Muhammed mentioned in the Bible and Torah.

[Yitzi_K]

See above, I added it in after.

[enwiabe]

See above, I added it in after.

Hahaha you're very good at avoiding the issue. You still won't admit that they need the husband's consent and the husband's consent ONLY to allow a divorce?

Why? Blatant sexism. And you can't escape that fact

[Yitzi_K]

No, you need the consent of both of them. Did you or did you not look it up? It's quite explicit.

[enwiabe]

No, you need the consent of both of them. Did you or did you not look it up? It's quite explicit.

You don't need the woman's consent. The husband can override it if he wants to.

[enwiabe]

You know that a husband can just ask a rabbi for a divorce document and he gets one. If a woman wants one she has to sue in a rabbinical court. How is that not sexism?

[Thu Thu Train]

This thread has gone so far off topic the forum rules are crying.

[ninwa]

  Edit: Ha! Dennis Prager, (as well as making a good case against the continued indulgence of the Charedim) draws a parallel between Yeshiva scholars and Liberal Arts academics. Nice one!
  http://www.jewishjournal.com/dennis_prager/article/ultra-orthodox_yeshivas_and_secular_universities_20101201/

As a liberal arts student I am highly insulted >=[

[ninwa]

This thread has gone so far off topic the forum rules are crying.

I tried to split it but it had already gone off-topic in the first page

[Yitzi_K]

You know that a husband can just ask a rabbi for a divorce document and he gets one. If a woman wants one she has to sue in a rabbinical court. How is that not sexism?

No, incorrect. As I keep telling you, google the cherem of Rabbeinu Gershom. You've repeated this point 4 times now, every single time completely ignoring the point I've raised that what you're saying is completely and utterly halachically inaccurate. You of all people should know that repeating a point many times doesn't make it true.

[MuggedByReality]

 
   So, Yitzi, just one active Torah scholar is needed to save the world? Obviously he'll need several understudies in case something unforeseen happens to him.  And you could form part of a sort of  militia, (just as with the IDF), of auxiliary scholars, prepared for an emergency. But...you can't really make a case for hundreds of thousands to be similarly subsidised; it would rather contravene something I know from my very cursory knowledge of the Torah about not stealing.

  Edit: Ha! Dennis Prager, (as well as making a good case against the continued indulgence of the Charedim) draws a parallel between Yeshiva scholars and Liberal Arts academics. Nice one!
  http://www.jewishjournal.com/dennis_prager/article/ultra-orthodox_yeshivas_and_secular_universities_20101201/

As a liberal arts student I am highly insulted >=[

 I don't think he's 'anti-arts' (to use *that* phrase again); he objects to govt funded arts faculties being allowed to coexist in a left-wing echo chamber.

[enwiabe]

You know that a husband can just ask a rabbi for a divorce document and he gets one. If a woman wants one she has to sue in a rabbinical court. How is that not sexism?

No, incorrect. As I keep telling you, google the cherem of Rabbeinu Gershom. You've repeated this point 4 times now, every single time completely ignoring the point I've raised that what you're saying is completely and utterly halachically inaccurate. You of all people should know that repeating a point many times doesn't make it true.

From wiki, and this article is WELL sourced (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Get_%28divorce_document%29):
"Refusal to provide a get

The laws of gittin only provide for a divorce initiated by the husband. However, the wife has the right to sue for divorce in a rabbinical court."

Sexism.

[Mao]

WELL sourced (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Get_%28divorce_document%29):

If by well sourced, you mean it references five documents, three of which are news articles; and the line you quote does not have a citation, then yes. I can see how it is 'well' sourced.

[enwiabe]

WELL sourced (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Get_%28divorce_document%29):

If by well sourced, you mean it references five documents, three of which are news articles; and the line you quote does not have a citation, then yes. I can see how it is 'well' sourced.

It sources the relevant Judaic text.

[Yitzi_K]

No it doesn't. I see no mention of any of the relevant texts anywhere in the article. (I also find it hard to believe you would know what the relevant texts are.)

But even if we are to assume that what's written there is correct, it's at most a legal technicality which is essentially meaningless.

At the end of the day:

A man cannot give a get without the consent of his wife.
A woman cannot give a get without the consent of her husband.

A man can start divorce proceedings against his wife.
A woman can start divorce proceedings against her husband.

I dunno, to me that seems fairly equal, but if you want to get your knickers in a twist over some exaggerated perceived sexism, go with it.

[enwiabe]

No it doesn't. I see no mention of any of the relevant texts anywhere in the article. (I also find it hard to believe you would know what the relevant texts are.)

But even if we are to assume that what's written there is correct, it's at most a legal technicality which is essentially meaningless.

At the end of the day:

A man cannot give a get without the consent of his wife.
A woman cannot give a get without the consent of her husband.

A man can start divorce proceedings against his wife.
A woman can start divorce proceedings against her husband.

I dunno, to me that seems fairly equal, but if you want to get your knickers in a twist over some exaggerated perceived sexism, go with it.

Nah, I'm not letting you weasel out of this one It's interesting that you didn't rebut my point that Jewish men can just ASK for the document, but the woman must go through the degrading process of legal action in a court. Tell me how this isn't sexist? And finally, if it isn't sexist, tell me how this situation comes to pass:

http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/news/religious-courts-society-must-shun-divorce-deniers-1.255283

Where even the religious community is SHUNNING taht man because he won't grant his wife a divorce, yet they can't act to grant the divorce themselves? Seems like your religion has sexism ingrained within it...

Also you're such a fucking weasel. All that is required in Jewish law for a woman's "consent" is that the man hand the document to his wife. He can do that for any reason. Once the document has been handed to her, the divorce is finalised. She doesn't need to sign for it, or "consent" to him. He just needs to physically press the document into her hand.

And you knew that, and like the wormy weasel that you are you tried to play it down. How disgraceful.