John Locke an Enlightenment philosopher whose philosophy influenced the American Declaration of Independence said that a person is entitled to "life liberty and property." However from reading about the New Square arson attempt, John Locke does not apply to them. Aron Rottenberg decided to pray in a synagogue outside the village along with a few friend, the Rebbe, David Twersky, the ultimate religious authority of the town in Rockland County, New York that is predominantly part of the Skver Hasidut, reacted by making a decree that nobody could pray outside his synagogue. Rottenberg was constantly harassed, his children were kicked out of school, his property was damaged, he even received threatening phone calls. Ultimately this ended when, the Rebbe's butler, Shaul Spitzer decided to take a rag doused in gasoline and attempt to burn down Rottenberg's home. Rottenberg confronted Spitzer which led to over 50% of Rottenberg's body being covered in third degree burns and Spitzer with burns on his hands and arms and is out on bail being treated for his burns at Cornell's burn unit.
Obviously most people would say that New Square sounds like a horrible place to live and that this was a horrible occurrence, and that what Spitzer and the Rebbe did was outrageous. I would probably say that I agree with that, but let's take a more objective view at this. Rottenberg simply chose a synagogue that fit his preference which is part of personal freedom, he decided that the going to pray outside the village was better for him. The Rebbe then decided to use his power and influence as in most religious societies to make a declaration that the residents were forbidden to pray outside his synagogue, I assume to maintain the monopoly that he had over his synagogue. People who view the Rebbe as the supreme authority decided that the Rebbe's word trumped a person's basic freedom. You can see it in the video above when the asked if he lives in America the follower of the Rebbe, the follower replies the he lives in "Jewland."
Rottenberg was denied the right of choosing where to pray, but that was not the only right that was denied. He clearly was denied the right to property seeing how people threw rocks at his widow and smashed the windows of his car, and ultimately the arson attempt. Also another thing that a person should know about New Square is that there is probably one school for boys and girls each and people who do not dress according to the standards of the town are shunned. Also Rottenberg's life was threatened through the phone calls and the attempted arson, thus denying him and his family the right to life.
Many will ask why Rottenberg did not just leave if he did not like the conditions that he was living under. Well, that question can be answered by this article. This article says that Rottenberg tried to sell his house for what it was worth, $600K, but those who tried to buy it for that price were threatened, thus denying Rottenberg's personal freedom along with the perspective buyers' freedom, I mean if it is true. Those responsible for the threats said that he could sell the house for only $300K, because they did not want him to make a profit off of leaving New Square. He was denied his personal freedom in many respects.
The burn victim hires Michael Sussman as his lawyer, who calls for federal investigation into the events surrounding Rottenberg's attack, and whether the town violated his civil liberties. This supposedly outrages the residents of the village. Since when was it outrageous to hire a lawyer and ask for a government investigation after something of this magnitude happens? I am not a proponent for big government, but I feel that the government has a right to intervene when a person's rights were violated. Well, one can look past civil rights, but this was not just about civil rights, but also violated all his natural rights. I am sure that John Locke would agree with me in this case.
No comments:
Post a Comment