1. But in order to fund public transportation on the Sabbath, the state uses taxes that were taken—coercively, by their very nature—from citizens, including the religious ones. So wouldn’t that in effect create secular coercion?

2. I’m speaking under the assumption that saving life is not a consideration. I was more interested in the considerations of nullifying the commandments of living in the Land and of Jewish rule in the Land.

1. That’s life in a democracy. Haredim and religious people are also funded by money from secular people. Beyond that, the funding isn’t divided between Sabbath and weekdays.
2. If saving life is not a consideration, then the dilemma doesn’t arise. Are you talking about a dilemma regarding the rights of the Palestinians?

A question for Rabbi Michi regarding public transportation on the Sabbath: if I’m a mayor, and I’m religious, and I hold that according to Jewish law there is a prohibition of “do not place a stumbling block” even with respect to secular Jews (like most halakhic decisors, except for you, since you hold a minority position on this) — then as a religious mayor, am I not obligated to oppose public transportation on the Sabbath (let’s say this is a case of “the two sides of the river”)? Or does my obligation to the citizens (democracy/morality) override that?

I think your democratic obligation overrides it. I discussed this at the beginning of my book Movements Between the Standing Ones and at its end.

Excellent, thank you very much. A few follow-up questions on this issue of conflicts between Jewish law and morality/democracy. 1) Is there discussion of this kind of contradiction in the halakhic literature (not just among contemporary later authorities)? If so, is there a precedent for ruling that when there is a clash between Jewish law and a non-halakhic system, one should go against Jewish law — without trying to provide meta-halakhic / halakhic justifications for ruling against the halakha?
Just to make sure I understood correctly: when you say that the halakhic obligation overrides, do you mean that this is what the Holy One, blessed be He, wants from us in such a situation? That is, if the Holy One, blessed be He, were revealed to you, or if there were a Torah-level law saying that in such a situation we must act according to the halakhic rule and not the democratic one, would you act according to Jewish law?

I’m not familiar with a systematic and direct discussion of this issue. Some cite the words of the Chazon Ish in Faith and Trust about schoolteachers, where he seemingly says that Jewish law determines morality. I’ve shown more than once that this is incorrect (meaning that even he doesn’t actually say that).
Of course, a halakhic decisor’s discussion has no real authority in such a matter, since this is not a halakhic issue. Jewish law is only one side of this conflict, and therefore the decision in it cannot be handed over to it.
I have definitely dealt with this systematically in quite a few places. There are several lecture series on morality and Jewish law. There are columns. And in my book Movements Between the Standing Ones.
And I answered that morality too is the will of God, so this is an internal conflict within the divine will. Therefore there is no reason to claim that Jewish law always takes precedence. I distinguished between situations where the conflict is inherent and situations where it is incidental. I distinguished between a halakha that has a clear source in the Torah and a halakha created by the Sages (even if it is Torah-level; they may have erred).
And finally I still brought examples from the halakhic decisors and from the Talmud — beginning with the topic of “a transgression for its own sake,” through the Chazon Ish’s remarks about the fifth section of the Shulchan Arukh, and ending with several examples from actual practice, such as the halakhic discussion about institutionalizing prostitution, the discussion about invalidating the marriages of secular people (proposals to always use a disqualified witness), and the like.

Of course also in my “It Doesn’t Fit” series of columns about the prohibition on gentile courts, etc.

Thank you very much!