Jewish Post, Indianapolis, Marion County, 16 March 1962 — Page 6

The National Jewish POST and OPINION

Friday, March 16, 1962

Church State Question Reaches Boil in Israel

Mercy Killing? NO! Says Ralibi

Even though a patient may be on his deathbed and close to the end, Judaic law forbids the use of active euthanasia in any form to hasten death. “Mercy killing” is banned under Jewish law which rules that “anyone who kills a dying person is liable to the death penalty as a common murderer.” Rabbi Immanuel Jakobovitz writing in the magazine Pharmaceutical News on the subject “Preparation In Death ami Euthanasia,” points out that the Hippocratic Oath requires the medical graduate to swear “Never will I give a deadly drug, not even if I am asked for one, nor will I give any advice tending in that direction.” “The predominantly ‘this-world-ly’ character of Judaism,” writes Rabbi Jakobovitz, “is reflected in the relative sparsity of its regulations on the inevitable passage of man from life to death.

“Life in this world is in the Jewish view but to serve as a preparation for the eternal bliss of the hereafter. “Judaism urges every caution to ensure that (the dying man’s) las*, preparation for death shall not aggravate his condition or compromise his will or ability to live. Among these preparations the ordering of his temporal affairs features as prominently as the reconciliation with his Creator. “The order of the confession prayer, too, seeks to reassure the patient: T acknowledge before Thee, O Lord my God and the God of my fathers that my recovery and my death are In Thine hand. May it be Thy Will to heal me with a perfect healing; but if I die, may my death be an atonement for all my sins, iniquities and transgressions which I committed before Thee.’ ”

Pigs and divorces (and of course Yossele) point up the increasingly grim problem of “religious compulsion,” as the more liberal elements of Israeli society put it. As to pigs, a law is now being routed through the Knesset to ban pig-raising in the Jewish State except in certain areas of Nazareth and Galilee. The bill passed its first reading last week. Protests have been lodged against it by liberal elements which argue it is motivated by a small religious clique which seeks to foist its ow r n opinions regarding stock-raising and eating on others. If Israelis want to eat pigs they should be allowed to do so, say the protesters, whether religious tradition argues against it or not. The Mapam Party is definitely pro-pig in the Knesset debate while Mapai is anti-pig to the extent of going the whole hog.

Deeply concerned in the pork polemics are some Mapam kibbutzim which have invested IL 2m in piggeries. Since these piggeries are in areas where pig-raising would be banned under the projected law, the kibbutzim would absorb a hefty loss. Divorce is another issue which raised the “King Charles’ head” of religious compulsion. In Dickens, “King Charles Head” was always appearing out of the strangest places to one of his troubled characters and that’s how the liberals find the question of divorce. Under existing Israeli law, divorcees cannot re-marry unless they have obtained a religious divorce. The League Against Religious Coercion is now embroiled in a case involving a divorced woman who wants to re marry but is ham strung by Israeli divorce statutes. Eight years ago, the woman, an

American, came to Israel with her two children. The trio settled in the Jewish State. She had been married in the United States in both a religious and civil ceremony. Five years after the marriage the couple were divorced by civil decree only. The husband has remarried in America by civil ceremony. The Rabbinical Court in Israel contacted a Rabbinic Court in America and asked it to obtain the husband's consent for a religious divorce. The husband refused his consent. “We wish to point out the legal injustice of such cases,” said Ben Menashe, a Tel Aviv lawyer and head of the League Against Religious Coercion. “We want the Rabbinic Court in Israel,” he declared “to judge cases before them in accordance with the principles of international private law in such instances where conflict bet wen the two creates personal tragedy." The league Against Religious Coercion recently staged a demonstration in Jerusalem, some 2,000 strong, against the closing of a portion of King George Avenue on Sabbath mornings when services are under way in Yeshurun Synagogue and Heichal Shk>mo. One of the placards carried by the demonstrators bore the inscription “Where is Yossele.” The question has long gone unanswered. Two years ago Yossele Schuhmacher was allegedly spirited away from his parents’ home in Israel at the behest of his granddad, Nahum Shtarkes who claimed the boy's mother planned to raise him in a nonreligious atmosphere. He has since been reported (A) in Europe, 'B) Behind the Iron Curtain and (C) Somewhere in England. His uncle Shalom Shtarkes. charged with complicity in his kidnapping, is now in the process of being extradited from England to Israel to stand trial on the abduction charge which carries with it a penalty of seven years’ imprisonment. The grandfather is already in custody in Israel as are two members of the Agudat Yisrael Moshav Kommemiut. They are Zalman and Rachel Cout. Police are holding them for questioning. It was from the Kommemiut Moshav that Yossele was allegedly spirited out of Israel after he had been confined there for a week following his removal from his parents’ home. The issue has lined the Orthodox religious elements up on one side and the liberals up on another, the latter group pointing to the kidnapping and the ensuing mother’s heartbreak as an example of the tragedy that can follow the unwise application of “religious coercion.”

Civil Rights Stressed Civil rights occupied a top priority spot on the agenda of the recent conventions of both major American political parties.

"Exciting and vivid description of contemporary Israel" -SAYS RECONSTRUCTIONIST MAGAZINE OF ROBERT GAMZEY'S "INGATHERING" Sand $4.50 to Golden Bell Prett, 2400 Curti* St., Denver, Colo.

Joseph Seligman-No WonderThey Called Him rr Eminent!

It was said that between 1860 and 1880, Joseph Seligman was the most eminent Jew in America. And indeed, he well may have deserved the kudos. For during that period of time, his contributions to his country were remarkable. Joseph Seligman had arrived, a penniless immigrant, in 1838. Shortly his Jounger brothers joined him—William, James, Jesse, Henry, Leopold, Abraham, and Isaac. The clothing business was something they understood and soon small Seligman establishments were selling dry goods in such diverse places as Lancaster, Pa., Watertown, N. Y., Greensboro, Ala., and later, San Francisco. By 1857 these enterprises had so prospered that the brothers were able to Establish the banking House of J. and W. Seligman in New York.

banking house performed the first of their remarkable services for the country. Singlehanded, he practically clothed the entire Union Army! Over a million dollars in uniforms were provided on credit to the hastily-formed defenders of tlie Union. Later in the war, when the governments of Britain and France were very doubtful of the Union’s chances and unwilling to loan badly needed funds, it was Joseph Seligman who, through his friends in Germany, was able to sell 200 million dollars worth of U. S. Bonds to keep the war effort going! But Joseph Seligman’s most remarkable act is a little-known one of personal compassion For it was he who. discovered the martyred Lincoln’s widow in her later years—alone, neglected, sick. And it was he who rescued her and helped to make her last years a little easier.

P. LORILLARD COMPANY „ ESTABLISHED 1 TO O

Soon after, Joseph Seligman and his No wonder men called him “eminenU"

First with the Finest Cigarettes through Lorillard research

•1942 P. Ctnune Ce