Home Home / Letter to Lawrence Kobrin about Amicus …

Correspondence

Dec. 21, 1971

Letter to Lawrence Kobrin about Amicus on Abortion Laws (1971)

Jewish Law & Secular Law
View The Text

This content is currently available in its original PDF format. As we expand the library, we plan to add a text version as well.

RELATED CONTENT

Correspondence

Letter to Dr. Konvitz about Article on Privacy and the Law (1967)

Dear Professor Konvitz: Please forgive me my undue delay in reacting to the splendid article, a reprint of which you sent me, on "Privacy and the Law: A Philosophical Prelude." I preferred to do justice to so eminent an author by reading his work, with the requisite diligence and attention, instead of a perfunctory and cursory reading together with a superficial note of thanks. Your ideas are certainly enlightening, and constitute a most valuable contribution to the current literature on the theme of privacy. I quite agree with your association of sexual immorality with the exposure of one’s physical privacy in the Bible, as evidenced by the cases of Adam and Noah. I would add that the general Biblical term for Illicit sex is giluy arayot – which implies exposure, revealing, uncovering, and therefore the reverse of privacy and modesty.I hope you will forgive me for registering one objection to this section of your article. I would not have referred to the story of Adam and Eve as a "mythical" teaching. Even if one does not accept the narrative of Adam and Eve as being literal and historical truth, it is still a considerable jump from mythology to figurative truth in the Bible.Your connection of Justice Douglas’s opinion on "Zones of Privacy" as flowing out of Justice Brennan's notion of "breathing space," calls to mind the great and fundamental Talmudic principle of seyag le’torah; if, therefore, indeed, privacy is a Biblical notion, then Jews must consider it not as a point but as an area or "zone," and therefore Rabbinical legislation must include the "penumbra" in the areas prohibited to intrusion.It might interest you to know that I have been invited by Senator Edward Long to testify before his Senate sub-Committee on the view of Jewish law and theology on the question of privacy.It was a pleasure corresponding with you – I still hope to hear from you and receive any comments you may have on my article – and I look forward to meeting you personally at the May 7…
Jewish Law & Secular Law

Correspondence

Letter to Lawrence Kobrin about Article on the Fourth Amendment and Halacha (1967)

Dear Larry: Thank you very much for your thoughtful comments on my recent article on the Fourth Amendment. The avenue of investigation which you suggest is interesting. Off-hand, however, I am not aware of any communication that is regarded by the Halakhah as "automatically privileged." The very fact that, as I mentioned in my article, every communication is considered sacrosanct, would seem to make superfluous any special category of "privileged information." Nevertheless, I am putting your letter aside and hope to think about it a bit more systematically, when I return to the city, please God. Meanwhile, Mindy joins me in sending best regards to Ruth and in expressing our delight that the two of you, after your long search are finally becoming our close neighbours.Cordially yours,RABBI NORMAN LAMM
Jewish Law & Secular Law

Correspondence

Letter from Lawrence Kobrin to R. Rackman about Article by Joseph Kaplan on Beth Din Policies (1970)

Dear Rabbi Rackman, As you may be aware, a rather comprehensive article on rabbinical courts, written by Joseph Kaplan, a Columbia student, was reprinted in the New York Law Journal during the summer. Certain of the information was based on interviews with you, and I assume that you must have previously seen a copy of the original article. If not, I would commend it to your attention. The appearance of the article suggests one or two points which I would share with you.The presentation of the activities of the RCA Beth Din is a rather favorable one. It occurs to me that it might be appropriate to arrange for some kind of reprinting and distribution of the article for publicity purposes. As a matter of fact, if the reprints could be made available in quantity, this is the kind of material that we might consider including in the "kit" normally distributed to UOJCA convention delegates.The conclusion of the article touches on a matter which has been the subject of correspondence between us in the past—the possible expanded use of the RCA Beth Din in areas other than matrimonial problems and situations. You may recall, for instance, that I had once suggested the recommendation that contracts with synagogue employees include compulsory arbitration provisions so that the embarrassing public display of a litigated dispute with a cantor, rabbi, or school principal could be avoided. While I know that the RCA has an excellent leaflet describing their procedures in matrimonial matters, a parallel publication for non-matrimonial activities might also be appropriate.The article contains an assertion that the Conservative *ketubah* clause has not been widely used. The only support for that assertion, however, which is given in the footnote appears to be a statement in the article originally written by Rabbi Lamm when the clause was first promulgated. In the light of our conversation and correspondence before the summer, I would be curious as to whether any better information is …
Jewish Law & Secular Law