It’s important for both religious and secular Jews to at least be able to enter the mindset of each other and to understand where the other is coming from. If the Torah community has no choice but to inconvenience people on issues of major importance, it needs to be able to demonstrate good-will, by being able to compromise in other, lesser, areas. This is based on assigning a relative level of importance to various issues.

Rabbi Yaakov Horowitz mentions this point in “Is Everything a Ten?”, linked below(I remember that this was also mentioned in a Jewish Observer article following the Tommy Lapid victory). As Dr. Richard Carlson writes(”Don’t Sweat the Small Stuff”), “if you choose your battles wisely, you’ll be far more effective in winning those battles that are truly important”.

http://www.rabbihorowitz.com/PYes/ArticleDetails.cfm?Book_ID=895&ThisGroup_ID=238&Type=Article&SID=2

I’m not even sure where we draw the line concerning what is and what isn’t “religious coercion”. Prohibiting murder, I think we agree is not religious coercion; Banning mixed swimming, we would agree, is. What about prohibiting pictures of almost naked women on bus stop shelters? What about mandating monetary disputes be adjudicated according to halacha? Isn’t the fact that Israel uses civil law for monetary disputes coercion?

Since these issues have been around for decades, surely no one has to bring them to the finest Torah scholars’ attention. Can a reader of Cross-Currents please link to an essay in which a great Torah scholar addresses this issue? (besides the Chazon Ish and Rav Shach, since they’ve already been mentioned.)

Koheles tells us that the words of the Sages are heard when said pleasntly. Mishlei tells us that a kind word turns away much wrath. If 95% of the neighbourhood is Chareidi, the biggest way to get the last 5% to agree to separate hours at the pool and a BaDatz eiruv is to live an exemplary Torah lifestyle that they wil be attracted to. Religious coercion will receive only a backlash and episodes of chilul HaShem, chas v’shalom.

“Many questions arise from the establishment of a Jewish sovereign state, questions that never arose in the Diaspora,” he notes. “How do we build a national economy? On what values do we base our national budget? The rabbinate has no view on this. We have an army now, we deal with counterterrorism, fighting in the middle of a civilian population, facing situations of kidnapped and missing soldiers, roadblocks. What are the ethics a Jewish army should have? How much should we pay for [kidnapped IDF soldier Cpl.] Gilad Schalit’s release?

“Judaism doesn’t have an opinion on this? Of course it does! But the rabbinate is silent. Or social justice - Judaism has nothing to say about social justice? Of course it does! But the rabbinate doesn’t say it. Should Israel conduct foreign relations with dictatorial regimes? Is Israel permitted to supply weapons to certain countries, according to Judaism? Is there room for moral considerations in all this? Of course there is. But the rabbinate doesn’t deal with it….

“There are many more questions connected to the meaning and structure of a Jewish state, for which the rabbinate could have been the intellectual and spiritual resource that inspires [us] and to which we turn to hear Judaism’s opinion on legislation, policy, and such. Not merely an enforcing body on marriage, divorce, mikvaot and kashrut. But all these great and important national questions aren’t heard in the rabbinate.”

And this has been a major factor in the rabbinate’s current irrelevance, he adds. The secular public doesn’t turn to the rabbinate, nor does the rabbinate attempt to speak to the secular public.

The challenge for what Rabbi Rosenblum terms “our finest Torah scholars” is much deeper than imagined. Dealing with these issues would have profound impact for all sides.

Fascinating article. I lean heavily to not ‘shoving religion down people’s throats’ …and I think that was the CI’s point. But if you feel that we still need to ask ‘our finest Torah scholars’ …the question in my mind is who exactly do we rely upon that is in the category of ‘our finest Torah scholars’?

Do we speak to a R. Elyashiv? …or do we speak to a Rav Lichtenstien? I’m not trying to say that they are equally qualified or that they have equal Torah knowledge. I’m not the one to judge that.

But Torah knowledge alone is not necessarily enough. Free access to a Posek and the ability to transmit all relevant information accurately to him… in a non biased way… is a necessary component for him to be able to Paskin correctly. Furthermore, a Gadol’s Hashkafic orientation is a factor too. And that can easily result in two opposite Halachic decisions on the part of two very qualified Poskim. Who do we listen to then?

If there are Halachic limits on religious coercion, it would be great Kidush haShem if Gdoley Israel were to articulate them in a way that Chilonim would understand and be able to trust.

====================================
Agreed, yet thses issues are not new. What has the response been on closing roads etc? Given the proclivity in this community to run one’s total life by daat torah, surely the question has been raised.
KT