Ack! I've started a religious war (a mild polite one as these things go
on usenet). I never meant to. I was making the point that there are 2
or more sides to every story, that not everything is cut and dry, that
Ben's view on the subject is valid and so is the one put forth by
Goomba, Nancy and Boron (apologies if the names in the sender column
aren't the preferred ones; I don't know y'all well enough yet). Since
you're all going by my rendition of what happened 30 years ago anyway, I
believe the person who was right in this situation was Mrs. Lieberman
herself, and she served me the milk.


Traditional Jewish law is clear on the subject of serving meat and milk
at the same meal. It is also clear on the subjects of hospitality,
generousity, and acts of lovingkindness. The nitty-gritty specifics are
subjects for case law, something that can vary from time to time and
situation to situation. Perhaps if I were a frequent guest in that home
and had come to expect milk at the end of every meat meal, Mrs.
Lieberman would have made a different decision the second time round.


Let's look at the long term effect of her decision. Thirty years later
I look back at that incident as one of kindness. Instead of having
negative feelings about people who keep kosher, I have admiration and
respect. I don't think of her decision as hypocritical. As the years
have gone by, I've been comfortable in many kosher homes. I haven't
been uncomfortably afraid that I'll inadvertently break some rule and
look like an idiot. Also, the repercussions of that act of kindness
have meant that I've been glad to make accomodations for folks who keep
kosher in my home. I'd never make anyone uncomfortable by bringing out
the bacon and then saying "well you don't have to eat it." Instead,
kosher guests in my home get well prepared vegetarian meals that
everyone, kosher or not, eats. I cheerfully use paper plates and
whatever cookware my kosher friends ask me to use. I'd say Mrs.
Lieberman made a good long term investment. YMMV


--Lia