perhaps Abramoff was wearing the hat to expess contrition,so,it might not be act of same to the name of God,as the writer claims, that those who did not undetstand its syumbolism saw it otherwise.Abramoff's,God,if he acknowledges one, God would know.Admitting to wrongdoing is not evil but wholesome.The Bible is particularly strong on the cleansing and redemptivre value of admitting guilt. unlike the other respondent,i dont think that using Jewish expressions as the writer did,or analysing the possible sybmbolism of Abramoff's hat is somthething that suggests arrogance or clannishness-if I read him right.I find foreign expressions,communicating a diffrent world from mine,fascinating.Also we should ask,does the observation of this writer not lead us to speculate on the influence of Jews on American politics as witenssed by the unfortunate policies on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict which have reached a new low under this administraion?

The hat therefore could signify cultural and political echoes that ramify quite widely.

Toyin

I can't say that I'm surprised that you offended people (independent ideas tend to do that.) That's not to say that I'm particularly offended, or that I think that what you said was wrong. I just see how it could be taken one way or another.

On that subject, I'm not sure I have much of an opinion about it. I'm a little confused as to why you're claiming someone who was just charged with a felony as "part of the pack," so-to-speak, so I suppose that I disagree with that portion a little bit. Does his being Orthodox automatically make him good?

But as for raising controversy, that's what this site is for, is it not? Maybe not controversy, but discussion at least. So in that respect, I would have to say that your article is wildly successful and exceeds expectations of its intended purpose.

So good for you, Dad, for writing something that gets people talking. That's what open-mindedness is all about, no?

The total U.S. population is around 296 million. The number of Jews who attend synagogue is around 4 million. And the number who are this observant is around 500,000, probably fewer, mostly concentrated in and around New York. So we are dealing here with a story about the fairly detailed religious practices of fewer than one-tenth of one percent of the country. And the basis of this is a news story about someone who assuredly is not all that truly observant -- I mean, he's a thief.

The thing about this kind of story that drives me up the wall is the unstated, but very real assumption that this stuff should be of serious interest to everyone. And we're not talking here about interest on the level of "Observant Jews wear hats, which is why Abramoff is wearing one." No, the author obviously believes that the arcana of the symbolic garments and religious practices of his subset of Judaism are inherently fascinating, whether or not one has any connection or interest in Judaism.

Guess what? They're not. And it's arrogant to think so. This is on the same level as Jews who routinely use semi-obscure Yiddish expressions in conversation, and assume that everyone else either is or should be just dying to learn what they mean. The cultural assumption of a reflexive fascination in Jewish practices is alienating at best, and at worst, really, seriously pisses people off.

When someone in public life utters some saying like "Thus endeth the sermon" there is never an article explaining the history of the Anglican Book of Common Prayer. So why this? Hirsch doesn't even bother to address why anyone who isn't Jewish should care -- the essay is written as if it's self-evident. It's not.

Thus endeth the sermon.

As an agnostic, I can compare religions with a more objective viewpoint. There are significant differences between all religions, sects, subsects, etc. I'm willing to say that most have some sort of "golden rule" commonality. The differences even in behavior are many (notwithstandign the greater belief differences): proper food, food preperation, contact between sexes, manner of dress, holy day, etc. are very different. But the base golden rules, are not too different. And that is where Abramahoff fails. I posit that you can not be a religious, moral man, not matter how many of the superficial lifestyle rules you follow if you do not behave in a religious moral manner, following the golden rule and being honorable towards other people.

following these behavioral mores do NOT make someone religious. Keeping kosher and wearing a yarmulke do not make you moral, in and of themselves. Only your actions towards other people make your moral. Of course, I don't think it's moral to treat men and women differently.

I have no problem whatsoever with a discussion of religion or things religious in Salon. Indeed, despite the dwindling of religion, discussion of various aspects of the lives of all Americans and indeed all those in the world are valuable and to be desired. Without it, how can we know each other or ourselves?

And to think that it was my first article...Thanks for being gentle!

Cosmicmojo, you definitely got my point. Just like "I may not do it" does not mean "I can not do it", "Orthodox" and "Frum" mean two different things. I consider Orthodox someone who goes to a synagogue where the men and women sit separately, and where the Services are in Hebrew exclusively. To be Frum is to observe all of the applicable Commandments, not that anyone does it perfectly in this world. That's why we have Rosh haShanah and Yom Kippur.

Mr. Author,

thanks for responding to our letters; I like that--it's more of a dialogue. It's cool to think you're interested in what we think.

I'm an atheist, but I don't mind articles about religion. It's a a part of our society, like it or not. I like to explore how religion affects our culture even if I don't believe. Because even if I don't believe, other people do and that's affecting my life (abortion legistation, blue laws, discrimination in the workplace for not being super Christian like the boss). REligious leaders wield hugh power in influencing voters and consumers.

I don't consider Abramoff religious. Sorry, but he only dresses in a religious manner, he doesn't act with any morality or decency. Whenever he says or implies through his dress that he is a religious man, I'd say he's lying, he acts like an immoral man, not a moral man.