<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">so the tenor i hear is it
is mussar-ly not a great idea, and occaisionally
may fall into the issur of nekama category. this is my distinction
of positive vs negative.</font>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">so using concrete examples
: </font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> take for example , kollel
lifestyle or position on the state of israel. so in a positive
direction, one might davka want to direct his tzedaka
TOWARDS kollelim, or TOWARDS the yeshivot of
a particular eidah. -- this i think no
one objects to </font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">in the negative direction ,
one might NEVER give money to a kollel ; or would
NEVER give money to a yeshiva of a certain eidah.</font>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">--- in this case , rMB would
hold it to be a poor midah ; [ the 2nd part -- mosdos
of particular eidos-- is more complicated , because one can always
say a certain eidah is 'krum', and therefore there might
be an actual isssur to SUPPORT those mosdos]</font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">now there is one other situation
, which is probably closer to what rMB would consider
an issur tora. that would be a particular mossad
does a behavior/expresses an opinion that one NOW finds
out about, and vigourously disagrees with. rMB would hold
, i think, that this would now be an issur of nekama to
withhold funds from .</font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> i think though an
alternate perspective would be that that mossad
now becomes assur to the disagreeing individual,
to the point that rather than holding it's assur NOT
to give to it [as nekama] , it's now assur to YES give
to it [as krumkeit, punishment for bad behaviour, etc] </font>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br>
<br>
</font><font size=1 face="Arial"><br>
</font>