Orthodox Jewish Couple Imprisoned By Superstition, Blames Motion-Sensing Light Instead

@The Lab: Face it, there are more Christians in this world working for feed the hungry, clothe the naked, and give rest to the weary than are Atheists. And I am talking about on a per capita level.

Oh, and for all GWB's failings (and there were a lot) he did hold true to his word to support AIDs relief in Africa with Billions of dollars in aid. What atheist world leader has done that?

dallasmay2

@Dipsomaniac: He's right. Very concise and nicely worded.

@Dipsomaniac: Being raised a certain way without being introduced to other choices of how to believe barely constitutes a "choice" in my book. How is everyone else in the apartment building being forced to submit to these people's choices? They offered to pay for an override switch.

@Dipsomaniac: They didn't move into an apartment that had this motion sensor. This landlord installed this thing later without approval of tennants. A key system would work too. The other tennants aren't making much of a sacrafice.

jewsrock

What the hell? They have every right to sue! It isn't absurd that they object to this at all, and it wouldn't be too hard to fix the issue either. Oh no, it "entails forcing the management company to install a custom override switch". That language was a bit too strong, don't you think? "Forcing"? "Custom"? How about getting a normal light? You can disagree with their religious beliefs, think them absurd, but don't criticize them for wanting to adhere to them. The school I went to allowed for Muslim students to disrupt class and pray. Was that wrong? No, and neither is this couple's law suit.

@The Lab: If you don't believe that Christianity has done more good than harm, then you haven't looked very far. Just as an example, can you name a secular organization that does what these Christians do? http://www.ijm.org/

Your examples, of the Spanish Inquisition, the Crusades, and Palistine v. Israel, actually seem to support my original argument that you may or may not have even read. Each of those cases involve people using religion to justify their actions. If they didn't have religion, they would just justify it some other way. What, you think that if the Palestinians weren't Islamic they wouldn't be mad that they were wrongly removed from their land? Or if the Jews weren't Jewish they wouldn't have suffered from the Racism of the Nazis? It had nothing to do with their religion, and everything to do with their race. Or how about GWB? If he didn't claim Christianity would Republicans not have voted for him and supported him during his war? Of course they would have. It wouldn't have changed the fact that we needed the oil.

You are using Religion as a justification for your hatred and bigotry of people just as religious people use their religion to justify their hatred and bigotry. And that doesn't surprise me, because you are a person just like they are.

dallasmay2

I'm really, really surprised at the level of religious bashing that's being allowed in this forum. I was raised in a highly religious house hold and refused to conform, so I understand the divide religion can cause between people. I'm not a fan of it. But the point is religious beliefs are exactly that -- a set of beliefs. It's a different perspective to see things from. It's a group people associate themselves with, which to me doesn't seem different, as I pointed out in another post, from race or sexuality. If either of those is criticized, banhammers go off in every direction it seems, or a verbal stoning is underway by fellow commenters. I just don't understand how the stance by many here is that voting for Prop 8 somehow made you a "bigot" but criticizing and being intolerant of religion isn't. Isn't that what bigotry is? Intolerance? I could understand someone criticizing the owner's right to sue or not to sue -- that's one thing. But to openly mock and diss and laugh at religion, calling those people "nuts" and "superstitous"? Lite couldn't even make a reference to 40 Year Old Virgin the other day without losing a star because of our homophobaphobia (if that's not a term yet, it should be). The whole thing just seems wrong to me.

@rcast1986: And I said that you can criticize whatever religion you would like - I never said that the entire body of people in that religion should personally be attacked nor did I even state that all religions were guilty of the examples of bad practices I listed.

One of the things (some might even say the most important thing) that makes this country great is tolerance. With tolerance comes the idea that reasonable accommodations should be made, since it would be otherwise meaningless. I don't believe in jeebus, moses, or the flying spaghetti monster, but I believe that if the jews want to have special lights in the the hallways, it doesn't bother me much at all, and they can go right ahead and do that.

And THAT'S why I live in America, not the UK. In fact, I'd say that's why most Americans came to America in the first place. Maybe it was a little bigger than lightbulbs, but it's basically the same reason. So come on over here to the US, Mr. and Mrs. Coleman. We'll leave the light on for ya.

@jewsrock: Their religion is a choice they made. True intolerance is saying that everyone else should be forced to submit to their choices.

Dipsomaniac

And calling it a "superstition"? Fuck you, Jack Luftos.

jewsrock

@Obsidian: also i think flicking the custom override counts as working. and where are they going on sabbath anyway? driving somewhere?

ninjajazza

@rcast1986: You said "I just fail to see how it is acceptable to criticize a group based on their beliefs, regardless of what those beliefs are or whether you agree with them or not." Do you have any idea how many horrendous views are out there? And nobody is allowed to speak out against them? Ludicrous.

They are deffinetly right. I'm a secular Jew who doesn't keep shabbat or kosher or anything but they are incredibly right. They can't use electricity on shabbat or be the cause of electricity being turned on on shabbat. Moving by the motion detector makes the thing work electrically. They're right. And this post is intollerant.

jewsrock

@Summermodoin'_GitEmSteveDave: The only thing holey about that man are his policies.


*rimshot*

@dnheller: Btw, does not breathing "excite" material as does moving your feet or arms or any of the numerous chemical reactions or movements directly caused by your person? An automatic light is much less intentional of an action than is the friction and energy we produce every single day. It is clearly unscientific and if anything has "no place in such a forum" (especially a gadget / technology-related blog) might it not be a topic such as this? I don't view religions as being any different as any other point of view or idea at all, and it would be impossible and socially / morally reprehensible to respect each one.

@Alchemistmerlin: How is it insanity? Because you disagree with it?

@dallasmay2: If you remove religion, the world would not become some happy utopia -it would get much worse.

You must be joking or trolling or just out of touch with reality. Religion is responsible for nearly every war, conflict, and border dispute every since the first religion/god was made up.

@ArtisticThought: Nice sweeping generalizations there, chief. So does tolerance for something like race and sexual orientation mean they can be openly criticized? Past action taken by the editors on this site (as well as in many other public forums) suggests this is not the case, and understandably so. I just fail to see how it is acceptable to criticize a group based on their beliefs, regardless of what those beliefs are or whether you agree with them or not. And even if an entire body of people "deserve criticism" for their association with that belief and practices you find fault with, is it proper and right to then turn and treat them the same way? Or is there maybe a better way of living? I'm not a religious man by any stretch of the imagination -- I agree that there are people with various religious affiliations that choose to use their belief systems to criticize others. But to lump them all into one group and to allow ones self to selectively show respect and regard for one group (say, homosexuals or latinos or whites or straights) but completely ignore that practice for others (Jews, Christians, Atheists, Agnositcs) seems hypocritical and wrong to me.

@switchblade saints: I know, I hate the new comments style too. I'm not normally the type of guy who starts a "Hate the new Facebook" group every time something changes, but the new comments are really a step backward.

It's really like going from my Mac at home to my PC at the office. (Hey, while we're commenting on a flaimbait blog post, I thought I would be a dick too.)

dallasmay2

@dallasmay2: Considering the Spanish inquisition, the Crusades, Palistine vs Israel, I feel there is adequate evidence to challenge your assertion that religion has done more good than harm.

I think peace is more likely to be achieved when we can communicate rationally, meaning only accepting that which the facts support. Otherwise you get Bush going into Iraq to find WMDs because the can "feel in his gut" that they are there. You get Palin who is proud she doesn't read. I reject that. I want my decisions based on facts.

@dnheller: Religious tolerance does not mean everybody else gets censored and cannot criticize religion. That would be unjust. This is a tech blog and this post tells the story of two people suing innocent people. Many religions deserve heavy criticism for their lack of tolerance alone, not to mention scientific inaccuracy and teaching children uneducated views.

They can't 'make' the fire, but is any non-jew does turn the light on, it is no sin, as no orthodox jew did it, and the goy isn't a sinner if he doesn't believe. If the goy, ever solicitous and ignorant of the orthodox ways, does turn the light on as an act of kindness, to illuminate the way of a couple of orthodox jews, are they in sin, as the intention wasn't theirs? If the couple goes out, and the light turns itself on, is the little silicon wafer inside the motion detector orthodox jew or goy? Is it not as the ignorant yet helpful neighbor? If the little automatic light is goy, there is no sin. Are machines made by goyim considered as goy? Can any machine be something other than non-orthodox, as only people are orthodox?

AEchinoderm

@switchblade saints: wow how do you enter a line break now? man I'm having 2.0 comment blues

Maybe the should just jump out the window to avoid 'creating frire' next time? Let's hope they live on the top floor!

MissingPieces

"Saturday, Donny, is Shabbos, the Jewish day of rest. That means that I don't work, I don't get in a car, I don't fucking ride in a car, I don't pick up the phone, I don't turn on the oven, and I sure as shit don't fucking roll! Shomer shabbos! !"

This is a dickish flamebate post. That said. Those guys are dicks.

dallasmay2

@The Lab: I see one major flaw in your "lends credibility and support" argument. It's that stupid/irrational/evil people with religion would be just as stupid/irrational/evil without religion. For exmple, the argument usually goes like this: "If religion died 100 years ago, the WTC would still be standing." No it wouldn't. If religion died a hundred years ago, the fanatics would still hate us and still have bombed those buildings. They would have just had different excuses. However, the contrary is not true. LOTS of people who are religious do very good things because their religion tells them too -and that's the only reason. For many Christians, for example, their own Church is the only charity they give to. Their church goes on to do good things with the money that the people wouldn't support by themselves.

If you remove religion, the world would not become some happy utopia -it would get much worse.

dallasmay2

@Jamez: Had the couple offered to foot the bill for hallway lights turned on for the whole sabbath, there would be no hubbub. But hey, a lawyer must be cheaper...

AEchinoderm

@Kharnellius:

"Religions aren't Ridiculous"

Yes...yes they are. I'd offer evidence, but since you're pro-religion, you'll just have to take my word for it.

Alchemistmerlin

Perhaps the the sensor actually ignites a gigantic bonfire in the corner of the hallway. Don't judge people, don't judge.

D.E.P.C. is on a Sexpedition

mmmm, i understand. they trip the light, they don't make the after-life.

I'll never buy one of their camping stoves again.

@Summermodoin'_GitEmSteveDave: Put him on a unicorn and I am down with that.

@sonicsurge: I used to believe in religious tolerance of the non-orthodox until someone pointed out that, by their very existence, they lend credibility and logistic support to the orthodox members of a religion. Religion is an assault against rational thought, simple as that. Once we say it is OK to abandon reason, we allow people to say all sorts of craziness just like the nutballs in this article.

@The Lab: I always thought he was a giant lizard, hence the form the illuminati take when Jesus possesses them.

D.E.P.C. is on a Sexpedition

@liku:

He should have to pay to support their insanity?

No, I'm sorry, no one should have to pay because other people are superstitious idiots.

Alchemistmerlin

While the couple in question take their devotion to the letter of Jewish law to a degree that others may not, I find shameful the contempt for and mocking of religious observance of which the Mr. Loftus and most readers here are simply ignorant. Such hostility to religion and such insult to personal beliefs have no place in such a forum, in my opinion.

The author and editors of Gizmodo should be embarrassed at their own behavior and lack of tolerance as expressed by the publication of Mr. Loftus' words. If he doesn't hold other religions in such contempt, then I might assume that Mr. Loftus might actually be an anti-Semite, and not just contemptuous of religion in general. Which is it Mr. Loftus? Do your standards apply to just Jews? Or to all religious people?

The couple in question are certainly not physically "imprisoned" , as Jewish law permits desecration of Sabbath observance to save a life, for example. But turning on a light does ignite or excite some material, like a fire, hence the religious ban to avoid the accidental ignition of a fire in the eyes of G-d.

That the apartment is a "holiday flat" is irrelevant. Religious obligation is not abrogated by being on vacation, Mr. Loftus.

dnheller

The neighbors could have headed this problem off early.

1. Install the auto-light fixture and tell the neighbor them that this is the new version of the more traditional "Goyim Stove Starter" - instead of sending your child over to turn on the light, (start the stove, etc.) you have installed this hi-tech version to protect their privacy and reduce intrusions on the sabbath.

2. Tell neighbor that the usual fee for the "Goyim Stove Starter" is waived, and also to remember that according to the Talmud, to waste is sin - that goes for the electricity.

3. Profit. Mazel Tov!

Walljasper

@computerwiz3491:

This isn't directed at YOU per se computerwiz3491, but what? Electricity only creates a fire with a spark (unless there is some other odd example that isn't coming to mind). Heat + Light != Fire. The filament in no way combusts with proper use, hence no fire. The reasoning behind why "the one thing that is hot and makes light" (incandescent bulb) is considered a fire and "the other thing that is hot and makes light" (such as a CFL) totally eludes me.

ChaosCon

@tande04 mile island in the sun: I'm pretty sure those automatic elevators still have door sensors that prevent them from closing while you are standing in the doorway. Motion-sensor activated lights are equivalent to those sensors. Both are automatic and require no effort on your part (thus no work), and both exist for reasons of safety and efficiency.

jdale

@The Lab:

It sounds like they were already living there, and the apartment manager went and did something that makes the place uninhabitable for them (not people in general--his existing tenants). Sounds fair he should have to pay to make it livable for the people he plans to demand rent from, if it ever was livable at all.

liku

I find it odd that no one has noted the Colemans are not turning anything on, because those lights are always on. How else is the infrared motion sensor working?

The light is always on, merely sucking far less energy than if the bulb were left on 24/7. The Colemans are creating nothing.

sweenish

People like this seem to love to gripe and moan about losing their 'individual freedoms' -- if you could call sh*t like this that -- but they often take for granted the benefits of the society they live in. You simply cannot have ALL the individual freedoms you want and ALL the benefits of society at the same time. In that light, it seems to me these people whine for the sake of it; to which I say STFU.

ChaosCon

aside from her teeth that look like awful dentures, they DID originally offer to pay for the override themselves, AND they say they were told before they moved in that there wouldnt ever be motion sensors installed in teh complex. I dont agree with their religious views, but its not like they just decided to sue out of the blue, they claim they were lied to and even offered to pay.

irfan

@The Lab: Shhhhuuuuunnnnn the unbeliever. Shhhhhuuuuuuunnnnn!

@computerwiz3491: True. There is always somebody who believes their brand of religious fiction is closer to the absolute truth than someone else's.

@GlenTen: Don't knock religion. Religion's all well and good when you realize that not everything should be taken literally and a lot of the guidelines are outdated. It's greedy people who want money and are willing to use any excuse to get it.

Religions aren't ridiculous, it's the people who interpret them in the most selfish manner possible. Ironic considering most religions speak out against selfishness.

@Scotland: nice

How do these people avoid just creating fire when they tread carpet and build up static ? They talk about not being accomodated here, but why should the world need to adjust to them ? You either get with the program and deal with it rationally or you hide in your apartment until it's over. What really irritates me here isn't that they're suing everyone - No, it's that some lawyer took the case and some judge won't have the balls to throw it out of court.

GiovanniGautham

@GlenTen:
In Soviet Russia God created humans!

Colin Cassady

More evidence to support the absurdity of religion in the 21st century.

Why don't they just add a speaker on to the motion sensing light, which when triggered activates a voice recording - "And God said, "Let there be light," and there was light."

Is this a possible solution? (Most of my knowledge about Judaism derives from South Park and Sarah Silverman)

(Edit: I had intended for this to be a separate comment and not just a reply - i.e my comment from above was me trying to correct this but then I somehow managed to repeat my mistake.)

Scotland

Edit: (accidental post)

Scotland

The headline is totally fair. I think it is high time for everyone to admit there is no more reason to believe in god as there is the FSM. We laugh at everyone else who believes things without any proof, why can we not laugh at the religious?

For the record, I believe Jesus was a unicorn.

"Which rule? The Promethean one" - ok, that line was just freakin awesome.

corpserotten

@Windhawk: In Judaism, just because one Rabbi says something, it doesn't make it so according to everybody.

computerwiz3491

@Jamez: "The Colemans have offered to pay for an override switch to disable the light sensors during the Sabbath.

But the Embassy Court Management Company - which represents all residents and whose three directors also live in the block - said this would set an 'unacceptable precedent'.
"

computerwiz3491

A modern-orthodox rabbi in Israel ruled that the basis of the claim is a big bunch of BS, since today, with the large number of sensors in the environment, such as CCTV security cameras, you are likely to cause the CCTV sensor to register a change in value simply due to walking down a street with a security camera on it.

The rabbi ruled that since the change in the state of the sensor is not your intention nor is it in your control, therefore you are not ('hiave') liable.

Thus triggering the light is not even considered as an un-intentional sin and therefore this couple has a baseless halikic claim.

@tande04 mile island in the sun:
Are you saying we can't make fun of a single religious view at one single time; that we must make fun of everything at once? Impossible.

To be fair, the couple did offer to pay for an override switch install, but the management didn't want to "set a precedent", which seems equally ridiculous to me. And while I don't hold the same beliefs, which may seem antiquated and out of touch, I also wasn't raised as an Orthodox Jew so it's impossible to say how I would feel had I been born under similar circumstances. I don't know, just doesn't seem like it would hurt to look at things from another perspective.

@tande04 mile island in the sun: Exactly. It's not stupid and makes sense, just on a technical level. The idea is that electricity cannot be used or activated, at least intentionally. The fact that they're suing is a little stupid, instead of working with the building manager during the installation to see what could be done to accommodate them. But, I'm sure this isn't the whole story, so it's hard to judge.

@skitchparks: You get back to us just as soon as you can nail down a meaningful distinction between those two concepts.

Dayv

Religion gets to a point where it's almost ridiculous, and I think Judaism is in the top 3 of the "insanely crazy unnecessary guideline religions".

Don't get me wrong though, I love Jewish people, and I have plenty of Jewish friends, but there's a line you cross where it just becomes ridiculous.

I'm sorry if this offends anyone here who might have a Judaic background.

Well yeah. I'm not jewish so please correct me but my understanding is the its always been against "the rules" for orthidox jews (or any jews observing the sabbath) to use electrcity under the same "rule". As I understand it the elevators in isreal stop on every floor for that very reason.
If you want to make a blanket statement saying any religious observance is stupid go for it. I watched religiolus I enjoyed it. But you can't single out this one and not say any other one is stupid.

The landlord sounds like some kind of Jew, trying to save all that money. He's just trying to Jew them out of more money for rent any way!

@hfutrell: Actually according to Rabbi Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach, a leading Orthodox law ruler, electricity is only forbidden when it actually creates a fire (such as the filament in a light bulb). Therefore, Florescent and LED lights are OK. Additionally, because it is not their intention to turn on the light, it is also OK.

computerwiz3491

@Serolf Divad: nah, any electricity is "fire". Go figure.

hfutrell

I call Spaghetti Monster and counter-sue claiming that in installing a custom override switch they are violating my ability to worship the god of automatic electrical lighting, thereby infringing on my rights to practice my religion.

And in a decade 2nd-semester 1Ls will be reading about the seminal case, Coleman v. Embassy Court...

EDIT: And, clicking through, I discover they are British, so I doubt our non-foreign-law-liking American judges have anything to worry about...

I think there's a mistake here, this is actually about them being sue happy from their religious beliefs and not superstition.

skitchparks

can't they get a dispensation by paying the local rabbi?

Maybe the landlord could install one of those newfangled LED bulbs. Maybe you can interpret a glowing filament as "fire" but surely an Light Emitting Diode isn't "fire."

BTW: why is is that the first thing that entered my mind when reading of this was some primitive creature cowering at the roar of white man's "fire stick"?

if they dont like it they can move....to israel....where they can actually get away with a lawsuit like that....

urbanturban666

@Rugbydan: I would.

I think that the natural world reinforces belief in the supernatural.

rob_p

@shufflemoomin: No, you're not wrong. The sun would be the best example I can come up with. But this really becomes a philosophical question. What constitutes fire? I think by most people's definitions they would see the sun as a giant ball of fire. Whether or not it fits a strict scientific definition, I don't know.

My basic point here is think before you speak. Very often the other guy that you might think is nuts has a perfectly logical train of thought. And if you actually examine it you might find yourself persuaded.

rob_p

@nutbastard: I like how the proposed compromise - using a custom override switch - takes more work than just allowing the light to turn on. Since, you know, the laws were originally written to prevent you from working on the sabbath.

@Voyou_Charmant: I'm pretty sure he's talking about everyone smashing religion left and right, including Loftus. And if you'd read through most of the comments I think you would agree they do come off sounding extremely anti-Semitic. If Lite referencing The 40 Year Old Virgin two days ago and losing his star is based on the grounds that his comments were "anti-gay", then I definitely think you could say that an entire thread full of people calling this couple "bat-shit crazy" and "insane nut-jobs" and suggesting they kill themselves is anti-Semitic. And that's what pisses me off the most about the people on this website, and even in the world. They preach tolerance and abhor anything that isn't (tolerant, that is) pretending like they give a shit about the equal treatment of people when it's something they agree on. But they don't hesitate to suddenly and completely toss all of that aside when it's something they don't agree with. Not saying I'm not at times, but these people are fucking hypocrites, plan and simple.

We live in democracy; fortunately and unfortunately, the majority counts.

We shouldn't forget that the needs of the many outweighs the needs of the few.

Minorities exist everywhere; if someone doesn't want to be part of any minority and bear the consequences of it, he or she should return to wherever his or her minority isn't such.

No person's believes must neglect other person's believes; that is tyranny.

I'm neither being racial nor xenophobe, only pragmatic and logical; both qualities are usualy lacking in most religions and I am a "theist" [Roman catholic, sadly] who was given all the "antidevil" treatments the church has to offer, nonetheless, dogmas are ridiculous and extremism is dangerous.

@rob_p: If Flipping a light switch is work, then walking is work too- it requires energy, which is fueled by chemical reactions in the human body. Chemical reactions like the ones that make fire.

Since there is no effort in walking past the motion sensor there is no work. Since they don't even live there full time, this is clearly a cash grab frivolous lawsuit.

@DesmondManius: But you're ignoring the fact that
A - This couple doesn't even live here through most of the year.
B - They are in the minority and it is unfair for them to force the rest of the tenants to pay to accompany them, when they can just as easily move somewhere else. A private facility has no obligation to respect or even accomodate all people for their personal tastes and belliefs, this includes religion.

@Castleknight75:

I know of no religion that abrogates observance just because one is "on holiday" or in a common area (i.e. not privately owned) So the "not year round" and "lack of ownership" issues are irrelevant to observance of Jewish law in this case.

Jewish religious laws may be abrogated in situations where life must be preserved (calling an ambulance on Sabbath, protecting against an intruder, etc.), as the preservation of life is the highest and most important of Jewish laws.

dnheller

@Marvin Francois:

For your information, Jewish law allows for breaking observance of Sabbath and other religious laws in order to preserve life. Emergency lighting would qualify on religious grounds alone, but Jewish law also defers to local laws (e.g. building codes relating to emergency lighting) in such matters.

In addition, if the emergency light was already on when people enter the hall, they have not triggered it themselves, and thus the Sabbath has not been desecrated.

You might want to check with knowledgeable sources before making assertions on subjects about which you know nothing.

dnheller

um,. i've gotta ask in all seriousness:

How do Orthodox Jews stay warm in winter states if they are not permitted to "make fire," yet apartment buildings forbid the turning-off of heating during winter months because the pipes will freeze? by using "fire" that was already lit, you're still using it. I'm so confused.

@Voyou_Charmant: Actually, back then, the pork prohibition probably did save a lot of lives. Along with the prohibition on shell-fish and several others. Wearing blended fabrics (punished by stoning) on the other hand, I have no explination for.

worsethannormal

@Nirtaz: How is filing a law-suit, live-and-let-live? They are the ones that want the building management to install a special switch and the other tenants to pay for the extra electricity used since the lights will need to be lit prior to the Sabbatha and not turned off until its over. That is not living-and-letting-live.

Also, I think you should examine the reason for these laws. The "no work during the Sabbath" law is about "keeping the Sabbath holy". In other words this is the day once a week the People meditate on their faith and their god. How does walkng in front of a motion detector interupt that meditation?

Also, if they are so dead set on this, I have a cheaper solution: a down comforter and some mime lessons. The comforter will provide some dampening for the motion detectors and the mime lessons will teach them how to move slow enough as to not set it off. Now that would be living and letting live.

worsethannormal

@golferal - Now with more Segway!: Actually, animal sacrifice is still part of the Jewish tradition. The problem is they don't have a temple in which to perform the sacrifices. If the temple were rebuilt and the red heffers being bread in the U.S. deemed sufficient then animal sacrifice would start back up tomorrow.

It has nothing to do with them being outdated. How could they be outdted? they are "the word of God", they are timeless.

worsethannormal

I'm appalled at some of the comments below. I presume that certain posters below dislike religion because it sometimes come across as ridiculous, pushy, and judgmental. Does it occur to the sarcastic posters below that their disrespect and ridicule of this couple *also* comes across as pushy and judgmental? If dislike of "people pushing beliefs" is so repugnant what justifies one doing the same in a tactless and ridiculing manner?

I don't agree with this couple's religious beliefs - my own understanding of Jewish rules of behavior (traditionally known as Halakhah) would say that the lights count as "d'var she aino mitkaven" - an end result that is not intended and from which the couple derives no intentional benefit. But there are some that disagree (because turning the light on is a necessary consequence of walking down the hall, even though the "benefit" was undesired). Apparently this couple is among them.

We all have an moral responsibility to decide for ourselves what is right and wrong. If this responsibility causes conflicts between people, well, that is what interpersonal negotiation, and failing that, courts are for. It seems to me that this couple is merely trying to use the tools at hand to resolve their conflict with their fellow tenants. What right do any of us have to deny or discourage them from this?

DesmondManius

@Nirtaz:

"Even Led, it's tiny but it still based on heating up a wire or gas."

Completely wrong. The light from an LED is NOT due to heating up a wire or gas.

The light from an LED is due to a phenomenon known as spontaneous emission. It's hard to summarise in a single paragraph, but here goes.

The electrons of an atom orbit at distinct energy "levels". When an electron drops from a higher to a lower level, it loses energy, but since energy cannot just be destroyed, it has to go somewhere. In this case, the energy lost results in a photon being emitted, one which has energy equivalent to that which was lost by the electron.

The energy of the photon governs its wavelength (i.e. its colour, if it's in the visible spectrum).

Now, as to why this happens in LEDs and how electrons can be excited to higher energy levels, I can't really summarise that in a few words. Oh well.

Normally I wouldn't give a toss about false statements like this, but this is supposed to be a tech site. I'm probably going to end up talking to myself anyway as I don't have a little star next to my name...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiative_recombination

http://electronics.howstuffworks.com/led2.htm

So. let me get this right. Friday night, at about 11:30 PM there is a fire that knocks out the electrical system in the building. In order to accomodate the participant Jewish tenants, emergency lighting is not available. NON jewish tenants open their hallway doors to find a pitch-black hallway. The observant Jews are not breaking the sabbath, but at the potential cost of the lives of others. Scenario 2. 11:30 on a Friday night, a tenant in an adjacent apartment comes home and in the darkness of the hallway is assaulted. Again, the observant jewish tenants are not breaking the sabbath, but again at a potential cost to others. Scenario 3. A Amish family moves into the building and promptly requests that all electrical service to the building be disconnected... A person's religion is between that person and their god. Let's not just arbitrarily impose that on others.

˙uı ǝʌıן ǝʍ pןɹoʍ uʍop-ǝpısdn uɐ ʇɐɥʍ

Marvin Francois

This just screams money grab to me, a couple of people claiming something because it interferes with their religion. It makes it even more obvious that they are not year round residents. Especially since motion activated lights are meant as a security feature, and people have a right to that manual switch means that it could be turned off by and intruder, and the fact the landlord is trying to offer the lighting while reducing operational costs is quite considerate. So I am guessing during this time they do not start their car because that would be a violation to according to what they are saying. Besides the area in question is common so the lack of ownership is evident. I have faith in the justice system, unless it is in Cali (Just dont trust them out there)

@rob_p: empty tomb and eyewitnesses?? Really? The point of the article is not to bash religion, that is just what you got out of it because you are utlra-sensitive. The point of the argument is people, like you, thinking that everyone else needs to cater to their every belief. Just because we have freedom of religion in the united states does not mean that everyone has to do everything in their power to make sure every single one of your beliefs is upheld. If they don't like the motion light THEN MOVE! It's that easy. A lawsuit is friggin ridiculous. No one is forcing them to live there. It's this ultrasensitive crap that is costing our country way too much money and time of everyone's feelings getting hurt.

Ridiculous.

@PeterSimpson: Combustion and electroluminescence are completely different. You need to brush up on everything you are talking about.

@irshalem: Great answer!

rushevents

So it's known, technology and religion are more related than more than half the articles I come by on Gizmodo. Faith is not a method of deduction and should therefore be treated as such. Just like we would all poke fun at that forsaken verizon spokesguy, the visual flagship of an organization, it is logically equivalent to poke fun of deities and the like.

Of course that preassumes no bias, and we all know how true that is about ANY human being, nonetheless this entertaining site.

theangeltyreal

@Nirtaz: "Using any kind of light is starting a fire"

No, you're mixing heat generation, and combustion.

You believe in God, I believe in science. You believe in creation, I believe in evolution.

betterdays

@Nirtaz: It appears you failed reading comprehension. I did not say that they cannot continue their practices, I simply stated that some things simply do not make sense in today's world. And I did not state the Judaism or any other religion is "outdated", I said that some of the traditions are.

Being of a specific faith forces one to make constant choices such as what people to associate with, what movies to watch, what music listen to, etc. And being of a specific faith does not give you the right to FORCE everyone else to adhere to YOUR religion's traditions and requirements.

As if we needed another evidence that religions are nonsensical and dangerous for your sanity.

betterdays

@XSteveMurphy: More people should be watching that show. It did manage to get renewed for season 2, at least.

Dayv

I'm not against this couple's right to practice ANY religion they want to provided it does NOT impede/harm/lower the quality of ANYONE ELSE'S LIFE. In this particular case, clearly they decided to live in a community which is not composed of strictly their brand of religion, and in doing so they GAVE UP THEIR RIGHT TO DICTATE ON OTHERS THE RESTRICTIONS OF THEIR RELIGION. Outside of their little family unit, I don't think they EVER had the right to limit other peoples lives/lifestyles due to their religious views.

BTW, and this is VERY important, Jesus told fanatical Jewish teachers (pharisees) that it was OK for His disciples to 'make wheat' on the Sabbath. He HEALED on the Sabbath. He travelled and taught on the Sabbath.

Oh, wait, these were orthodox Jews, right? Never mind.

banmojo

@Colage: mythbusters can evade these sensor detection, just lather up in cold mud or something... make sure its kosher!

@Dillinger23: What evidence do you have that the Otyugh is the creator and ruler of everything? I have the empty tomb and eyewitnesses for my faith.

Your argument is a straw man. I do not believe blindly, but I do believe.

rob_p

The problem they are having isn't that they are accidentally triggering the light, its that they would be knowingly setting it off each time they walk into its range.

Of course, they are totally retarded for suing. I'm an orthodox Jew and I would never dream of doing something like that. Frankly, its embarrassing. If it's bothering them they should either do their best to avoid it or move somewhere else.

Frankly... This is another case supporting atheism.

Motion detecting lights are in place for public safety. Shall we forgo all public safety for religious beliefs?

Birth control should be illegal?

it is the same argument.

Joshua Fleetwood

@BerylJahooby: I will join. I will even attest that his noodly self appeared to you telling you that paying rent is wicked, and that your apartment should be filled with candy. If I repeat the lie enough times I know I will believe it myself which is the truth behind a lot of old beliefs or 'witnesses'.

Toribor

@nutbastard: Generally speaking, you need to be aware that you're doing it. If you don't know that you're stepping in front of a sensor, the accepted interpretation is that you're in the clear. If you know a sensor is there, then you're not.

Whether or not that's a reasonable rule can be left up to the individual to decide.

@Nirtaz:

LEDs don't create light based on heating up wires or gas, get your facts straight:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LED

It's energy release via a electron/hole recombination, thus releasing a photon.

diredesire

-Freedom of religion does not mean the freedom to force other people to accommodate your religion. It means you can't be stopped from practicing your own religion. It places no burden on others. What if I had a religion that said it were a sin to pay for a place to live, and that you thus must live for free. Could I then force these people to rent a place to me for free? If this suit goes in favor of these morons, I will be making such a religion. Anyone else want to join?

-These jerks are not turning on an electrical circuit. They are only walking past. It is not their fault someone else has set a circuit to turn on. The blame isn't even on them even if their religion weren't insane.

BerylJahooby

What was the original headline anyway? I'm all for a little militant anti-religious views. To reiterate my own views I have no problem with faith; faith, even blind faith, does have a purpose for some in this world, it's religion I have problems with.

Toribor

@badbob001: They will have to jump in a bath of ice water, to lower their temperature and then run before they cool off. The bath of course will have to be set up the night before. :D

Toribor

Your rights end where my rights begin and visa versa. Their religious beliefs should NOT be stepping on the safety and energy conscious support of the other tenants. What this couple needs is to have the light shut off for religions reasons and then get mugged because they couldn't see the shady character standing back in the shadows.

The sad thing is that they likely won't be the ones caught in a situation like this. It will probably be some mother or child that gets hurt if these idiots get their way.

Here's something to consider: People go for a walk on the Sabbath right? Chances are someone has walked by an automatic door, a house with automatic lights, or some other such triggered device. It happens. --- If your imaginary friend is such an a$$h0le that he'd send you to hell for walking by an automatic device that you yourself did not put up, then I think it is time for you to find a better / more sane imaginary friend.

Growing up, one of my friends was Jewish and followed his beliefs very closely. He NEVER would have dreamed of forcing his beliefs onto other people and would never have tried to force other people to conform to him.

bustedchain

The way I see it, if they don't like it then move. Oh wait this is a Holiday flat... then go on vacation someplace else. Or go buy your own freestanding Holiday dwelling.

Froggmann

God was created out of fear by human imagination. What if I were to tell you today that I saw Jesus or talked to god, I would be called a lunatic by EVERYONE including the orthodox. Why? Because everyone knows rationally that it's impossible. But why would it have been possible thousands of years ago and not now?


I do respect religion and the good things that have come from it. Some people really do NEED religion. People who are unsure of right and wrong and have their morals all screwed up. For those people, I'm glad that religion was thought up. Thousands of years ago it scared many people from killing and stealing and such. What I don't like however is certain peoples use of religion. I heard someone tell me the other day "I can do what ever the F$*k i want as long as i ask Jesus for for forgiveness, I'll still end up in heaven. This guy goes around stealing from his family and friends, and hurting people around him with this false sense of security. It makes me sick.


I think if people were rational and fearless, religion would not be necessary, however, this is not the case. Like they say "there is no atheist in a foxhole". In extreme situations, no matter what, everyone hopes there's something looking out for them. Its an interesting phenomenon, but still completely unrealistic. The truth is, you are either a healthy and rational person, or you are irrational and follow someone elses ideas instead of your own and by far the latter is quite possibly the worst, especially when you are following ideas from thousands of years ago. We are much smarter now, that's why religion is still the same. We need some change!!

one of my best friends is an orthodox jew and every friday afternoon after school we used to get a few rounds of halo in and then BAM looks at the watch and the horizon for the sun. those afternoons quickly ended around 7 or so where he'd rushed back home just before the sun set. he wasn't that strict about it, it would be that his dad would be upset that they were crossing shabbat (later i learned this was just sabbath) and miss shabbat dinner or something and would still use the phone on saturday.

anyway that's not the point of this post; one of his nicknames is "werejew". shabbat shalom!

so if you're Jewish and you trip and fall onto a pile of flint, steel and dry brush, and inadvertently ignite a fire, that’s a sin?

Because that’s what’s going on here – they aren’t intentionally ‘making fire’, it’s incidental. MY understanding of sin is that there must be some force of will behind an act for it to be sinful – you can’t accidentally sin, nor can you sin by simply being a passive participant in your environment.

nutbastard

@Voyou_Charmant: Lol, I agree. Those lights detect motion, so if they move veeery very slowly they should be fine.

Toribor

Wait. Even better solution: sit very still.

Don't these sensors only respond to movement from heat, that is, from a living person? Couldn't they hide in a giant refrigerator box and walk out metal-gear style?

@Nirtaz: "this "Outdated Religion" kept them alive as a nation for 2000 years"



What does that even mean?

Fulfilling the necessary requirements to keep human beings alive kept them alive, not the absence of pork or not starting a fire one day a week and none of the other superstitious gobbledy goop.

Okay, so basically they want to other tenants to pay for their "fix" to a problem that basically is almost the most ridiculous thing i've ever heard, because honestly, how do they get showered and dressed and so on in a flat without creating fire by turning on lights, or using the water heater (a la fire)? Do they drive? Do they go into supermarkets? Are they not allowed to make fire, or not allowed to use it on the Sabbath?

It's the 21st century. Everything makes fire. Hell, they're breathing, walking fire makers themselves. Why don't they sue each other for living on the sabbath, because what do think happens inside your body to make you warm? Why else would they call it firing off synapses unless they meant it? This case and others like it blur the lines between religious disputes and legal ones, and make it hard to get real legal and religious issues taken seriously in a court room. I don't think flouting the law to gain money for your religious "issues" is right. And the motion sensor and light it's connected to are to make things livable.

I think the management of that apartment building should cut all the power and hot water to that flat every sabbath. Then maybe they'd have something to complain about.

Atriel

This should've been posted on a Saturday so any responding OJ's would have been called out :D

wiggin

@JadeLazork: You are requesting that someone prove a negative. You can not prove a negative.

The burden of proof is on you. You are making a claim, in this case God is real, you have to now prove it. You have the belief system that allows you to simple feel that something is the way it is. You say you have "plenty of evidence" but, you don't, at all. There is no evidence that any religion is any more right than the other, they just all believe they are.

Religion, at it's best, is one of the worst and most destructive inventions of man.

@Nirtaz:


1) No. It's just bat shit crazy. If someone were to file a lawsuit against a school for insisting the earth was round and only offering round globes, because their religion says soand they only offer round globes, you would likely look at this differently.

How do you feel about the intelligent design lawsuits?

You can say it's different because it's a school, it's public education, but if anything it should be more offensive to someone so open to religious beliefs.

And you can't say anything about it because it's their crazy fucking belief and that's that.

2) It isn't anti-Semitic to say that their beliefs and the lawsuit filed are crazy. The claim/complaint is the issue, not the religion it's based on.

@bucklefilledbird: I totally agree, those people shoulkd get with the times, or just move back where they came from.

@jewsrock: It’s a light...

Dillinger23

@jewsrock: It is, plain and simple.

The only difference between superstition and religion is marketing and bloodshed. A lot less people have died over *Non-Religious* superstition than religious superstition, and Superstition doesn’t have its own banks.

Dillinger23

@dnheller: erm, didn't the good samaritan parabel point out that you couldn't break the sabbath even for a thirsty dying man and that the samaritan, under no such law, point out how inpractical such a law was in facing someone in need?

@LolpantsofArabia: And here is the crux of the issue, "Religious Tolerance". If religion had any bearing on reality there would be no need for religious tolerance, cause there would be proof. Real solid, oh i saw your god at the grocery store last week proof. But there isnt ANY prooof of ANY religion, So people "Tolerate" other peoples made up BS.

Say it together now, Tolerance is proof that Religion is bullshit. I would have no need to tolerate your religion if you could prove even 1 simple fact of it, but you just cant.

Dillinger23

Flipping a switch to turn on the lights on the Sabbath actually falls into the Din Bniya category (building, as in building an electric circuit), and not necessarily lighting a fire. That just goes to prove that the law is not 4000 years old, but rather something much more modern. Just like in a civil court, the lawyers will argue their points based on previous legal rulings or try to persuade the court as to what the lawmakers meant in their wording etc. This applies to Jewish law too. That way the law continues to be updated so as to keep up with the times.
As for this couple, I may suggest that they seek the assistance of the Tzomet Institute in Israel (http://www.zomet.org.il/ ). The Institute specializes in modifying technology to aid the observant Jew, and though the site is in Hebrew (the English one is under construction) I doubt they will have trouble finding someone to translate. I believe that the Institute has dealt with this issue in the past and they may very well have a solution that will satisfy all Rabbis.
(Just to clarify, I am an Orthodox Rabbi)

irshalem

@shufflemoomin: exactly

Dillinger23

@closethipster: If you are that easily offended, you should not be on the Internet.

Dillinger23

@rob_p: So i believe that The Otyugh that lives in my PO Box is the creator and ruler of everything, and under her guise i am supposed to eat nothing but hot dogs on Friday followed by a sacrifice of a person from any of the most popular religions.

After that we have the dance of the Smooth Criminal, followed by a reading from the sacred texts of Hansel and Gretel, which tells us the story of how our Ancestors wandered through the desert err i mean forrest with nothing but bread crumbs for survival AND navigation. Following the all seeing eye into the fourth cyber dimension of procrastination, to the Lords house of Candyshell Goodness and all things chewey. Wherein we will be granted eternal life and unlimited non virgins for the manicuring.

Am i to be taken seriously? Its 2009, space flight and giant telescopes and yet no floating god in space. Weird, check your PO boxes people.

Dillinger23

They should annex portions of the building and reroute the plumbing so that everyone else is cut off from water. Then bulldoze the other tenants flats.

Problem solved.

@Mecharine: the point of the sabbath is to not do work or cause something else to do work. in this case their presence causes the light to turn on. if the lights were perpetually on or off during the sabbath, they wouldn't have a problem.

and yes, there are sabbath elevators.

@Nirtaz: But do they unplug the fridge? Because the compressor for the fridge also uses "fire" (electrical impulses) to turn on and off, as does their air conditioner, fan, and brain.

Dillinger23

@Nirtaz: So how come they only have to observe the sabbath in their time zone? Do you think their 2000 year old religion takes time zones into effect? Cause technically Friday morning is the sabbath in one part of the world.

Dillinger23

@dallasmay2: Everyone can't be governed by their state 24/7, all civilizations need the 'god-fearing' aspect in their lives to keep whatever moral compass they have intact, and prevent basic instinct from taking over. As an atheist, who has no reason to fear God, I remain an upstanding citizen; my behavior cannot be compared to others under the same circumstance. You are correct in your theory, which prevents us from living under 'the almighty atom' instead of 'the lord almighty'. As far as tolerance goes, from the perspective of someone who holds faith only in science: Orthodox Judaism is one of the most in-my-face, disliked, non tolerated religions in my book. So sue me. (oops, maybe they will..)

ugotworms

Also I think it's fairly sickening how far orthodox Jews will go to 'sneak around god'. "Ha ha I made a machine that does this automatically so that I can have modern conveniences while adhering to a many thousand year old archaic literature"

Whereas less 'orthodox' Jews accept a more loose interpretation of the literature and don't allow it to affect their 'divinity'. "I turned on a light, it doesn't matter because it isn't affecting my relationship with god."

Of course when it all boils down both are still worshiping invisible sky people but who's to judge.

Toribor

@blash: If that's the case, then the couple should have to pay to have an over-ride switch installed. If you're going to uphold ridiculous antiquated religious BS and force it upon other people then THEY should be the ones to suffer for it.

@rockhopper: Here here! I wholeheartedly agree.

Toribor

But see, I believe in the invisible pink unicorn and the invisible pink unicorn says that I must live in my apartment for free. I'm sorry but tippy-toeing around religion is ridiculous because anyone can make anything up that they would like. If I were the manager of the apartment I would apologize that the light offends them or makes their lives difficult but their belief system is the problem, not the light. The apartment manager is saving electricity and being reasonable, that's all there is to it.

Toribor

I guess based on this. we have to eliminate every motion detecting light in America because it MIGHT interfear with someone. Next it will be pork, then ending with the toal elimination of all Catholics. This leaves the Jews killing the Muslims and the word as we know it has now rebooted itself!

@shufflemoomin: That is the big question! The answer depends on your definintion of "believe". I have beliefs but I don't have certainty. That means I am willing to imagine that you could be right and I could be wrong. Therefore, I'm firm in my "personal" beliefs but unwilling to kill you over them, or even enforce my views by manipulating the poltical system.

PaddyDugan

@DDigital: Except it's only outside the norm by those who are not educated. Which is why I'm all about educating people.

My problem with the comment in question is that it isn't impinging on anyone's rights. It's a stinkin' light, after all. Come on -- requesting to disable this light on 52 Saturdays (and the few weekday holidays we have) really shouldn't be an imposition. I respect that other people are baffled by these religious beliefs but I take offense to the fact that these people are said to be impinging on others' rights. Can't we all just get along?

(side note response: gah, that has happened to me 5282340 times on this post!)

@Nirtaz: Using any kind of light is starting a fire.
Even Led, it's tiny but it still based on heating up a wire or gas.

You need to brush up on your semiconductor physics. The above statement is not scientifically accurate.

@dicknervous: You'd really have to ask a Rabbi about both. But I'd guess that most Rabbis would NOT allow either because of something called ma'arat ayin, which is the appearance of impropriety. For example, a guy wearing a yarmulke would be prohibited from entering a McDonald's because of the assumption that he's going to eat there. On the same note, an electric car is still a car and an LED light may appear to be just a regular incandescent light from a distance. To avoid these gray areas, the whole umbrella of items is prohibited.

@TuxRug: Yup, sounds about right. I know a lot of people who use them. If the oven is turned on and set up prior to the Sabbath, there's no problem with it powering off -- without the intervention of another person -- on the Sabbath.

"FTFA: 'The lessees also allege in the claim that when they purchased their flat in the spring of 2003 it was on the basis of assurances from selling agents that that movement sensors would not be installed at Embassy Court."

Did they get that in writing?

Live by the sword, die by the sword.

These folks sound like they would be happier living somewhere else. I'm all for respecting religious beliefs, but here it appears that their (some would say, "overly restrictive") religious beliefs are (a) bringing them into conflict with their neighbors, and (b) costing their neighbors money. So, the judge is going to have to weigh the issue of religious beliefs against energy conservation.

@Tamar Weinberg You know, by sticking to the letter of the law (not to do any work on the Sabbath) they are forgetting the spirit of the law (to use it as a day to connect with God and rest from their daily lives).

I actually feel sorry for this Orthodox Jewish couple because they are letting their religion get in the way of commuting with God. Do you think God really cares about them flicking a light switch on or off (its not even them switching it on, its automated). "God will understand, and if he doesn't, then we need not worry because he is not God" -Balian of Ibelin

God and religion are two very different and separate things. God actually automated the earth to spin on its access and let the sun shine (even on the Sabbath)... God, I hope he got permission from his Rabbi for that.

SuprabhaCaerus

@SpudMills: Uhm, not really relevant. (the Shoah is an unspeakable horror that must never be repeated) Hitler invaded Poland, that is what started WW II. Also Hitler hated Semites. Even those who had converted to Christianity were rounded up. Read up on Edith Stein. Hitler was a pagan, possibly an athiest. But the Reich was about power and land. Religion had nothing to do with it.

rob_p

Completely idiotic. Religious freedom does not mean you can sue to impose your primitive neanderthal beliefs on others. If you want to believe in ridiculous crap go ahead. Keep it away from people who have decided to actually think.

Try rational thought for a change

rockhopper

rob_p

rob_p

@Rhodizzle: I think the point, or general feeling is people who have extreme views of religion lack logical thought. For example, when only 4 out of 10 people in the US believe in evolution because there is a replacement belief in a creation story, that's a little scary. There are many parts of religions that are out dated, and to be taking some of them so literally still doesn't really make sense. 100 years ago (though still unfortunately today) politics and religion were more fused together, that paired with the lack of understanding when it came to science made for some pretty funky out comes, and to still be enforcing those outcomes by suing someone who is trying to save a little money and electricity is why we lack the ability to resolve big big issues like global warming. I'm not saying religion caused global warming, I'm saying that the kind of non linear thought you find in fanatics is the kind of thought process that puts the environmental issue, and other important issues on the back burner.

Also props to the lab on calling out dallasmay2 for the statements made, that is a good example of non linear thinking.

loriensleafs

@rob_p: You probably are right, but do you think someone defending this insane position is going to drop science on me? I say probably not.

Rugbydan

@Tamar Weinberg: Yea I think this is a load. Not saving electricity for something like this is dumb. It's for reasons like this we have environmental problems. All these stupid things human's are committed to are more important then saving some energy. Even if it had nothing to do with electricity, a motion senor light isn't sending anyone to hell, and if that's what you believe you need to seriously reconsider your priorities. It's the fucking landlords property.

loriensleafs

@Nirtaz: Oooo, I hadn't thought of a refrigerator light. Does that then get an override switch also? Very interesting, like a Bokononist foma...

iliad2099

@PaddyDugan: Doesn't every religious person believe their 'story' is true and the others are wrong. Isn't that essentially the base of religion?

shufflemoomin

Erm... I know that this may not be the media-worthy solution the couple clearly want, but... Wouldn't a penny's worth of black electrical tape over the sensor do the trick?

@The Nacon: I assume English isn't your first language or you don't live in the US? That's a strong opinion for someone who either doesn't live in the country, is a recent immigrant there or is a US born citizen and in bad need of an education.

shufflemoomin

@rob_p:
why don't you try actual intellectual engagement with someone who has investigated their beliefs and examined the theological system behind them and see just how irrational they are.

What makes you think nobody has tried that? I've never heard any rational argument for religion except the "comfort" argument. Hard cold truthfulness be damned, but that doesn't stop them.

andyo

@rob_p: I don't think an incandescent bulb constitutes fire. To my knowledge, incandescent heat can be created without the need for oxygen, or am I wrong?

shufflemoomin

@Nirtaz: People are free to do what they want, but not when it inconveniences other people.

shufflemoomin

@Nirtaz: Incandescent bulbs are not using 'fire', fool. Heat != Fire.

shufflemoomin

@dallasmay2: the fanatics that you so glibly mentions only flew into the WTC because of the troops we have stationed in their holy land. Saudi Arabia has foreign troops, US troops, stationed there.

and you are very wrong about the world getting worse without religion. it's just the opposite. our criminal justice system is irreligious. public schools are irreligious. Social Security is irreligious. the US Constitution is irreligious. medicine is irreligious. science in general is irreligious.

on the other hand, religious organizations shun people for getting medical care, wearing the wrong clothes, eating the wrong thing and many other arbitrary things. religious organizations promote genital mutilation. religious organizations promote the subjugation of women. religious organizations can and do deny services to people with disabilities or for having the wrong sexual orientation. religion was used to promote slavery in the US.

i could go on and on, but the point is that society is a secular pursuit and we get more civilized as we limit the effects religion can have on society.

dbisping

This is sick. 6 MILLION died in the holocaust and Jews are still suffering persecution and marginalisation. How many more have to die to get the message across? 6 MILLION!?

alsheron

I am a little disappointed to see that the title of the post was changed.

It was harmless, and frankly I don't think it would have been changed had any other group been on the receiving end of this very justified criticism.

So why create an issue out of it by renaming the post?

Now to address the topic, I think again that it is rather disappointing to see this level of selfishness and naiveté on behalf of the couple.

Lighting is very important. Saving energy is equally important. This couple, who only use this apartment as a holiday residence, (as stated) should find a location more friendly to their restrictive religious rules.

@daPrinz: They turned off the refrigerator light too (Before the shabath)

Please People read about it before you say silly things...

Nirtaz

@iliad2099: They turned off the refrigerator light too (Before the shabath)
If they know the light (The Fire) will turn on when they are there they cant do it.
UnLighting fire in "shabath" is one of the most Importent rules of the Jews

Nirtaz

Easy solution.

If automaticly switching the light on constitutes "creating fire", then replace the lightbulbs with LED, OLED or hallogen lamps.

Instead of bitching about them doing the labour of creating fire, you'd think they'd have a much bigger problem with them being forced to copy their makers primordial actions by running into the halway and without touching or effort, go "LET THERE BE LIGHT"

LeviBunting

@weatherman: I definitely didn't picture him looking at ALL like this...

@Haggie: The holiness of "Life" is more Importent then keeping the "Shabath" (like in Asimov rules) - so they can use fire to keep someone alive even in Shabath but can't "Enjoy" it.
If the fire was start before the Shabath they can use it as well...

Nirtaz

@golferal - Now with more Segway!: I am sorry but you are as outdated as they are.we live in the 21 century and the most importent thing about this century and America is "live and let live". they can do whatever they want .. this "Outdated Religion" kept them alive as a nation for 2000 years, so maybe they got something over there ha?

Nirtaz

Well, at first it seems funny but now... you all look pretty "anti-Semite" to me..
They have their Beliefs they agreed to pay for solving the problem... what is wrong with that?

Most of you are "inlove" with your "Non Religious" Religion so much that you simply cant understand that someone may want to keep their 2000 years Beliefs ...
And BTW, Using any kind of light is starting a fire.
Even Led, it's tiny but it still based on heating up a wire or gas.
And the switch itself can make a small "fire" when turning it on.
So - I don't practice those Beliefs but i can still understand and honor other People Beliefs.

Nirtaz

@The Lab: Doubt everything, find your own path. That is what I live by, not a religous view but a philosphical one.

Mr.DuckSauce

@dallasmay2: http://www.amnesty.org/

@The Lab: i have simple way to explain something complicated. intrinsic value. happiness is an intrinsic value. when you have something like a favourite blanket you have happiness in that blanket. the blanket has a value, $10. used $3. but because it is your favourite blanket the value for the owner would be $100 dollars.
now if you believe that the value of something increases with the amount of emotional satisfaction then there is no point on mocking religion. religion it's 100% intrinsic value. they dont make you give money but you still do if you so need it or want to. it is free if you want to, but you cant brake it into pieces and give it away. you can account to it in any kind of unit of measurement.
if you need a picture is because it is through your eyes that you can adquire more information. information that makes you feel secure about what you see or have learned.
other people give intrinsic value to money. money is not worth its value but what it can get you. 100 dollars can mean candy for a month or a hooker. either way it is the way you think you will achieve something you want.
finally religion has a proof, but it has it only for me. money has only intrinsic value too but we all choose to give it value for the benefit of OUR capitalistic system. so money is logical ONLY in a system where all integrants are for it. in another system 1M cotton pieces with death people on them would never have the value of a house, a land, goods, or any other kind of element.
religion is good and bad. but people good and bad. some people dont need religion but other do need it, some people need a picture, others just need the math to work.
as long as "someone's" math doesn't try to quantify "my" religion, and "my" religion doesn't stop "you" from looking at all the pictures "you" want we should be fine!

wow i have written a lot. hope someone reads it!!! XD

@Tamar Weinberg: sorry but the problem i have with all scriptures is that they ARE open to interpretation. so today it means something cause it is what it means today to society, and it helps/prevents something happening. i am a religious man, im am not Jewish, but i do believe in religion, GOD, scriptures, etc.

I think there is solution for all this but it should be met with compromises. if there is a majority of people who are for an upgrade then the individual liberty to leave should be exercised. but that is the easy way out. there could also be another solution, put one main shutoff timer on the apartment so before they go out they can unable the lights for an certain amount of time. but that is just too much on the part of the majority.

if i was in a place where the majority of people choose something that is not in my best interest i can put them all in the situation where i make them change for "my" individual reazon, but then again they could argue that I should change in benefit of "their" individual reazons.

i say, give them their apartments worth, and LET them choose a better fitting apartment complex.

@elgringoguapo: Truth be told I simply didn't get one after my freshman year until this last year when I decided it might be a good idea (I've somehow been fortunate enough to navigate around all kinds of holds). I'm going into my fifth year now -- just recently started a new minor that I want to finish -- and this last time I explained where I was at but that I wanted to finish and the bishop seemed to understand. As long as I keep the rules it'd hard for them to justify kicking me out because of where I stood, especially 2 semesters before my graduation.

I take it you attend school there as well?

@The Lab: I hate to say it, but I had even MORE written when I accidentally clicked out of the text box as I was finishing the stupid thing. Luckily I had copied and pasted the first half, then just filled in the rest based on what I had remembered writing, which wasn't all that much. Thanks for taking the time to read through all of it though.

On one end I don't fault those who pretend -- in such a staunch, strict culture it takes an insanely strong will to make it with the truth written on you (the truth being how you really feel), and not everybody has that. Mine is my gift and my curse, a stubborn resolve that forces me to always stick by my principles. I actually have my parent's faith to thank for that.

But on the other, it really drives me up the wall that these people are feigning living such a specific lifestyle and get the societal glory. Maybe that's just because the life I chose of being honest and forthcoming is one with no glory at all. But at the end of the night at least I can look myself in the mirror. That's consolation enough.

I should also just point out that there are some damn good people in that church (not to say there aren't any outside of it). Some have more obvious character flaws than others, and that's where the majority of my frustration is targeted. It took me a while, but I finally learned to separate the good from the bad and appreciate the former more than I had been doing all along. And when I did things looked a little better.

PS - I wish the editors shared your enthusiasm; I've been craving a star for years now ;)

@michael haendler: Not nearly as weird as spider religion. That shit's nuts.

@Torgo823:I hope no one tells the Orthodox that every time they move a muscle they're "turning on an electrical item."

Torgo823

I was going to make a long post, but The Lab covered my views fairly well. I just don't grok orthodox anything.
How can someone run their lives based on the writings of bronze age primitives? And be honest, that's what we're talking about here.
Sure, the faithful cherry pick which parts to get bent about but in the end it's all based on the teaching of folks who'd burn you for a witch if they saw your iPhone.

commentotron

God: I know you people love to pick and choose which rules you follow in that book I wrote, but I think I was pretty clear on the whole not using motion sensor lights on the Sabbath.

Torgo823

It's religion. It's not supposed to make sense.

Personally, as a Scientologist..

Let's face it: No matter what religion you are, there are customs and edicts that have become outdated. Ritual sacrifice was also a Jewish tradition at one time but was eventually retired.

I am not trying to be disrespectful towards Judaism here, but this is a practice that serves no practical purpose and should be eliminated. That and not being able to eat pork...

Set their apartment on fire. I'll bet that they run out into the hallway (triggering the lights) instead of burning to death...

@Tamar Weinberg: I used to have an electric stove with a "sabbath mode". The safety, by default, turned off the oven after a few hours (six I think). For Sabbath Mode, first you would set the desired temperature, and then either turn the oven light on or leave it off. Then, you press and hold two buttons for 10 seconds, the screen will show "SAb" for a few seconds, then the screen would turn off. It would bypass the safety time-delay shutoff for up to 48 hours or until Sabbath Mode was disabled. It would also keep the oven light set to either off or on for the entire duration.
I never used the mode, as I am "Casual Catholic", but I found it an interesting section in the owner's manual.

This doesn't seem to make sense, on it's own terms. The landlord, who I assume is a gentile, is the one who installed and wired up the motion sensor. The Jewish couple are not turning on the light, they are just walking, and the landlord by extension is turning the light off and on for them. In this scenario, the motion sensor is their shabbos goy--a shabbos goy that they aren't paying-- what's more Jewish than that?

And how the gehenna does flipping a light switch on the Sabbath constitute doing work, while flipping an override switch doesn't?

iliad2099

Orthodox Jews are bad for the environment. LOL
Sorry people, as much as I respect everyones opinion about religion this is a perfect example how ridiculous faith can become. I wonder if a Orthodox Jew is allowed to open a refrigerator since a light is triggered, too.

daPrinz

This couple is acting in a manner that is consistent with their beliefs. They attempted to reach a reasonable accommodation with the management company. When the management company refused to compromise, they sued.

This article appears to be more about criticizing their beliefs than about gadgets, and as such would appear to be off topic.

You could have explored the nature of the belief and some of the technology that has been created to work around the limitations of that belief. For example, Orthodox Jews will tape over the switch that turns on the light inside a refrigerator when the door is opened. Some will add an override switch inside the refrigerator. Many use automated timers to turn on and off lights throughout the sabbath. Radios in Israel are designed to automatically turn on when an emergency signal is received. Elevators are set to stop on every floor during the sabbath. Hot plates and hot pots are used to keep food warm.

There is a lot of technical discussion in the religious communities concerning what it is about flipping a light switch that is prohibited. There is one line of thought that it is not the light per se that is problematic so much as the tiny spark that occurs when the switch closes. Some argue that throwing a condenser across the gap to prevent the spark is sufficient. Others argue that it is not sufficient. Still others argue that even if it is sufficient, one must still establish a boundary around the prohibited action because it might lead one to violate the sabbath in other circumstances. These positions are not pure opinion, but rather supported opinion reasoned logically from an extensive literature of religious teachings.

So this couple's problem is neither simplistic nor trivial. In all likelihood they belong to a brand of orthodox Judaism that does not permit the workarounds described above.

Moreover, in all likelihood this management company is using the situation as a pretext to discriminate against the couple. The couple offered to pay for the installation of an override switch (and apparently also for the extra cost of the electricity). The same management company apparently has no problem with the extra electricity for lighting up the annual Christmas tree.

mkant

@Tamar Weinberg: Freedom for interpretation makes the whole thing utterly flawed though. Plus most people only believe in the religion because it had been embedded in their mind since they were a child, which is very wrong.

Kakkoister

@Tamar Weinberg: Their mere existence creates light, so it's essentially flawed :P.

Kakkoister

As an Orhodox Jew I'm very upset about this post. You've broken the cardinal rule of blogging and business in general which is to leave religion out at any cost ( unless your blog is about religion). You've painted this couple and their religious beliefes in a negative light by labelling this matter silly. The sabbath is no silly matter to us. Furthermore, you've left out a crucial part from the original article which says : "The Colemans have offered to pay for an override switch to disable the light sensors during the Sabbath." yet the building management declined the offer. All this shows that the author of this article is an anti-religious biggot.
Frankly I don't care about the religious views of the authors of this site because the only reason I'm subcribed to this site's rss feed is to hear the latest on technology. By posting this article you've upset me and you've invited comments that are negative towards my religion (and all religions in general) which makes me feel unwelcome as a reader and a commentor of this blog. I will unsubcribe from your blog's rss feed until you take down this article and post an apology for posting it in the first place. Please excuse any spelling and/or grammor error as the only access to the Internet I have at the moment is through my iPhone.

QuillanMalacky

@dallasmay2: I am going to end this dialogue because you are putting words in my mouth and that is not fair. I EXPLICITLY said I do not have any ill-will towards the religious but now you suggest I think the world would be better off without them? Come on.

My point is the same as the point the management company in the story has, namely that it sets a bad precedent. For example, if they disable an energy-saving security light so they don't anger the god of a tenant then how come I can't claim that the elevator upsets my god? Is Judiasm somehow better than my religion? The problem I see here is that these people expect strangers to accept "don't anger god" as a better rational than "save energy and provide security".

Be religious, believe in whatever you want. However don't go around imposing your belief system on other people and expect it to be respected. I'm not telling people how they should think, I'm just telling them why I won' t listen to them when they tell me how to.

@Summermodoin'_GitEmSteveDave:

@The Lab: Sadly, the best I can do is Robocop on a unicorn. But he DOES have a lightsaber.

@weatherman: Neither did I. This will make listening to "Wait, Wait...Don't tell me" a little more weird now.

@The Lab:Let me remind you of where this conversation began. You said that you have decided that any religious tolerance at all "abandon reason, [and] allow[s] people to say all sorts of craziness". I heard, and correct me if I am wrong, you you believe that the world would be a better place without a religious people. That makes you a bigot, and guilty of the same unproductive communication that your accuse ALL religious people of. I don't know your roommates at Harvard. I have no reason to assume they are not bright upstanding people. And I don't know you. I have no reason to assume you didn't help the hondurans rebuild. I applaud you if you did. But I do know your argument. I know it well. It's the same argument that has been used over and over again. "If X didn't exist, then there would be no problems in the world." The X can be anything. Cars, taxes, pollution, races, or religions (in your case, it's every religion.)

You have no right -what so ever- to look at a person from another culture and place a preconceived judgement on the person based on their personal faith. The person will have a different history and life experiences than you. There are many people in this world, much smarter/logical/productive/caring/evil than you. Learn from them. You have no right to remove a huge aspect of their culture and history just because you have a different one.

dallasmay2

@rob_p: Hitler hated Jews. That's a religion, not a nationality. I don't know enough about WWI to comment.

Tell the morons to shove their fairy tales up their asses

EvilJesus

@dallasmay2: I am going to let that stripping comment slide this once, but you mention it again and I'll have to say "pics or it didn't happen".

In any case, the definition of bigotry requires that the bigot hate the group in question. I don't hate any group. My only point is that accepting someone's unfounded beliefs as valid opens the door to all sorts of unfounded belief. For the sake of productive communication, that has to stop.

It is also conversationally unproductive to make personal or ad hominem attacks. You presume a lot about me in that comment, a lot that is intended to be offensive and that can drive a conversation into an argument. I don't have TV and used to live in a house with Harvard Divinity school graduate students so I do actually know this subject. Well. Like backwards and forwards. If you don't like my opinions, attack them but don't suggest I spend all my time watching TV and don't have any friends.

@rob_p: OK there are tons of non-religious groups that do great work. The Shriners are apparently religious ("shrine" shuld have been a clue) but what about doctors without borders or habitat for humanity or the peace corps? The idea here is that there are no groups that define themselves as atheists, we atheists don't really hang out together based on our lack of a belief in god. But to say there aren't a metric ton of non-religious organizations doing good is patently wrong.

@rcast1986: Thanks for taking the time to write a really interesting post. I'm sorry you had to experience that discrimination in your college no less. In high school one of my good friends was mormon. I know him well enough to know he doesn't believe but now he has a big family and gets his picture taken with Mitt Romney. So I've seen first-hand the face of those who pretend to believe, they are not uncommon. I've got no rhetorical point, just saying that was a good post.

Uhm... did they actually check with a halachic (Jewish legal) authority before getting all sue-happy? Because I live in a very Orthodox nabe (Borough Park, Brooklyn), sharing a driveway with very Orthodox neighbors, and they have a motion sensor light over their garage that annoys the hell out of me on general nuisance grounds because it flashes on and off every two minutes, although I bite my tongue to preserve our friendship and good neighborly relationship of over 35 years. Offhand, I can't remember what happens on the Sabbath, though. Could be they disconnect it. But I know a lot of people have dawn-to-dusk outdoor lights, which are a kind of sensor, although they don't depend on motion to turn on and off.

Anyway, I understand the bewilderment about exactly what the Sabbath infraction is, the laws of the labors forbidden on the Sabbath are extremely complicated to parse for 21st century life. They are based on 39 labor listed in the Bible itself (as opposed to being handed down by the Rabbis), and in their original form it's often impossible to understand how the modern injuction is derived - for example, how does flipping a light switch derive from the labor of creating fire. But in this story, I'm not sure there is actually a forbidden labor going on here to begin with, although I'm not knowledgeable enough to know for sure.

clickable

@LolpantsofArabia: SSSHHHHHH!!!!! don't give'm ideas.

the_wiggle

@rob_p: Thank you. This current argument, one that is the main thesis of Bill Maher's recent documentary, is very popular right now. I personally find it very flawed. The flaw, as I see it, is that the removal of religion would not negate peoples greed for money/prestige/power. Bad people would still lust over these things and still do bad things to get them. On the other hand, religion is often the only reason people do good to others.

dallasmay2

@Dipsomaniac: I'm not, I'm saying it wouldn't be criticized much, if at all.

Mr. Loftus, the sarcastic and condescending tone of your post is really disappointing, and I find it quite offensive. Yes, I am Jewish.

I frequent Gizmodo daily because I like your coverage on technology, I don't come here to read your views on religion.

Report the story for what it is, and leave your snide and ignorant comments aside.

ClaudeSwindle

@LolpantsofArabia: Wait, so actually reading the F article might explain something that wasn't written in a quick blog post? I should try that sometime.

dallasmay2

@weatherman: Or maybe he changed the headline because a few people took the time to read the article and explain that there was an agreement with the property owners beforehand about not installing the lights. The anti-religious perspective may have been misplaced.

dallasmay2

@The Lab: Actually, I have a funny story about the Shriners -stripped for them during one of their initiations... Err, nevermind, kinda a long story.

Anyways, I would certainly never bad mouth the good deeds or intentions of others; Shriners, Yours, or Bill Gate's. Any thing that done, for whatever motivation that brings good things to helpless people is admirable to me.

In the case presented, it appears from the article that these people consulted their lawyers more than their rabbis. These people were probably out to sue, and they picked a reason. If it wasn't this, it would have been that.

I do claim, sir, that you are bigoted. Anyone who will place preconceived judgement on an entire group of people, especially one as absurdly diverse as 'all religious people', is a textbook bigot. You should open your ears sometime, turn off the TV, and meet some people. Chances are that you will find that 'Religious People' are a very diverse group, with a very diverse history, desires, needs, thoughts, feelings, hopes, goals, morals, etc. Are there bad 'Religious People'? Yes, of course there have always been, and always will be greedy and vindictive people that will abuse any cultural system. Atheists are certainly not exempt from that fact. If the world was run by atheist instead, there would still be greedy/vindictive people.

dallasmay2

@Tamar Weinberg: The beauty of Gizmodo's comment system is that a "star" poster can promote someone else's response to their comment, just so that they can bash it in return.

In fairness, I think LolpantsofArabia makes an interesting point about the possible benefits of this law in ancient times.

"Of the 35 other owners in the complex, not a single one of them supports the Colemans' lawsuit or their suggested fix"

how many of the tenants are orthadox jews?

people who are deeply into their religion are interesting folks. On the one hand their views are some degree of crazy, but on the other they stick to their principles like nobody's business.

truth be told, normally i would try and defend them,I would be a hypercrite for getting all defensive about this, since I constantly make fun of all other religions for being crazy.

ant religion weird?

michael haendler

@rcast1986: How do you go about obtaining your ecclesiastical endorsement?

elgringoguapo

@Tamar Weinberg: Well, you can't really expect people not to think something is "loopy" when it is outside the norm. It's human nature.

I'm sure that if I lived in a town inhabited entirely by Orthodox Jews and walked around on the Sabbath listening to my IPod (maybe jamming to Black Sabbath?) and mixing up margaritas on my deck, I might be called "loopy" (or worse).

The thing is, most religions have changed over time because rules that made sense 4,000 years ago no longer do today. In fact, many are now illegal (otherwise we'd still be stoning our daughters for having premarital sex, and women would still be the property of men as it states in a certain good book).

Religion is a touchy subject, always has been. Believe what you want to believe (it's your right), but you can't expect people to not think it's weird when it's so far removed from what is perceived as "normal" in modern society. It's not malicious, like i said, it's just human nature.

It shouldn't offend you that people think it's strange, it's their right to think that, just as it is your right to believe in what you believe. I think vegans are strange. Doesn't mean I am persecuting them, it's just what I believe. They shouldn't be offended by it. They can live how they want to live (probably thinking that I'm strange) and I'll live the way i want to. That's the beauty of a free society.

One thing to look forward to though: If the green movement really takes off more people might start adopting Orthodox Judaism... you know, to save more energy : )

(side note: I had a better response typed out a minute ago, but I clicked outside the comment box which apparently is the same thing as hitting the cancel button now... so that kinda sucked)

BTW I think it's totally BS that you changed the headline, Jack. If you're going to be anti-religious, stick to it, man. Nothing wrong with that from a purely free-speech perspective. Just don't change the headline afterwards and make all the commenters look like they're the ones over-reacting.

@Rugbydan: If you think about it, light bulbs are kind of like small fires, they take large amounts of energy and turn it into light and heat. Fires take mass and turn it into light and heat. We even talk about light bulbs, 'burning out.' And the temperature of a tungsten filament in a light bulb reaches 3100-5400°F (ref: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incandescent_light_bulb ) I don't follow Jewish law (I'm Catholic) but I think that they could make a better case that a light bulb is a little container of fire than you could to the contrary...

rob_p

@Mecharine: The prohibition of using electricity on the Sabbath is based off the fact that flipping a lightswitch or plugging in a cable and completing a circuit can cause a spark - which has many of the properties of fire, albeit on a smaller, much briefer level. (I should know, I wrote my Bar-Mitzvah speech on it, and I still think it's a load of BS).

What they are asking for is not something that will inconvenience other people. What they're asking for is to continue the motion-sensing properties of the automatic light during the week, with a manual override switch to keep the light turned on during the Sabbath. Where is the inconvenience factor? Last time I checked, people have had lights on in the hallways outside their hotel rooms for quite some time now, and I'm sure the Orthodox couple in question would be able to volunteer to turn on the manual switch before the Sabbath, or to have a timed switch that turns the lights on and off at a certain time of day (which is permissible since the timer is set before the Sabbath). Orthodoxy allows lights to burn through the Sabbath which is why electric clocks and wristwatches are allowed to continue running through the Sabbath as well as being the basis for Sabbath-permissible (shomer-shabbat) lights, which are always turned on but are "turned off" by drawing a blind across the lamp (i.e. the same concept as making a room dark by closing the drapes/blinds).

Having the judge tell them to find another place sets a dangerous precedent, because it allows any landlord who wishes to not have Orthodox tenants to be rid of them simply by installing automatic lights. Soon, all landlords will have automatic lighting (since this is now considered to be "modern" lighting) thereby establishing a loophole to equal housing laws, and denying housing to many Orthodox tenants in the vast majority of apartment buildings because their beliefs no longer permit them to live there.

blash

@Polybius: Reasonable question. The issue is about the interpretation of ancient scripture and if the Rabbi is willing to apply Biblical verses to the specific scenario.

The beauty of the Torah is that it's open to interpretation on the finer points but there are some main concepts that are agreed upon by everyone.

I have no problem being tolerant, but when it affects the rest of the population living around them, tough toenails. It's 2009, I refuse to held hostage by ancient superstitions.

Also, creating fire? Light bulbs are not little containers of fire.

Rugbydan

@rcast1986: What a novel idea in this thread, being fair...

rob_p

@The Lab: Actually, they excommunicated mom and the doctors, the girl is too young to be subject to excommunication. (Church law is a hobby of mine) Excommunication is a proper reaction if you believe that abortion is tantamount to murder, as the Catholic Church does.

And just because you don't accept the evidence, (the empty tomb, the eyewitnesses) doesn't mean it is not true. Natural and supernatural things both require faith, some level of trust, to accept them as true.

rob_p

@Tamar Weinberg: Being married to a Jewish woman who went to Yeshiva for 12 years, I know all about these rules and customs. I also know that the most Orthodox (in any religion) take these ancient writings as literally as possible. However, since I am not Jewish (and she is obviously not Orthodox), I have a serious question for you...

The rules state that you can't "make fire", correct? If that is so, I can understand not driving a car (internal combustion), using a gas oven/stove, and even an incandescent light (since it uses heat to generate light). But what about an electric car or LED light? Neither of those use fire or heat to run? Would those be acceptable?

@The Lab: Shriners are Freemasons, Freemasons have as a central belief that there is a creator God, so try again.

rob_p

@SpudMills: How about World War I and World War II or am I just cherry picking?

rob_p

@dallasmay2: Oddly enough, even though I disagree with your stance, I find your comment more rational and better written than this post.

rob_p

@ArtisticThought:

You might be "Artistic", but the "Thought" part needs some lessons in reading comprehension.

Re-read what I wrote. I didn't ask for censorship of legitimate criticism of religion. I complained about prejudiced and bigoted attitudes toward religion and believers, and Judaism and observant Jews in particular.

And what technology is related to the lawsuit? Light? Motion-activated light switches? Hardly newsworthy technology. Guess it's a slow tech news day.

No, the article is a thinly veiled excuse for Mr. Loftus insulting religion and religious people, and possibly something ugly, based on prima facie evidence. And evidence of poor editorial supervision on this blog.

A tech blog is not exactly the forum for any legitimate criticism of religion, is it? Those who want to complain about religion should find a blog on religion, but they should be better armed for wars of words on religion than is Mr. Loftus

dnheller

Wow... Ignorance, intolerance and cruelty. Jack, your article does nothing but incite hatred. You still have it tagged as superstition (thanks for the value judgement) your original headline was just offensive and without really reporting on the situation described in the article you pass judgement on these people for trying to receive a little accommodation and then for good measure you wish evil on these people at the end of your article. I think that somebody needed to count to ten before they started to write. Plainly your atheistic tendencies (religion=superstition) were offended by these people trying to live an observant Jewish lifestyle.

Finally to all the commenters who equate religion with irrationality, why don't you try actual intellectual engagement with someone who has investigated their beliefs and examined the theological system behind them and see just how irrational they are. I believe that while you may not share their faith you will find that there is rationality and internal coherence.

rob_p

for the record, this is a public forum, and here in America we have the right to free speech. If we want to bash your religion or praise you religion, we'll do it, and if you don't like it "you can get the hell out."

@dallasmay2: well-said.

Walljasper

@Tamar Weinberg: Well-said - thanks.

Walljasper

@Mecharine:Let's not forget that the article states that they expect the other tenants to foot the bill for their (the couple's) legal fees. That's just pure gold-digging and it sure as hell is not the way you ought to treat your neighbors.

JoeKhurr

The Lab has pretty much got the point of the picture here. It makes no sense from a logical and "modern" standpoint to blindly believe in something that you have not experienced as truth yourself or had PERSONAL hard evidence as revelation to your believe. To do so makes that person seem quite daft to those of us who actively think.


Obsidian also made a good point with the comment below:
I call Spaghetti Monster and counter-sue claiming that in installing a custom override switch they are violating my ability to worship the god of automatic electrical lighting, thereby infringing on my rights to practice my religion


This whole notion of believing things you have no proof of makes things spiral out of control because one person doing it and justifying it promotes other to do the same. The case of Spagehtti Monster vs. The Jewish Religion could go on ad nauseum forever and it'd all be fundamentally a huge waste of time.


Don't get me wrong, this is not an anti-religious comment, it's an anti-illogical comment hoping that it might spark up an interest in people to start thinking for themselves and search for truths, not being led by the hand of as one reader put, and "arcane" school of thought.

wishfullthinkng

@The Lab: Just the "do it out of love for your fellow man." I'm more of a hedonist, and feel that nobody can really do anything without doing it for themselves. To be honest I don't really know what the point of my post was haha, just that it's an interesting topic as related to the one part in your post.

So no one was willing to say how they Jews could relate in a "penny pinching" sort of way?

Matthew Rebmann

This is the BEST argument I've heard FOR the Taliban.

CaliforniaKid

@The Lab: What you said about Jack setting the tone makes sense. That said, I greatly disagree with his approach (which has since been slightly reworked, which I for one appreciate). I think you'll agree that "superstitious" in this case carries some very negative, patronizing overtones like "magic" or "witchcraft."

I'd have to go back and re-read to be sure, but I'm pretty positive your comments are mostly along the lines of logic, intelligent and informed discussion, like your reply to me. Others, however, are suggesting these religious "nuts" or "crazies" hurl themselves out of the top of a multi-story apartment building, or that their requests are a joke based solely on their belief system, which seem to be continually discredited because others in this forum don't share that belief. I just think about the cries of "bigot!" against anyone not "tolerable" to the gay movement regarding Prop 8.

In the interest of full disclosure: I was raised Mormon with my two active Mormon parents, and was probably pretty devout until I was about 11 or 12 and started to go my own way. I've since followed a path of what can be considered logic to personally believe that the existence of a God is highly unlikely, and that others in history have turned to deity as an explanation for constructs we don't understand (Greek/Roman/Norse mythology, et al). I am currently attending BYU, a Mormon institution (got a scholarship and the tuition is cheap anyways for a pretty good education), passing up on literally every college in Texas due to expense. I refused to go on a two year mission for my church because, well, I don't believe in it, and have thus been the target of much discrimination, isolation, and even ridicule. I've seen fakes and hypocrites lie their way through religious ceremonies for social status and glorification while I sit here, honest and true to my own beliefs and refusing to make a mockery of what many in the faith consider to be holy practices. I should by all means, more than many here, be painfully bitter towards those of a highly religious background and completely unsympathetic to stories like these. But I think what the struggle with my parents and myself and some individuals in my church has taught me is not to fall into the same trap of blasting another because of their belief or non-belief in something. My point is that there could be a God, or many Gods, a God that loves us or a God that hates us or one that doesn't give a shit. Hell, we could be run by the Family-Guy writing manatees on South Park. We'll never know until we die, and perhaps not even then. So, like someone else pointed out here, I feel like everyone is using their silly beliefs to criticize others silly beliefs and saying theirs is better because of that. I see it happen between religions, from believers to non-believers, and from those who don't believe to those who do. I feel like this is the place to take the high road, and that's what I choose to do with this issue (God I sound like an ass; I fully acknowledge myriad weaknesses within me, and I speak utterly useless garbage probably 70% of the time -- this is the one area I feel confidently passionate about to argue this way). It's just hard to swallow when the banner of tolerance has been waving freely around these partswith both the Prop 8 issue and the Obama election, often times by the same people. It's no less ironic to me than those who preach Christlike love in church and then tell someone they're "going to hell for being Mormon [and not Baptist]" like I was yelled at in 7th grade, or something similar.

@switchblade saints: It's because images are floated left. You'd have to try to break the float, though I don't know how this page is programmed, it may end up messing with the rest of the page. At least it doesn't look too bad the way it is, still funny.

@Tamar Weinberg: Hmm... if the rule applies to everybody, why should one Rabbi say that it's ok and another not? Doesn't sound like a constant religious belief to me. And if the Law is the Law (Moses') shouldn't all Jews follow the same Law instead of choosing how much of it to believe in?

I can't believe the tone of this article. In my RSS reader the title is still "Orthodox Jewish Couple Imprisoned By Superstition, Blames Motion-Sensing Light Instead [Superstition]." Unbelievable. I'm not an Orthodox Jew (or even Jewish) but I find myself a little offended reading lines like "May the management install even more motion-sensing lights in that span." What is that?

@Obsidian: hahah i think this comment just settled the argument.

deux_ex_machina

@Tamar Weinberg: See, all of that makes sense. It's not like you're actively setting out to turn lights on during the Sabbath in that case, so the dispensation just sounds like common sense. Then again, as you said, not everyone may see things that way.

But if there were contractual obligations to not install the motion sensors, then they'd have a case. Their beliefs would only be background material, as the real question would be breach of contract.

drjayphd

@rcast1986: Care to elaborate on that? Not sure what you mean.

@jewsrock: No, it isn't.

Dipsomaniac

@The Lab: Ah, the great hedonism vs. altruism debate.

@Dipsomaniac: Its telling them they can't follow that religion.

jewsrock

@ArtisticThought: Yeah, exactly. last year I took an abnormal psych class and it really opened my eyes to social categorizations and the issues of right and wrong in our civilization. The title of this class itself implies its premise, that there is a majority that is considered "normal" and anything that opposes it that is thereafter "abnormal". So something like homosexuality, was, according to the DSM-II (pre-revision), a sexual disorder until enough people complained and it was seen as a more accepted and "normal" way of sexual functioning. Still other variants, like pedophilia for example, are merely sexual attractions that aren't common enough to be considered normal and that will never in this culture be accepted this way. Because of that it's "wrong", and we're raised to believe this way.

@jewsrock: No, sorry, a light that they don't agree with isn't anything like telling them they can't have a a religion.

Dipsomaniac

@BK Beezy: What makes you think that isn't what about a million people say every day?

Dipsomaniac

@switchblade saints: I was quoting him, I just didn't know what he looked like :)

@Spiral: Good catch. You are right to point out that "proof" is a very high bar. I should have said "evidence". To clarify my point, I am not suggesting it is illogical to believe in something until it is proven but there should be some evidence to provide a basis for belief.

Assumptions based on evidence are all well and good. I can see myself as can others, therefore I assume I exist. However to believe there is a father, son, and holy ghost with no evidence to base this assumption off of is illogical. Furthermore, much religious belief disregards strong evidence. The world is 6,000 years old? No evidence to support it and outstanding evidence to the contrary. Wildly illogical. The bible is full of demonstrably false information. Some people pick and choose what they want to believe but if the book is supposedly the "word of god" isn't it illogical to accept large parts are false without questioning the validity of the whole work?

I'll bet they know some good lawyers.

vista64guy

@ArtisticThought: Bombing abortion facilities...man that pisses me off. I'm pro life, at least I think (talk about another really confusing issue), but that's just such a wrong way of going about things. But I gotcha.

@Spiral: Yes, although in practical circumstances truth and logic is valid according to how well it pertains to reality outside of the boundaries of a system of thought. Even if it is perfectly internally consistent. I view proof as what can be established from the scientific method and the theories based directly on them. Of course, to be serious about this you really would have to dismiss metaphysics altogether unless you can systematically prove that a supernatural occurrence happened and that the information pertaining to it is most likely true.

In terms of finding an absolute, metaphysical truth, even if a particular religion in which god is said to have told people to do something, could it not be explained that some sort of malevolent, or possibly even misguided supernatural entity faked the whole thing up?

There's a hilarious episode of Better Off Ted where the company installs new motions sensors on every device in the company... but as it turns out, they can't see black people. Doors, elevators, water fountains. Hilarious.

fuck religion.

CharitableNinja

@Californian:
Yeah disrupting class for praying is wrong because i assume you were in a public school and its disrupting class.

Public school is separate from religion for a reason. It's not reasonable for one couple to inconvenience everyone because of what their parents told them to believe

@Windhawk:

Feynman is made of win. And you sir, for citing him, are also made of win :) I'm only entering into my 2nd year of undergraduate physics, but I've only read one of his books for fear of lack of comprehension (one of the colleges I applied to sent it to me actually - neat gesture!) Perhaps I should look into reading more though! ^_^

ChaosCon

@rcast1986: I am responding to your post because I think you are legitimately curious about the questions you posed.

First, the reason no one is getting de-starred or banned for their comments is because they are in direct relation to an observation made in the original post by Jack Loftus that (I'm paraphrasing) certain extreme religious belief is tantamount to superstition. It would be disingenuous to start a conversation and then punish people for participating. Also, the discussions have been largely respectful for such a volatile topic.

As someone who has spoken out against religion in these comments, my reason for doing so is that I do not believe it is fair that we must respect certain beliefs that have no factual support just because they are religious beliefs.

For example, I am a scientist. Suppose I said I believe DNA generates cellular energy. No other scientist would respect me, publish my work, or talk to me. Why? Because they are "intolerant"? No, it is because I have no proof and belief without proof is unacceptable anywhere except, for some reason, in religion.

I still think it is important to dispute illogical thought wherever it exists, but in religion it is especially so because religions have a hard time letting people live and let live. The catholic church just excommunicated a 9 year old girl in Brazil because she got an abortion after her step-father raped het (google it). The mormons worked very hard to make sure gays can't marry (shouldn't we be promoting long-term loving relationships?). Former president Carter quit the Baptist church because they discriminate against women.

If religions left me alone, I'd leave them alone but they have a 2000+ year history of trying to force their unfounded beliefs on unwilling people and frankly I don't trust them.

@rcast1986: Yeah, haha you can't always base social decisions on the scientific method. People seem to be naturally illogical in many ways so compromises are nice. In the real world it seems as if "whatever makes the most people happy" is generally a rule of thumb, lol, because whatever decisions you make in a business or public office you want to be well-accepted and liked.

@The Lab: Hopefully I can throw this out without getting too embroiled in this discussion.

You said "it IS illogical to believe something for which you have no proof."

I disagree. If taken as one of your assumptions, logic works fine. Religion makes assumptions on which their logical arguments are based. Most systems of thoughts make assumptions, even athiest ones. Outside of something such as phenomenology, assumptions are taken somewhere, without seeking proof or validity before logic starts. Examples: "things exist", "I exist", "helping people is better than not helping them", "logical things are better than illogical things", etc.

So within their context, religions are logical, even when they take something they have no proof for, as long as it is one of their initial assumptions.

Spiral

@rcast1986: I think that's a very good point - I like what you have to say. And we do need to own our own thread, haha. Overall everything should be looked at on a case-by-case basis I believe. A minor inconvenience to the public I don't necessarily forbid, if it's to accommodate a religious group. In the case of a business I would generally leave it up them: whether or not they want to keep certain clients.

@ArtisticThought: There's just so many different variables to consider in all of this. It makes finding positions extremely difficult to defend at times. What to do?

Wow. You're all assholes (well, a lot of you, anyway). Just because you don't agree with what they believe doesn't mean you should insult the person. Believing in religion or not does not change how stupid/retarded/idiotic, etc they are, it just changes what they believe in. What if I went around saying everyone who doesn't believe in god is fucktarded? How is that any different?

@LolpantsofArabia: I am sorry that other people's ways of life are "loopy" and that it's "mumbo jumbo." If you clearly are "all for religious tolerance," your statements are rather inconsistent with that.

Recall that this issue is simply about a light. The light previously was one that you could turn on and off with the flip of a switch (that was probably accessible to building management, I'd suppose). The building performed an upgrade, it seems, in the interest of saving money. The monetary savings for a motion-activated light is probably not that substantial (what? $30/year?). I don't think that there are any rights impinged here. If anything, the freedom of the Jews are impinged upon.

Again, I made it clear that there are Rabbis who will make exceptions for these strict rules. Those who don't, however, often cite religious scripture to back up their claim. Please don't call that "loopy."

@switchblade saints: Where's the fault on the Jew's side? It seems like the legal issue has nothing to do with religion-

They rented the property after being assured that those lights wouldn't be installed. Then they were installed. Breach of contract.

orionburcham

@ArtisticThought: But if having a religion means doing and not doing certain things, and a place that you're living in breaks their contract by putting in a device that doesn't allow you to observe these particular rules, doesn't that mean the apartment is enforcing their own religious views (or lack thereof; we don't know much about the landlord) on this couple?

And business and government buildings should most certainly not be forced to take this kind of action, within reason, to uphold everyone's beliefs. But I think we both agree an apartment complex with a contractual obligation is very different than public spaces or privately owned property.

Man, you and I need our own thread or something.

@rcast1986: Hehe, well yes not insane - I was just talking about how they are generally viewed. In psychiatry the person would be called delusional. "A false belief strongly held in spite of invalidating evidence." Of course, according to that definition most everybody is delusional in some way. Perhaps it's true? Personally I just try to read from the most academic, or well-respected sources in the field as much as I can and use the principals of logic - I think that predisposes me to more secular views. True, many popular religions started with one, or very few people. One of the reasons why I don't think religions should not be censored, or given a privileged status.

Changing the headline isn't enough.

jewsrock

"for failing to accommodate their religion."

First of all, on USA, the owner can do whatever it want to do with it as pleased... Next time, don't USE their place.

The Nacon

@jewsrock: By enforcing their religion I think he means when people who are or a particular religious view force people who are not to adhere to it in some way. It's quite different than the right to have religion.

@Tamar Weinberg: nice, finally some real information about the light switch etc.. it sounds like there might be a little fault on both parties, well at least some room for improvement or change

@ArtisticThought: I feel like you're addressing me as if I'm a "believer". I'm not. I follow logic and reasoning to reach a conclusion that allows others to consider me as "agnostic". Also, these people aren't following a religion supported by one person -- they're Orthodox Jews, which I'm fairly positive has a reasonably large support group. Furthermore, do you suppose most religions start with an automatically large group of followers? I'm assuming you're familiar with the origins or Christianity or Judaism and that they essentially started with one man or only a few. Even beliefs in the sciences can be seen beginning this way with examples like Copernicus and his heliocentric theory. It's hard for me to defend the examples you posit since I hold no personal belief in a God, but I can assure you that, given certain particular variables now outlined in your post, someone in my field of psychology wouldn't likely instantly label a person as insane like you are asserting. They would merely look for a more logical and reasonable explanation behind why the patient feels this is happening.

@Tamar Weinberg: I'm all for religious tolerance, but not when it means putting up with mumbo-jumbo like this.

I'm sure an exhortation against making fire on the Sabbath made great sense 4,000 years ago - as a way of stopping shyster bosses from exploiting their workers, if nothing else - but now it's just loopy. Especially when, as in this case, it impinges on the rights of everyone else to live in the modern world.

How many motion-sensitive cameras do you reckon the average person sets off walking pretty much anywhere? Should they sue about that, too?

LolpantsofArabia

@Dipsomaniac: They are not enforcing a religion, they are enforcing the right to have a religion, which is in the first amendmant (you know, the most fundemental part of the COURT system)

jewsrock

I can't wait until we move on from religion. The world will be a much better place once arcane and retarded believes in the supernatural or magic give way to logic and reason. We don't need religion giving power and control to the few.

RyaninCalgary

Religion isn't the problem per se. It's people are arrogant enough to believe that they have the exclusive on truth. If the only violent, stupid people were those with religious faith, I'd go with your "religiousity" rants. What I hear you saying is that my silly beliefs are sillier than your silly beliefs. Come back in ten years when you've realized you're just as stupid as everybody else.

PaddyDugan

@rcast1986: Hm, yes I agree with you then. I don't view public ridicule of the people in a particular religion as professional or tasteful in the slightest. In the very extreme cases, such as bombing abortion facilities or jihadists, I criticize the system of thought and call the people involved victims. I haven't read all of the comments on here and I'm sure people have said some very unpleasant things, which I didn't mean to defend, lol.

@Mecharine: That's not it. The problem is that the lights turn on when these people step outside their apartment. Their presence causes the lights be activated. Jews cannot turn lights on during the Sabbath; they have to do so beforehand or afterward.

They didn't have a problem with lights being turned on and off before it was automated because the lights were always on. Walking in and out of their apartment building did not mean that lights would be activated before these motion-sensing lights were utilized.

It has nothing to do with living in an apartment building either. I often see these lights near garage doors in driveways and most Jews avoid them if they know that stepping nearby will activate the lights.

@sneakypoo: I tried the BR and it didnt break after the photo. hmmm. oh well ha

@weatherman: Tom Bodett, spokesman of motel 6. His catch phrase was "we'll leave the light on for ya"

This doesn't make any sense. If they didnt have a problem with the lights being turned on and off before it was automated, then why is it a problem now? In my building, the lights are always on, meaning they're always being operated. Does that mean that the Orthodox Jews cant live in apartment buildings ? Apparently it does.

And seeing as how this is their "vacation" flat, they'll get even less sympathy from the court. The judge will just tell them to find another place , because what they're asking is for the inconvenience of others, to provide a convenience to them.

Mecharine

I'm an Orthodox Jew who ran into a similar issue recently. I was given permission from an Orthodox Rabbi who said that we could live among the motion sensors as there was no way to avoid the sensors on the Sabbath. That said, not all Orthodox Jews may abide by this leniency, but I think this couple should at least inquire with their Rabbi if they haven't already.

However, it states in the actual article that the flat was purchased under assurances that motion sensing devices would not be installed. If that's the case and they have that in writing, there is violation of contract.

I take slight offense to the statement that religion is all superstition. Quite frankly, I think that was the wrong phrase to use here, and I think the article is in poor choice altogether since it opens doors for religious bashing. There's no need to single out people who have specific observances, even though it might be a little unfathomable for those of you who live tied to your electric gadgets all day.

@Dipsomaniac: The state of California with proposition 8 possibly? Everybody I assume.

@Rhodizzle: To clarify, I don't think religious people are "less mentally capable".

Now to address your point, it IS illogical to believe something for which you have no proof. That is the definition of illogical. Believing in god is no more logical than believing in Santa or anything else for which there is no proof.

You suggest it is dangerous when people use their unfounded beliefs to justify "stupid" actions. I suggest it is dangerous to use unfounded belief to justify ANY action. If you want to be good, be good. Don't do it for "god". Don't do it to avoid "hell". Do it for the love of your fellow man. You don't have to believe in christ to care about other people.

@ArtisticThought: Pardon me, they should not be accepted, or respected, simply because they are a religion I meant to say.

@switchblade saints: "< b r >" without the extra spaces of course. And I couldn't agree more, the new system is seriously flawed.

sneakypoo

@The Lab: I agree - well said! I think religions should be subject to academic criticism the same as any other views. They should be accepted based on authenticity and social merits because they are a "religion."

@ArtisticThought: Incorrect. I'm arguing what seemed to be you defending this article (Loftus' Giz article, that is) which uses very striking and insulting language to portray the situation at this complex. It also sounded initially like you were justifying the way religion is being completely destroyed by both Jack and the community here because of religion's (such a large group of people and an even larger concept for one word) history that includes many misdeeds revolving around intolerance and even hate. If that's not what you're saying then I apologize, but your first post in this thread indicated to me that this was the direction you were headed.

It's hard not to break open an entire conversation on moral obligations and the stated issue social responsibilities and humanism of both a secular and religious nature when addressing something of this matter. That "right" and "wrong" are so static and subjective doesn't help at all either. I'll go ahead and say that yes, violent acts in the name of a jihad are terrible and horrendous, but again this is according to our world view. And yes, I would openly criticize this kind of behavior so I understand your point. I guess I should have included some kind of disclaimer or better worded my point that having a switch, especially one paid for by the tenants, isn't "hurting" anyone especially not in a way that a car bomb or a suicide attack would hurt another.

I still don't see how this is a restriction of freedom on anyone since it revolves around a contractual promise by the landlord. With that said, it seems like both this article and the commenters are using the hate speech you talk about, and it was that issue which I initially wished to address.

@ArtisticThought: So if this couple is allowed to use the court system to enforce their religion, who else can?

Dipsomaniac

@SpudMills: Religion is absolutely not responsible for all of those things. Powerful people who want to twist beliefs to justify a stupid decision are what is to blame.

Rhodizzle

@The Lab: I have to disagree with your assertion that Religion is an assault on logical thought. It's logical that this person has beliefs and wants to follow them. That doesn't make them any less mentally capable than you.

However, these folks that take their beliefs and try to use them for stupid reasons (Read: The Crusades, Westboro "God Hates Fags" Baptist Church, myriad other examples) are what threatens reason. Don't take a single example of stupidity and try to apply it to an entire group because you don't believe with them. That in and of itself is just...well rather stupid.

Rhodizzle

@rcast1986: That would make sense. I still view it as more of a courtesy to have the lights installed though, and not obligatory - the same with most business or government buildings, which could not possibly comply to every religious demand they receive, nor should they, but they do offer physical assistance (or accessibility) to the handicapped, which I firmly support.

@switchblade saints: ?

its interesting that some of the comments here make out that people who are not religious do not care about other people.

this not only is rediculus but offensive as well. I do not follow any religion as stipulated by a book written hundreds if not thousands of years ago, normally comprising stories an ideas passed down word of mouth for many thousand of years prier to that.

I do though treat people with kindness and respect and wish to help those less fortunate than myself.

the problem with religion is that it is miss used by thoughs who do not under stand that the foundation of all religions is the same, that of living with your neighbour and leaving the judgement of their values to something bigger than yourself. also to understand that you can not enforce your thinking and beliefs on others so you must learn to live by compromise and seeing what is the best way to live together using the least resisted path not forcing a way through.

this couple is forcing against others not coming to understand that they can stay in their house for the day or apologies to their God for breaking a rule. God is a just God and will understand and except when its congregation is forced to go outside of its rules, at least any god I have read about is.

caniffis

@rcast1986: Alchemistmerlin believes certain views are more educated and truthful than others, and that we have adequate scholarly means of determining the validity of these views. In his defense (and as a person with a degree in theology), I must say that many religious views would be naturally coined as insane if they were only believed by one person. A person who believes that God told them not to tie their shoes or skip their feet would not be subjected to religious tolerance, but a psychiatrist.

@ArtisticThought: Jack didn't mention it in his article, so maybe that's why most people are losing their minds over this.

so, uh.... how about them Yankees?

@dallasmay2: The Gates foundation has done a tremendous amount of work and in a more organized fashion.

Atheists do a ton of work, they just don't have an organization keeping statistics. I find your notion that one could actually quantify and compare the "good" done by the religious versus the non-religious laughable. My point is that there is no clear answer who has done more good and therefore suggesting that religion is necessary for there to be good in the world is unbelievably insulting to atheists and really, I don't mean to make an ad hominem attack here, arrogant.

@ChaosCon: Richard Feynman also notes the vast difference between oxidation (the method in fire) versus electron transport (electricity) in one of his books. But alas the Rabbis are more focused on the intention involved in "doing useful labor" than the particular physics.

@weatherman:

@rcast1986: I think you're just arguing to argue and I find it hard to believe you disagree with me. Aside from beginning a discussion on the ethics of secular humanism or social responsibility vs. a number of religious world views I'll simply ask you - is not violent jihad "horrendous"? There are things worth speaking out against.

If homosexuals or minorities wanted to impose a restriction of right or freedom on anybody then I would be all up for open debate, which is much different than hate speech.

@dallasmay2: How about the Shriners? A non-religious group that provides cost-free care in 22 hospitals just in my local area.

What you are doing is claiming all the good done in the name of religion and dismissing all the violence. Unacceptable. You are also seemingly suggesting that non-religious people like myself aren't performing acts of selfless kindness. Also unacceptable. I spent months in Honduras helping rebuild schools and treat the poor after hurricane Mitch, my reward? Dysentery. I don't need the threat of hell to be good.

Your claim that I am bigoted is also unfair as you wouldn't respect my beliefs if I said I believe in Santa (no proof) so why should I respect your belief in god (no proof).

I don't hate anyone. I just believe communication would be more fluid between groups if there were some ground rules such as points supported by facts get precedence over those without support. In this case "motion sensing lights save energy" wins over "god gets angry when you turn on a light on Saturday".

@ArtisticThought: Horrendous according to you. What defines if something is "good" or "bad" or "right" or "wrong"? Majority rule? Popular thought? My point was that it seems like the latest topic in "tolerance" revolves around homosexuality, and in that case it appears that even lightly criticizing these practices is deemed "wrong" and is, ironically enough, not tolerated. On Gizmodo and in the United States.

@rcast1986: True, if they offered to pay for the switch then I would be fine with accommodating them.

This article is disgusting. Since when is Gizmodo's mission to bash religion?

Superstition? Should I expect to see such terminology directed towards other faiths soon as well?

Jack, the article speaks volumes of your character.

TaylorTeucer

@bustedchain: They don't want the lights off, they want them on! That way, they are not the ones triggering the light on the Sabbath!

drdoombot

@banmojo: All they were asking for originally was for the lights to stay on all the time during the Sabbath. That way, THEY wouldn't be triggering the light every time they moved (which would violate their religious principles). How does this harm other people?

drdoombot

@betterdays: The Jewish nation introduced the concepts of prayer, charity, universal literacy and education, capitalism and international trade to the world.

Nonsensical and dangerous indeed.

drdoombot

@Castleknight75: They don't want the override switch to keep the lights off, they want to keep the lights on! That way, they are not breaking religious law by triggering the light during the Sabbath.

On all other days, they don't mind triggering the motion sensor.

drdoombot

@ArcticLotus:

Jews cannot start a new fire on the Sabbath. A fire that was starting before the Sabbath may be utilized.

drdoombot

I say they just walk past the sensor VEEEEERRRRRYYYY slowly to not set off the sensor. I used to do it in my house and was able to get across the whole room without setting off the detector.
And they can think about god or whatever while doing it. Everyone wins!

BriGuy

@DesmondManius: Here there is no respect for religious folks evidently. I've seen it a lot of times. Somehow if you believe in something you're a freak of nature.

While I don't agree with the couple who is suing I hardly think that people need to be so disrespectful of their beliefs and religion in genera. Atheism is a religion too.

vqro

@prometeum: "Roman catholic, sadly" ???

vqro

@prometeum: You said: "Minorities exist everywhere; if someone doesn't want to be part of any minority and bear the consequences of it, he or she should return to wherever his or her minority isn't such."

What about disabled people, or little people, or blind people? There's no "blind land" to return to.

Should we not add ramps for those who are wheelchair bound because it would require a fee for construction? Should we not allow blind people with seeing-eye dogs into public areas because the dog might poop on the carpet?

The needs of the few can be just as important, if not more so. We are not a Darwinistic society who just let the sick or disabled suffer and die.

You can say what you want about BELIEFS but watch what you say about NEEDS.

adamhunterpeck

@nutbastard: Shomer Shabbos!