Q&A: A non-Jew who publicly used many antisemitic expressions, was a serial spreader of lies, stirred up and inflamed hateful discourse, spread conspiracies, fantasies, delusions, and craziness about COVID that caused many not to get vaccinated, to infect and be infected, probably even to die, hounded professors at universities, and plenty of other abusive behavior—though he publicly supported the State of Israel—was murdered last night. An important rabbi is eulogizing him. Is that permitted?
A non-Jew who publicly used many antisemitic expressions, was a serial spreader of lies, stirred up and inflamed hateful discourse, spread conspiracies, fantasies, delusions, and craziness about COVID that caused many not to get vaccinated, to infect and be infected, probably even to die, hounded professors at universities, and plenty of other abusive behavior—though he publicly supported the State of Israel—was murdered last night. An important rabbi is eulogizing him. Is that permitted?
Question
A non-Jew who hates and spreads a lot of poison and hatred around him, and was not deterred even by antisemitism—on the contrary…
He lied again and again and spread his lies in public, along with plenty of other fine deeds…
On the other hand, he publicly supported Israel.
Rabbi #1 is mourning him deeply, and in my estimation is going to eulogize him on Friday night in the synagogue.
In my humble opinion, this rabbi is confused.
There is no need to eulogize a non-Jew on the Sabbath in the synagogue when we buried 10 Jews here in our land; if anything, it would be better to eulogize them.
Am I right?
Answer
This is already the third question about Kirk. I do not know the man, and I understand that he was problematic, but he also had positive sides. I do not see why someone who thinks he was a good person should not eulogize him. And I do not see considerations of priority in eulogies. A eulogy for him does not preclude a eulogy for others, and vice versa.
Discussion on Answer
See Wikipedia and you’ll see what a total scoundrel and liiiiiaaaaar we’re dealing with.
Of course, I was right. Not surprised.
We are committing all kinds of war crimes in Gaza. See Wikipedia (English) and you’ll see what a scoundrelly and liiiiiaaaaar nation we are.
Come on—based on your “research” in a tiny little Wikipedia entry, you write this barrage of insults? And you even exaggerated things that were barely written there (like “many antisemitic expressions,” when they could barely find a retweet of a tweet that was itself not antisemitic).
Disclaimer: he was certainly not all blue sky and pure wool (sic), but who is?
If they had murdered Yinon Magal by gunshot at some responsa conference, would you ask the same thing? And he is actually provocative, unlike Charlie.
It’s revolting. The response of a decent person should be shock. I would be shocked and condemn even the murder of Amos Schocken, just for example.
P.S. Sorry for using people in a risk group as examples.
Among many Haredim (and not only them, but on the right generally), he is practically a saint, the foundation of the world; pretty soon they’ll be going to prostrate themselves on his grave…
https://forum.otzar.org/viewtopic.php?f=51&t=67231
Yuck.
His “problematic” views are very common in the moderate American right, and they are not delusional at all (even if I don’t agree with them). He did not knowingly lie any more than anyone else. I’m sure that when you say he lied, you mean that he said things that, in your personal opinion, are not true. Speaking gently and empathetically against abortion, in favor of family life, against changing the U.S. Constitution, and so on—that is not called hate speech; maybe it is speech that you hate.
He was pleasant and certainly not abusive. A family man who was murdered because of his views (which, compared to the standards of the extremes in this country, are calmer and more moderate than Benny Gantz).
Your stream of abuse—which clearly comes from blindly listening to other people’s labels and not from direct familiarity with the man’s actual words—right as he has been murdered, is unbelievably ugly.
It always disgusts me to see deceptive labeling that comes in the wake of a person’s political affiliation, without actually bothering to listen to what he says. But seeing it immediately after the person was murdered makes me want to throw up in my mouth. It is not fitting even if this had been a famous antisemite.
If this were a serious question and not straightforward hate speech, you would have phrased it differently.