Shit, do I really have to spell every little thing out? Look at what I wrote. I said reasonable taxation. The most broadly accepted understanding of Dina De Malchutei Dina takes into account the possibility of unfair taxation and allows Jews to not pay or avoid taxes in such cases. Hence the qualifier "reasonable."

 Anonymous wrote: Nothing makes Jews look worse, in my opinion, than endorsing a
conformist herd mentality regarding morals legislation in an explicitly
secular republic.

Legislation regarding prostitution is not exclusively moral. In the common law, much of it had to do with the simple nuisance associated with the trade. In our more enlightened times, governments have legislated laws against other aspects of the trade involving consent as well - i.e. the involvement of minors and trafficked humans. My support of that does not make me conformist or a mindless member of a herd. I love sex! I just prefer it to involve fully consenting adults. Spitzer looked bad because he vocally and enthusiastically enforced laws that he himself did not follow.

Again, Judaism encourages, even commands, the pursuit of Justice - even to the point of civil disobedience. Spitzer's actions were not based on any notion of civil disobedience. He wasn't advocating for more enlightened treatment of sex trade workers. He was just getting his rocks off and thought he could get away with it. You need to stop equating the activities of horndogs with those of American revolutionaries, social activists and a people escaping persecution.

 Anonymous wrote: Pleasing the foreign king and the subjects of his realm was probably
more important to the survival and well-being of Jews when the
Babylonian talmud was being compiled than it is in a post-enlightenment
world that acknowledges the primacy of individual rights over legally
antiquated cultural artifacts - no matter how often that is forgotten.

Dina De Malchutei Dina has nothing to do with pleasing foreign Kings and everything to do with encouraging honesty. There is nothing antiquated about honesty and individual rights do not exist in a vacuum - they are always, even in our post-enlightenment world, subject to competing individual rights and the common good. Your right to swing your fists ends where my nose begins, to paraphrase Oliver Wendell Holmes.

---------------------------------

I blog at Jewlicious.com