You've got to be kidding. You have successfully provided an even greater support for giving them all of their requests! Precisely because of the inevitable risks, the Torah clearly instructs to do everything you can to avoid unnecessary risks and maintain your camp in holiness - והיה מחניך קדוש. Only then can you be sure that God will be with you. They should be even more demanding of a higher degree of spiritual strength when possible in the army than anywhere else!
Your argument is backwards. Because was is dangerous, well, then, let's just give in to the risks and give up our protections? Let's not fortify ourselves? This works be absurd even if the Torah didn't make a point of emphasizing the greater degree of preparedness needed.
Yes, some risks are unavoidable and yes, they'll use any excuse they can pull out of nowhere to avoid participating in the army. I am mostly in agreement with your comment for their general attitude to this topic. But they're right about this one.
(Also, you make mehadrin sound like an extra. That's already below their usual standards but even if it meet them, they deserve that. The only reason they didn't get it is neglect, bad faith or incompetence. No one was in the heat of battle when compromise is needed)
NS's argument is that the verse is an obligation for soldiers while serving, not an exemption for those worried about camp conditions. It's addressed to participants, not would-be abstainers. the Torah includes yefat to'ar, regulating soldiers taking non-Jewish captive women as wives - a spiritual compromise far exceeding non-mehadrin food - yet never suggests that concern over such risks exempts one from service. NS isn't arguing against spiritual fortification; he's arguing that imperfect fortification isn't grounds for total non-participation, which is a different claim.
Bottom line, it's one thing to voluntarily choose to be extra frum (though even that is likely חסיד שוטה), but not at others' expense (the typical charedi מגיע לי )
"However, there is something else that I would like to focus on: the expectation that charedi standards of kashrus and other things must always be met, whether in military service or in prison. And this is put forth as one of the very reasons why charedim will not serve in the army."
He's not talking about some claim for exemption, which no one's has made in the first place. He's talking about their expectations that these standards should be met. My comment demonstrated that they are absolutely right to expect them, there is no reason the army should not meet them and so the army is not doing their part to take the charedim's needs seriously. It's no different than women demanding their unique needs to be met if they are to be drafted - provided they are legitimate in both cases. So your expected attempt to defend him is incorrect once again.
As I said, the approach of the charedim to this topic is contemptible. But on this point, they are 100% right.
So if your children were served pork and beans in the army, you are saying the dati leumi community would not take a political position and refuse to serve under those conditions? You're just dismissing their mehadrin standards because you personally believe them excessive. They personally believe them minimal and not meeting them to be an explicit and aggressive act to unwind their entire religious way of life and assimilate them into the country.
"He's talking about their expectations that these standards should be met. My comment demonstrated that they are absolutely right to expect them."
No, they have no right to expect them. Your comment simply argued that a soldier should (maybe) voluntarily choose to be extra frum, but it doesn't demonstrate that it should be at others' expense
That's not how society works, and I proved that with my example of women. The US has a law requiring "reasonable accommodations" in the workplace for all sincere religious beliefs. I am a lawyer and have even won one of these cases against the post office (together with a partner who was the lead - I don't normally do employment law). It applies similarly in the army with slightly different rules, especially as explained in the famous Supreme Court case of Wisconsin v. Yoder, IIRC, about wearing a yarmulke. This is 100% appropriate and to absolutely to be expected and respected in a Jewish state with a million people sincerely holding a certain belief.
My heart bleeds for bochurim who miss out on hot schnitzel three days in a row. However, I had thought that as Bnei Torah they had accepted upon themselves pas v'meilech, so why aren't they fine with mehadrin cold cuts or cheese, hummus, and pittah, washed down with mitz tapppuzim? The mehadrin issue is only preventing them from eating food heated up in a non mehadrin kitchen. For sure, cheeses and cold cuts with pita are available.
Excuse my ignorance but I genuinely don't understand the demand for mehadrin food here. If what they are saying is that they don't trust the Rabbanut and they want a Badatz hechsher only then I get it. But if they do trust the Rabbanut to give them food with the word "Mehadrin" on it, why don't they trust them with regular food from the Rabbanut. As far as I understand, mehadrin is not a specific halachic term like glatt which means the lungs on a cow had to be smooth, but just a general term that implies some higher level of kashrut without specifying exactly what that is. But please correct me if I am wrong
Make them suffer…only OU-D for them….
Lol. Now you've gone too far ;)
You've got to be kidding. You have successfully provided an even greater support for giving them all of their requests! Precisely because of the inevitable risks, the Torah clearly instructs to do everything you can to avoid unnecessary risks and maintain your camp in holiness - והיה מחניך קדוש. Only then can you be sure that God will be with you. They should be even more demanding of a higher degree of spiritual strength when possible in the army than anywhere else!
Your argument is backwards. Because was is dangerous, well, then, let's just give in to the risks and give up our protections? Let's not fortify ourselves? This works be absurd even if the Torah didn't make a point of emphasizing the greater degree of preparedness needed.
Yes, some risks are unavoidable and yes, they'll use any excuse they can pull out of nowhere to avoid participating in the army. I am mostly in agreement with your comment for their general attitude to this topic. But they're right about this one.
(Also, you make mehadrin sound like an extra. That's already below their usual standards but even if it meet them, they deserve that. The only reason they didn't get it is neglect, bad faith or incompetence. No one was in the heat of battle when compromise is needed)
NS's argument is that the verse is an obligation for soldiers while serving, not an exemption for those worried about camp conditions. It's addressed to participants, not would-be abstainers. the Torah includes yefat to'ar, regulating soldiers taking non-Jewish captive women as wives - a spiritual compromise far exceeding non-mehadrin food - yet never suggests that concern over such risks exempts one from service. NS isn't arguing against spiritual fortification; he's arguing that imperfect fortification isn't grounds for total non-participation, which is a different claim.
Bottom line, it's one thing to voluntarily choose to be extra frum (though even that is likely חסיד שוטה), but not at others' expense (the typical charedi מגיע לי )
Did you even read what he wrote?
"However, there is something else that I would like to focus on: the expectation that charedi standards of kashrus and other things must always be met, whether in military service or in prison. And this is put forth as one of the very reasons why charedim will not serve in the army."
He's not talking about some claim for exemption, which no one's has made in the first place. He's talking about their expectations that these standards should be met. My comment demonstrated that they are absolutely right to expect them, there is no reason the army should not meet them and so the army is not doing their part to take the charedim's needs seriously. It's no different than women demanding their unique needs to be met if they are to be drafted - provided they are legitimate in both cases. So your expected attempt to defend him is incorrect once again.
As I said, the approach of the charedim to this topic is contemptible. But on this point, they are 100% right.
They have a right to ask for them. They do not have a right to make their service conditional on receiving them.
So if your children were served pork and beans in the army, you are saying the dati leumi community would not take a political position and refuse to serve under those conditions? You're just dismissing their mehadrin standards because you personally believe them excessive. They personally believe them minimal and not meeting them to be an explicit and aggressive act to unwind their entire religious way of life and assimilate them into the country.
"He's talking about their expectations that these standards should be met. My comment demonstrated that they are absolutely right to expect them."
No, they have no right to expect them. Your comment simply argued that a soldier should (maybe) voluntarily choose to be extra frum, but it doesn't demonstrate that it should be at others' expense
That's not how society works, and I proved that with my example of women. The US has a law requiring "reasonable accommodations" in the workplace for all sincere religious beliefs. I am a lawyer and have even won one of these cases against the post office (together with a partner who was the lead - I don't normally do employment law). It applies similarly in the army with slightly different rules, especially as explained in the famous Supreme Court case of Wisconsin v. Yoder, IIRC, about wearing a yarmulke. This is 100% appropriate and to absolutely to be expected and respected in a Jewish state with a million people sincerely holding a certain belief.
A bigger disgrace is that they were in prison at all - whatever their offences!
My heart bleeds for bochurim who miss out on hot schnitzel three days in a row. However, I had thought that as Bnei Torah they had accepted upon themselves pas v'meilech, so why aren't they fine with mehadrin cold cuts or cheese, hummus, and pittah, washed down with mitz tapppuzim? The mehadrin issue is only preventing them from eating food heated up in a non mehadrin kitchen. For sure, cheeses and cold cuts with pita are available.
Excuse my ignorance but I genuinely don't understand the demand for mehadrin food here. If what they are saying is that they don't trust the Rabbanut and they want a Badatz hechsher only then I get it. But if they do trust the Rabbanut to give them food with the word "Mehadrin" on it, why don't they trust them with regular food from the Rabbanut. As far as I understand, mehadrin is not a specific halachic term like glatt which means the lungs on a cow had to be smooth, but just a general term that implies some higher level of kashrut without specifying exactly what that is. But please correct me if I am wrong
Missed opportunity to make a joke about yated :)