[Avodah] [Areivim] URL: article about halachic infertility and proposed changes to hilchos nidah

[Zev Sero]

> http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/798797.html

>  Within this situation is a failure of internal logic: It is
> unreasonable that a ruling that derives from a humra of Jewish women
> will produce a conflict with the first commandment in the Torah - to
> be fruitful and multiply.

Has this man never heard of "shev ve'al taaseh"?  Does he hear shofar
on RH which is on shabbat?

In any case, both women and men are obligated by the laws of nidah and
zivah, while only men are obligated by pru urvu, which means that the
woman would have to break a law, even if only a light derabanan, in
order for her husband to fulfil a mitzvah; this reduces the question
to the already-solved one of rediyat hapat, where the psak is that
"we do not tell one person to sin so that another person will benefit".
(The chumra of 7 nekiyim seems analogous to the issur of rediyat hapat,
which is not even a shevut; and the benefit to the second party in this
case is only an asei, rather than being saved from an issur karet.  So
it seems to me to be a kal vachomer.)

(And that's leaving aside the consideration that if the husband is so
concerned about the mitzvah he can fulfil it with another woman.) 


-- 
Zev Sero               Something has gone seriously awry with this Court's
zev at sero.name          interpretation of the Constitution.
                       	                          - Clarence Thomas