However, loads have been increasing, so the low load flights where there are plenty of empty seats to be blockable or to switch to when boarding are harder to get on. Of course, a blocked seat may still be filled of the flight does fill up.
If the picky passenger knows how Southwest boarding works, s/he can buy on Southwest and use the boarding system to make it very unlikely that s/he will be stuck next to an “unacceptable” passenger in the next seat. I.e. do not buy the priority boarding, but check in on-line at flight time minus 24 hours (usually gets a late A or early B pass – in the middle of boarding), then choose a seat all of whose neighbors are already occupied by “acceptable” people.
“What does she do if those four seats are already occupied (preferably by those who are legally supposed to have priority for those seats)?”
She gets on at one of the first stops so that never, ever happens. Which is not an accident. She could take a different bus route to get closer to her job but she would be toward the end of the route and would be getting on to a much more crowded bus. The front four seats aren’t the most desirable so they don’t generally fill until there are no empty rows left.
EK, in this context, there are five people with obvious and severe handicaps who regularly ride this bus. There may be others with invisible handicaps, but these are people who need to have the bus kneeled to get on or off the vis and for whom moving to the back particularly when the bus is moving, is difficult. All of them move back to avoid her. Most people just want to be left alone.
I was a little upset when a family of 7 died in our area recently from an electrical slow cooker which is set before sundown Friday and not unplugged until the sabbath is over, caught fire and killed them. Turns out these fires are not uncommon. It was so sad, and I wondered where religion and safety rules conflict, and how they draw the various lines.
In the case of saving a life, it supercedes laws. The man would not just be permitted to accept the help of a female doctor ( and vice versa) , he would be obligated to accept the help.
This includes saving any life, or accepting help from anyone, regardless of gender or religion.
A while back, I read something about childhood seizures that were helped by the child having a ketogenic ( very high fat ) diet. For many, this includes bacon. In this case, bacon could be included in an orthodox child’s diet if it helped him/her eat enough fat calories and stay on the diet to help seizures.
The “no physical contact” between the sexes is not, actually, a law. The law is about physical intimacy with someone that is not a spouse and this is an extension of it. The variation in practices comes from adaptations of customs around the laws. So this practice is not usually seen outside very orthodox circles. There are some orthodox men who would sit next to women, and shake their hands, while others won’t.
When I meet an orthodox man for the first time, I wait to see if he makes a gesture to shake hands. If he does not, then I know not to extend my hand to shake his.
So. An O Jew male can receive medical attention from a female physician on a flight, but can’t sit next to her for fear of touching. If the female doc is “unclean”, what happens? Then he goes to the hospital and is touched and treated by femal e nurses and Physicians? Why is this okay while a SEAT on a flight is not?i
So my DH grew up Orthodox and I grew up as a very secular Jew. The majority of his cousins are Orthodox and all have become way more religious in the past 20 years as the entire religious culture has become more rigid. So when we have a family gathering with his more religious cousins which is infrequent the seating is at a long table in which the women are one side and the men on the other so no married man has to risk coming into contact accidentally touching a woman they are not married to.
When DH grew up there were limited places for religious Jew to eat outside the home so if you were traveling you either packed food or ate something like eggs or salad as a entire parallel world of Kosher establishments did not exist. When he was a kid he could go into a candy store/luncheonette and have an ice cream soda or something similar for a treat. In today’s Orthodox community, that would never happen. My BIL and SIL would never now dine in a non-kosher establishment unless they were away somewhere with no other options yet years ago they would go out to dinner with us a non-kosher fish restaurants where shellfish was being served. I did ask DH what my MIL did when he was growing up as in today’s world religious women throw out all their make-up in favor of Kosher for Passover make-up. Anyone in the market for Kosher for Passover dog food or fish food? It can now be easily found. As someone who did not grow up in this tradition, it has been interesting… especially to see how it has changed over the years so I am not surprised by this news story.
So is it the religion that obligates him to accept this help? If so, how hypocritical.
There are volumes of these laws with commentary. I’ve attempted to condense an explanation as well as I possibly can. I am not an expert. I’ve done my best to explain something as succincly as possible and now those works are being interpreted in a negative way.
So for this question- would an orthodox man accept medical help from a female- is anyone actually interested in knowing the answer- which is yes, and learning about why that is so, or to be critical. If you have this much vitriol towards these people, why bother asking anything more.
Maybe the more revealing question would be would be who here would stop and help an orthodox man having a heart attack?
This is the crux of it. I wouldn’t even characterize it as “more religious”, it is truly just more rigid.
Maybe it’s partially in response to the rest of the world seeming to be more permissive. Maybe some people just take comfort in living an increasingly rigid and regimented life. It seems to me that sometimes people cling to their dogma, whatever it may be, when they perceive it to be under attack, or when they themselves begin to question it. Rituals appear to authenticate religious belief except to many secular people who may only shake their heads and wonder about the logic of it all.
“is anyone actually interested in knowing the answer”
Penny lane, I was the one who asked, and I was genuinely curious. I appreciated your helpful response. Different posters may have their own takes on the issue, but I posed the question out of honest interest.
I object to the statement “so is it the religion” because it’s clearly not, but is rather these individuals’ interpretations (and perhaps their individual rabbis). As has been stated, Judaism isn’t Catholicism with a central authority. It isn’t any form of Protestant sect which has a conference (of bishops, etc.) or other form of meeting/convocation/etc. that establishes doctrine. These things don’t exist in Judaism and doubly so in the US which lacks the essentially ceremonial position of “Chief Rabbi”, whatever the heck that is besides a title. So it isn’t “the religion” but an individual’s set of beliefs. To show why I think that’s offensive, imagine a Jew saying that the nutcases who protest funerals of servicemen represent Christianity. It’s ignorant and paints people with that brush.
I hate having the bus lowered for me. when the driver sees I have a cane, they automatically do it. It takes so long and is embarrassing. Im glad I don’t have to use the cane anymore1 (knockonwood)
Everyone should have current CPR/ first aid training.
Or even if they don’t get re certified every year or so, they should know enough to help.
I was present when someone was having a heart attack (twice actually), once while we were on a school tour and I wasn’t sure what was happening, another time when my class was touring the fire boat station on the waterfront.
I knew CPR, but I did not feel confident enough to direct people, luckily, he had help within five minutes.
But I wonder how many others get training?
I have basic training, as does my oldest. Youngest is certified as a Wilderness First Responder and she can perform search and rescue.
Many churches and other organizations encourage their members to take classes, I’m assuming temples so as well, or would they only be allowed to help their same sex?
An Orthodox Jewish male only accepts medical care from a woman if it is a life threatening condition. A broken leg on the plane would go untreated, unless it was a compound break with bleeding severe enough to require a tourniquet, for example. Because life is to be preserved by whatever means necessary. The man is OBLIGATED to respect the sanctity of life.
Sitting next to a woman does not save his life. Therefore it falls under the avoiding contact wit
I can’t believe those bus drivers wouldn’t tell that woman to cut it out.
When I was pregnant with D1 I used to take to and from work instead of taking a subway. One day when I was 7 months pregnant, the bus was completely full, with a lot of men sitting there with papers over their face. I was literally standing there with my stomach in a guy’s face. The bus driver said over the loud speaker, “I am not moving until someone gives that really pregnant woman a seat.” I was very embarrassed, but grateful for a seat.
What about the other side of the coin, KKmama? Would an ultra orthodox physician be likewise obligated to offer lifesaving assistance to a female patient? What if the condition/injury does not rise to the level of saving a life, but does require the help of a physician - Would he be allowed to help (according to the orthodox rules as people are referring to them, recognizing there are different levels of observance)?