Kol Sasson
Ravchaz
Ms. Keleigh Wine (Chana Kayla bat Avraham v'Sarah) of Atlanta, Georgia. IY'H,
we will be wed in Atlanta in June, after which we will make our home here in
Baltimore.
Charles Arian
Baltimore
Dan Kimmel
mos...@mm.huji.ac.il
Mazal Tov. May the zivug be "oleh yafeh" - be propitious - and may
merit to create a bayit ne'eman b'Yisrael.
Moshe Schorr
It is a tremendous Mitzvah to always be happy! - Reb Nachman of Breslov
May Eliyahu Chayim ben Sarah Henna (Eliot Shimoff) have a refuah Shlaima.
Piska Tova.
Adelle Stavis
Mazel Tov!!!!
Adelle Stavis
Eliyahu
Susan Cohen
Ravchaz wrote:
MAZEL TOV! Couldn't be happier!
Susan
Art Werschulz
Mazal tov!! Start the music and dancing!!
--
Art Werschulz (8-{)} "Metaphors be with you." -- bumper sticker
GCS/M (GAT): d? -p+ c++ l u+(-) e--- m* s n+ h f g+ w+ t++ r- y?
Internet: a...@cs.columbia.edu<a href="http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~agw/">WWW</a>
ATTnet: Columbia U. (212) 939-7061, Fordham U. (212) 636-6325
GAN EDEN WINES
BS"D
Mazel Tov!!
Craig Winchell
Dr. Shlomo Argamon (Engelson)
MAZAL TOV!!!
`Invei hagefen be`invei hagefen...
-Shlomo-
Jonathan J. Baker
>MAZAL TOV!!!
Ditto!
>`Invei hagefen be`invei hagefen...
...va'anachnu besheim Hashem nishteh?
Anyway, may you build a house worthy of the Ne'eman Commission in Israel.
What? That isn't what "bayit ne'eman beyisrael" means? And here I
thought that Chalav Yisrael was shipped daily by refrigerated plane from
Yisroel Eretz Kodsheinu.
At any rate, may you enjoy many years of mutual happiness, learning and
growth.
--
Jonathan Baker | Ksivechsimetoiveh!
jjb...@panix.com | (It's a contraction, like Shkoiech, or Brshmo)
Webpage: <http://www.panix.com/~jjbaker/>
bac...@vms.huji.ac.il
Mazal Tov ! May you build a *bayit neeman b'yisrael* !
Josh
>
> Charles Arian
> Baltimore
Robert
Mazel Tov!
Praised are you, the Omnipresent, who creates joy and gladness, bride and
groom, pleasure, song, delight, laughter, love and harmony, and peace and
companionship. Let the mountains of Israel dance! Let the gates of Jerusalem
ring with the sounds of joy, gladness and happiness, and with the jubilant
voices of those joined in marriage under the huppah, the happy shouts of
their friends and companions in feasting and singing. Praised are you, Lord,
who lets the bride and groom rejoice together. (From the Sheva Berachot)
Shalom,
Robert
Abe Kohen
Mazal Tov,
Zeh Kaylee v'anveichu.
Abe
Susan S
rav...@aol.com (Ravchaz):
Wonderful news. Mazel Tov!
Susan Silberstein
Joel Shurkin
<rav...@aol.com> wrote:
Sounds like another excuse for a dinner. Mazel tov.
j
--
"Those are my principles. If you don't like them, I have others."
Grouch Marx
Joel Shurkin
Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions
Baltimore
toichen
Mazel tov.
I would be curious to know if you are going to keep taharas
hamishpocha, i.e. 5 + 7 days combined with the requisite checkings,
followed by a dip in a kosher mikveh.
toichen
Susan Cohen
toichen wrote:
> Mazel tov.
> I would be curious to know if you are going to keep taharas
> hamishpocha, i.e. 5 + 7 days combined with the requisite checkings,
> followed by a dip in a kosher mikveh.
And why on earth would you be curious about this???
Either he's going to do it, or he's not; if he is, there's no point in your asking.
And if he's not, nothing you say is going to change it & not only is there also no point to your
asking, *&* will only cause rancor & resentment.
Susan
Talqcom
>From: Susan Cohen fla...@hers.com
>Date: 9/22/2002 9:00 PM Eastern Standard Time
>And why on earth would you be curious about this???
>Either he's going to do it, or he's not; if he is, there's no point in your
>asking.
So his curiosity, to have a point, must be in line with your assumptions and
weltanschaung.
Would it help to know that toichen is sympathetic to democratic ideologies?
Ray
Abe Kohen
"Susan Cohen" <fla...@hers.com> wrote in message
news:3D8E6778...@hers.com...
Perhaps he wants to join the Mrs. in the mikve and make sure there is no
hatzitza?
Abe
Jess Olson
Good call, Susan.
It is also asur, unless it is for some kind of really pressing halakhic
need (the categories of which are hard for me to imagine) to even *ask* a
person questions in this realm. Were this fellow to answer, I think
it would constitute a breech of tsniyus. I suspect that "for the sake of
chatting on a newsgroup" doesn't fall into the category of a pressing
halakhic need.
Toichen might as well take off the "mazel tov" at the beginning of each of
his posts on this issue; he seems obviously to have a problem with this
fellow's conversion and is trying to trip him up. It's certainly
none of his business at any rate, unless Toichen happens to be one of the
rabbeim on this guy's beys din (which obviously he is not). My advice to
this person would be not to answer Toichen's questions.
JO
>
> Susan
>
Charles Vitez
Charles Vitez
"Ravchaz" <rav...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20020919075150...@mb-dh.aol.com...
Susan Cohen
Talqcom wrote:
> >Subject: Re: Kol Sasson
> >From: Susan Cohen fla...@hers.com
> >Date: 9/22/2002 9:00 PM Eastern Standard Time
>
> >And why on earth would you be curious about this???
> >Either he's going to do it, or he's not; if he is, there's no point in your
> >asking.
>
> So his curiosity, to have a point, must be in line with your assumptions and
> weltanschaung.
This is an extreme leap which I will not bother to answer.
> Would it help to know that toichen is sympathetic to democratic ideologies?
Would it help to know that I find that term ill-applied?
Susan
>
>
> Ray
Susan Cohen
Jess Olson wrote:
> On Mon, 23 Sep 2002, Susan Cohen wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > toichen wrote:
> >
> > > Mazel tov.
> > > I would be curious to know if you are going to keep taharas
> > > hamishpocha, i.e. 5 + 7 days combined with the requisite checkings,
> > > followed by a dip in a kosher mikveh.
> >
> > And why on earth would you be curious about this???
> > Either he's going to do it, or he's not; if he is, there's no point in your asking.
> > And if he's not, nothing you say is going to change it & not only is there also no point to your
> > asking, *&* will only cause rancor & resentment.
>
> Good call, Susan.
>
> It is also asur, unless it is for some kind of really pressing halakhic
> need (the categories of which are hard for me to imagine) to even *ask* a
> person questions in this realm. Were this fellow to answer, I think
> it would constitute a breech of tsniyus. I suspect that "for the sake of
> chatting on a newsgroup" doesn't fall into the category of a pressing
> halakhic need.
You stated this *far* better than I could have, thank you.
Susan
CW
Mazel tov! May you know only health, prosperity, and children that make
you proud.
CW
Harry Weiss
Harry Weiss
Your really have an overbundance of chutzpah. You can question a group's
requiring or not requiring an observance, but what right to you have to
ask about a person's individual observance, especially this one.
Do you hang out at the Mikvah at night, checking who is going?
toichen
> On Mon, 23 Sep 2002, Susan Cohen wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > toichen wrote:
> >
> > > Mazel tov.
> > > I would be curious to know if you are going to keep taharas
> > > hamishpocha, i.e. 5 + 7 days combined with the requisite checkings,
> > > followed by a dip in a kosher mikveh.
> >
> > And why on earth would you be curious about this???
> > Either he's going to do it, or he's not; if he is, there's no point in your asking.
> > And if he's not, nothing you say is going to change it & not only is there also no point to your
> > asking, *&* will only cause rancor & resentment.
>
> Good call, Susan.
>
> It is also asur, unless it is for some kind of really pressing halakhic
> need (the categories of which are hard for me to imagine) to even *ask* a
> person questions in this realm.
Source? The only isur I am aware of, is to ask someone when they are
going to mikveh, not, if they go to mikve.
> Were this fellow to answer, I think
> it would constitute a breech of tsniyus. I suspect that "for the sake of
> chatting on a newsgroup" doesn't fall into the category of a pressing
> halakhic need.
>
> Toichen might as well take off the "mazel tov" at the beginning of each of
> his posts on this issue; he seems obviously to have a problem with this
> fellow's conversion
So far as I am aware, Rachvaz was born a Jew. You are confusing him
with someone else.
toichen
Jess Olson
> Jess Olson <j...@stanford.edu> wrote in message news:<Pine.LNX.4.44.020923...@cardinal5.Stanford.EDU>...
> > On Mon, 23 Sep 2002, Susan Cohen wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > toichen wrote:
> > >
> > > > Mazel tov.
> > > > I would be curious to know if you are going to keep taharas
> > > > hamishpocha, i.e. 5 + 7 days combined with the requisite checkings,
> > > > followed by a dip in a kosher mikveh.
> > >
> > > And why on earth would you be curious about this???
> > > Either he's going to do it, or he's not; if he is, there's no point in your asking.
> > > And if he's not, nothing you say is going to change it & not only is there also no point to your
> > > asking, *&* will only cause rancor & resentment.
> >
> > Good call, Susan.
> >
> > It is also asur, unless it is for some kind of really pressing halakhic
> > need (the categories of which are hard for me to imagine) to even *ask* a
> > person questions in this realm.
>
> Source? The only isur I am aware of, is to ask someone when they are
> going to mikveh, not, if they go to mikve.
Well, I don't know about you, but it was pretty well drilled into me
during my chasan tutoring that the area of taharos mishpacha was subject
to the most stringent preservation of privacy possible. I was taught that
it is, if not black-and-white law, at least extremely frowned upon to ask
others (again, unless there is some kind of pressing halakhic need) about
these issues. It isn't something you just casually (or in this case,
polemically) ask another person about. At the very least, in this case, I
would say that this is a case of dun l'kaf z'chus.
Just admit it: it really reveals a tremendous lack of derekh erets to ask
someone these questions if you aren't directly interested or affected in
some way (which, short of being this guy's wife, I don't know how you
could be). I'd suggest rather than defending your question, you refrain
from asking it.
JO
toichen
> >Subject: Re: Kol Sasson
> >From: Susan Cohen fla...@hers.com
> >Date: 9/22/2002 9:00 PM Eastern Standard Time
>
> >And why on earth would you be curious about this???
> >Either he's going to do it, or he's not; if he is, there's no point in your
> >asking.
Well, if he's not going to keep taharat hamishpocha, then he would be
better off not getting married and obviously no mazel tov is in place.
I know that some might say it's downright cruel to talk like this, and
I thought long and hard before posting the original post, but I
concluded that a point made is better than a point ignored.
toichen
Jess Olson
And you concluded incorrectly. It's none of your business whatsoever. Did
someone appoint you to the s.c.j.m. tsniyus patrol? It isn't cruel per se,
it is rude, it is presumptuous, it shows, as I mentioned before, a
tremendous lack of derekh erets.
JO
> toichen
>
Harry Weiss
Who appointed you ThM cop for the world? You are way out of line. Check
with your Rabbi if you are allowed to pose such a question.
Adelle Stavis
"toichen" <toi...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:dd1c0ee8.02092...@posting.google.com...
Your hesitation before sending your post was you common sense and better
self trying to tell you that you are being asinine. And so far beyond rude
that I can't even find the right words.
..
I thought we were supposed to assume the best of people? I thought we were
supposed to set examples for others so that they would be drawn to observing
mitzvot, rather than denounce them if they don't?
Celebrating a simcha is it's own mitzvah. Being joyous for the bride and
groom is it's own mitzvah. To specifically refuse to even offer
congratulations until you find out whether the couple will adhere to a
particular level of observance is ludicrous, the specific repudiation of
doing a mitzvah. I'm astounded by the hypocrisy. How dare you make such a
judgement?!!!!! Especially when you have to breach tsnius/modesty to find
out.
Anytime a Jew marries and has an opportunity to rejoice, and possibly then
produce more Jews, should be a joyous occasion to *all* Jews.
The better point to make is that while we each may not observe all 613
mitzvot, we should create the kind of environment that make people want to
observe more mitzvot. You have done the opposite. You have alienated people,
and shown yourself to be priggish and small minded.
Adelle Stavis
Eliyahu
When a couple in your real-life community that you don't know very well (or
have never met before) makes an announcement of their impending marriage, do
you also make such a query of them? Perhaps you could come up with a
detailed checklist, inquring about their planned bedroom habits, use of the
mikvah, kosher arrangements and child-rearing plans before wishing them
well... And yes, I think it's incredibly rude to even have asked this.
Eliyahu
Susan Cohen
Adelle Stavis wrote:
> The better point to make is that while we each may not observe all 613
> mitzvot, we should create the kind of environment that make people want to
> observe more mitzvot.
KOL HAKAVOD!!
Susan
toichen
> "toichen" <toi...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
> news:dd1c0ee8.02092...@posting.google.com...
> > tal...@aol.com (Talqcom) wrote in message
> news:<20020922210338...@mb-mn.aol.com>...
> > > >Subject: Re: Kol Sasson
> > > >From: Susan Cohen fla...@hers.com
> > > >Date: 9/22/2002 9:00 PM Eastern Standard Time
>
> > > >And why on earth would you be curious about this???
> > > >Either he's going to do it, or he's not; if he is, there's no point in
> your
> > > >asking.
> >
> > Well, if he's not going to keep taharat hamishpocha, then he would be
> > better off not getting married and obviously no mazel tov is in place.
> > I know that some might say it's downright cruel to talk like this, and
> > I thought long and hard before posting the original post, but I
> > concluded that a point made is better than a point ignored.
> > toichen
>
> Your hesitation before sending your post was you common sense and better
> self trying to tell you that you are being asinine. And so far beyond rude
> that I can't even find the right words.
> ..
> I thought we were supposed to assume the best of people? I thought we were
> supposed to set examples for others so that they would be drawn to observing
> mitzvot, rather than denounce them if they don't?
Did I denounce him? I asked a question, no more and no less. Since
many C Jews do not keep ThM, I think the question as an intellectual
exercise was legitimate.
> Celebrating a simcha is it's own mitzvah. Being joyous for the bride and
> groom is it's own mitzvah.
It is not a simcha when their whole relationship will be an extremely
serious aveira, day in day out, day in day out, every single day of
their marriage.
> To specifically refuse to even offer
> congratulations until you find out whether the couple will adhere to a
> particular level of observance is ludicrous,
I did not do that.
> the specific repudiation of
> doing a mitzvah. I'm astounded by the hypocrisy. How dare you make such a
> judgement?!!!!! Especially when you have to breach tsnius/modesty to find
> out.
>
> Anytime a Jew marries and has an opportunity to rejoice, and possibly then
> produce more Jews, should be a joyous occasion to *all* Jews.
>
> The better point to make is that while we each may not observe all 613
> mitzvot, we should create the kind of environment that make people want to
> observe more mitzvot. You have done the opposite. You have alienated people,
> and shown yourself to be priggish and small minded.
>
> Adelle Stavis
That is a valid point. Though I believe there is room for a 'tell it
as it is' talk aswell.
toichen
Susan Cohen
toichen wrote:
>
> Did I denounce him? I asked a question, no more and no less. Since
> many C Jews do not keep ThM, I think the question as an intellectual
> exercise was legitimate.
You make an assumption here---
> > Celebrating a simcha is it's own mitzvah. Being joyous for the bride and
> > groom is it's own mitzvah.
>
> It is not a simcha when their whole relationship will be an extremely
> serious aveira, day in day out, day in day out, every single day of
> their marriage.
---and then you confirm it as fact.
How is that *not* a denunciation"?
Susan
toichen
Rest assured that in real life I would not make these comments. It is
precisely because the internet is an impersonal medium, where any
poster is free to ignore the other, that I feel that such a point can
be made.
toichen
Dr. Shlomo Argamon (Engelson)
toi...@my-deja.com (toichen) writes:
BIG mistake, Reb Yid! In fact the Internet is a far WORSE place for
such comments because it is *extremely* public and is archived. Have
you asked your Rav about this? (I don't need an answer, but you know
what the answer should be.)
Hhag Sameahh!
-Shlomo-
Annonymous_Jew
toichen's posts in this thread, I would just like to note that I find
your reaction to be motivated more by contemporary Western libertarian
values, mores and sensibilities than by Torah ones.
Susan Cohen
Annonymous_Jew wrote:
Not only do I disagree, but I have to tell you that your anonymity robs your posts of any weight you may be trying to give
them.
Susan
Jess Olson
Well, my Rav would disagree with you. So would, in my experience, most
rabbeim I have known.
Incidentally, how can you make this determination without commenting on
the "intrinsic content" of the posts on this thread? They are exactly what
are at issue. The issue is toichen's grilling of another gentleman who
announced his marriage on this newsgroup as to whether or not he intends
to keep taharos mishpacha. I state again, I have been taught that it is
profoundly inappropriate for a person who is not directly affected by
someone's keeping or not keeping T.M., or a halakhic authority that has an
interest in that individual's keeping or not keeping them (i.e., the rabbi
responsible for overseeing the kedushin) to ask these questions. Toichen,
so far as I can tell, is neither. It is pure chutzpah to ask about them.
And even if he WERE a party of direct interest, it is profoundly
inappropriate for him to be airing his concerns in this medium.
There is nothing "Western libertarian" about it. I object to your
implications, and I note that you misuse the term "libertarian". You mean
"liberal," but either way, you're wrong.
JO
>
Micha Berger
:> And you concluded incorrectly. It's none of your business whatsoever. Did
:> someone appoint you to the s.c.j.m. tsniyus patrol? It isn't cruel per se,
:> it is rude, it is presumptuous, it shows, as I mentioned before, a
:> tremendous lack of derekh erets.
: Without commenting on the intrinsic content of either your's or
: toichen's posts in this thread, I would just like to note that I find
: your reaction to be motivated more by contemporary Western libertarian
: values, mores and sensibilities than by Torah ones.
Yes, and no.
Yes to the primary point: Judaism is about areivus (or if they prefer,
"arevut") not "live and let live".
Asking a personal question on scjm, though, isn't the way to accomplish
that. More than a good book on lashon hara, we need a solid guide to
tochachah (how to correct people).
-mi
--
Micha Berger "The most prevalent illness of our generation is
mi...@aishdas.org excessive anxiety.... Emunah decreases anxiety:
http://www.aishdas.org 'The Almighty is my source of salvation; I will
Fax: (413) 403-9905 trust and not be afraid.'" (Isa 12) -Shalhevesya
Herman Rubin
Torah ones or Talmudic ones? The Torah is certainly not
libertarian, but is far more so than the Talmud.
When Samuel argued against having a king, the argument
was somewhat on libertarian lines, although nobody at that
time could have been libertarian.
--
This address is for information only. I do not claim that these views
are those of the Statistics Department or of Purdue University.
Herman Rubin, Deptartment of Statistics, Purdue University
hru...@stat.purdue.edu Phone: (765)494-6054 FAX: (765)494-0558
mos...@mm.huji.ac.il
snip
> When Samuel argued against having a king, the argument
> was somewhat on libertarian lines, although nobody at that
> time could have been libertarian.
What's your point? That if the term did not exist, the underlying
concepts could not exist?
Moshe Schorr
It is a tremendous Mitzvah to always be happy! - Reb Nachman of Breslov
May Eliyahu Chayim ben Sarah Henna (Eliot Shimoff) have a refuah Shlaima.
toichen
> toichen wrote:
>
> >
> > Did I denounce him? I asked a question, no more and no less. Since
> > many C Jews do not keep ThM, I think the question as an intellectual
> > exercise was legitimate.
>
> You make an assumption here---
That is not an assumption but rather a fact, attested to in numerous
Conservative publications, the one that comes to mind right now is,
The Responsa of Professor Louis Ginzberg.
> > > Celebrating a simcha is it's own mitzvah. Being joyous for the bride and
> > > groom is it's own mitzvah.
> >
> > It is not a simcha when their whole relationship will be an extremely
> > serious aveira, day in day out, day in day out, every single day of
> > their marriage.
>
> ---and then you confirm it as fact.
>
> How is that *not* a denunciation"?
>
> Susan
That was a slip, I should have written: It is not a simcha if their
whole relatonship.... Thank you for pointing it out, and my apologies
to Rachvaz.
toichen
Sammy (Reply in Group Please)
> Incidentally, how can you make this determination without commenting on
> the "intrinsic content" of the posts on this thread? They are exactly what
> are at issue. The issue is toichen's grilling of another gentleman who
> announced his marriage on this newsgroup as to whether or not he intends
> to keep taharos mishpacha.
And that is exactly what I was _not_ commenting-on and what I intended to
convey by my disclaimer.
M. Berger summed-it-up pretty well in his reply to my post [1]; basically,
that while Toichen's _concern_ is mandated by Torah, his _approach_ was
contrary to it.
In short, I felt your reaction was _motivated_ primarily by the tediously
trite , "What two consenting adults do in the privacy of their home is
nobody's business but their own" libertarian [2] view and sensiblities which
are actually antithetical to the Torah ones. Your sentence, "It's none of
your business whatsoever" was one of the key factors in forming this
impression.
Given the entire context here, though, I realize that my reply to you was
indeed awkawrd and gratuitously provocative. I should especially note how I
appreciate how sanctimonious and self-righteous it could have come across in
light of the fact that few, if any of us, are on the level of reacting and
being motivated based _solely_ on completely pure and proper thoughts. In
fact, this very post of mine was probably far more ego-driven than anything
else.
<sigh> "One who guards his mouth and tongue saves himself from much
trouble" - Classic Torah source.
Or, l'havdil, as Ralph Kramden would say,
"I've got a B--I-I---I---I--G MOUTH...."
NOTES:
[1] But he incorrectly implied that I claimed otherwise.
[2] Yes, I meant _libertarian_ (even though I misspelled it) , as this how
the aforementioned view is widely described.
--
Please Reply in Group. Email Address Invalid. Thank you.
Cindy S.
"Sammy (Reply in Group Please)" <re...@group.INVALID.net> wrote in message
news:anfa29$dmlv4$1...@ID-67534.news.dfncis.de...
> "Jess Olson" <j...@stanford.edu> wrote in message
> news:Pine.LNX.4.44.021001...@cardinal5.Stanford.EDU...
>
> trouble" - Classic Torah source.
>
> Or, l'havdil, as Ralph Kramden would say,
>
> "I've got a B--I-I---I---I--G MOUTH...."
But you mean well. Welcome back.
Best regards,
--Cindy S.
Jess Olson
I appreciate your candor. Just let's be clear here: I never was implying
that it wasn't a serious problem if a person is not observing Th"M, only
that there is no appropriate way that anyone, especially someone who is
writing in this medium and who is not directly affected by the behavoir,
could confront another person about their practice without a severe
breech (sp?) of tsniyut and common decent courtesy. I say again that this
is not my own opinion, but what I was taught when I was a chasan by my
Rav.
But you are apologizing here, and I appreciate that. I just want to make
sure that you understand what I was saying (becuase I'm not 100% sure from
this post that you do...I still have the impression you think I believe
in some kind of "live and let live" Judaism. Which I do not. And yes, I
see now that your use of the term Libertarian was appropriate for the
view you mistakenly attribute to me. That was my mistake).
JO
Sammy (Reply in Group Please)
news:dvHm9.75921$kk7.14...@twister.nyroc.rr.com...
>
> "Sammy (Reply in Group Please)" <re...@group.INVALID.net> wrote in message
> news:anfa29$dmlv4$1...@ID-67534.news.dfncis.de...
> > "Jess Olson" <j...@stanford.edu> wrote in message
> > news:Pine.LNX.4.44.021001...@cardinal5.Stanford.EDU...
> >
> > <sigh> "One who guards his mouth and tongue saves himself from much
> > trouble" - Classic Torah source.
> >
> > Or, l'havdil, as Ralph Kramden would say,
> >
> > "I've got a B--I-I---I---I--G MOUTH...."
>
> But you mean well. Welcome back.
Thank you.
Susan Cohen
toichen wrote:
> Susan Cohen <not...@hers.com> wrote in message news:<3D943A53...@hers.com>...
> > toichen wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > Did I denounce him? I asked a question, no more and no less. Since
> > > many C Jews do not keep ThM, I think the question as an intellectual
> > > exercise was legitimate.
> >
> > You make an assumption here---
>
> That is not an assumption but rather a fact, attested to in numerous
> Conservative publications, the one that comes to mind right now is,
> The Responsa of Professor Louis Ginzberg.
But for you to automatically assume he's one of them is wrong.
Susan
toichen
Susan Cohen <fla...@hers.com> wrote in message news:<3D9B5F30...@hers.com>...
I did not, I asked.
toichen
> Susan