusual.”

Confusion abounds as well in the congregants’ range of responses.

 Some knew of his behavior for decades and ask now, “So what’s the big news?” Others are upset that board leaders took matters into their own hands, seeking to monitor the rabbi’s interactions with young men without informing the congregation at large.

Until our rabbinic organizations and synagogues cede power to outside experts to monitor the behavior of rabbis, the pattern will continue: peers will take precedence over possible victims. Surely we must recognize by now that rabbis, like everyone else, can have both inspiring and harmful traits. Those characteristics are not mutually exclusive; in fact, they make us human. So it’s possible that the same rabbi who shows great compassion and sensitivity to some can also present a threat to others.

It’s up to the leaders, members and rabbi of RJC to resolve this issue in a way that is dignified and fair. But it’s too late to do it quietly, under the radar.

They had that chance decades ago, but no longer.

Jewish Week associate editor Jonathan Mark contributed reporting.
gary@jewishweek.org
https://www.thejewishweek.com/news/new-york/riverdales-open-secret-goes-public

"The behaviour of some of these people is what pushed me to the edge of my sanity, and to the edge of my faith. I was lied to, lied about, ignored, pacified, and profoundly betrayed. Not by sick, indecent men, but by people who thought they were doing the right thing...."

Migdal Emunah

An open letter to Rabonim and Askonim

In the aftermath of what has been a very difficult time for chareidi leadership in the UK, I ask you to allow me to reflect on my experience as a victim of Mr Grynhaus, and to hear what I have to say.

There are indecent people in every society. Our community, which prides itself on kedusha and tahara, is not immune. Some people are just sick. They need to be kept away from children as a basic safety measure for the klall.

I don't want to talk about those types of people.I want to talk about other people, who are not sick. Who don't have twisted desires and who have self-control and self-respect. I'm referring to rabonim, teachers, layleaders, frum GPs and therapists.

The behaviour of some of these people is what pushed me to the edge of my sanity, and to the edge of my faith. I was lied to, lied about, ignored, pacified, and profoundly betrayed. Not by sick, indecent men, but by people who thought they were doing the right thing.

I know that many of these Rabonim do not set out to be cruel. Their actions are not malicious. However, even if they didn't mean to, they caused me horrific pain and suffering. That suffering is on a level with the suffering caused by the abuse itself, and responsibility needs to be accepted for that pain.

Apart from more recent UK laws surrounding safeguarding issues, our own halacha is thousands of years old. The first time I was assaulted, it was in a situation of yichud. I can count at least five frum adults who knew this man was being meyached with me. But they kept quiet. They must bear responsibility for their silence, for ignoring the breach in halacha.

I am suffering so much. If you looked the other way then, don't look away now. If, in the past, you were involved in keeping abuse quiet or abuse happened on your watch, hold up your hands to it. It would help me, and other victims, if you could reach out and apologise, and acknowledge what happened. Please, take steps to become educated in safeguarding issues.

If you are someone who has responsibility for children or vulnerable adults, provide pastoral care or healthcare, please, take my message on board. If you can't, perhaps you need to rethink your position.
Our community must stop being a safe place for predators. If you look away, that invites an offender to strike again.

All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.

https://www.facebook.com/MigdalEmunah/posts/976928979008039?fref=nf

They get to move across the country, start a new life, and are presented a plateful of new women. Women who have no idea. Congregations that have no idea. Even when you stare us down with gag orders and secret meeting or trials. These men still find our weakness....

..."At first, I said no to his advances, but his wanting me felt so good, and I was so hungry. We lived in different states, but he was going to a rabbinical conference close to me, so we decided to meet. It was the start of an affair that soon became twisted and dark. He’d call me from strip clubs, and text me as he walked onto the pulpit for Friday night services. We met again while he attended another conference. He took me to dinner and drinks all on his synagogue’s dime. Soon, he grew darker. 
 

He stopped calling me by name: I was now bitch, slut, mistress. 

And then one day, he sent me pictures of his wife without her knowledge. There are no words for that type of violation. I should have stopped then. I should have stopped for his own marriage, but most of all, I should have stopped for her. When I tried to speak up, he reminded me of his importance in the Jewish community. I was scared. I was scared to lose my own friends and ruin his life. And then, my husband found our texts, and threw me out. And then the rabbi turned his back. I lost everything bit by bit. It ate at me. His world stayed the same and mine was destroyed. His wife found out, and she didn’t leave.  Eventually, I went to the head of the ethics committee of the movement. He took my story and was kind, but nothing happened. I had to be the one to decide if they would start an investigation. The decision plagued me. I had to reach out to a therapist. 

And then I learned that I wasn’t the only one. And I learned from other people that he wasn’t the powerful man he pretended to be. He needed to be stopped, and I had to be brave. 

More than anything, I felt obligated to stop him from hurting other women. 

In the end, he refused to be investigated. In the end, he was kicked out of the movement. In the end, his wife moved him across the country. And in the end, he remained a rabbi. None of the other rabbis know the details. No one can help me. Worst of all, he is still a danger. He is still a predator. He still has access, and no one in his new world knows.

We forget that predators who take advantage live among us. Whether they live inside our own homes, or stand on high at their pulpit. They ruin our lives and many times get to move on with theirs. Even when they get a slap on the hand; even when they get kicked out of their movement. Even when they get 6 years; if they hurt 1 woman or 152. 

They get to move across the country, start a new life, and are presented a plateful of new women. Women who have no idea. Congregations that have no idea. Even when you stare us down with gag orders and secret meeting or trials. These men still find our weakness.

The sisters that spoke up about Josh Duggar are brave. The women who spoke out against Rabbi Freundel are brave. I wish the rest of us ruined by certain rabbis were strong enough to do the same.

http://www.girlbodypride.com/2015/05/the-mistresss-rabbi/

Statement on Sexual Abuse From The Chief Rabbi of the U.K.

Chief Rabbi Ephraim Mirvis - United Kingdom

Statement on Sexual Abuse

26 May 2015 --- The conviction of a prominent member of the Manchester Jewish community for sexual abuse is of immense significance. Though certainly not the first such case, it sends an unequivocal message that nobody, in any part of our community, can expect to commit these horrific crimes and escape prosecution. The longstanding view of the Chief Rabbi and Beth Din has been restated a number of times in recent years, but this is an opportune moment to reinforce that position once again.

I would like to commend the victims and others who withstood tremendous pressure and gave evidence. I hope that their courage will inspire others to come forward in the future.

This kind of abuse is a stain on all of society and we are no less vulnerable to the scourge of sexual crimes than any other community. Perpetrators of these crimes destroy lives and every one of us shares in the responsibility to protect victims and potential victims. As such, we must not only ensure that all incidents are reported to the police without delay, but that we must do everything in our power to promote a culture whereby reporting such crimes to the relevant statutory authorities is supported and encouraged.

It is imperative that communities across the country have robust child protection policies in place and should act in consultation with the statutory services. Every community should review its policies and procedures regularly and consider what else can be done – we can always do more.

Further to previously held training seminars for Rabbis, I will be writing this week to Rabbis across the country, advising them of a mandatory, dedicated seminar that the United Synagogue is organising on behalf of its communities, in order to better prepare Rabbis to identify and respond to incidents of child abuse in their communities and to reinforce the importance of being vigilant at all times. In addition, I am meeting with victims of abuse and campaigners in this area to seek views from them as to what more can be done to better protect vulnerable people in our communities.

May we all have the courage to seek out and challenge cruelty and injustice from within our midst.

Chief Rabbi Ephraim Mirvis

http://www.chiefrabbi.org/abuse260515/ 

MUST READ:
http://www.thejc.com/news/uk-news/136821/chief-rabbi-urges-community-report-sex-abuse-allegations-police

 On The Radio 2006:
http://www.survivorsforjustice.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=7&Itemid=67

"Like any democracy, Israel isn’t perfect, but its government and people need no lessons from Barack Obama about values or which policies best serve its long-term interests. Israel doesn’t need to be saved from itself, and anyone who thinks it should be has no respect for the Israeli people...."

Obama on Israel: A Judgmental Friend and Its Open Enemies

The Know-Nothing President Dons A Yarmulke & Lectures American Jews about His Audacity of Being a "Chickensh*t"

President Obama’s sales pitch for his still unfinished nuclear deal with Iran went to the next level today as he spoke at a Washington, D.C. synagogue to commemorate Jewish Heritage Month. As he always does when speaking before friendly liberal Jewish audiences, the president knows just what buttons to push to win the hearts of his listeners. Flattery about the place of Jews in American history? Check. Appeals to common liberal values and Jewish participation in the civil rights movement? Of course. Support for Israel? I’ve got your back. Opposition to an Iranian nuclear bomb? I’ll never let it happen

Outrage about anti-Semitism? You got it. The result is always the same. Liberal Jews reconfirm their love affair with the president and file away any doubts they have about his predilection for picking fights with the Jewish state and for his pursuit of détente with one of the most anti-Semitic governments in the world. But Barack Obama’s troubling ideas about friendship with Israel should give even his most ardent Jewish fans pause. The problem with Obama is not that he’s an avowed enemy of Israel but that he’s the sort of judgmental friend whose positions are often indistinguishable from those of its foes. 

Obama’s purpose was twofold

One is to rally liberal Jews behind the Iran nuclear deal despite its many shortcomings. The president doesn’t need to win the votes of the majority of the House or the Senate, just one third plus one, the amount to sustain a veto of what might be a strong “no” vote in both bodies. Getting 34 members of the Senate to back a terrible deal whose final form may wind up even weaker than we thought it would be won’t be easy. But so long as a critical mass of liberal Jews are willing to stick with him, it will be easier.

The other is to soften up domestic opposition to a policy shift on Israel in which the president will effectively abandon Israel at the United Nations. Obama’s antipathy for Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu has only increased in the last few months. Netanyahu’s campaign against the Iran deal and his re-election that led to the creation on an even more right-wing government has deepened the president’s resolve to increase pressure on the Jewish state to make concessions to the Palestinians. That leaves open the possibility that the administration will stop vetoing Palestinian efforts to gain recognition for their independence at the UN without first having to make peace with Israel.

But the president’s message to the Jews today was that they shouldn’t regard any of this as a sign of his lack of regard for them or Israel.

The argument for accepting this point of view was rehearsed often enough during the 2012 presidential election. We were told then, as we were today, that Obama likes Israel and won’t let anything bad happen to it. But what was different about today’s speech is that the Iran deal and the open scorn that administration officials have directed at Israel in the last year (chickensh*t) while wrongly blaming Netanyahu for the latest collapse of the peace process gives the lie to many of his re-election promises. Nor is it easy to sell a liberal Jewry that was promised in 2012 that Obama would insist that any Iran deal made them give up their nuclear program on the idea that an agreement that treats allows them to keep that program is kosher.

So to justify this open hostility and policies that seem clearly aimed at downgrading the alliance as he embraces Iran, the president was forced to explain his ideas about the nature of friendship with Israel.

Obama sees himself as a critical friend who prefers the Israel of the early years of the country when it was widely lauded as an example of how ideas of social justice could blend with nationalism to the complex reality of the current day:

I came to know Israel as a young man through these incredible images of kibbutzim, and Moshe Dayan, and Golda Meir, and Israel overcoming incredible odds in the ’67 war.  The notion of pioneers who set out not only to safeguard a nation, but to remake the world.  Not only to make the desert bloom, but to allow their values to flourish; to ensure that the best of Judaism would thrive.  And those values in many ways came to be my own values.  They believed the story of their people gave them a unique perspective among the nations of the world, a unique moral authority and responsibility that comes from having once been a stranger yourself.

That is the sort of sentiment that many liberal Jews would echo. They liked the Israel that was run by the Labor Party of previous generations because it didn’t seem too right-wing or religious and acted as if peace were always just around the corner. A lot of Israelis may share that idea but the problem here is that the real life Israel of 2015 is different. More to the point, Israel changed for a reason. If support there for the peace process collapsed, it was because the Palestinians never accepted Israel’s peace offers and responded instead with terrorism.

Obama’s says he is as judgmental of Israel as he is of the United States, and perhaps that is true. But that judgmental attitude is rooted in the notion that he knows better than both Israel’s government and its people what is good for its security or its survival. And he thinks it’s good for the relationship for these differences to be fully aired.

But if there is anything we have learned in the last six-plus years, it is that the daylight between Washington and Jerusalem that Obama came into office seeking has not advanced the cause of peace one bit. To the contrary, his open arguments with Israel’s government have only made it even less likely that the Palestinians will ever accept the legitimacy of a Jewish state no matter where its borders might be drawn. That has enhanced the chances of violence and conflict in a region where Islamist terror has grown on Obama’s watch. His embrace of an entente with an Iran is just as dangerous.

The point here is not just that his Iran deal is a sham or that his refusal to hold the Palestinians accountable for their refusal to make peace is wrongheaded. It is that Obama’s conception of the relationship with Israel is such that he thinks it empowers him to pressure it to adopt policies that are clearly detrimental to its security despite all the lip service for that concept. He not only thinks Netanyahu is wrong, he thinks his delusional nostalgia for the Israel of the past gives him the right to be a scourge to the Israel of the present; even if that means cutting off arms supplies during war (as he did last summer during the conflict with Hamas), isolating it at the UN or allowing Iran to become, at the very least, a threshold nuclear power.

That’s the sort of friendship that is insufferable to a country that is still beset by enemies that are fueled by the rising tide of anti-Semitism around the world that Obama acknowledged. But in its willingness to excuse or reward the behavior of Israel’s open foes, it downgrades the alliance to a conditional relationship rather than a genuine alliance.

Like any democracy, Israel isn’t perfect, but its government and people need no lessons from Barack Obama about values or which policies best serve its long-term interests. Israel doesn’t need to be saved from itself, and anyone who thinks it should be has no respect for the Israeli people. American Jews who warmly applauded Obama’s speech need to understand that friendship on those terms is not only not much of a friendship but also, if he follows through on his threats, tiptoes perilously toward open hostility.

https://www.commentarymagazine.com/2015/05/22/obama-on-israel-a-judgmental-friend-and-its-open-enemies/

"Pretty much every rabbi we know has used his pulpit or his classroom to tell us what he thinks of our flesh. Of course we’re all traumatized. Our bodies have been on communal display for a very long time. Freundel’s actions triggered some of our worst fears and unleashed a lot of trauma. But it’s not enough to say, well, it wasn’t rape, or it’s only one rabbi.... This is the right time for the entire Jewish community to try to understand what really happens when girls’ and women’s bodies are considered communal property".

Stop Minimizing Barry Freundel's Actions By Saying He is Nonviolent

• May 21, 2015
• by Elana Sztokman
• Barry Freundel

BARRY FREUNDEL

One of the most infuriating responses to the Freundel scandal I‘ve heard is the argument, “But it wasn’t rape.” As if to say, what he did was not such a big deal — after all it’s not categorized as a “violent” crime. In one really frustrating exchange I had, a radio host kept insisting that the requested 17-year prison term was too long because “it wasn’t rape,” he said, “I would rather be watched than penetrated.”

This comment is absurd in that it assumes that victims have a choice about how to be violated and that one is “better” than the other, but more dangerously it belies the very real and powerful impact of this category of so-called “non-violent” sexual assault. This is a type of assault that we need to understand better, because in this digital age, it is likely to increase.

What is the damage that is caused to a victim of voyeurism? That is the question that prosecutors in this case were trying to quantify. The prosecutor’s brief, followed by victim testimony in court, painted a portrait of sexual and spiritual trauma. It included victims who are afraid to get undressed, who are having difficulty resuming their intimate relationships, who have trouble trusting rabbis, who cannot walk into synagogue, who cannot walk into a mikveh, who are questioning their entire Jewish identity and religious practice.

Therapists have known for some time that emotional abuse can be just as hard to heal from – if not harder in some cases – than physical abuse. As a friend of mine, who had been in an emotionally abusive relationship for 12 years before her husband hit her, told me: “When you see a black eye, there is no denying that you have a problem that you need to fix. But when it’s emotional abuse, it’s harder to know and identify. And it’s hard to trust yourself.” The victim of so-called non-violent abuse is trapped in a web of mind games: What did I to deserve this? Why am I feeling so bad? Everything is fine, isn’t it? It’s my fault that I’m feeling this way. Recovering from non-violent abuse does not involve surgeons or bandages or rehabilitation. It requires taking ownership again of your own mind and your own truth. It requires learning to trust yourself and trust the world around you, even when the world proved itself to be unsafe. This is the kind of challenge that, for some victims, can take a lifetime.

This particular crime of secretly taping naked women in the mikveh is particularly hard because it violates women’s very basic fears. In order for a woman to immerse in the mikveh – to stand naked in front of a mikveh attendant who asks personal questions, plucks hairs off her back and watches her get in and out of the water – you have to consciously let go of the voice inside your head telling you that this is a bad idea. The idea that I need to strip and be watched in order to be religious is so counter-intuitive, and in fact such a basic violation of basic dignity – but women who immerse systematically put all those feelings aside and are taught that this is trustworthy practice, that the mikveh is safe. No wonder so many women who were not directly victims of Freundel were demonstrably shaken by this story. It proves all the things that our deepest consciousness may have been telling us all along: that going to the mikveh is probably a really bad idea. Who to trust now? How do we make our way back to our religious lives and identities? What is the recovery like for that particular violation?

Voyeurism is often seen as a kind of victimless crime. But that attitude is a mistake. In the digital age, where we spend so much of our day watching images and connecting in non-physical ways, there is a tremendous need to understand how this kind of non-physical violation can harm people. I think there are clues to this in the issue of sexting, for example, where people share intimate photos of themselves thinking that they are for private use but may end of being viewed by others, sometimes virally. Research demonstrates a connection between depression – even suicide – and the sharing of intimate photos. In one study teenagers involved in sexting were more likely to attempt suicide, and were twice as likely to have depressive symptoms as students who weren't involved in sexting. One psychologist described a sense of disillusionment and a sense of betrayal” when the private image gets shared, which leads to depression and regret. “These girls may act real tough and say this doesn't matter but a lot of them do wind up doing some sort of self harm…cutting, bulimia, burning themselves, pulling out eyelashes or pubic hair, or some other sort of self-injurious behavior like alcohol and drug use.” This psychologist is not describing healing from rape; it is about healing from non-contact, non-physical sexual violation.

Society must acknowledge the kind of emotional and psychological scarring this kind of dynamic can cause. It’s not about physical violence, but rather about a form of sexual abuse in which your body and your sexuality is the object of gaze or conversation among people who did not ask for permission to watch or talk about your body. In fact, the most famous victim of this kind of “non-violent” sexual violation is Monica Lewinsky, who recently gave a riveting TED talk about the impact of having the entire universe discuss your sexual life. At times, Lewinsky couldn’t leave her house, and her mother was afraid that she would do something drastic to herself.

Orthodox women and girls have a particular vulnerability to non-contact sexual violation, and not just because of the mikveh practice. It starts much earlier than that. In the Orthodox community, commentary on girls’ bodies is so commonplace that most day schools have staff members whose job description includes watching girls’ knees and elbows for signs of exposure. The entire Orthodox community is taught that this is okay, that it’s normal religious practice for adults to comment on the sexual allure of girls’ bodies. The community never bothers to ask how this practice affects girls’ relationships with their own bodies, and certainly does not ask how it affects girls’ abilities to know when their sexual privacy is being violated. I think that girls who are forced to endure incessant commentary from adult teachers about their skin and body parts are all victims of sexual voyeurism.

And it’s no wonder that so many women – myself included – found ourselves shaking from the Freundel story. Trembling, actually. Our bodies have been watched and measured by an entire community for our whole lives. Pretty much every rabbi we know has used his pulpit or his classroom to tell us what he thinks of our flesh. Of course we’re all traumatized. Our bodies have been on communal display for a very long time.

Freundel’s actions triggered some of our worst fears and unleashed a lot of trauma. But it’s not enough to say, well, it wasn’t rape, or it’s only one rabbi. These events should be used to instigate a communal conversation about what so-called non-violent sexual assault looks like, and what it does to a person. This is the right time for the entire Jewish community to try to understand what really happens when girls’ and women’s bodies are considered communal property.

 SEE:

http://www.minddisorders.com/Py-Z/Voyeurism.html

http://forward.com/sisterhood/308634/stop-minimizing-freundels-actions-by-saying-he-is-nonviolent/

The Vatican has been at best indifferent and at worst, like today, willfully harmful to the Jewish State....

Op-Ed: The Vatican has Always Tried to Inflict Damage on the Jewish State

A few days ago, before his deplorable meeting with PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas,  the Vatican choose to recognize the “State of Palestine” in a historic move severely criticized by Israel. The Zionist Organization of America rightly condemned it as “the Pope recognizing Jew/Christian-Hating Palestinian State”.

There is nothing new under the sun. Despite the fact that there are many Catholics around the world who share a pro-Israel attitude, the Catholic Church has always been at war with the Jewish State and did everything in its power to prevent its establishment and then to derail it.

After the pro-Jewish Balfour Declaration of 1917, the Vatican’s opposition to Jewish territorial sovereignty grew more entrenched. In the years after the Holocaust, Vatican anti-Zionist policies attempted to block the partition of Palestine at the United Nations, and to secure Jerusalem as an international, sovereign “corpus separatum”, which was meant to prevent the Jews from setting a foot in the Old City of Jerusalem and on the Temple Mount.

Two major cardinals were active in British Palestine in the first twenty years of the 20th century: the British Francis Bourne and the Italian Filippo Giustini. Cardinal Bourne in 1919 sent a letter to the then British government, writing that Zionism had not received the approval of the Vatican, and that if the Jews would “ever again dominate and rule the country, it would be an outrage to Christianity and its Divine founder”.

Cardinal Giustini in that year cabled the Pope from Jerusalem asking for his intervention “to prevent the re-establishment of Zionist Israel in Palestine”. In another letter from Jerusalem, Cardinal Bourne defined Zionism as “contrary to Christian sensitivity and tradition”.

“There was no real reason why the Jews should be back in Palestine. Why should not a nice place be found for them, for instance in South America?”.
Cardinal Pietro Gasparri, who was Secretary of State under two Popes (Benedict XV and his successor Pius XI) said that “the most dangerous threat is the creation of a Jewish State in Palestine”. Gasparri claimed that, “It is better [to have] the internationalization of the Holy Sites rather than see Jerusalem in the hands of the Jews”. Then Latin Patriarch of Jerusalem, Luigi Barlassina, condemned the creation of an “autocratic Zionist domination” in many articles and dispatches to Rome.

And during the ‘30s, while the Jews were under attack in Germany and Italy, Domenico Tardini, the Vatican Undersecretary of State, told a British diplomat in 1938: “There was no real reason why the Jews should be back in Palestine. Why should not a nice place be found for them, for instance in South America?”.

The Vatican not only opposed the Balfour declaration at the League of Nations, it also endorsed the British “White Paper”, which fought the Jews’ right to immigrate to their Holy Land.

Even Archbishop Angelo Roncalli, later to become Pope John XXIII and recognized by some Jews as a friend, wrote that he was “uneasy about the attempts of Jews to reach Palestine, as if they were trying to reconstruct a Jewish kingdom”.

At the peak of the Holocaust, the Vatican’s main thought was to oppose the creation of a Jewish State, which if it would had been established before could have saved many Jews fleeing Hitler. Pope Pius XII made his opposition toward a Jewish homeland known to Franklin Delano Roosevelt. Dated June 22, 1943, the letter sent by Amleto Cicognani, the Pope’s special representative to the US, to Ambassador Myron Taylor, Roosevelt’s emissary to Pius XII, made Pius’s policy against Zionism crystal clear.

On 10 April 1945, while the war was still going on in Europe, Moshè Sharet of the Jewish Agency, was received by Pope Pius XII. He hoped for the “moral support” of the Catholic Church for “our renewed existence in Palestine”. But he did not receive any support; on the contrary the Vatican started a new campaign for “the internationalization of Jerusalem” supported by France, another name used to deprive the Jews of their homeland.

Giorgio Hakim, then Catholic bishop of San Giovanni d’Acri, in 1947 delivered a letter by the Muftì of Jerusalem to the Pope in the Vatican — who had been an ally to Hitler in the “final solution” — against Israel’s projected establishment. Pius XII reacted “very cordially”. In 1948, when Israel was fighting six Arab armies which wanted to annihilate the tiny and fragile Jewish State, the Catholic press and the Vatican officials attempted to tie the Arab Christian refugee crisis into its general critique of “Israeli incursions” and “Jewish imperialism”.

In 1949 the Italian embassy in the Vatican dispatched a message that the Holy See had the opinion that “the Israelis are using against the Arabs the same methods that the Nazis used against them”.

I could go on with this list of Vatican’s attempts to derail the creation and survival of the State of Israel. Emanuel Ringelblum, the great historian of Polish Jewry who was killed during the Holocaust, noted that during the war “when the blood of Jewish students was shed and anti-Semitic savages rioted, the clergy either kept silent or approved these deeds...”.

Those words, pronounced by a hero of the Warsaw ghetto, could be used also today for the Vatican’s indifference to Israel’s mortal siege. And just as it did in World War II, by choosing to recognize the “State of Palestine,” the Vatican made common cause with an evil Palestinian Arab Islamic power in a vain attempt to buy temporary security for their own communities.

But despite these attempts, the Jewish people will grow in its land and city. All the land is theirs. Period. 

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/Articles/Article.aspx/16943#.VVtd51JinzK

"Rav Shraga Feivel Mendlowitz, the founding dean of New York's Mesifta Torah VoDaath, became a vegetarian after the Holocaust/Shoah, simply yet powerfully declaring, "There has been enough killing in the world."

The Planet-Saving Mitzvah: Why Jews Should Consider Vegetarianism 

by Daniel Brook

Judaism has to be a daily spiritual and social practice, not simply a ritualized one, if it is to be meaningful to Jews and relevant to others. Beyond being spiritual, we are called upon to uplift ourselves and to make the world a better place for ourselves, our families, our communities, and others.

In Why Be Jewish? Rabbi David J. Wolpe writes that "Judaism emphasizes good deeds because nothing else can replace them. To love justice and decency, to hate cruelty and to thirst for righteousness-that is the essence of the human task." The human task, therefore, is to be a mensch: a good, kind, and compassionate person.

One of the ways to follow our rich tradition while putting Judaism's highest ideals into daily practice is to choose vegetarianism. In the words of Rabbi Fred Scherlinder Dobb, "I see vegetarianism as a mitzvah"-a sacred duty and good deed.

Maimonides postulated thirteen principles of the Jewish faith, while Rabbi Moses Cordovero wrote about The Thirteen Divine Attributes. Here are thirteen categorical imperatives suggesting why Jews should seriously consider vegetarianism and then move in that direction:

1. Righteousness and Charity.
Even though it is often difficult, we do all have the power to break bad habits and soul search for better ways of living. Becoming vegetarian sets a lifelong course of righteousness. Righteous people regard-and guard-the lives of animals (Proverbs 12:10). According to Albert Einstein, if people aspire toward a righteous life, their "first act of abstinence is from injury to animals." A tzadik, or righteous person, is held in the highest regard because of righteous actions.

The Torah and Talmud are filled with stories of people rewarded for their kindness to animals and punished for their thoughtlessness and cruelty to them. In the Torah, Jacob, Moses, and David were all shepherds who cared for animals. Moses is specifically praised for how he showed compassion toward a lamb, as well as people. Rebecca was acceptable as a wife for Isaac because she showed concern for animals, offering water to thirsty camels in addition to the thirsty person who asked for it. Noah is considered righteous as he cared for the lives of the many animals on the Ark.

In contrast, two hunters mentioned in the Torah, Nimrod and Esau, are represented as villains. Further, according to legend, Rabbi Judah the Prince, compiler and editor of the Mishnah, was punished with years of pain for his insensitivity to the fear of a calf on its way to slaughter (Talmud, Bava Mezia 85a).

In the words of Torah commentary from Rabbi Moses Cassuto, "You are permitted to use the animals and employ them for work, have dominion over them in order to utilize their services for your subsistence, but must not hold their life cheap nor slaughter them for food. Your natural diet is vegetarian." Indeed, all of the promises of sustenance and food for the Israelites in the Torah are vegetarian: vineyards and gardens, wheat and barley, figs and pomegranates, grapes and dates, fruits and seeds, nuts and gum, olives and bread, milk and honey. Even the manna, "like coriander seed" (Numbers 11:7), was vegan. In contrast, when the Israelites in the Sinai desert call out for and consume meat and fish, many suffer and die in a plague and are buried in the Graves of Lust.

Judaism stresses the importance of tzedakah, that we be kind, assist the poor and weak, and share our food with the hungry. Yet about three-fourths of major U.S. crops such as corn, wheat, soybeans, oats, and alfalfa are fed to the billions of animals destined to be slaughtered for meat, while millions of people worldwide die from hunger and its cruel effects each year. This is an avoidable shanda (shame) on the world.

In the Talmud, Rabbi Assi states, "Tzedakah is equivalent to all the other religious precepts combined" (Baba Batra 9a). The way of the tzadik is the way of chesed (loving-kindness), compassion, charity, and righteousness for all living beings. Vegetarianism is a major form of tzedakah, on a daily basis, which can do as much for the giver as for the receiver.

2. Tikkun Olam.
While Judaism teaches that we are to be shomrei adamah, partners in tikkun olam-re-creating, preserving, and healing the world (Talmud, Shabbat 10a)-mass production of meat contributes substantially to greenhouse gas emission and global warming (what Rabbi Arthur Waskow calls "global scorching," and what the United Nations says is "the most serious challenge facing the human race"). Meat production also contributes to air and water pollution; overuse of chemicals and fossil fuels; the deforestation and destruction of tropical rain forests, coral reefs, mangroves, and other habitats; soil erosion; desertification; species extinction; loss of biodiversity; and various other forms of global environmental degradation. Among other things, we need to re-establish and reinvigorate the earth's mayim chayim-its living waters.

"The human appetite for animal flesh is," according to the editors of the science-based environmental magazine World Watch (July/August 2004), "a driving force behind virtually every major category of environmental damage now threatening the human future-deforestation, erosion, fresh water scarcity, air and water pollution, climate change, biodiversity loss, social injustice, the destabilization of communities, and the spread of disease."

In the words of Isaac Bashevis Singer, the great Yiddish writer and winner of the Nobel Prize for Literature: "This is my protest against the conduct of the world. To be a vegetarian is to disagree-to disagree with the course of things today. Starvation, world hunger, cruelty, waste, wars-we must make a statement against these things. Vegetarianism is my statement and I think it's a strong one."

3. Conservation of Resources.
Judaism teaches bal tashchit (concern for the environment, based on Deuteronomy 20:19-20), that we should not waste or unnecessarily destroy anything of value (in other words, engage in conservation), and that we should not use more than what is necessary to accomplish a purpose (in other words, prioritize efficiency). Yet, in contrast to these Jewish values, meat production requires the very wasteful use of land, topsoil, water, fossil fuels and other forms of energy, labor, grain, and other vital resources, in addition to various toxic chemicals, antibiotics, and hormones. For example, it can require approximately seventy-eight calories of non-renewable fossil fuel for each calorie of protein obtained from factory-farmed beef, but only two calories of fossil fuel to produce a calorie of protein from soybeans. Thousands of gallons of fresh water are wasted merely to produce a single pound of beef.

"This is the way of pious and elevated people," wrote thirteenth-century Rabbi Aaron HaLevi of Barcelona. "They will not waste even a mustard seed, and they are distressed at every ruination and spoilage they see, and if they are able to save, they will save anything from destruction with all of their power." The meat industry is exceptionally wasteful, inefficient, costly, and destructive, even while better alternatives are plentiful, easily obtainable, and healthier for consumers, workers, animals, and our environment.

4. Health and Safety.
Health and the protection of life are repeatedly emphasized, and even prioritized, in Jewish teachings. While Judaism teaches that we should be very careful about sh'mirat haguf (preserving our bodies and health), and pekuach nefesh (protecting our lives at almost any cost), numerous scientific studies have linked animal-based diets directly to heart disease and heart attacks (the number-one cause of death in the United States), various forms of cancer (the number-two cause of death), stroke (the number-three cause of death), high blood pressure, obesity, diabetes, osteoporosis, asthma, atherosclerosis, aneurysms, rheumatoid arthritis, impotence, endometriosis, gallstones, gout, Alzheimer's, and other ailments. About two-thirds of diseases in the United States are diet-related-and vegetarians are much less afflicted. Note that even meat-eating doctors almost always recommend eating less meat, not more, while advocating the consumption of more fresh fruit, vegetables, beans, and whole grains for better health.

Further, since more than half of all antibiotics in the United States are given to livestock (plus immense amounts of chemicals, steroids, hormones, and other drugs), resistant bacteria are increasing at an alarming rate, creating untreatable superbugs, like MRSA, that kill tens of thousands of people per year in the United States alone. And don't forget mad cow disease, bird flu, foot and mouth disease, E. coli, salmonella, and food poisoning. "If there were no poultry industry," concludes Neal Barnard, M.D., "there would be no epidemics of bird flu." And if there were no cow industry, there would be no E. coli outbreaks.

Packaged meat has been discovered to be injected with carbon monoxide to keep it looking red, even when it's rancid. Fish often contain mercury, arsenic, lead, cadmium and toxic POPs, including PCBs, DDT, and dioxin, which can't be removed from the fish and which bioaccumulate in consumers' bodies.

The meat industry is unhealthy and unsafe. A vegetarian diet (one that does not include any animals) or a vegan diet (a vegetarian diet that does not include any animal products at all, including meat, dairy, and eggs) can help prevent, and sometimes reverse, many of these health- and life-threatening conditions.

Vegetarianism also reduces the need for medical attention, medicine, and drugs throughout one's life. As Albert Einstein said, "Nothing will benefit health and increase the chances for survival of life on Earth as the evolution to a vegetarian diet." It's time for us to evolve toward better personal and planetary health.

5. Compassion.
As fifteenth-century Rabbi Joseph Albo writes, "In the killing of animals, there is cruelty." Centuries earlier, Maimonides, both rabbi and physician, wrote that "There is no difference between the pain of humans and the pain of other animals." It is as simple as that. Compassion is not a new concept, yet it has to be continually renewed. The Sages of the Talmud (Beitza 32b) remark that "Jews are rachmanin b'nei rachmanin [compassionate children of compassionate ancestors], and one who is not compassionate cannot truly be a descendant of our father Abraham."

While Judaism forbids tsa'ar ba'alei chayim (inflicting unnecessary pain on animals), and encourages people to be compassionate, most farm animals-including most of those certified organic or "free range," as well as most animals raised for kosher and halal consumers-are raised on factory farms where they suffer in cramped, confined, and cruel places, and are often drugged, mutilated, burned, tortured, and denied fresh air, water, sunlight, exercise, and any enjoyment of life, whether on Shabbat or any other day, before they are slaughtered on dis-assembly lines.

"Being compassionate toward animal life is not just a matter of being responsible for animal life," writes Rabbi David Rosen, former Chief Rabbi of Ireland, "which we have very clearly laid down in the Torah, expounded by our sages, but is a matter of imbuing ourselves with the right kind of values. If we are insensitive toward animal life, then we desensitize ourselves as human beings. And therefore a truly sensitive human being, compassionate toward other human beings, should be compassionate toward animals." And as Rabbi Rami Shapiro says, "Vegetarianism is not simply a dietary ideal. It is a practice designed to enhance your capacity for compassion." Indeed, Rabbi Shlomo Riskin, the Chief Rabbi of Efrat in Israel, states that "the dietary laws are intended to teach us compassion and lead us gently [back] to vegetarianism."

Just as we were strangers in Egypt and freed from our slavery, animals need to be freed from their narrow confines of slavery, suffering, torture, and untimely death, in order to feed the whole world with the spirit of compassion, love, life, and liberation. Animals should not have to suffer and die for our selfish pleasure. Consonant with the ethics of Judaism, vegetarianism offers compassion, respects the stranger, reduces suffering, and saves lives every day.

Again, Albert Einstein offers his wisdom: "Our task must be to free ourselves by widening our circle of compassion to embrace all living creatures and the whole of nature." Vegetarianism is an easy and effective way of putting one's highest values into action, practicing compassion with every meal, thereby reducing pain, suffering, and death for those who can't speak for or defend themselves.

6. Atonement.
 Thirteen represents the number of compassionate traits attributed to YHVH (HaShem) as recounted in the covenant with Moses that is recited on Yom Kippur, the Day of Atonement, which is the holiest day in the Jewish calendar. On this day, among other things, it is traditional to fast and to refrain from wearing leather shoes, as we are to be as pure as possible while asking for forgiveness and mercy. While fasting on Yom Kippur, however, we read the Prophet Isaiah, who reminds us that the true purpose of our fast should be to sensitize us to the needs of the hungry and the oppressed, so that we will work to end oppression and "share thy bread with the hungry" (Isaiah 58:6-7). Yet, we deny bread to the hungry by feeding so much grain to livestock animals to be killed and consumed as meat. We cannot atone while continuing to engage in the behavior for which we want to atone.

Other animals should not have to suffer and die for our meals and clothes. "Living creatures possess a soul and a certain spiritual superiority," writes the great thirteenth-century commentator Nachmanides, "which in this respect make them similar to those who possess intellect, and they have the power of affecting their own welfare and their food, and they flee from pain and death." If we are sincere in seeking atonement or at-one-ment, we cannot want for ourselves what we do not grant to others. Atonement through teshuvah (turning or repentance) can be a way for us to get back to who we really are and who we really want to be. If we truly want to atone and have compassion for ourselves, and want to emulate the compassion of the Divine, it is imperative that we extend compassion to others. Vegetarianism, and especially veganism, is a much purer form of diet-one without violence, killing, or the spilling of blood.

7. Knowledge and Spirituality.
Judaism often emphasizes the interplay between thinking and doing, highlighting the vital role of kavanah (spiritual intention and concentration) as a precondition for action. That is a motivation behind the blessings, of which there is none specifically for meat-unlike for grains, fruits, and vegetables. According to Jewish tradition, meat-eating was permitted, with elaborate restrictions, after the Flood of Noah as a temporary concession to the human weakness of those with a "lust for meat." It is also part of our teaching, from Hillel's disagreement with Shamai over the lighting of the Chanukah menorah recounted in the Talmud, that ma'alin bakodesh v'ayn moridim: in sacred matters we must increase in holiness rather than decrease. We can increase our holiness by making our consumption more holy.

For those who erroneously think it might be a mitzvah to eat meat during holy days, it is a mitzvah haba'ah al y'dei aveirah, a mitzvah that derives from a sin; it is the fruit of a poisonous tree, and therefore no mitzvah at all. Citing Jewish law, Rabbi Adam Frank says, "The end user of a product knowingly derived by cruel means is a participant in the cruelty." Rabbi Frank adds: "Modern, secular thinking allows for sentient creatures to be treated like inanimate objects, but Jewish tradition does not.... My decision to abstain from the consumption of animal products is an expression of my adherence to Jewish law, and it expresses my disapproval and disdain for the cruel practices of the industry."

Our sage Rabbi Joseph Albo chimes in, "Aside from the cruelty, rage, and fury in killing animals, and the fact that it teaches human beings the bad trait of shedding blood for naught; eating the flesh even of select animals will yet give rise to a mean and insensitive soul." Neither scripture, nor science, nor our long and proud tradition commands or requires Jews or others to consume meat; quite the contrary.

In our creation story, the term nefesh chayah, living being or living soul, is applied to people and animals. Eating meat can be considered a Chilul HaShem, a desecration of YHVH's name, due to the destruction of life and spirit entailed, while eating plants could be considered a Kiddush HaShem, a blessing and sanctification of YHVH's name-however you conceive of YHVH-due to the protection of health and life of both humans and non-human animals. "When you slaughter a creature," Yiddish author and Nobel Prize winner Isaac Bashevis Singer said, "you slaughter God."

Our sages in the Talmud (Chulin 84a) determined that "The Torah teaches a lesson in moral conduct, that people shall not eat meat unless they have a special craving for it ... and [then] shall eat it only occasionally and sparingly." The first Ashkenazi Chief Rabbi of pre-state Israel, Rabbi Abraham Isaac Kook, in A View of Vegetarianism and Peace, regarded the reluctant permission for some to eat a small amount of meat as a concealed reproach and an implied rebuke.

According to Rabbi David Rosen, former Chief Rabbi of Ireland, who is an authority on Halachah (Jewish law), "meat has become halachically unacceptable" and vegetarianism is now a "halachic imperative." As Rabbi Bonnie Koppell states, "There is no question that the Torah's ideal is vegetarianism."

Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai hid in a cave with his son Rabbi Eleazar for thirteen years after being condemned to death by the Roman conquerors for speaking out against them, following the destruction of the Second Temple and the murders of Rabbi Akiva (50-135 CE) and many of his students. They were sustained by their cave, a nearby carob tree, a local stream, and their studies of the Torah. Rabbi Shimon taught that our world and the unseen "higher" worlds are unified as manifestations of the Divine Soul, and that the meaning of life is to reunify Creation with the source of Creation.

Further, it is believed by Maimonides, Rav Kook, and other Chief Rabbis and Torah scholars that in the messianic age of the Third Temple, when "the wolf shall dwell with the lamb ... and the lion shall eat straw like the ox" (Isaiah 11:6-7), Temple sacrifices as well as all other food will be vegetarian. Vegetarians live closer to the messianic age by creating it in the present, while also hastening it for the world. "Vegetarianism is a response to today's world," Rabbi Zalman Schachter-Shalomi declares. "Meat-eating, like polygamy, fit into an earlier stage of human history." While polygamy is acceptable in the Torah, it was deemed to be unacceptable 1,000 years ago. Likewise, meat will eventually be deemed as unfit and unacceptable, thereby relegated to a primitive past-yet we can live the ideal now, creating both inner and outer peace and justice.
As Rabbi Rami Shapiro reminds us, "Vegetarianism is central to holy living as Judaism has understood it for thousands of years."

8. Divinity.
The scholar and mystic Rabbi Moses Cordovero (1522-1570 CE) wrote a manual on ethics titled The Thirteen Divine Attributes. He included meditation exercises involving the visualization of one's body as the Tree of Life, while focusing on a particular aspect of the Tree, or body. The meat industry is responsible for a tremendous amount of deforestation, cutting down, burning, and clearing millions of trees each day, destroying about an acre of Amazon Rainforest every second, thereby also displacing or killing the people, animals, and plants living there.

The meat industry is making mincemeat out of the rainforests, which are often referred to as "the lungs of the planet," essentially converting this amazing life-sustaining resource into carbon dioxide and cholesterol, significantly contributing to both planetary and personal ill-health. In a miracle of continuing co-evolutionary development, as Rabbi Arthur Waskow discusses, we breathe in the oxygen that trees breathe out, while we breathe out the carbon dioxide that trees breathe in. We need each other and breathe each other into continued existence, yet the production and consumption of meat is killing the trees of life, ignoring both science and Torah.

A spiritual view of the world recognizes the awesome power and beauty of nature, while it abhors destruction and desecration, embracing what Rabbi Abraham Joshua Heschel described as "radical amazement" in the presence of the divine. The livestock industry is the antithesis of this view. As Rabbi Adam Frank says, "The environmental destruction caused by the animal-agriculture industry, by the amount of dung produced, by the amount of sewage that gets poured into our waterways and our systems [is] ... damaging our world." He adds that this environmental destruction violates "the Jewish mandate to protect and observe and care for the Earth.... We are ignoring things that are essential and that are critical to the character of Judaism, in order to meet our selfish desires and wants." It is impossible to fully elevate ourselves if we are debasing our bodies, our minds, our spirits, and our world by spilling the blood of other beings.

9. Peace and Justice.
Judaism repeatedly stresses that we must always seek and pursue shalom v'tzedek (peace and justice) and that moral degradation and violence result from unjust conditions. Animal-centered diets waste valuable resources and desensitize us to violence. Such diets help to perpetuate the widespread poverty, hunger, environmental destruction, and despair that lead to mass suffering, social insecurity, ethnic hostilities, violence, genocide, and war.

Our sages note that the Hebrew words for bread (lechem) and for war (milchamah) come from the same root and are therefore related, since shortages of food and instances of wars are correlated, with each contributing to the other.

To resolve these most important issues, we are told to "seek peace and pursue it" (Psalm 34:14). We are told, "justice, justice shall you pursue" (Deuteronomy 16:20), and we are instructed that we "shall not kill [murder]" (Sixth Commandment). We are further told to "love peace, pursue peace, love all creatures" (Hillel), that "he who kills an ox is as if he slew a person" (Isaiah 66:3), and that "one who destroys a single life is considered to have destroyed an entire world, and one who saves a single life is considered to have saved an entire world" (Sanhedrin 4:5).

According to Rabbi Adam Frank: "Judaism does not make the claim of moral superiority, rather, it makes the demand for responsibility of actions. Judaism starts from a place of concern for justice and tries to protect all members of community, both local and global, from abuses of power and privilege." The mitzvah of vegetarianism promotes this responsibility.

10. Hunger.
Hunger is a huge and growing concern in the United States, Israel, and through much of the world. Article 25 of the United Nations' Universal Declaration of Human Rights includes food as a human right. While millions of people annually die from overconsumption, particularly consumption of fat and cholesterol, millions of excluded people annually die from underconsumption-from starvation and hunger-related diseases. Although the world produces more than enough food to feed all its people, the inequality of wealth and power, along with the inefficiency of land use and food distribution, creates conditions that lead to scarcity, chronic hunger, malnutrition, starvation, environmental degradation, and ethnic violence.

About one billion poor people chronically suffer from hunger, malnutrition, and their debilitating effects. Tens of thousands of them, disproportionately children, consequently die each day, about one every few seconds, while millions of affluent people get sick and die from the ill effects of overeating and overconsumption, primarily of animal products. In the words of rock star Chrissie Hynde, "Global hunger could be directly attributed to meat-eating."

World hunger is neither necessary, nor automatic, nor inevitable. John Cavanagh and Jerry Mander point out that "when those who have the money to enjoy meat-rich diets cause the market to redirect available supplies of grain away from the tables of people who cannot pay in order to feed livestock to provide meat to those who can, they contribute to the dynamics of hunger."

Vegetarianism creates conditions that are more fair and just, more efficient and sustainable, and more healthy, thereby potentially allowing more people to be fed, rather than using land, grain, water, labor, energy, and other resources to inefficiently and immorally produce food to be fed to animals that are later killed and fed to a smaller number of more affluent people.

11. Keeping Kosher.
The practice of kashrut, or keeping kosher, is the specific way of applying Jewish teachings and Jewish values to our consumption of food. Besides being life-sustaining, satisfying, and often joyous, eating is a holy act. And as Rabbi Pinchas Peli writes in Torah Today, "The laws of kashrut come to teach us that a Jew's first preference should be a vegetarian meal." Further, Rabbi Robert Gordis states, "Vegetarianism offers an ideal mode for preserving the religious and ethical values which kashrut was designed to concretize in human life." Indeed, as Rabbi Daniel Jezer says, "A higher form of being kosher is vegetarianism."

Vegetarianism, as a form of eco-kashrut, is an easy and effective way to keep kosher, to be more sustainable, to be more healthy, and to be more holy. In this sense, all meat is treyf, unkosher and unfit for human consumption. Rabbi Jonathan Sacks, chief rabbi of the United Hebrew Congregations of the Commonwealth, commented that "I'm a vegetarian and I stay milchik all the time." Similarly, Rabbi Shear Yashuv Cohen, Ashkenazi Chief Rabbi of Haifa, Israel, said, "If you don't eat meat, you are certainly kosher, and I believe that is what we should tell our fellow rabbis."

12. Fighting Fascism.
Historically, and unfortunately still presently, Jews have been common targets of authoritarian, fascist, and genocidal policies and actions, whatever their names and places. Jewish ethics, Jewish values, and even the method of the Talmud itself, respects and protects minority opinions and minority groups. "Just as the Nazis dehumanized the Jews in their propaganda and in the atrocities they committed," writes Jay Levine, M.D., "the apologists for meat consumption and the exploitation of animals have stereotyped and degraded the animal kingdom for their own purposes, declaring animals to be devoid of cognitive functioning and even of pain."

It is important to note that "the Nazis explicitly structured their industrial destruction of the Jews [and other peoples] on the model of animal slaughter," according to Rabbi Hillel Norry. "This is not to compare the suffering of animals and humans, but shows that the way we treat animals is similar to the way the Nazis treated us."

Rav Shraga Feivel Mendlowitz, the founding dean of New York's Mesifta Torah VoDaath, became a vegetarian after the Holocaust/Shoah, simply yet powerfully declaring, "There has been enough killing in the world."

Isaac Bashevis Singer powerfully declares, "In relation to them, all people are Nazis; for the animals it is an eternal Treblinka." The livestock industry is a chronic and widespread form of enslavement and torture, while vegetarianism is a powerful way of actively yet nonviolently opposing the daily and brutal outrage of meat production and consumption.

13. Concern for the Community.
Concern for the Jewish community (Klal Yisrael), as well as the wider community (Klal Ha'Olam), is integral to Jewish ethics and requires personal and communal responsibility.

Israel, and the rest of the Middle East, is especially threatened by global warming, as indicated by a 2007 report from the Israel Union for Environmental Defense: there will be an increase in the frequency, intensity and duration of heat waves; the number of rainy days will drop and annual rainfall may decrease by up to 30 percent; an expected rise in the Mediterranean Sea will cause major flooding of low-lying and coastal areas; Israel's flora and fauna, already widely affected by human activities, are especially vulnerable to the effects of major climate changes; and the potential economic cost to Israel due to global warming effects has been estimated to go as high as $33 billion annually.

According to Friends of the Earth Middle East's report, "Climate Change: A New Threat to Middle East Security," climate change is likely to act as a "threat multiplier" in the Middle East. The report adds that climate change will exacerbate "water scarcity and tensions over water within and between nations." Furthermore, "Water shortages and rising sea levels could lead to mass migration in the region. Economic unrest across the region, due to a decline in agricultural production from climate impacts on water resources, also could lead to greater political unrest ... thereby affecting internal and cross-border relations."

Conclusions
Vegetarianism helps us to preserve and protect our health, environment, culture, community, society, and spirit l'dor vador, from generation to generation. Ecclesiastes 3:19, which is attributed to King Solomon, says: "The fate of men and the fate of animals, they have one and the same fate. As one dies, so does the other, and they all have the same spirit." What we do to animals and the environment, therefore, we are ultimately doing to ourselves and our communities. We are fouling our own nest.

Like Leo Baeck, I am struck with "ethical optimism." We can do better.

Rav Kook, the first Chief Rabbi of pre-state Israel, famously wrote "hayashan yitchadesh, v'hechadash yitkadesh, the old shall be made new, and the new shall be made holy." A shift toward vegetarianism can also be a major factor in the rededication, revitalization, and renewal of Judaism, as it would further demonstrate that Jewish values are not only relevant but essential to everyday personal life, communal development, and global survival.

If you want to make a powerful and positive difference and have more meaning in your life, living by Judaism's highest ideals, participating in a lifelong, life-affirming spiritual process, then vegetarianism is the best gift you could give yourself, your family, our community, and our world. To paraphrase Hillel: Do not do unto other beings what would be hateful if done to you. All the rest is dessert. Now go and eat!

Daniel Brook, a vegetarian since working on Kibbutz Sa'ar in Israel, is an author, speaker, and instructor of sociology at San Jose State University. He welcomes comments via vegnik@gmail.com.