Opinion
Editorials are posted and archived on JNonline.us .
Editorial
Now Hear This
R
abbinical courts in Israel and
the United States have struggled
to come up with uniform stan-
dards for Orthodox conversions, crucial
to Israel's never-ending "Who is a Jew?"
debates. But a Chief Rabbinical Court rul-
ing that came to light last month shouldn't
be a matter of debate; it deserves condem-
nation.
The ruling, delivered by Rabbi Avraham
Sherman and reported by Yediot Achronot,
concerned a woman who wanted to con-
vert to Judaism and marry the Jewish
man she loved. The conversion could have
been denied on the grounds that a desire
to marry is not sufficient cause to convert.
But the woman's motive was not the issue.
Instead, the Chief Rabbinical Court
decided that she could not convert
because she is deaf; and the deaf, like the
young and "simpletons," are halachically
exempt from the obligation to observe
mitzvot. In the court's view, if you couldn't
be held accountable for the mitzvot, your
conversion would have no meaning, so it's
not allowed.
That's a shocking standard for Judaism
in the 21st century.
We're not talking about crossing a line
established by the Torah. There is noth-
ing in Scripture that says those who are
deaf or hearing-impaired or who combine
a speech impediment with a hearing
problem cannot be Jewish. The leeway
Halachah grants to the deaf is a practical
matter: It's not fair to expect people to
follow commandments they can't under-
stand.
But communication usually isn't
an obstacle today. Deaf men serve as
Orthodox rabbis. A yeshivah in Toronto
serves high school boys who are deaf. The
Council of Young Israel Rabbis in Israel
runs a program to foster Jewish identity
and learning through sign language for
the estimated 18,000 Israelis who are deaf
and the additional 200,000 who are hear-
ing-impaired.
We're troubled by the idea of an exclu-
sionary Judaism. Both our reading of
Torah and our study of Jewish history
lead us to believe that membership in the
Chosen People is not meant to be limited
to a few million lucky souls. To the con-
trary, we can and should welcome all who
want to take on the burden and the privi-
lege of being Jewish.
In only the rarest of cases is it beyond
the ability of a rabbinical court to com-
municate with a prospective convert who
has hearing problems. Wise rabbis, there-
fore, should be able to judge the would-be
convert's knowledge, motives and sincerity
on a case-by-case basis.
JUST
Dry Bones 14E
WON'T QUIT!
Can Judaism survive if
fOLMERT
we refuse the conversions
/
LIKE THE 1
of people who can't hear?
AMAZING
Of course. But the implica-
WINNER
OF
tions of the court ruling
SOME TV
run deeper than whether
SURVIVOR
a couple in love can have
a Jewish marriage or how
SHOW
a family with a deaf child
is received when seeking
conversion.
A Jew by choice is and
should be no different
than a Jew by birth. The
Chief Rabbinical Court is
ALMOST
setting a precedent for a
EVERYBODY
AND HE G07 H IS S
dismissive view of all deaf
WANTED
HIM
MONEY AT THE
Jews, and that's repugnant
OUT
„
,
BEGINNING!
regardless of your views
on conversion.
Rabbi Shlomo
Dichovsky wrote a dissent-
ing opinion to the court
ruling. He focused on con-
version as an acceptance
of "the burden of faith"
www.drybonesblog.com
and Jewish continuity.
"The appellant has every
That's the bottom line: If you want to
right to seek conversion since she resides
be Jewish, understand what it means to
and works among Jewish people he
be Jewish and are willing to strive to fol-
wrote. "Conversion should be hers if she so low our laws, we should welcome you with
wants it:'
open eyes, open ears and open arms. ❑
Reality Check
Missing The Detour Sign
H
enry Ford was the first manu-
facturer to figure out that a
small profit margin on a large
market will always return more than a
large profit margin on a small market.
It was the basis for his assembly line
and $5 a day pay scale. One lowered pro-
duction costs and the other expanded the
market for his cars to include his own
workers. Too bad the current bunch of
automakers forgot that. Or maybe they
didn't believe the same economic truths
applied to them.
It wasn't as if they hadn't been warned.
Previous spikes in gas prices had driven
down demand for big vehicles. The lesson
was there to be learned.
Nevertheless, "small cars, small profits"
became the Big 3's mantra. So they went
on building trucks and SUVs as if the
price point at which the market would
tip was never going to come or that gas
prices somehow were going to reverse
themselves.
As a result, they are lagging
behind in developing small and
mid-sized cars with good gas
mileage. Again. It appears to be a
real slow learning curve.
It seemed to astonish the fin-
est minds at Ford and GM that
such a thing would knock all
their marvelous recovery plans
into the ashcan. The response
has been to reduce their hourly
and salaried work force even
more, dealing yet another blow to any
recovery by the Michigan economy.
Maybe they couldn't have foreseen the
credit squeeze or the speculative frenzy in
oil futures. The realities of the internation-
al market also made it impossible to sus-
tain the packages the UAW once obtained
for its members. But the crash landing has
been harder than it might have been with
better foresight.
It's funny how the automakers always
refer to more job cuts and factory closings
as "tough decisions."
Tough for whom? Not for
the executives who make
them. They flitter high above
any accountability for the
abject failure of their plans,
compensated at a rate so
much higher than the aver-
age wage of their employees
that it would have made a
19th century robber baron
blanch.
I am no populist, but in the winners and
losers that a free market demands there
has to be some penalty for being so wrong
so consistently. Corporate America has
cushioned its top executives from the con-
sequences of their bad guesses, however.
There is no shared pain. Their life rafts are
waterproof. Their boards of directors are
complaisant.
In terms of buying power, Ford's $5 day
of 94 years ago translates into about $70
today. There was no medical coverage of
any kind back then, no pension plans, no
overtime pay.
But there were no taxes to speak of,
either, for the average worker on the line.
So it's hard to make an argument that auto
workers are keeping pace with the past
under the sharply reduced pay scale in the
new union contracts for new hires.
Some economists feel that the high
price of oil will result in incentives that
will lead to development of old fields
in the United States and Canada. In the
long run, they claim, that will drive down
prices and increase the supply of secure
oil reserves.
Of course, that is cold comfort because
you know where you and I will be in the
long run.
Which makes me wonder: How much
does it cost to gas up a hearse these
days? ❑
George Cantor's e-mail address is
gcantor614@aol.com .
June 19 • 2008
A31