# Separation of church and state and Jewish spouses **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [March 28, 2011, 6:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/separation-of-church-and-state-and-jewish-spouses/576289 "2011-03-28T18:34:53Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 7\ **Page:** 7
**Author:** ![Farmer\_Jane](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/bbe5ce/32.png) [@Farmer\_Jane](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Farmer_Jane)\ **Post date:** [April 21, 2011, 1:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/separation-of-church-and-state-and-jewish-spouses/576289/121 "2011-04-21T13:09:55Z")
Like I said, I live in a world where chicken isn’t pareve… (Even though it meets criteria - does not lactate, does not eat meat, has feathers, and it’s a bird.) The ban on chicken is not needed anymore. But that’s ok - it’s not hurting anyone. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [April 21, 2011, 1:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/separation-of-church-and-state-and-jewish-spouses/576289/122 "2011-04-21T13:29:34Z")
> [@CitizenPained](#): > > It’s poultry! It has feathers! It’s pareve! > > Except somehow we decided it wasn’t…just in case someone couldn’t tell the difference. Ah, yes, and that stupid rice thing on Passover, too. Yes. But the thing is… there are plenty of _mitzvot d’rabbanan_ – laws instituted by the rabbis as opposed to laws directly found in the Torah. You won’t find any mention of Hanukkah in Torah, of course… so naturally the _mitzvah_ to light candles is entirely a _mitzvah d’rabbanan_. (This is a category of _mitzvot d’rabbanan_ called _takkanah_, a _mitzvah_ created to serve the Jewish people, as opposed to the chicken=meat _gezeirah_, the “fence around the commandments” we discussed above. You’re free to decide just how you want to observe Torah, of course, and free to reject any particular _mitzvah_. But if the overall discussion is about Orthodox practice, then the _mitzvot_ are the _mitzvot_, and while there can be (and is!) lively discussion about many topics in the Orthodox world, chicken’s status as _fleishik_ is not in any real dispute. ---
**Author:** ![Farmer\_Jane](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/bbe5ce/32.png) [@Farmer\_Jane](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Farmer_Jane)\ **Post date:** [April 21, 2011, 1:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/separation-of-church-and-state-and-jewish-spouses/576289/123 "2011-04-21T13:50:53Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Yes. But the thing is… there are plenty of _mitzvot d’rabbanan_ – laws instituted by the rabbis as opposed to laws directly found in the Torah. You won’t find any mention of Hanukkah in Torah, of course… so naturally the _mitzvah_ to light candles is entirely a _mitzvah d’rabbanan_. (This is a category of _mitzvot d’rabbanan_ called _takkanah_, a _mitzvah_ created to serve the Jewish people, as opposed to the chicken=meat _gezeirah_, the “fence around the commandments” we discussed above. > > You’re free to decide just how you want to observe Torah, of course, and free to reject any particular _mitzvah_. But if the overall discussion is about Orthodox practice, then the _mitzvot_ are the _mitzvot_, and while there can be (and is!) lively discussion about many topics in the Orthodox world, chicken’s status as _fleishik_ is not in any real dispute. Of course. And if you look at the _mitzvah d’rabanan_ rules that concern Hanukkah, you’ll see a curious wash of the political aspect and more of a general “light the candles” emphasis. Hanukkah was effectively de-nationalized. But! I like examining the thought process behind law. Chicken is not of concern; no. I wouldn’t support such a claim. But for me, well, I eat certain things on Passover because I have allergies and I’m tired of being malnourished for a week. My son actually eats the rice, but refuses any other chometz on religious grounds. I didn’t see why I should follow the traditions of Ashkenazic Jews. He thinks I’m treif, anyway. He’s _six_! edit\* he thinks he refuses chometz. kid doesn’t make his own matzo or anything. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [April 21, 2011, 1:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/separation-of-church-and-state-and-jewish-spouses/576289/124 "2011-04-21T13:51:09Z")
> [@CitizenPained](#): > > Like I said, I live in a world where chicken isn’t pareve… > > (Even though it meets criteria - does not lactate, does not eat meat, has feathers, and it’s a bird.) > > The ban on chicken is not needed anymore. But that’s ok - it’s not hurting anyone. In his 1972 book “To Be a Jew: A Guide to Jewish Observance in Contemporary Life,” Rabbi Hayim Halevy Donin says: > [@](#): > > The Torah calls upon the Jews to become the sacred people by living a life of sanctity at all times. This is then the purpose for the observance of the laws – to contribute to personal sanctity and help create a more sanctified society. > > This is not an easy task. And people being people, not all Jews have even looked upon it as a desirable goal. All too often, they have sought to “escape” from the “burden” imposed upon them. “Let us be as all the other nations,” was a cry that was heard through the centuries from the earliest periods of Israel’s history. He goes on to say that determining the difference between right and wrong; true from false; good from bad; sacred from profane; pure from impure; and clean from unclean is at the heart of the personal sanctity, and that the practice in adhering to _mitzvot_ strengthens that kind of control and discernment, and thus has value even apart from the intrinsic value of any given _mitzvah_. I think he has a point, but I don’t have that covenant with G-d, so my view is one of an outsider looking in. (I’d like to think I’m a tad more hip to _halakha_ than your average outsider, but still…) ---
**Author:** ![SecondJudith](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5ac83/32.png) [@SecondJudith](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SecondJudith)\ **Post date:** [April 21, 2011, 2:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/separation-of-church-and-state-and-jewish-spouses/576289/125 "2011-04-21T14:09:43Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > I know you know this, of course. Thank you. I just thought “of course chicken isn’t pareve” was unnecessarily strong, because it isn’t an “of course” (and there are many people for whom it is pareve, depending on how they engage with halacha). ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [April 25, 2011, 12:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/separation-of-church-and-state-and-jewish-spouses/576289/126 "2011-04-25T12:41:17Z")
> [@CitizenPained](#): > > Kind of like…precedent. 😉 > > so yes, i’ll parse that out, but that’s going to be me pulling out some texts and since you let this thread lapse, it’s fair to give me a few! > [@Bricker](#): > > Take your time. I’ll bump this thread in a couple of days. Hello! ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2011, 7:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/separation-of-church-and-state-and-jewish-spouses/576289/127 "2011-04-27T19:31:04Z")
> [@CitizenPained](#): > > I’m _not_ trying to backpeddle, but I may have phrased that a bit off. If I said, “Rabbis have been arguing this specific thing for centuries”, well, then Jewish law would have been changed by now and that’d be an easy 1 second Google. > > I think I had a misplaced modifier. What I mean to say is that commentary on related issues made by Rabbis over the centuries could be applied to the cases we have today that would warrant a revisit of law. What would a Talmudic rabbi say about xyz situation? > > Finally, Talmud is not an end all be all. > > That’s basically what responsa does today. (: Rabbis never discussed “late term abortions”, but rabbis today can reasonably conclude what the law may say to this situation. > > Kind of like…precedent. 😉 > > so yes, i’ll parse that out, but that’s going to be me pulling out some texts and since you let this thread lapse, it’s fair to give me a few! Having trouble finding those texts? The reason you’re not coming up with anything is that there’s a vast weight of Talmudic reasoning having to do with contracts, and your idea that the _ketubah_ is voidable by the future act of (a) getting a civil divorce but (b) refusing to deliver a _get_ simply finds no strong support in the rest of Talmudic law. Even rabbis that have sought to solve the problem of _agunah_ have not gone this route, but rather have suggested it be solved by carving out cases where a _get_ is simply not required. Conservative rabbis have accepted this solution, allowing a rabbinical ruling to replace the requirement of a _get_. But the Orthodox have not – see Teshuvot Tzitz Eliezer 1:2b; also Teshuvot Melamed L’hoil E.H.3:22. If you want o just drop this, let me know – but if you really are looking for texts, this is why you haven’t found any. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/separation-of-church-and-state-and-jewish-spouses/576289.md?page=6)