בתשובה לאורי פז, 21/05/04 17:20
המספרים מדברים בעד עצמם 220661
I must have underexplained myself. What I meant was that I find serious ethical flaws in your suggestion, according to which the original exemption from service, accorded to people for the purpose of learning Torah - an agreement that many people in the secular public would be (perhaps grudgingly) ready to live with - should be broadened to accomodate those who cheat and lie and put to ridicule the original agreement.

The usage of the word "kuuuuulam" is cynical and redundant in this respect. I think we both know well that the public in Israel will not be holding hands and singing Kumbaya in the matter of Ultra-Orthodox draft. However, when people share the same state, some common ground as to policy must be reached. So there you have it:

The religious public was seeking an exemption from service to allow for the study of Torah. The secular public, heavily burdened by this exemption, would like to see everyone perform military service. So the agreement was to allow for a quota of studying people, which grew and grew as decades flew by. But the Ultra-Orthodox public never went as far as you suggest: the agreement was exploited by those who cheated and in fact did not study, but no one would dare to openly claim that people who cynically violate the basis for the agreement - exemption for the purpose of studying - should benefit from this infringment. If you seriously suggest rewards for this unethical and illegal behavior - way beyond any reasonable and less than reasonable suggestion I ever heard from any Ultra-Orthodox public figure - surely you must see why this suggestion is beyond unacceptable.
מה להלכה ולאתיקה? 220667

חזרה לעמוד הראשי

מערכת האייל הקורא אינה אחראית לתוכן תגובות שנכתבו בידי קוראים