Dei'ah veDibur - Information & Insight
  

A Window into the Charedi World

1 Adar II 5760 - March 8, 2000 | Mordecai Plaut, director Published Weekly
NEWS

OPINION
& COMMENT

HOME
& FAMILY

IN-DEPTH
FEATURES

VAAD HORABBONIM HAOLAMI LEINYONEI GIYUR

TOPICS IN THE NEWS

HOMEPAGE

 

Sponsored by
Shema Yisrael Torah Network
Shema Yisrael Torah Network

Produced and housed by
Jencom

News
U.S. Aguda to High Court: Morality Has Legal Meaning

by B. Isaac

The vital role of traditional moral values in American society is a theme shared by two legal briefs just submitted by Agudas Yisroel of America to the United States Supreme Court.

The group submitted two "friend of the court" briefs, authored by its attorneys Chaim Dovid Zwiebel, Eytan Kobre and Abba Cohen, with the assistance of Columbia Law School student Moshe Klein. They were entered in cases addressing issues of the taking of life and immoral personal practices.

In one case, the Court is considering whether a state has the right to ban a procedure in which a living fetus is partially delivered and then killed, a murdered, prior to full delivery.

The brief argues that such a ban is constitutionally acceptable, even under the framework of the High Court's Roe v. Wade ruling that legalized the termination of fetal life. In addition, the group said, banning the procedure furthers a state's strong interest in protecting human life and grants a state a means of "expressing and preserving, through its laws, a moral consensus that exists among citizens" opposing the procedure.

The gruesomeness of the controversial practice, which has been described as being "literally seconds and inches away from being classified as a murder by every State in the Union," has provoked massive public opposition. Thirty states, as well as both houses of Congress have passed resolutions to ban its use. The Agudas Yisroel attorneys contend that the procedure in question is not only unusually inhumane, but "from the perspective of classical Jewish law...most likely would in fact be deemed infanticide."

As a result, the brief argues, state prohibition of this procedure also serves as a "bulwark against...the threat of a creeping social legitimization of infanticide."

In another case soon to be argued before the High Court, the Boy Scouts of America is appealing a decision of the New Jersey Supreme Court, which ruled that a local chapter violated a state anti-discrimination law when it discharged a man who was openly living an immoral lifestyle.

Agudas Yisroel's submission supporting the Boy Scouts appeal calls the Court's attention to the ramifications that the New Jersey ruling holds for a broad range of religiously- affiliated youth programs.

The brief contends that the ruling disallows private entities like Boy Scouts of America from embracing their own notions of moral propriety." As such, the ruling "could threaten the religious independence of countless programs and institutions" run by "religious denominations like Orthodox Judaism...and the numerous other faith groups across this nation that are not prepared to concede the irrelevancy of Leviticus" and its absolute rejection of certain activities.

"Agudas Yisroel's involvement in these cases underscores our firm view that the laws of the land should preserve the long- standing moral bonds that hold our society together," said Mr. Zwiebel, the organization's executive vice president for government and public affairs.

Legal briefs opposing perspectives on the two issues, including submissions by other segments of the Jewish community, are slated to be filed later this month. The Court is due to issue rulings in both cases by late spring or early summer.


All material on this site is copyrighted and its use is restricted.
Click here for conditions of use.