Monday, 7 June 2010

On Suicide Pacts

The Constitution is not a suicide pact - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

«"The Constitution is not a suicide pact" is a rhetorical phrase in American political and legal discourse. The phrase expresses the belief that constitutional restrictions on governmental power must give way to urgent practical needs....»

Yet when it comes to those Jewish groups who support Palestine over Israel, isn't that itself a "suicide pact"?

What could be more destrucitve to existential needs of Israel's survival than for Jews to play with Israel's right to exist for the sake of Palestinianism?

Does Jewish "Leftism"
Trump Jewish survival
Does this suicide-pact mentality really stem from a form of Jewish self-hatred?


Some snips from above that might be applicable to Halachic norms...

Jefferson on the Louisiana Purchase
«In justifying his actions, he later wrote: "[a] strict observance of the written law is doubtless one of the high duties of a good citizen, but it is not the highest. The laws of necessity, of self-preservation, of saving our country when in danger, are of higher obligation. To lose our country by a scrupulous adherence to the written law, would be to lose the law itself, with life, liberty, property and all those who are enjoying them with us; thus absurdly sacrificing the ends to the means."[1]»

Lincoln defending his suspension of Habeus Corpus

«Lincoln responded in a Special Session to Congress on July 4, 1861 that an insurrection "in nearly one-third of the States had subverted the whole of the laws . . . Are all the laws, but one, to go unexecuted, and the government itself go to pieces, lest that one be violated?" »

Justice Jackson in a dissent against William O. Douglas permitting a pro-nazi rlly..

«Jackson wrote a twenty-four page dissent in response to the Court's four page decision, [that permitted a pro-nazi rally] which concluded: "The choice is not between order and liberty. It is between liberty with order and anarchy without either. There is danger that, if the court does not temper its doctrinaire logic with a little practical wisdom, it will convert the constitutional Bill of Rights into a suicide pact."»

Even the Constitution needs "tweeking" in an urgency

«"Horo'at sho'oh" supercedes Halachah. In those cases "meta-Halachah" trumps»



Rabbi Burns said...

Aye, laddie, but:
The best laid schemes o' mice an' men
Gang aft agley,
An' lea'e us nought but grief an' pain,
For promis'd joy!

The end is only capable of justifying the means where the following conditions are met:

1. You can prove, and not merely assert, that the harm done by the means, including 'domino effects', is outweighed by the good done by the ends. This is indeed a tall order and is rarely possible to prove.
2. You can prove, and not merely assert, that the outcomes, including carry-on effects, are entirely predictable and free of unintended consequences.
3. Those most loudly advocating these means and those whose position gives them the final say on taking action, must not be spared the full consequences in the event that it all goes badly.
People who go around saying that the end justifies the means are invariably those who will be spared the horrors and harm caused by the means are who stand to gain the most from the desired ends.
Once all special protections and privileges are removed, this is the real test to see if they really mean what they say or will only advocate it if they are under special protection from the worst effects of their plans.

Rabbi R Wolpoe said...

A hora'at Sho'oh does not change Halachah. It suspends it. W/O a doubt a navi may do this, hahcamim probably may do so also

The Rambam actually justifies lopping off a Mitzvah just as an amputation might save a patient. I guess the Rambam must have been a physician or something to use such metaphors! :->