A She'eilah I recently received:
ABC wrote:
A family friend whose husband recently left her after 30 years of marriage for another woman has moved from California to the east coast. She has several health problems and is on a number of medications. She is also struggling for money. She had [Big Insurance Company] medical insurance here in CA for many years, and after moving had to reapply for the east coast [Big Insurance Company] . They turned her down because of her many pre-existing conditions. If she says she lives here in CA, she can keep her old [Big Insurance Company] until she finds another solution, but she has asked if she can use our address in [city in CA] to prove she lives here. Is that okay?
Thank you,
ABC
A family friend whose husband recently left her after 30 years of marriage for another woman has moved from California to the east coast. She has several health problems and is on a number of medications. She is also struggling for money. She had [Big Insurance Company] medical insurance here in CA for many years, and after moving had to reapply for the east coast [Big Insurance Company] . They turned her down because of her many pre-existing conditions. If she says she lives here in CA, she can keep her old [Big Insurance Company] until she finds another solution, but she has asked if she can use our address in [city in CA] to prove she lives here. Is that okay?
Thank you,
ABC
I responded:
Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer <ygbechhofer@gmail.com> wrote:
A tough question! What she should do, I'm not going to address. You can allow her to use your house as a mail drop, stipulating that you would rather not know the contents of the correspondence. Does that help?
KT,
YGB
A tough question! What she should do, I'm not going to address. You can allow her to use your house as a mail drop, stipulating that you would rather not know the contents of the correspondence. Does that help?
KT,
YGB
lav davka universal health care. another possible solution would be standards that rationalize all the differing state regulations. i'm not necessarily arguing against universal health care, but its important to point out that its not so poshut.
ReplyDelete-Y
We can ease these transitions and still not go to the government- mismanaged, -rationed, -delayed, and -denied care that exists in countries our Maximum Leader wants to emulate.
ReplyDeleteRabbi Bechofer, I know that this is off topic but do you have any thoughts on the Rabbi Dovid Cohen scnadal that is all over the blogosphere and that is the talk of the town in RCA circles and in the Teaneck/Bergenfield community?
ReplyDeleteI commented on Emes V'Emunah. I thought all he said is that you don't have to specify money paid cleaning ladies, baby sitters, etc.
ReplyDeleteRYGB, unfortunately he said a lot more than that. He said that tax evasion is permissible if there is no realistic possibility that the person will get caught, he said that he would deny his statements if quoted, and he made terribble statements about american goyim in the context of discussing eisav soneh es yaakov. It was an unbelievable CH. He then said in private that gezel akum is also permissible. That is why the RCA severed all ties with him.
ReplyDeleteSomone stealing your Ideas or a freind?Rabbi Levi Brackman
ReplyDeleteIs free healthcare our moral duty?http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3744688,00.html
I don't believe RDC said what is being maliciously attributed to him. A very highly placed source told me, in fact, that shortly after the incident the RCA called RDC in to interrogate him, and was perfectly satisfied with his views. It was only due to the relentless campaign of a certain individual that they finally disbanded their Va'ad Halacha just to get the fellow off their backs.
ReplyDeleteRabbi Bechofer, unfortunately you have been mislead. You must have either spoken to the Rabbi of the shul in which the speech took place or one of his disciples. That Rabbi has told people that it is proper to make misleading statements so that people do not know the truth regarding RDC's views and what he said when he spoke in Bergenfield.
ReplyDeleteIf you want to know the truth, you should read all of the letters that were sent to the RCA by people who have heard RDC speak about these matters and/or have spoken to him directly. You can also talk to the many Rabbis at the RCA who know what happened. I could give you a long list if you are interested. The suggestion that RDC was called in from some type of interrogation is completely ridiculous -- just ask the RCA leadership. I would suggest that you call Rabbi Goldin who is the VP of the RCA or Rabbi Weinreb of the OU. In any case, one hundred witnesses can tell you that RDC said on a number of occasions in his public speech that he would deny his views and statements if he get in trouble. If that is not enough, you should just ask the many people in Brooklyn who have discussed this with RDC over the years.
RYGB, if in fact RDC did not say what the JW attributed to him, then the Teaneck/Bergenfield community is deserving of condemnation. If this is a conspiracy, shouldn't the community and its Rabbis take action against the "conspirators" who wrote letters to the RCA to tell the RCA that they heard RDC explicitly say that tax evasion is permissible when there is no realistic possibility of getting caught and thereby causing a CH? Even worse, there were over 100 people from many different shuls who were at the lecture and not one person who was present at the lecture wrote a letter to the JW to challenge the content of the article. How could 100 people remain quiet in the face of a public motzei shem ra against RDC? We have a choice here -- either RDC did say what the JW attributed to him or the Teaneck/Bergenfield community is a Rabbi hating place that deserves to be condemned. I know that the former is true because I was present at the lecture, but I just want to make it clear that one who takes the position that RDC did not say what the JW attributed to him is making a very harsh accusation against the Teaneck/Bergenfield community.
ReplyDeleteThere was just an article in the Times about people who deny that astronauts ever made it to the moon, calling it all a hoax. I don't mean any disrespect to you by referencing this. In fact it pains me that Rabbis I have always respected so much would lie about this event (I believe you have been misled and are not lying) and put themselves in this category.
ReplyDeleteAre we misled if we do believe they made it or if we don't believe they made it?
ReplyDeleteThe 'highly placed source' who lies to cover up Rabbi Cohen's statements causes innocent individuals to make themselves look as foolish as those who deny that astronauts ever walked on the moon.
ReplyDeleteGot it. So long as I'm only b'geder misled, I can live with that. :-)
ReplyDeleteWho was it, in the Talmud, who said that at times it is OK to lie? (ex: about one's host, about the mesechta, etc. See
ReplyDeletehttp://dafnotes.blogspot.com/2009/07/license-to-lie.html) I wonder what the "blogs" of the day had to say about him!
Bava Metzia 23b.
ReplyDelete