Gitel's Blog

It's YOUR Money - Shouldn't You Decide How to Spend It?

2009-10-04T08:20:00.003-05:00

We need Vouchers. Okay. I said it. So what?

A good voucher plan will give parents full choice of where to send their children.

A good voucher plan will not Punish people by having them pay for public school then having them pay again for private school.

A good voucher plan will improve the quality of public schools.

Now, all we need is a good voucher plan.

There have been several different voucher plans proposed. They've all been similar. I would like to Propose one that is different.

Voucher plans seem to be tied to the students. Each student gets a voucher.

My voucher plan is tied to the taxpayers. Each taxpayer would get a voucher. They pay for the schools, they should decide which schools benefit.

Here's how my plan works:

Let's assume you are a property owner. The portion of your property tax that goes for education is $ 1000 (just to give a nice, round number). You would get a voucher for $ 1000. If you have a child in a private school, you could give that voucher to that school. If you have two children in two different schools, you could split the voucher 50-50, 60-40 or any other way you choose.

But what if you do not have any children in school? What would you do with your voucher? Do you have grandchildren? Nieces or Nephews? Friends? Any of them could be the recipient of your voucher. Do not know any children at all? Perhaps there's a school whose educational philosophy you really like. You can give them your voucher. If you are a Staunch supporter of government-run education, you can give your voucher to the local public school.

What if you just do not care? There would be a deadline each year. The money from any Vouchers that were not redeemed by the deadline would automatically go to the public school.

This is fair.

Those who pay the money get to decide where the money goes. More money will be available for private schools, thereby Lowering tuition.

And the public schools? If they want their share of the money, they will have to prove they are worth it. Would you want to give your money to Substandard schools? Maybe if you think it would help them you would. But would not you want them to have a plan for improvement before giving them your money? No longer would public schools have a free ride. They would have to Compete for money just like any other business that has competition.

Has anybody noticed the one problem with this plan?

Not everybody pays property tax. What if you rent? You do not pay tax; you do not get a voucher.

The solution is simple. Your landlord gets a fairly large voucher, as he is the owner of a large piece of rental property. It's true he pays the property tax, but he gets the money with which to pay it from his Tenants. Ask him for part of his voucher.

Imagine looking at an apartment and asking the owner if he will give you part of his voucher. If he says "no," you look at a different apartment. It will not take long for landlords who do not share Vouchers to realize they are losing to landlords Tenants who do. If they want to Compete, they will learn to share.

Imagine. . . it's your money. You get to decide how to spend it. What a radical concept.

What we can learn from the Beverly Hillbillies

2009-09-23T03:33:00.002-05:00

Many years ago there was a tv show called "The Beverly Hillbillies." It was about a family from Bugtussle, TN, who suddenly became wealthy and moved to Beverly Hills, CA. These people were not stupid. (Okay, maybe Jethro was.) But here was a family that was thrust into a culture totally different from what they were used to. It caused some problems. They would do things like go out and shoot their dinner, not realizing that this was not acceptable behavior in Beverly Hills.

Several years later there was another tv show, this time it was "3rd Rock From the Sun." It was basically the same premise, except this time it was a group from another planet trying to learn about Earth. Again, they encountered problems as they were not familiar with the culture in which they put themselves.

These things happen in real life. People travel to different places and don't take the time to learn beforehand what is acceptable and what isn't. They end up offending people unintentionally.

Do you know anybody who ever had business dealings in Japan? When a Japanese businessman gives you his business card, don't just put it in your pocket. You could mess up a multi-million dollar deal. Take the card with both hands and study it. Show your approval. Then put it away. That's part of their culture.

Things are quite different in Israel now than they were during my first trip here. In those days, while many places had modern plumbing, many still had the old plumbing. Therefore toilet could accommodate what they were intended to accommodate, but nothing else. There was a covered wastebasket next to the toilet and one was expected to throw their paper products in there as not to clog the pipes.

You can bet if things were that way in Israel, they were no different in the rest of the Middle East. Which brings me to a woman I once knew. Her husband worked in a factory that employed many Arabs. She always spoke about how filthy and disgusting they were because they wouldn't flush their toilet paper. Instead, they threw it in the wastebasket.

This is not a case of people being filthy and disgusting. This is a case of people not realizing that the country they were coming to was different from the one they left. Maybe asking what to do with used toilet paper is not the first question one would ask about a culture, but maybe it shold be.

Now there is a new "place" that many people visit. It's called Cyberspace. There are cultural norms here, too.

First, if you write complete in upper case, that is how you convey that you are yelling at the person. I DON'T LIKE TO BE YELLED AT. If you yell at me, I will not respond. I may not even read what you wrote.

Second, computers are not cell phones. When sending a text message, we are limited. So abbreviations are acceptable. Wen u hav litl space its ok & evn gr8. However, when sending an e-mail, or posting to a blog, or FaceBook, or any other site, it's not. Learn to spell. "What" is not spelled "wat." "Great" is not spelled "gr8." Need I go on? Using such abbreviations when not necessary does not make you look cool. It makes you look stupid.

Welcome to Cyberspace. We're happy to have you. Just remember, this is not a sitcom, and not knowing the culture is not funny.

Lubavitch: Are they really the closest thing to Judaism?

2006-01-24T08:06:00.000-06:00

I have several friends who are Lubavitch. Many times it seems like we follow different religions. They joke and say Lubavitch is the closest thing to Judaism. I joke and say I think it's really closer to Xianity than Judaism.

Somebody once said every joke has a kernel of truth in it.

One of the more famous Lubavitchers these days is Matisyahu. For those unfamiliar with him, he performs reggae. The question I have is, why has he collaborated with the Xian group POD to appear on their new CD "Testify"? What is it about a Xian rock group that makes it appropriate for a Jew to collaborate with them?

I can't answer it. Perhaps one of my Lubavitch friends can.

Or just maybe, Lubavitch is closer to Xianity than even I realized.

How much is inspiration worth?

2005-02-13T19:28:00.000-06:00

The Shabbos (Sabbath) morning service in the synagogue is really two services: Shachris, the morning prayers, and Mussaf, the additional prayers. Of course, if you have a rabbi, you generally have a speech. Where the speech falls in the service is a matter of personal taste.

Some rabbis choose to speak at the end, some speak between Shachris and Mussaf.

There are good reasons for the rabbi to speak at the end. For one thing, it doesn't interrupt the flow of things. For another, anybody who doesn't want to listen can leave. On the other hand, anybody who wants to come just to hear the rabbi speak can come late and skip the prayers (even though they are the whole point of things).

That leaving early thing is really great if the rabbi isn't. However, if you are lucky enough to have a rabbi who is a great speaker, he can truly inspire people through his words. If he speaks at the end, what exactly was that inspiration for? When a rabbi like that speaks in the middle, you can infuse your prayers with so much feeling it's almost like speaking to Hashem face-to-face. Why wouldn't anybody want that?

Is Divorce Idol Worship?

2005-02-11T15:38:00.000-06:00

I think most of us have seen weddings, if not in person, then certainly on TV or in the movies. The couple, very much in love and excited about the new life they are about to begin, stands before their clergyman and with the blessings of G-d, they change from two people into one family.

At some time, before the couple reaches the point of holding the ceremony, chances are they went to the county courthouse and secured a marriage license. The question is: Why?

In the words of constitutional scholar Michael Badnarik, what does that license give them permission to do that they could not do before, who gave them that permission, and who gave that person the authority to grant permission? In truth, each religion has its own requirements that it expects a couple to fulfill before they can marry. In Judaism, neither one of the couple can be presently married to somebody else, there are some relationships which are prohibited based on a person's lineage, and they must be knowledgeable in the laws pertaining to marital relations. If they fulfill those requirements, they prepare a kesubah (marriage contract), stand before witnesses and they get married.

Sometimes, after the wedding, people discover things they didn't know about each other. He didn't know she wouldn't like his friends. She didn't know he likes to spend his winters ice fishing above the Arctic Circle. He didn't know her wardrobe occupies its own bedroom. She didn't know he snores.

Alas, for some couples it is too much, and they decide to divorce.

For most people, this means a protracted stay in divorce court. HOWEVER, if they didn't get a marriage license, and only had a religious ceremony, then it is up to the religious authorities to dissolve the marriage. And in Judaism, that is exactly what should happen.

The couple should (and often does) go to a Beis Din (religious court) which grants them the divorce. All too often, however, a Jewish couple, even from a Torah-observant background, will find themselves in divorce court because they involved the government when they decided to get married.

This is wrong.

In his commentary to Shemos 21:1, Rashi states that one who brings disputes before a secular court desecrates the name of G-d. He says it is tantamount to idol worship. So why does this seemingly religious couple bring their dispute before the secular court? Because they got a marriage license.

I wonder why the rabbi signed it. Isn't he then forcing them into the secular court system, forcing them into an idolatrous situation?

There Oughta Be A Law

2005-02-07T22:22:00.000-06:00

How many times have you heard (or even said), "There oughta be a law . . ."?

We say this when we don't like what someone else is doing. Thnk about it a minute. If you were suddently granted the power to make whatever laws you wanted, what would they be? No cell phones in restaurants? Mandatory hand-washing after using the bathroom? No colorzing old movies?

Imagine how wonderful it would be if you could enact any laws you wanted. Imagine how nice and orderly the world would be.

Now imagine for just a moment that someone else received that power. What laws would they enact? No smoking in public ever? That's not too pleasant if you're a smoker. How about no meal with more than 3 grams of fat? Forget eating some of your favorite fast food.

Thnk about everything you do. Is there anything that someone, somewhere might not like? Maybe you drink too much (and some people consider any drinking too much). Maybe you like to eat animal products (which doesn't fly too well with the animal rights people).

Let's pretend that every time you get to pass a law against behavior you don't like, someone else gets to pass a law against your behavior. It starts to make what other people do a bit more tolerable, doesn't it?

In Norwood, Ohio, Joy and Carl Gamble just lost their home to the powers of eminent domain. It seems a developer wants their land for a shopping mall/condo complex. Joy and Carl want to keep their home, but at what cost to the community?

With the new development comes more jobs and more taxes. Those things are good for the city and for the majority of the citizens. Why shouldn't they be forced to give up their home for the greater good?

Only one reason--if they can be forced to give up their home, so can you. If we don't protect the rights of others, nobody will bother to protect ours.

If you want freedom, the only way is to work and fight for the freedom of evverybody else.

Pet Peeves

2005-01-30T13:55:00.000-06:00

I'm in the mood to vent on a variety of topics, so if you aren't in the mood for ravings, skip this post.

MISPLACED PRIORITIES

If you aren't Jewish, this may be incomprehensible. Feel free to skip to the next topic.

I was recently at a sheva brachos. Among those chosen to make brachos were two men who couldn't get through it without stumbling over the words. That was expected of one of the men. He isn't frum. He doesn't pretend to be frum. He doesn't want to be frum. The fact that he can read Hebrew at all is something to be commended.

The second man, however, does claim to be frum, and in his mind, he probably is. One look would tell you he is "frum." He wears a kapota and a gartle. He dresses all in black, from his shoes to his hat. Yet he can't get through a simple bracha without stumbling. How does he daven?

As it happens, he is a member of a particular group who tends to put appearances over substance. (I'm choosing not to name them because there are a few members who are unusual and don't fit the stereotype. They should not be held accountable for the sins of their brethren.) Over the years I've met many members of this group. In addition to the man in black who can't make a bracha, I've seen so much else.

I've seen a man with yarmulke and tzitzis go into a store to buy a non-kosher candy bar. I've seen a man at a shiur wanting to share "chasidic" insights into the parsha (Vayeira) and then ask the rabbi what made him think Sarah was childless? I've seen countless people who've been frum for years who, like the gentlemen above, cannot get through a simple bracha. I've seen many people who have minhagim that would be aveiros to the rest of the world.

This stems from one cause: as long as you have the right "feelings" the halachos can come later. All too often, the halachos never come at all. We are left with feelings.

But isn't that important? As long as I "feel" Jewish. doesn't that count?

Of course it does. Just ask any non-frum Jew. They'll tell you that feelings are more important than halachos.

Ask any reform Jew. They'll tell you that feelings are more important than halachos.

Ask any christian. They'll tell you that feelings are more important than halachos.

I am relatively certain that no member of that group would want to be associated with non-frum Jews, reform Jews, or christians. Yet they behave the same way.

BEING PUNISHED FOR BEING SINGLE

I recently had occasion to be among the hostesses at a party. Here's a lesson for the future: discuss finances beforehand. Thoroughly.

Let's give an example (which is not based on reality, but based on round numbers being easier to work with).

Imagine you are single. You are giving a party along with four other people whom we'll call Ms. A, Ms. B, Ms. C and Ms. D. The party costs $500 and there will be 50 people there.

Should you each put in $100? At first glance, that would seem fair. However, let's look a little deeper into the situation.

You are coming to the party alone. Ms. A is bringing her husband. Ms. B is bringing her husband and 1 child. Ms. C is bring her husband and 2 children. Ms. D is bringing her husband and 3 children. That means there are 15 "family" members and 35 "guests."

Remember, the party costs $10 per person.

When you pay $100, you are paying for yourself plus 9 guests. Ms. D is paying for her family and 5 guests. Why should you pay for more guests? Why should you subsidize the Ds?

Here is what's fair: each of the five hostesses should pay for their family and seven guests. Therefore you pay $80, Ms. A pays $90, Ms. B pays $100, Ms. C pays $110 and Ms. D pays $120. Yes, Ms. D pays 50 percent more than you, but her family is 400 percent bigger than yours.

In fact, I spoke to several people. They all told me when they've been in this situation, they divided the costs per person and each paid for his or her own family, plus an equal number of guests. That's how it should be. I wish that's how it had been.

DISRESPECTFUL CHILDREN

There is a girl in my shul who likes to get to the kiddush table early and take all the potatoes out of the cholent bowl, leaving none for anybody else. Although she has been told not to do this, she continues, week after week. Unfortunately, she is not an aberration.

I was recently at a different shul. Here there was a separate table for the girls. Before all the adults had a chance to take cholent, a couple girls came and took the cholent bowl to their table. It never returned.

Where does this behavior come from?

Rabbi Alter tells of a time he was in a store in New York. This store was owned by an older couple. While Rabbi Alter was in the store, he witnessed the son berating his mother for some perceived misdeed. Rabbi Alter was ready to say something when the young man's father walked in and started berating his wife for yet another perceived misdeed. What could Rabbi Alter say? How could the son learn respect when the parents don't show any?

I was recently at a dinner in someone's home. When one of the men got up to make a speech, several of the women got up to clear the table. It was very distracting to those of us who wanted to hear what was being said. I did mention to one of the women that perhaps it might be considered rude to be clearing the table while someone was speaking, but she said she didn't care.

Here are people who have not learned respect. If they haven't learned it, how can they pass it on to their children?

A FINAL NOTE

I have to recommend a book. it's not a new book, it's been out for several years. However, I have been re-reading it lately and it is as marvelous, if not more, the second time than it was the first. It's "Doesn't Anyone Blush Anymore?" by Rabbi Manis Friedman. Buy it. Read it. Practice it.

Unions

2005-01-19T15:54:00.000-06:00

Those of us of a certain age probably remember the "Look for the Union Label" commercial of some years ago. For those who are too young to remember, it was a commercial for the International Ladies' Garment Workers Union. The commercial reminded people to buy union-made clothing so that union workers could keep their jobs, feed the kids and run the house.

My grandfather was one of the founders of the Garment Workers Union. He helped many workers who were being exploited by unscrupulous, or simply greedy, bosses.

Times have changed.

I worked in a union shop. I learned the truth about unions. Although they do help many people, unions are not the answer for everybody.

The company I worked for had a union contract which based salary on experience--not necessarily with the company, but experience in general. The older you were, the more experience you had, the more money you made.

But what if a younger worker was more efficient, more capable or just a harder worker? Too bad. A mediocre older worker would get paid more than a top-notch younger worker because that was what the union contract stipulated. Fair? I don't think so.

Now, a union has struck again.

A friend of mine works for a company, also controlled by a union contract. A position opened up for which he was qualified, so he applied. Many of his co-workers felt he should get the position. In fact, while the position was vacant, he was filling in and doing the job. Finally, they've chosen someone. Did he get the job?

He should have. He's qualified, he's already been doing it, he's been with the company longer than anybody else in his department. However, the union contract states that all positions have to be offered to the public. He was passed over in favor of an outsider.

Loyalty meant nothing. Hard work meant nothing. Ability meant nothing.

The union spoke. So be it.

How We See Things

2005-01-02T07:13:00.000-06:00

Many years ago I went to a concert given by the Civic Orchestra of Chicago. As the musicians came on stage, I was amazed that the orchestra was mostly women. I was not alone. I heard someone sitting near me exclaim, "My G-d, this orchestra is all women."

At that moment I decided to count and see how many there actually were. As it turns out, the percentage of women was 49%, less than half. So how do we explain the mistaken impression that the orchestra was mostly women?

It seems pretty simple. Those of us who are familiar with orchestras know they are overwhelmingly male. Since we expect to see at least 19 men to every woman, something that approaches a one-to-one ratio appears to us as more than what it actually is.

As numerous experiments have proven, two eyewitnesses to an event can come up with very different versions of the facts. Neither of them is lying, they just saw things differently.

What we see is naturally colored by who we are, what we've experienced, and any pre-conceived ideas we may have.

This is my seventh posting to this blog. The first was a short post about nothing. Three were about politics. One was about cultural differences, although it touched on religion. Only the most recent one was truly religious in nature.

Yet someone asked why everything is about my faith. Two people see the same things, and see them totally differently. Is my view so colored by my belief in G-d that I don't even recognize when it creeps into my writing? Is his view so colored by his views (lack of belief?) that he sees more religion than actually exists, just as I saw more women in the orchestra than were actually there?

How much of what we see in life is what is really there, and how much is a product of what we want to see?

Of Tsunamis and 9/11

2005-01-01T20:14:00.000-06:00

Some events are so enormous that every detail is seared into our collective memory. You never forget where you were when JFK was shot. When men landed on the moon. When the Berlin wall came down.

The tragedy of 9/11 was such an event. We saw the gaping hole emitting smoke and flames then watched in horror as the second plane hit. We saw the towers fall and cried for those who lost their lives. But for Jews, something miraculous happened. People suddenly understood Israel. They understood what it was like to go about your daily business then suddenly find yourself the victim of a terrorist attack. For once, Israel was the country that had to deal with Arab terror on a daily basis instead of being the horrible country that oppresses Palestinian "freedom fighters."

As we sifted through the debris, the hope of finding survivors gradually fading, we marveled at how Israel can face their own 9/11 day after day after day and still manage to go on.

Unfortunately, our collective consciousness has a blind spot when it comes to Israel. A blind spot when it comes to Jews. After a few days, Israel once again became the bad guy in the Middle East. Once again was chastised for trying to defend itself. Yet again, the Jews were the bad guys.

Now we've experienced another great tragedy. An earthquake in the Indian Ocean caused a Tsunami that, as of this writing, has killed more than 123,000 and the death toll is still rising. Whole villages have been wiped out. Large families have become much smaller. A Sri Lankan family, now living in the United States, was interviewed on TV. They lost 70 members of their family. They have only two relatives left. One can't helped but be reminded of the devastation Jewish familes faced during the Holocaust.

When the war ended, people returned to their villages and towns, hoping to find that some members of their family had survived. In far too many cases, finding two relatives would have been a miracle.

We don't know when the end of days is coming. We do know it's approaching. We do know that when the Messiah comes we will, at last, have peace. The world will finally know G-d. The world will finally understand the Truth that Jews have been proclaiming for thousands of years.

There is a lot we don't know, but it appears G-d is hinting to the world what it's like to be a Jew. Trying to make the world understand so they can prepare. 9/11 hinted at Israel. The Tsunami hinted at the Holocaust. What will be next? Will we have a taste of the Inquisition or will it be the Egyptian slavery?

Or will the world learn and spare us further tragedy?

Let us all look forward to the day when we can ask, "Do you remember where you were when we finally achieved peace?"

It's not a horse race

2004-10-14T14:27:00.000-05:00

It's been several years since I've been to the track, but I still remember how it's done.

First, you pore over the Racing Form. You study each horse, you study each jockey. You watch the horses parade around the track. You try to figure out which horse will cross the finish line first.

You go to the window and make your prediction (place your bet). If you guess right, you win--you get your money back plus extra. If you guess wrong, you lose--you've lost whatever money you've placed on "your" horse.

November 2 we have an election coming up. It's not a horse race. The idea is to tell the public who YOU choose to be our leader, not to predict who the winner will be.

Let's look at some examples.

You have a group of 10 people who need to choose a leader. You have three choices: A, B and C. You favor C. Three people vote for A, three people vote for B and three people vote for C. It is now up to you to decide you the new leader will be. Up until now the polls have said only A and B have a realistic chance of winning. Do you vote for A or B or do you vote for C? Regardless of what the polls said, if you vote for C, you will get the candidate of your choice. If you vote for either A or B, you don't. You had the power to put the best candidate in office, but you chose not to because you confused the election with a horse race and tried to predict the winner.

Take another group of 10 people. They also have three choices: D, E and F. You favor F. Six people vote for D, and three for E. Your vote no longer matters. If you vote for D, the score will be seven to three, making D believe he has a clear mandate for his views--not what you intended. If you vote for E, the score will be six to four, not as clear a mandate. The only thing those numbers show is that nobody cares about F--again, not what you intended. If you vote for F, at least your voice will be heard.

One more group. The choices are G, H and I. You favor I. In this particular group, five people favor G, three people favor H, and only you and one other person favor I. The polls are predicting a landslide victory for G. Since "everybody knows" G is going to win, four of those five people don't even bother to vote, and neither do two of the three who favor H. Of course, since those who like I are idealistic, both of them go to the polls. Final score? G - one vote, H - one vote, I - two votes.

In a horse race you win when you correctly guess which horse comes in first. In an election, you win when you vote your conscience.

What Do You Want?

2004-09-27T19:36:00.000-05:00

I want peace. I want security. I want a roof over my head and food on my table. I want my health. I want good friends. I want some good intellectual stimulation now and again.

I don't think what I want is unreasonable.

The question is: who should provide me with what I want?

Bush and Kerry would have me believe it is the job of the government to provide these things. I disagree.

Yes, it is the job of the government to provide for my security. That's why we have an army. It should protect our borders from foreign invaders. I'd like to know who's watching out borders now, since our soldiers (and sailors and flyers and marines) are thousands of miles away in the Middle East.

Should the government provide me with food and shelter? They apparently think so. We have Section 8 housing to help those who can't afford rent, food stamps for those who can't afford food. Where did the government get the money to provide these things? From the rest of us. And the more money they take to give to other people, the more difficult it gets for us to provide for our own housing and sustenance.

Is it up to the government to keep me healthy? They try to, whether we want it or not. The government decides what health care we should receive, and what we can do without. There are one or two physicians in Congress, but they would be hard-pressed to provide care to all of the U.S. So the decisions fall on the rest of Congress, most of whom know nothing about medicine.

What about friends? Surely the government can't be trying to decide who should associate with whom! At an early age, the goverment does exactly that. The goverment decides which schools our children should attend, and therefore who their classmates (and potential friends) are. Of course each parent has the right to send his child to a non-government (private) school, but then he pays twice--once for the government school and once for the school he chooses.

The public library--the government's attempt at intellectual stimulation. I rarely use it. The library is rarely open when it's convenient for me. The library frequently doesn't have the books I want to read, and doesn't want to acquire them. They provide services, but rarely are there any I can use. Yet we all pay for this, whether we use it or not.

If the government would provide for my security and leave me to provide the rest for me, then I believe that at last, we would finally have the peace we all surely desire.

A 40-year streak is about to end

2004-09-14T18:08:00.000-05:00

In 1964 by father voted against Barry Goldwater. He hasn't felt compelled to vote since.

So why, after 40 years, has my father decided to register to vote? Because this year my father has found a candidate he can support: Michael Badnarik, the Libertarian.

Why not one of the two "major" candidates?

First of all, it seems as if almost everybody is discussing the "lesser of two evils." My father doesn't want to vote for evil, lesser or otherwise.

Does the oath of office mean anything? For those who need a reminder:

"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

It's pretty tough to "preserve, protect and defend" a document you aren't familiar with.

Badnarik is a consitutional scholar. He travels the country teaching people about our Constitution* Do Kerry or Bush even have a nodding acquaintance with the Constitution? A look at their records would make one believe otherwise.

Government does not exist to provide handouts to people. Government does not exist to be surrogate parents. Government does not exist to protect citizens from themselves.

Government DOES exist to protect its citizens from those who would cause harm, domestic or foreign.

Michael Badnarik understands that.

Of all the candidates, he seems to be the only one who does.

After 40 years, there is finally a candidate worth voting for.

*Here is a link so you can experience Michael Badnarik's Constitution class on video:

http://www.archive.org/movies/details-db.php?collection=election_2004&collectionid=Michael_Badnarik

Chief Illiniwek and Madonna

2004-09-10T15:45:00.000-05:00

The Chief Illinwek controversy has surfaced again.

Let me tell you what I see when i see the Chief do his dance. I see a majestic warrior perparing for battle. It's a very stirring sight. However, it's not my heritage he's making a mockery of.

As someone whose family came to these shores in the 20th century, can I possibly know what it feels like to see thousands of people making light of beliefs I hold dear?

The answer is a resounding "Yes."

Madonna, having gained some expertise in Kabbalah, now wants to be called by her "Hebrew name" Esther. I have the same amount (or more) expertise in Kabbalah as Madonna. The difference is, I am aware that I know absolutely zilch about it.

Imagine trying to teach advanced calculus to a first-grader. Maybe he will pick up something here and there, but he won't understand calculus. First he needs to understand 2 + 2. Then he can move on to subtraction, then multiplication and division, then fractions and decimals. Eventually he can learn algebra, geometry, trigonometry and college algebra. Finally, he can BEGIN to learn calculus.

Actually, that is how we teach calculus to a first-grader. The only thing is, by the time he masters calculus, he is in college. Calculus takes years of preparation before you begin to tackle it, and more time to master it. Kabbalah is no different.

First one needs to learn Hebrew. Then one can move on to learning about the Torah and the other writings in the Bible. Of course, these studies include thoroughly mastering the Mishna and Gemorah, an encyclopedic work. Only then can one BEGIN to learn Kabbalah. This point typically comes after one turns 40, assuming he has been learning since he was a small child. (Other people say it's after 40 years of learning that one can begin to study Kabbalah.)

In any case, what Madonna is practicing is not Kabbalah. It isn't even Judaism. You see, Judaism requires certain things of it's practitioners.

The first requirement is that one be Jewish. Madonna isn't. She could be, if she wanted to. One can become Jewish, but then one has to agree to abide by the laws of Judaism. I don't believe Madonna is ready to do that.

For starters, one has to keep the Sabbath. A quick look at her concert schedule (posted on her website) shows she doesn't do that.

For another, one has to follow the laws of modesty. I don't believe the words "modesty" and "Madonna" were ever used in the same sentence before. Another quick glance at her website shows she doesn't do that either.

Modesty is based on privacy. One's body is private. It isn't something to put on display for the entire world. It certainly isn't something one shares (in public, no less) with a man she isn't married to.

Yes, I understand how it feels when a native American sees Chief Illinwek, because I can see Madonna.

I have a heritage that for 3300 years my ancestors were willing to die for. Many of my relatives gave their lives because they commited the unforgivable "crime" of being Jewish.

When Madonna is willing to give her life to be Jewish, and when Chief Illiniwek is willing to give his life as so many did in the early days of our nation, then they will have earned the right to make fun. By then, they will no longer want to.

P.S. "In Whose Honor" is a great documentary on the Chief Illinwek issue. I highly recommend it.

My new blog

2004-08-31T16:49:00.000-05:00

Yea! I finally have my own blog. It'll take me a while to figure out what to do with this, but when I do . . .