February 5, 1999/19 Shevat 5759, Vol. 51, No. 19
Letters to the Editor2/5/1999
School clarifies policies, commits to future growth
Editor:We appreciate the coverage your paper has given to Solomon Schechter Day School in recent weeks. However, we were disappointed with the incomplete reporting by Jewish News in a front page story on Jan. 29. The reporter quoted two former Schechter parents who offered negative remarks. Yet, the overwhelming support and positive voices of many more parents and faculty present at the same Jan. 26 meeting were not mentioned. The Solomon Schechter board sought input from many sources before it took any formal action. Over the past several months, parents have answered written and oral surveys about the school's move. A significant majority of parents answered in support of the move. Open letters from the board were distributed to families and faculty giving them updated information. Parents and staff have had opportunities to raise concerns during board meetings and in small group forums. A meeting for families of current students as well as faculty is scheduled at the new school location, another example of how the board is keeping families apprised. Families and faculty are aware that the board's Judaic studies committee will concentrate on maintaining the school's existing Judaic curriculum. The board has openly and repeatedly stated that the school's Judaic philosophy will carry on as it has every year since its establishment in 1987. Students will continue their study of Tanakh, Mishnah, Gemarah and Responsa, Hebrew language, Shabbat and holidays, Jewish/Israeli history and the observance and practice of mitzvot (obligations), tzedakah (charity), and gemilut Chasidim (acts of loving kindness). The synagogue's chapel will be used as the site for the students' daily tefilot (prayers), and the observance of kabbalat shabbat (welcoming the Sabbath) and other holidays. The portion of the kitchen to be used by the school at the synagogue will be kashered. The changes planned for the school will make it stronger and create an opportunity to educate more Jewish children. All those involved with the school look forward to it becoming an Or Hadash (a great light) for the entire Phoenix community for many years to come. Board of Directors Solomon Schechter Day School of Greater Phoenix Think of what can be, not what might have been
Editor:In response to your recent article on the proposed changes at the Solomon Schechter Day School (Jewish News, Jan. 29), the quotes by Marc Kelman and Marvin Glazer were all too accurate. It is a "tragedy" and disgrace that the eighth largest city in this country is unable to support and sustain a Conservative day school. Each and every one of us holds responsibility. For those who are upset at the board for voting to disaffiliate and change the name of the school, I would like to ask: "Where have you been for the past several years when the school has been struggling to hold its ground? When you were called and asked to aid the school, perhaps you could have said 'yes' instead of 'my children don't go there, why should I support it.' " This is not easy for anyone, and the board has been diligent and serious in its endeavors. A choice had to be made: to stay where we are with the knowledge that the school will only survive another few years; or, to do what we can to provide a Jewish education for the children of this community for many years to come. Now is the time to move forward. We all mourn what could have been. Let us now work together to create a pluralistic Jewish day school that will, with everyone's support, continue to grow for many years to come. Andrea Popowich Meislin Paradise Valley Reader finds center's stand on abortion untenable
Editor:I attended the Jewish Policy Center forum at the Arizona Biltmore Jan. 24. I do agree with much if not with most of what the panelists opined though they were too strident for my taste or for my intelligence. Like most thinking (and supposedly educated) Americans, I am a Libertarian at heart - I espouse individual responsibility unhindered, and unhindered especially by a big nanny government. However, I find the center's position of "curbing partial birth abortion" (expressed in their "Details" handout) totally unacceptable. The right to have an abortion is, in my view, not only every women's right, but is also linked intimately with freedom of choice and privacy. In 1996 I voted for Bill Clinton because the thought of having Bob Dole, Ralph Reed, Gary Bauer, Jerry Falwell and Pat Buchanan all sitting together at the top of our executive branch in Washington was terrifying. Given everything said and done to this day by the Christian right, I have no regrets. Martin G. Rosenthal Phoenix Falwell's remark not offensive
Editor:I am responding to letters to the editor (Jewish News, Jan. 29) regarding the Jan. 24 Jewish Policy Center forum at the Arizona Biltmore. The forum featured nationally syndicated radio talk show host Michael Medved, Harvard Professor Ruth Wisse, columnist Don Feder, author David Horowitz and Toward Tradition president Rabbi Daniel Lapin. I am Arizona chair of Toward Tradition and though Lapin is a fellow at the Jewish Policy Center, I am not affiliated with it. I attended the event, which included a panel discussion, question and answer session and dessert reception. It was free of charge and no appeal for funds was made. It attracted more than 400 people. How unfortunate the two letter writers could not appreciate the diverse points of view the panel represented. Church-state relations, education reform, Israel, affirmative action and other matters were covered from a conservative perspective. The panel represented views not often heard in or presented to Jewish communities and certainly legitimate disagreements exist on these thought provoking issues. All the more reason to appreciate the Jewish Policy Center for presenting their forum. One letter mentioned Lapin's defense of Rev. Jerry Falwell. The writer neglected to mention Lapin's citing of Jewish law which requires Jews to thank people who do us favors. Falwell has been a staunch supporter of Israel within the Christian community, a community that constitutes the overwhelming majority of this nation. If some were offended by Falwell's comment about the anti-Christ, perhaps they should acquaint themselves with Christian theology. In this doctrine, the anti-Christ masquerades as Jesus, causing confusion among believers. Since Jesus was in fact a Jew, it would be a logical conclusion that Christians could well assume a Jewish man would fulfill this role. I salute the center for hosting such an interesting and diverse panel in our community. Carol Nichols Turoff Phoenix If you don't like the opinions, ask for your money back
Editor:Two letters to the editor (Jewish News, Jan. 29) harshly criticized the recent forum sponsored by the Jewish Policy Center. One letter-writer claimed it was a waste of her time; another was "shocked" at the "distortions." The prime example of distortions mentioned was Rabbi Daniel Lapin's defense of Rev. Jerry Falwell. I am bewildered. The Jewish Policy Center provided, free of charge, a dynamic panel of conservative thinkers consisting of some of the best and brightest minds in Judaism today. There was also a question and answer session for the audience and dessert reception. I think the policy center should be commended not criticized. Of course, not everyone has to agree with the speakers, but then again, no one challenged them during the question and answer period. There was only positive feedback. How could it be a waste of time to hear a point of view that is not often presented to the Jewish community? Israel has more than 40 political parties, so why are Jews in America so monolithic or deaf to other points of view? If one speaker's defense of Falwell was so offensive, let me express my shock. Falwell may have been insensitive in his speech to his co-religionists about the anti-Christ being Jewish. But wait a minute - if the Christian messiah is supposed to be Jewish, wouldn't the anti-messiah, who pretends to be the real thing, also be Jewish? Hardly the stuff of base anti-Semitism. By the way, those who didn't like the event can ask for their money back. Shayna Lewin Scottsdale (Via the Internet) If rabbi was president, how would he respond?
Editor:Rabbi Eugene H. Levy refers to his personal experiences with President Bill Clinton (Jewish News, Jan. 24) whom he classifies as "a most compassionate man," implying that a person questioning that characterization is "too often vengeful, narrow, self-righteous, zealous, punitive and hateful." Isn't it possible that this zealot is disgusted that the leader of our country admittedly has committed perjury by stating that he "never had sex with that woman" on national television? He has also obstructed justice with witness tampering and delaying tactics. What would Levy expect his congregation to do if he was found to be doing the same things as this president? I would be quite interested in how Levy would answer his religious school pupils concerning the sexual encounters of the president. I am also curious whether Levy would take the same position if Clinton was a Republican. What would he say to Clinton's wife and daughter? And finally, I would love to learn what he would consider "a measured, appropriate response." Melvin R. Fincke Peoria |
