Avodah Mailing List

Volume 28: Number 224

Thu, 03 Nov 2011

< Previous Next >
Subjects Discussed In This Issue:
Message: 1
From: Micha Berger <mi...@aishdas.org>
Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2011 15:23:42 -0400
Subject:
Re: [Avodah] mabul


On Thu, Nov 03, 2011 at 02:25:56PM -0400, Zev Sero wrote:
> On 3/11/2011 1:26 PM, Micha Berger wrote:
>> Both R' Eliezer and R' Yehushua both describe the flood (RH 11b) as
>> falling through the heaven onto the earth. Rebbe (Pesachim 94b) is
>> described as arguing against the ages of Rome when he said the mazalos
>> move and the galgal is fixed (which was the Babylonian theory). So there
>> were tannaim who didn't buy into Ptolemy.
>
> None of which has to do with the shape of the earth itself...

Except it's all one theory. Ptolemy's model of the universe was where
they got the spherical earth concept from. The Romans themselves never
taught one without the other. For R' Eliezer and R' Yehoshua to know
the world was round because they were in the Roman Empire raises the
question of why they didn't buy into the rest of the theory.

However, the Romans themselves didn't buy into Greek Astronomy until
the 2nd generation of amora'im. And so the line appears to be around
R' Chiyya Ruba (as he was titled in EY) in EY and a generation or two
later in Bavel.

I am agreeing with your basic thesis, that Chazal believed the latest
science, as it was understood to be in their times and places. However,
I think the data both from Chazal and of when the surrounding culture
accepted the Ptolmeic theory isn't EY vs Bavel or tannaim vs amoraim.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Feeling grateful  to or appreciative of  someone
mi...@aishdas.org        or something in your life actually attracts more
http://www.aishdas.org   of the things that you appreciate and value into
Fax: (270) 514-1507      your life.         - Christiane Northrup, M.D.



Go to top.

Message: 2
From: Micha Berger <mi...@aishdas.org>
Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2011 15:28:42 -0400
Subject:
Re: [Avodah] avraham's geirim


On Thu, Nov 03, 2011 at 03:07:19PM -0400, Rich, Joel wrote:
: The simplest explanation imho is they became monotheists, not Jews.

Which is compelled by the fact that geirus means joining beris Sinai,
which didn't exist yet. Geirus as we know it wasn't defined until MRAH
told them to do milah for the qorban pesach and miqvah as part of the 3
Yemei haGebalah. (Which is how the Rambam can conclude that the qorban
isn't me'aqev.)

-Micha



Go to top.

Message: 3
From: Micha Berger <mi...@aishdas.org>
Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2011 15:54:28 -0400
Subject:
Re: [Avodah] Status of Non-Jew born to Jewish Father


On Wed, Nov 02, 2011 at 06:40:02PM -0400, T6...@aol.com wrote:
: He is different from any other non-Jew only in this respect:  if he  
: decides that he wants to convert to Judaism, he is not initially discouraged
: but is immediately encouraged and welcomed to join the Jewish people.

: I find it hard to believe that a Chabad rabbi performed a bris on a  
: non-Jewish baby...

This is actually the norm, Chabad and not, in such cases. As others
noted. I just want to add thenuance that you yourself explain why...
We do not try discouraging such a boy if he would choose to convert
later. And so, if the parents want a milah, why not save him future pain
-- the thought of which could well discourage him?

However, it is documented that it's lesheim geirus.

When my great uncle, R' Joseph Goldberg, performed a beris, he wrote in
a little pad that could fit in a shirt pocket the name of the child,
the purpose of the beris (if lesheim geirus) and a couple of other
details. At the time of his petirah, he had two closets full of boxes
of such notebooks, sorted by date. Just for such referencing, if they
would ever be needed. And therefore he could never throw one away.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Our greatest fear is not that we're inadequate,
mi...@aishdas.org        Our greatest fear is that we're powerful
http://www.aishdas.org   beyond measure
Fax: (270) 514-1507                        - Anonymous



Go to top.

Message: 4
From: Zev Sero <z...@sero.name>
Date: Thu, 03 Nov 2011 15:27:39 -0400
Subject:
Re: [Avodah] spurious correlation


On 3/11/2011 3:13 PM, David Riceman wrote:
> Ought there to be any relation between a person's halachic opinion about brain death and about abortion?

It seems logical to me.  If the brain has enough activity that if the
person was at the end of his life you'd arrest anyone who cut him up for
spare parts, then kal vachomer if he's at the beginning of his life.
The earliest detectable brain activity (as far as I've been able to
gather) comes at 6 weeks, coincidentally (or not) close to Chazal's
40 days.  I'm sure "6 weeks" doesn't mean precisely 42 days, so there's
not necessarily even a small mismatch.


-- 
Zev Sero        If they use these guns against us once, at that moment
z...@sero.name   the Oslo Accord will be annulled and the IDF will
                 return to all the places that have been given to them.
                                            - Yitzchak Rabin

                    
                



Go to top.

Message: 5
From: Zev Sero <z...@sero.name>
Date: Thu, 03 Nov 2011 15:32:42 -0400
Subject:
Re: [Avodah] mabul


On 3/11/2011 3:23 PM, Micha Berger wrote:
> Except it's all one theory. Ptolemy's model of the universe was where
> they got the spherical earth concept from.

No, it isn't.  They got the spherical earth from such things as ships
disappearing over the horizon mast first.  And Aristothenes (if I've
remembered his name correctly) estimated the size of the earth fairly
accurately by measuring the shadow of a stick in two locations that
were on the same longitude.  Those are the sort of discoveries that
would have eventually reached the tana'im in EY, but would have taken
a while longer to get to the amora'im of Bavel.

-- 
Zev Sero        If they use these guns against us once, at that moment
z...@sero.name   the Oslo Accord will be annulled and the IDF will
                 return to all the places that have been given to them.
                                            - Yitzchak Rabin

                    
                



Go to top.

Message: 6
From: Micha Berger <mi...@aishdas.org>
Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2011 16:13:15 -0400
Subject:
Re: [Avodah] mabul


On Thu, Nov 03, 2011 at 03:32:42PM -0400, Zev Sero wrote:
>                              Those are the sort of discoveries that
> would have eventually reached the tana'im in EY, but would have taken
> a while longer to get to the amora'im of Bavel.

But again, the Romans had a model of the universe. Ptolemy comibined ideas
from Apollonius, Plato, Erastothenes, etc... to produce a single theory,
and that was the system Roman philosophers bought. The pieces, though,
are nearly all Greek. Plato has the sun going adounf the earth (moon,
sun, mercury, venus); Ptlomey moved mercury and venus lower down than the
sun. But little else. Apollonius of perga introduced epicycles. It's all
from the early bayis sheini. Ptolemy gets credit for picking variants
that he could glue all together to make one picture. And in doing so,
his Amalgest convinced the empire.

But if it's compelling that the tannaim believed in a round earth
because the Romans did, why didn't that compell them to believe
in the sun orbiting the earth?

Why are you assuming the tannaim had a cosmos no philosophical school
every produced when there is no evidence for it? And why wasn't their
model passed down to the amoraim who thought the world was flat and
floated atop the tehom or rested above it on pillars? Is there any
tanna who actually mentions the globe?

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Man can aspire to spiritual-moral greatness
mi...@aishdas.org        which is seldom fully achieved and easily lost
http://www.aishdas.org   again. Fulfillment lies not in a final goal,
Fax: (270) 514-1507      but in an eternal striving for perfection. -RSRH



Go to top.

Message: 7
From: Eli Turkel <elitur...@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2011 22:02:25 +0200
Subject:
[Avodah] mabul


<<Whereas the amora'im in Bavel hadn't necessarily heard about these
discoveries, and thus we find some who thought the earth was flat and
some who knew it was round.>>

Of course there were Amoraim also in EY.
In line with this I have seen claims that in spite of the gemara that Shmuel
knew the heavens like the streets of Nehardea that in fact the knowledge of
R. Yochanan of science and mathematics was superior to that of Shmuel

-- 
Eli Turkel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20111103/94fd10b8/attachment-0001.htm>


Go to top.

Message: 8
From: Zev Sero <z...@sero.name>
Date: Thu, 03 Nov 2011 16:24:52 -0400
Subject:
Re: [Avodah] mabul


On 3/11/2011 4:02 PM, Eli Turkel wrote:
> <<Whereas the amora'im in Bavel hadn't necessarily heard about these
> discoveries, and thus we find some who thought the earth was flat and
> some who knew it was round.>>
>
> Of course there were Amoraim also in EY.

Yes, and they knew the earth was round.

-- 
Zev Sero        If they use these guns against us once, at that moment
z...@sero.name   the Oslo Accord will be annulled and the IDF will
                 return to all the places that have been given to them.
                                            - Yitzchak Rabin

                    
                



Go to top.

Message: 9
From: Zev Sero <z...@sero.name>
Date: Thu, 03 Nov 2011 16:24:05 -0400
Subject:
Re: [Avodah] mabul


On 3/11/2011 4:13 PM, Micha Berger wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 03, 2011 at 03:32:42PM -0400, Zev Sero wrote:
>>                               Those are the sort of discoveries that
>> would have eventually reached the tana'im in EY, but would have taken
>> a while longer to get to the amora'im of Bavel.
>
> But again, the Romans had a model of the universe.

Again with the Romans.  Why them?  The intellectual world was Greek.
And why should they adopt every stupid idea that comes down the pike.
Some ideas made sense to them, especially the ones that were proven
by experiment, such as the shape and size of the earth, while others
seemed like nonsense to them, as indeed they turned out to be.


> But if it's compelling that the tannaim believed in a round earth
> because the Romans did, why didn't that compell them to believe
> in the sun orbiting the earth?

For the same reason that hardly any scientists believed that until
quite recently.  Remember that in Galileo's day the scientific consensus
was *against* him.   Whereas there hasn't been a time for well over 2000
years when educated people thought the earth was flat.



> Why are you assuming the tannaim had a cosmos no philosophical school
> every produced when there is no evidence for it? And why wasn't their
> model passed down to the amoraim who thought the world was flat and
> floated atop the tehom or rested above it on pillars? Is there any
> tanna who actually mentions the globe?

IIRC there's a Tosfos in Avoda Zara that explains the mishneh about the
orb, sceptre, and bird being signs of mastery over the world (the first
two eventually made their way into modern times as symbols of royalty).
The orb, says Tosfos, represents the earth, which is an orb, citing an
explicit Yerushalmi.  So the amoraim of the Y'mi knew, but so did the
tana'im.  And the only flat earth references we find are from Bavli
amora'im.  So it makes sense that they hadn't heard the news.


-- 
Zev Sero        If they use these guns against us once, at that moment
z...@sero.name   the Oslo Accord will be annulled and the IDF will
                 return to all the places that have been given to them.
                                            - Yitzchak Rabin

                    
                



Go to top.

Message: 10
From: Micha Berger <mi...@aishdas.org>
Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2011 16:48:54 -0400
Subject:
Re: [Avodah] mabul


On Thu, Nov 03, 2011 at 04:24:52PM -0400, Zev Sero wrote:
>> Of course there were Amoraim also in EY.

> Yes, and they knew the earth was round.

And they believed in galgalim and orbits.

What you don't have is any evidence that tannaim knew about the earth
being round. It would mean they bought into the idea at a time the
Romans were still on the fence about picking up the Greek cosmos. We do
have multiple quotes showing that "the Greeks said it and their Roman
oppressors accepted it" is insufficient reason to believe the tannaim
necessarily accepted a scientific idea.

And in fact, I already mentioned that R' Yehudah thought the sun going
under the earth would heat up suberranian water -- clear evidence that
he believed neither in the sun going behind the sky, nor a round earth!

In Bereishis Rabba 6:8, R' Yehudah bar Ilai and the sages debate (which
says which is a girsa issue) whether the sun goes up at night or down. R'
Yochachan and R' Shimon b Yochai each say there is no way to prove one
side over the other. R' Shimon, a tanna, wasn't sure if the world was
round. R' Yochanan much of his life as a tanna as well. This is /exactly/
where Roman science was in the first years after the Amalgest -- some
bought into the revived Greek ideas, some not. No definitive answer.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             The fittingness of your matzos [for the seder]
mi...@aishdas.org        isn't complete with being careful in the laws
http://www.aishdas.org   of Passover. One must also be very careful in
Fax: (270) 514-1507      the laws of business.    - Rav Yisrael Salanter



Go to top.

Message: 11
From: Zev Sero <z...@sero.name>
Date: Thu, 03 Nov 2011 16:56:17 -0400
Subject:
Re: [Avodah] mabul


On 3/11/2011 4:48 PM, Micha Berger wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 03, 2011 at 04:24:52PM -0400, Zev Sero wrote:
>>> >>  Of course there were Amoraim also in EY.
>> >  Yes, and they knew the earth was round.
> And they believed in galgalim and orbits.

Yes, but not necessarily in the same way as the Romans did.  They
probably got their information from the Greeks (tenth-hand) rather
than the Romans.

> What you don't have is any evidence that tannaim knew about the
> earth being round.

I cited the mishneh in AZ.  While it's *possible* to interpret it
differently, in light of the Y'mi it seems more likely that Tosfos is
correct, and the author of this mishneh knew that the earth was an orb
-- and he assumed that it was common knowledge among the goyim too.

-- 
Zev Sero        If they use these guns against us once, at that moment
z...@sero.name   the Oslo Accord will be annulled and the IDF will
                 return to all the places that have been given to them.
                                            - Yitzchak Rabin

                    
                



Go to top.

Message: 12
From: Micha Berger <mi...@aishdas.org>
Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2011 17:04:49 -0400
Subject:
Re: [Avodah] mabul


On Thu, Nov 03, 2011 at 04:56:17PM -0400, Zev Sero wrote:
> I cited the mishneh in AZ.  While it's *possible* to interpret it
> differently, in light of the Y'mi it seems more likely that Tosfos is
> correct, and the author of this mishneh knew that the earth was an orb
> -- and he assumed that it was common knowledge among the goyim too.

One last time...

The author of the mishnah clearly stated that water in underground springs
is warmer at night because the sun is under the earth. Thus, he believed
that the sun's distance below the earth at night, plus the width of the
earth, is less than its height above the earth during the day.

This rules out the earth being an orb, as well as orbits. It defies
the dome-of-sky cosmology of the Babylonians as well.

Rebbe didn't know the earth was a globe. So again, we have no evidence
of tannaim saying the earth was round, or anything implying it was. But
tannaim who say things that do contradict the idea.

And the shell of the sky comes from a comology in which the world is
flat. A globe world wouldn't have a dome shell sky, it would have a
sphere (galgal hamazalos). For the tannaim to somehow combine ideas
(despite my last sentence) that come from different places, ideas that
no one else combined, requires evidence. Rebbe's statement about the
sun going down at night isn't it.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Live as if you were living already for the
mi...@aishdas.org        second time and as if you had acted the first
http://www.aishdas.org   time as wrongly as you are about to act now!
Fax: (270) 514-1507            - Victor Frankl, Man's search for Meaning



Go to top.

Message: 13
From: Micha Berger <mi...@aishdas.org>
Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2011 17:14:18 -0400
Subject:
Re: [Avodah] spurious correlation


On Thu, Nov 03, 2011 at 03:13:07PM -0400, David Riceman wrote:
> Ought there to be any relation between a person's halachic opinion about  
> brain death and about abortion?

If brain death means the death of the brains ability to maintain
breath on its own, then the parallel would be when the baby starts
breathing on its own -- birth.

And most posqim do consider birth to be the start of life, and abortion
being prohibited for reasons other than murder. Perhaps a "toladah of
retzichah" perhaps "hashchasas zera", but not retzichah itself.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Like a bird, man can reach undreamed-of
mi...@aishdas.org        heights as long as he works his wings.
http://www.aishdas.org   But if he relaxes them for but one minute,
Fax: (270) 514-1507      he plummets downward.   - Rav Yisrael Salanter



Go to top.

Message: 14
From: Lampel <zvilam...@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 03 Nov 2011 16:30:34 -0400
Subject:
Re: [Avodah] Mabul


>> >  <<"Down" means towards the centre of the earth. "Up" means away from it.
>> >  Thus all of the sky is above the land, not under it.>>
In agreement: In Moreh Nevuchim, the Rambam states both that the earth 
is a globe (1:73, in 10th Proposition), and (2:30) that when it says 
that Hashem created the "shamayim" and the "aretz,," it means those 
things that are above and those things that are below (ha-elyonim 
v'ha-tach'tonim).

Astronauts and astronomers also speak of "looking down at the earth."

Some examples:

http://www.nasa.gov/vision/space/features/carey_retires_prt.htm
?It's a passion for me," he said. "Even while looking down from space, I 
would imagine moving across those green expanses on a motorcycle?? Space 
Shuttle pilot, Astronaut Duane G. "Digger" Carey, going back to his true 
love of motorcycling.


http://www.nasaimages.org/luna/servlet/detail/NSVS~3~3~13899~113899:Loo
king-Down-at-the-Earth-from-Space

http://www.nasa.gov/centers/langley/news/researchernews/rn_ast
rophotography.html
Joseph
?Although my job here at NASA Langely [Research Center] requires that I 
look down at the Earth?s atmosphere from space, I never stopped looking 
up at space from down here on earth? (Jospeh Zawdony, senior research 
scientist, Langely Research Center).

http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2001/ast07aug_1/

http://www.archive.org/details/SVS-2630 ?Looking Down at the Earth?s 
Ocean Floor from Space.?




Go to top.

Message: 15
From: David Riceman <drice...@optimum.net>
Date: Thu, 03 Nov 2011 17:43:51 -0400
Subject:
Re: [Avodah] spurious correlation


RMB:

<<If brain death means the death of the brains ability to maintain 
breath on its own, then the parallel would be when the baby starts 
breathing on its own -- birth.>>

You're making my point very eloquently.  The parallel to "the [end] of 
the brain's ability to maintain breath" is "the beginning of the brain's 
ability to maintain breath".  That's considerably earlier than "when the 
baby starts breathing on its own".  I don't know the exact numbers, but 
certainly seven month old fetuses can breathe without assistance when 
born early.

<<And most posqim do consider birth to be the start of life, and 
abortion being prohibited for reasons other than murder.>>

That's exactly my question.  Shouldn't those who hold that death can 
ensue before the cessation of breathing also hold that birth can ensue 
before the onset of breathing? Shouldn't the precise parallel be that a  
fetus is considered born if it could breathe on its own, even if it's 
now still unbreathing inside the womb?

David Riceman






Go to top.

Message: 16
From: Micha Berger <mi...@aishdas.org>
Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2011 18:17:39 -0400
Subject:
Re: [Avodah] spurious correlation


On Thu, Nov 03, 2011 at 05:43:51PM -0400, David Riceman wrote:
> That's exactly my question.  Shouldn't those who hold that death can  
> ensue before the cessation of breathing also hold that birth can ensue  
> before the onset of breathing? Shouldn't the precise parallel be that a   
> fetus is considered born if it could breathe on its own, even if it's  
> now still unbreathing inside the womb?

1- Do we agree that abortion is not retzichah, at least not the "av
retzichah"? (Thus explaining why the onesh is different for Benei
Yisrael.) If so, the answer to the question on the subject line is
that abortion is assur regardless of when life begins.

2- "Brain death" in this machloqes is actually shorthand for "brain stem
death" which in turn is a stand-in for "the end of autonomous breathing
and/or heartbeat". It is not what the AMA or most countries mean by
the term "brain death".

Chazal have a machloqes about breathing vs hearbeat, do you check the nose
or the chest, etc... But let's put both on one side of the scale, in
contrast to brain death.

AISI whole machloqes isn't whether breathing (or heartbeat) is replaced by
brain activity in our definition of life. Rather, it's whether the breathing
needs to be autonomous, caused by the person's brain step, or whether any
breathing whatsoever qualifies as life.

Therefore, even by the "brain death" definition, life begins at birth for
the same reason as the breathing defnition. Or maybe a couple of seconds
later, when the doctor makes the baby cry its first breath.

3- However, it could well be that there really is no correlation. Say we
side with the gemaros that indicate that death is defined by heartbeat
(or autonomous heartbeat). Then life would begin before birth, at around
6-1/2 to 7 weeks. (The proverbial 40 days?) But as we said above, few
acharonim hold that abortion is murder -- ie rov posqim do not hold life
begins at 40 days. It would seem therefore that either:
a- the start and end of life actually have different definitions, or
b- rov posqim go by breathing, not heartbeat.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             For a mitzvah is a lamp,
mi...@aishdas.org        And the Torah, its light.
http://www.aishdas.org                   - based on Mishlei 6:2
Fax: (270) 514-1507



Go to top.

Message: 17
From: "Prof. Levine" <llev...@stevens.edu>
Date: Thu, 03 Nov 2011 17:50:32 -0400
Subject:
[Avodah] The Case Of The Missing Tallis ? Informality vs.


 From http://tinyurl.com/3pfufta

Ashkenazic tradition is to wear a Talis (gadol) in Shul even at times 
when such is not  generally worn by the congregation at large, for 
example at a weekday mincha davening, when one is carrying out 
certain tasks, e.g. acting as the , or , leading the prayers and 
representing the congregation. The same goes for when leading the 
evening tefilloh commonly referred to as 'maariv', when getting an 
aliyah or leining at of , and other occasions.

This practice is faithfully followed to the present day in (German) 
Ashkenazic congregations, as well as elsewhere, such as Lithuanian 
type Yeshivos, and such 'Yeshivishe minyonim'.

In other places, e.g. many Eastern European Ashkenazic Shuls, there 
has been an erosion in this aspect of the Ashkenazic tradition, due 
to, it seems, Chassidic influence, as well as perhaps modern trends 
toward informality. In such places, one can see people going to the 
amud to lead the services at maariv, and sometimes even at mincha, 
without a tallis gadol. And also leining and going up for aliyos at 
mincha of Shabbos similarly.

Please see the above URL for the rest of this article.  YL

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20111103/631d012f/attachment-0001.htm>


Go to top.

Message: 18
From: Zev Sero <z...@sero.name>
Date: Thu, 03 Nov 2011 17:30:05 -0400
Subject:
Re: [Avodah] mabul


And what of the mishneh in AZ?   Where did the orb come from?


-- 
Zev Sero        If they use these guns against us once, at that moment
z...@sero.name   the Oslo Accord will be annulled and the IDF will
                 return to all the places that have been given to them.
                                            - Yitzchak Rabin

                    
                



Go to top.

Message: 19
From: Micha Berger <mi...@aishdas.org>
Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2011 18:29:22 -0400
Subject:
Re: [Avodah] mabul


On Thu, Nov 03, 2011 at 05:30:05PM -0400, Zev Sero wrote:
> And what of the mishneh in AZ?   Where did the orb come from?

Sun or moon.

Or even the earth -- as seen and worshipped by those who made it into
an AZ. That doesn't show Rebbe agreed it really was round. (And we have
a quote from him that indicates he thought it wasn't.)

The first indication we have of any of chazal agreeing is in the Y-mi
on that mishnah (vilna: 18b), R' Yonah (4th gen, early 4th cent) talks
about Alexander flying high enough to see that the earth was a ball.
But that's 2 centuries after Rebbe.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha



Go to top.

Message: 20
From: T6...@aol.com
Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2011 18:28:08 -0400 (EDT)
Subject:
Re: [Avodah] Is there any issur here al pi




 
From:  "Joseph C. Kaplan" <jkap...@tenzerlunin.com>
R'n IE: "The idea is  really scary and makes me very uncomfortable, but 
it's hard to
make a moral  judgment given that everyone comes out ahead - the recipient
gets a kidney  and the donor gets badly needed money."

Not everybody.  The poor  person whose condition is worse than the rich 
person's but doesn't get the  kidney and dies comes out way behind.

Joseph Kaplan 

 
>>>>>>
If a much larger pool of kidneys becomes available I don't know how or why  
the poor person would be any worse off than he is now.  Right now many  
people die because there aren't enough kidneys.  You seem to think a large  
number of deaths is acceptable, as long as rich and poor have an equal chance 
of  dying.  But you must realize that right now rich people have a better  
chance of surviving any illness you can think of, because of greater access  
and  knowledge, better networking, ability to travel to top-notch  transplant 
centers, better nutrition and a host of other factors.
 
Assume that insurance would pay the donor just as it pays the  surgeon.  
How would the poor be worse off?  Or assume that the poor  would be less 
likely to have insurance.  OK, again, if donors were paid,  how would the poor be 
worse off than they are now?
 
Assume that Medicaid would do for the poor whatever it presently  does.  
Our poor man who needs a kidney transplant is already worse off than  the rich 
man with good insurance.  Will he be even /worse/ off when the  donor is 
paid and not only the doctor and the hospital?
 
I bet you could get a lot of people to donate a kidney for the cost of a  
single week in the ICU of an American hospital.  That would end up  saving 
money for insurance companies and for Medicaid.
 
Are you assuming that donors would be paid out of the patient's  pocket?  
Why make that assumption?
 

--Toby  Katz
================




_____________________  




-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-ai
shdas.org/attachments/20111103/bf59fae4/attachment.htm>

------------------------------


Avodah mailing list
Avo...@lists.aishdas.org
http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org


End of Avodah Digest, Vol 28, Issue 224
***************************************

Send Avodah mailing list submissions to
	avodah@lists.aishdas.org

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
	http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
	avodah-request@lists.aishdas.org

You can reach the person managing the list at
	avodah-owner@lists.aishdas.org

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Avodah digest..."


< Previous Next >