rabbi tells parents-incest rape is ok

[BlaqueKatt]

story here

Short version, 20 year old and 19 year old brothers repeatedly raped their 10 year old sister, and the rabbi told the parents to NOT go to the police, because "these things happen all the time"- WTF? And now that they've been charged, after TWO YEARS of this, the Rabbi is still defending their actions. He has a DUTY TO REPORT suspected child abuse, BY LAW, and he does nothing. The parents do nothing, that poor little girl......

[Kheldarson]

Looks like this is an interpretation issue. I'm finding a lot of back and forth on this from within the community...but mostly around the interpretation of a Torah law about turning in a fellow Jew to the secular government.

That's not saying that I think this rabbi did right, just noting an interesting reason as to why he might have chosen to hide it. And the articles around that debate are fascinating.

[siead_lietrathua]

*sighs, grabs shotgun* bbiaf

wait... i dont have a passport. damnit.

[BlaqueKatt]

That's not saying that I think this rabbi did right, just noting an interesting reason as to why he might have chosen to hide it.

only issue is duty to report is federal law, and the feds do not make exception for religious laws-otherwise I could start a religion saying it was my duty to kill anyone with a purple eyebrow tattoo. It falls under giving one religion preferential treatment. And I'm not sure one torah law overrides the ones against rape and incest.

that and the Talmud states: "The law of the kingdom is the law", in the absence of a Sanhedrin.

[Kheldarson]

Was this in the US? The only thing I got from the article was some state was involved and Israel news. I thought maybe it was in Israel itself?

But either way, in trying to find the answer to that question, I was commenting on the fact that there is apparently a couple of Orthodox groups that are saying that reporting fellow Jews to "the kingdom", even in cases like this, is against Torah and that issues should be first reported to the elder rabbis. And the arguments are fascinating on both sides (I'm interested in how religious groups constantly update interpretations of religious texts), however, no, I don't think that they did right here. Because, ultimately, the rabbi failed in what his next step should've been if he wasn't going to report under the one law interpretation, which would've been to implement the laws guiding punishment of rapists and the incestuous.

[Sleepwalker]

It's wrong because raping kids is wrong, not because some nutjob's invisible friend told him different from some other nutjobs' invisible friends. Jesus. Interesting, my ass. When two men are raping their ten year old sister, and your first response is to ponder theology, just turn in your humanity card already.

[Kheldarson]

This has nothing to do with God, per se. It has to do with human laws being interpreted and deciding which society's laws has precedence. That's what I find fascinating.

Because, honestly, who's going to disagree that what they did was sick?

[jackfaire]

I would argue it has little to do with religion. The "it happens all the time" component is the more damaging aspect of the Rabbi's argument as it indicates a mentality that is often seen in more insular groups as "well if it happens all the time it's normal thus not wrong"

[Sleepwalker]

It's funny how a thread about a religious leader being told as a leader of a religious community that someone is being raped, and said religious leader then decides not to bring in secular authorities based on said religious beliefs, and the reporters of said rape do not report it to secular authorities because they reported it to religious authorities, and then commenters parse said religious texts in discussion of said case, but OMG THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH RELIGION!!!1one!!

Is this like religious tourettes? You are talking about the religious component to this crime, but the second a non believer comes in, IT'S NOT ABOUT GOD.

Similar to the viewpoint of the rabbi, perhaps. More important to keep the power and reputation of the religion than to address the abuse of a little girl.

[Kheldarson]

Um...because there's no debate there. It's awful what happened to her, and awful that the rabbi hid it.

The debate really is why? And frankly, BlaqueKatt's statement that he's required by law to report got me looking. Since I had no idea what ynet is or publishes or from where, the language used made me think maybe US, but the lack of city, state, or what have you, led me to think maybe it was in Israel. Which, it seems, is where it occurred. So, then the question is, is it really a law, like in the US, for a rabbi to report. Which is a fair question as well, as I don't live in Israel.

And wouldn't you know? Besides a reference to a UN convention on children's rights (which I can't find the link to now) which says that Israel agreed to, all I found was abuse cases and arguments why a rabbi should or should not report.

And I'm sorry, I think that argument is a bit more...important? Interesting? then commiserating over what a horrible fucking thing somebody did that everybody in this discussion so far agrees is a horrible fucking thing.

Furthermore, part of why this is a lead in to a bigger discussion is consider: a possible reason why he did not report was because you do not report a Jew to a secular government without a group of elder rabbis. This happened in Israel. A Jewish state. That means that there is a sect of Jews who do not believe they should respond to the Jewish government. And that's why, for all it's religious trappings, this is more political than religious.

[Sleepwalker]

"because you do not report a Jew to a secular government without a group of elder rabbis"

"And that's why, for all it's religious trappings, this is more political than religious."


/facedesk

[Kheldarson]

Ignoring the fact that Jews are an ethnic group as well as a religion are we?

Because right now, the way this is playing out is that Jews aren't supposed to report fellow Jews to the Jews.

[Sleepwalker]

/sigh

Rabbis. Secular government. Religious. Parse the word in as snippy a schoolmarm tone as you like, right now the way this is playing out is that religious PEOPLE aren't supposed to report religious RAPISTS to non religious AUTHORITIES.

Your own bloody posts makes damn clear that it isn't race that is the defining feature, it is affiliation, or lack thereof, with a religion.

[Kheldarson]

/sigh yourself.

You've got yourself wrapped in a tizzy because I refuse to acknowledge your desire to beat down the evils of religion when I'm more interested in the political ramifications of the issue. The fact that the issue occurred is regrettable, and upsetting, however, without addressing the true underlying concern which is a redefinition of a traditional law by sector of a religious and ethnic group of people, with the definition spreading even into the United States, is of far more worry than an individual case. Or whether or not you want to define this as an evils of religion since, traditionally, Judaism is a theocracy, which means its both.

[Duelist925]

/sigh

Rabbis. Secular government. Religious. Parse the word in as snippy a schoolmarm tone as you like, right now the way this is playing out is that religious PEOPLE aren't supposed to report religious RAPISTS to non religious AUTHORITIES.

Your own bloody posts makes damn clear that it isn't race that is the defining feature, it is affiliation, or lack thereof, with a religion.

Except that he violated his own religions tenents by not reporting this. As Blaque sad, the Talmud states that the law of the land is the LAW period, if there is no Sanhedrin (a council of elder Rabbi's)

As of right now, there is debate over wether there is a Sanhedrin in Israel, since one was supposedly established in 2004. A bit of time googling shows that there is debate to it's validity amongst both religious, and secular communities.


This happened in Israel. Accordingly, the rabbi had exactly two options, according to the tenents of his own religion--Report it to the secular government, or report it to this debated Sanhedrin. He did Neither. He is in violation of both secular law, and his own religious law. Both laws agree here, he did the Wrong thing.