<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.6000.16809" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=774212114-14082009><FONT face=Arial>From R' A. Shafran on
C-C</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=774212114-14082009><FONT face=Arial></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=774212114-14082009><FONT face=Arial>"</FONT><FONT
face="Times New Roman">The Jewish faith is a system of both beliefs and laws,
and, like all laws, Judaism’s are meant to be applied objectively. To be sure,
there are instances where certain empathetic concerns can yield leniencies. In a
kashrut case, for example, if hewing to the normative approach in particular
situations will result in a great financial loss, it may be proper to adopt a
more lenient one. Or, if a married man goes missing and is suspected to have
died, certain evidentiary rules are waived for testimony about the man’s death,
so that his wife may remarry. But those leniencies exist within the law, and
when they can be invoked is itself the subject of law and precedent. Where there
is no such recourse, empathy is insufficient to supplant the law. We are
admonished to “not favor the poor man in his dispute” (Exodus, 23:3). The job of
a judge, as Judge Sotomayor rightly concluded, is to apply law, not
feelings."</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=774212114-14082009></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=774212114-14082009><FONT face=Arial></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=774212114-14082009><FONT face=Arial>I would appreciate the
chevra's take on this. IMHO it is what we used to call in the academy "hand
waving". Certainly there are cases where there is no recourse (R'YBS
famously on the giyoret who brought the intended chatan back to yiddishkeit only
to visit the grave and find him a kohain) but the "</FONT><FONT
face="Times New Roman"> leniencies exist within the law" is another way of
saying that the judge will use their empathetic concerns (me-lev shel
torah) to determine which rules apply when - which is exactly what imho
Judge Sotomayor was referring to in her original statement. Let's face it
, the judge is not always simply an umpire, especially in the secular
system where there is no ratzon hashem guideline. In our system,imho
it's expedient to overemphasize the "my hands are tied" aspect (so as to
tie the hands of those we don't accept)but imho if we are intellectually honest,
we must admit that (as R'YBS once said on a tape something like) the flexibility
that the baalei mesorah have is fairly wide, if they choose to use it (and I
would add of course if we choose to accept them as baalei
mesorah)<BR><BR>KT<BR>Joel Rich</FONT></SPAN></DIV><br><br><table bgcolor=white style="color:black"><tr><td><br>THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE <br>
ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL <br>
INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, <br>
distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is <br>
strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us <br>
immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. <br>
Thank you.<br>
</td></tr></table></BODY></HTML>