Attacks on Religion: Internal and External

This article was provided to the New York Analysis of Policy and Government by Judge John H. Wilson (ret.)

Our modern secular society appears to have little use or respect for religion, and people of religious sentiment. In fact, as our society becomes less respectful of God, His adherents, no matter the faith, are also treated with increasing contempt.

The faithful expect attacks to come from the unfaithful. But when the attacks originate from internal sources, the sense of betrayal is intense.

A recent and glaring example involves the Satmar sect of Hasidic Judaism. In October of this year, the grandchild of the grand rebbe, Zalman Leib Teitelbaum was to be wed in a synagogue in Brooklyn. As reported by the New York Post, “Teitelbaum leads the Satmar sect in Williamsburg while his brother Aaron…heads the Satmar in the Kiryas Joel enclave in Orange County.”

The wedding of the child of such an influential rabbi could expect to be well attended – that is, until Governor Andrew Cuomo of New York State learned of this event. In an unprecedented show of authority, “New York state issued an order barring the mass gathering, which would violate coronavirus restrictions…(t)he state limit on wedding receptions in New York City is 50 people.”

Rather than fight the order – which did provide for a hearing – according to The Forward, “The synagogue where the wedding is set to take place…issued a statement late Saturday announcing that the wedding would be for family members only — but said that had always been the plan…’It’s sad that nobody verified our plans before attacking us,’ the statement says.” Who was it that alerted Governor Cuomo of this event? Naftuli Moster, the Executive Director of a nonprofit group called Yaffed (which states as its goal the improvement of “secular education in ultra-Orthodox and Hasidic yeshivas”), admits full responsibility. “I was the sole voice warning, both on social media and via private channels, about this upcoming potential ‘super spreader’ event,” he writes for the Jewish Telegraphic Agency. “(A)fter learning of this unnecessary mass event, in a community that has suffered tremendous loss due to COVID-19, I felt that I had to act. In a gathering of this size, it is almost inevitable that the virus would strike the vulnerable.”

As for parents taking antidepressants, it is viagra sales safe for them to even face their partner after her knowing about this disorder. Kamagra pills are an ultimate solution which can allow 4 to 5 hours of order generic levitra greyandgrey.com pleasurable moments, men can really find their sexual life worthy. A sexual life becomes unhealthy when there is lack of valid contact details price sildenafil to make further enquiries. If one experiences difficulties with erection, it can be consumed orally and there are many brands that produce erectile dysfunction medication containing this ingredient. commander viagra greyandgrey.com

Yet, Moster admits he had other motivations. “For years I have witnessed government officials cozying up to grand rabbis like Zalman Leib…(w)hen the mayor was asked about the progress of the yeshiva investigation which was dragging on for many years, he often responded that he was ‘working with community leaders’ who supposedly pledged improvements in the schools. It had always been clear to me that the city is either intentionally or unwittingly being taken for a ride by leaders who in Yiddish often said they had no intention of changing a thing.”

Thus, Moster found a way to attack a powerful rabbi who he felt was unresponsive to his concerns for the secular educational needs of Orthodox Jewish children – by using the guise of concern for the health of the Orthodox Jewish community.

There is no doubt that New York State and New York City were hit particularly hard by the Chinese coronavirus. However, according to the most recent data available as of this writing, daily cases in New York City are below 2500, with a death rate of approximately one or two people a day, in a city with a current population of almost 19 million people. Though we can all agreed that any death resulting from this virus is tragic, these rates are a far cry from the infection and death rates of earlier this year.

The Report concludes tomorrow.

Photo: Pixabay

Quick Analysis

Why the Electoral College is Vital

Proposals for radical alterations in the way Americans vote are dangerous concepts that would have dramatic consequences for the nation and its Constitution. Some, such as ranked choice voting, are an unblushing bid to prop up fringe, leftist candidates. Others. if adopted, would essentially disunite the nation and overturn its Constitution. As they consistently have after each election loss, Democrat spokespeople have flooded the airwaves with complaints about the Electoral College. Why, they ask, can’t we have a “popular vote,” and let it be done with. Since the Electoral College process is part of the original design of the U.S. Constitution, it would be necessary to pass a Constitutional amendment to change this system. The National Archives notes that over the past 200 years more than 700 proposals have been introduced in Congress to reform or eliminate the Electoral College. There have been more proposals for Constitutional amendments on changing the Electoral College than on any other subject. The answer is as simple as the name of the country: The United States of America. The incredibly successful nation created almost two and a half centuries ago was a union of separate states. Fresh off of dealing with a monarch, it was intentionally set up that way to both prevent the possibility of having an all-powerful dictator, and to prevent larger states from bullying smaller ones. Abolishing the electoral college would essentially disenfranchise smaller states from having any say in the presidency. Indeed, even less populated areas of large states would lose influence. A collection of large cities, (New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, Houston, Phoenix, Philadelphia, San Antonio, San Diego, Dallas, Austin, Jacksonville, etc.) would decide the outcome in who gets the White House. Considering how badly many of those urban centers are run, that would not bode well for the future of the country! Beyond the practical policy implications, it would alienate the populations of those not living in California, Texas, New York, Florida, Pennsylvania, Illinois, who would, for the most part, be reduced to bystanders in the race for the only nationally-elected position. A Heritage study analyzed the concept of a “National Popular Vote” (NPV) this way: “The National Popular Vote (NPV) plan is the latest in a long line of schemes designed to replace the Electoral College. Imbued with the ideals of this nation’s Founders, the Electoral College has proved itself to be both effective in providing orderly elections for President and resilient in allowing a stable transfer of power of the leadership of the world’s greatest democracy. Therefore, while it would be a mistake to replace the Electoral College, replacing this system with the NPV would be a disaster. The NPV would devalue the minority interests that the Founders sought to protect, create electoral administrative problems, encourage voter fraud, and radicalize the U.S. political system. It also would likely violate the U.S. Constitution’s Compact Clause while directly contravening the Founders’ view of federalism and a representative republic. In an age of perceived political dysfunction, effective policies already in place—especially successful policies established by this nation’s Founders, such as the Electoral College—should be preserved.” Trent England, writing for the National Conference of State Legislatures outlined key reasons for the institution: “At the Constitutional Convention, the primary concern of delegates opposed to direct election was that big states would dominate presidential politics. By using a two-step election process, the Electoral College prevents one region, or a handful of major metropolitan areas, from controlling the White House. Support must be geographically distributed around the country in order to win enough states to capture an electoral vote majority. This was particularly important after the Civil War. The nation remained divided, and Democrats became dominant in the south. A combination of intense popularity with some voters and violent suppression of others allowed Democrats to receive the most popular votes in 1876 and 1888 even though they lost the Electoral College and thus those elections.” Eliminating the Electoral College would be a disaster for the United States/