http://science.howstuffworks.com/question88.htm

________

I am a secular sociologist, and I have no idea what you are talking about.

I must say we read the findings completely differently, and, to put it mildly, I am surpsrised by your interpretation. The committee highlights the fact that a large amount of people who ostensibly study in Yeshivot are not, in fact, to be found within the institution, but are using their status as a coverup for a life of no work and no military service. The fact that these people would not wish to expose themselves to a system that would require them to either study or work proves nothing beyond the futility of the legal arrangement, and certainly does not prove dedication to studying.

I would be interested to learn more about these methods, and how effective this informal system of monitoring learning works. Please tell us more.

I must have underexplained myself. What I meant was that I find serious ethical flaws in your suggestion, according to which the original exemption from service, accorded to people for the purpose of learning Torah - an agreement that many people in the secular public would be (perhaps grudgingly) ready to live with - should be broadened to accomodate those who cheat and lie and put to ridicule the original agreement.

The usage of the word "kuuuuulam" is cynical and redundant in this respect. I think we both know well that the public in Israel will not be holding hands and singing Kumbaya in the matter of Ultra-Orthodox draft. However, when people share the same state, some common ground as to policy must be reached. So there you have it:

The religious public was seeking an exemption from service to allow for the study of Torah. The secular public, heavily burdened by this exemption, would like to see everyone perform military service. So the agreement was to allow for a quota of studying people, which grew and grew as decades flew by. But the Ultra-Orthodox public never went as far as you suggest: the agreement was exploited by those who cheated and in fact did not study, but no one would dare to openly claim that people who cynically violate the basis for the agreement - exemption for the purpose of studying - should benefit from this infringment. If you seriously suggest rewards for this unethical and illegal behavior - way beyond any reasonable and less than reasonable suggestion I ever heard from any Ultra-Orthodox public figure - surely you must see why this suggestion is beyond unacceptable.