Miriam Shaviv has an interesting analysis of an interview conducted with Rabbi Meidan, and I think she has done an excellent job of both empathizing with the good rabbi and explaining her disagreements with his position.
I wanted to toss in only one other thought, which I readily confess is probably neither interesting nor terribly profound. Rabbi Meidan's fundamental definition of the Zionist project requires that never again is a Jew banished from his or her home because of his or her Jewishness. This, in an ideal world, can hardly be contested. However, the world is clearly far from ideal, and among the sloppinesses is a frequent need to pick the less bad of two bad options. The need to make such tough choices is, I think, but another duty of a mature religious Zionism, demonstrating how to live a Godly life in a complex world, as is, on an admittedly different scale, determining how to celebrate the bar mitzvah of one's child.
I have neither a firm nor a particularly informed opinion on the appropriateness of disengagement. I suspect that the legitimate focus on the likely near-term surge in, at the very least, the undesirable morale of Palestinian terrorists may be obscuring the benefits that may emerge over a longer period of time, such as an improvement in the economic, and subsequently the general, well-being of Palestinian society. I hope, which is to say I do not know with certainty, but I do hope, that the development of positive outlets for human aggressiveness within a freer Palestine will lead, over time, to a much-improved political situation, one that could not be attained in any other way.
Clearly, of course, this analysis assumes that underlying the disengagement plan, there are motivations more complex than simply getting Sharon's children off the hook. I continue to assume such motivations exist.
- Moishe Potemkin
Like so many of my equally ill-informed post-yeshivist burn-out compatriots, I wanted to throw out one more comment about the Slifkipalooza Apologetathon that continues to carom through the blogovelt. (Here's an interesting roundup featuring opinions from some fairly credible folks. My new best friend, or at least the only person I know of that's been to Bulgaria, has yet to chime in - good for her.)
Point is, when all of the name-calling subsides, and the damage is tallied up, one factor that will have contributed mightily to the gaping, smoking hole formerly occupied by respect will be the naked willingness of so many to retroactively create halachic stances - not in the pursuit of truth, but in a political attempt to justify what was oh-so-clearly a poorly conceived mis-step in the first place. If halacha is in fact as malleable as Blu used to say before she was toned down for prime time, well, then, its masters' worth might be up for some questioning.
Which is, I think, a bad thing. But I'm not certain.
- Moishe Potemkin