30 Oct Speak Your Vues
With this massacre in Pittsburgh there is a rush to arm ourselves in every Shul. I believe there maybe more accidents this way; all you need is an armed guard at every entrance of every Shul to act as a deterrence. Of course, nothing in life is guaranteed. We need to daven to Hashem to protect us.
Editor’s Note: Well written. Couldn’t agree with you more.
What constitutes the term tinok shenishba? If a person grew up in America and is conservative would he be considered a tinok shenishba?
Editor’s Note: That’s a question you’d have to ask your rav. There is a major machlokes what constitutes a tinok shenishba.
This year the Shabbos Inspire seems to have been very low key I did not see and signage to advertise this. I wonder if the idea (which was great) has become burnt out? I feel it needs a little chizuk.
Editor’s Note: I guess you could contact the organizers of Project Inspire and see how you can help make it great again.
WHOSE SIDE IS GILLIBRAND ON?
Never trust the left or the democrats this is what was posted on Matzav.com
New York State Assemblyman Dov Hikind (D-Brooklyn) said that he was surprised that U.S. Senator Kirsten Gillibrand came all the way to his community just to insult the Orthodox leadership. Hikind said the Senator’s meeting with 40 community leaders, which was reportedly held at her request, ended with leaders less than enchanted by Gillibrand’s message, and many of them shocked. “Gillibrand was careful not to allow any elected officials to attend the meeting, which took place at Ohel on E. 14th,” said Hikind. “Questions from attendees had been pre-approved and everything was supposed to follow a script. But that’s not what happened.”
Understanding how many felt about her association with Linda Sarsour, a known apologist for terrorism, Gillibrand attempted to downplay the relationship. She explained that only her praise of Sarsour has been reported, and none of her criticism. But when asked by an audience member to make her criticism of Sarsour public, Gillibrand dissembled, suggesting that it was “sexist to even suggest” that she, as a female Senator, would share views with a female activist. Then Gillibrand noted that she didn’t have to agree with anyone completely to meet with them. “I disagree with your group about women’s rights and your stance on the LGBT community,” she noted, by way of example. One member
of the group was visibly disturbed, and he objected to the Senator’s implication that the assembled leaders and their respective organizations were in any way discriminatory. pretty scary.
Editor’s Note: Just remember, a politician is a politician, is a politician. They only have their own interests in mind, to promote their own agenda.
There seems to be a double standard. It’s Trump’s fault that he person sent the bombs to all those democrats. They blame it as if he did it himself, yet the shooter who disagreed with Trump is also blamed on Trump. Do the Democrats take blame for anything? When Hillary says there should be no civility until the Democrats win isn’t that incitement?
Editor’s Note: The problem is the media is slanted against him.
With the weather constantly changing I would like to remind everyone to dress appropriately as this is the season where people catch colds.
Editor’s Note: Thanks for the reminder! I know so many people who have already gotten colds.
Every time a gun-related tragedy happens (far too often), Republicans yell, “More guns could have prevented this!”, Democrats yell, “If guns were illegal, this wouldn’t have happened!” They keep shouting in each other’s faces for a few weeks, and then nobody changes their mind, nobody does anything, and it keeps happening. We need to learn how to respectfully disagree and work toward real solutions despite our differences.
Someone with Common Sense
Editor’s Note: Law cannot not be written based on reactions. To use a sports adage: You’re never as good as after a winning streak and you’re never as bad as after a losing streak. Laws need to be passed at a neutral time and be well though out.
Without weapons, a person who is physically stronger can easily overpower a physically weaker person. This approximately gives one gender the complete ability to abuse and control the other. The Second Amendment exists to protect the weak, and if liberals really cared about feminism, they would allow women to carry weapons to protect their virtue.
Editor’s Note: I am not sure what liberals think. To me it seams like whatever rights they can limit they will attempt to limit.
CELL PHONES REVISITED
Yes, I would buy a car without air conditioning, if it ran faster, had better steering and could run five times as long on the same amount of fuel.
Editor’s Note: I wonder how many people would agree with you! Especially on a day that has weather in the upper nineties