1

In this answer, the image below appears. Ignoring the issue of the propriety of "non-kosher" phones, is the sign correct that it can ban entry with something not used in the shul, and that entry with the banned item is then theft?

My intuition would not be that a person who enters with something banned such as illegal drugs is stealing the seat he sits in. This is especially true as he hasn't taken it from someone else unless the synagogue is full.

So on what basis does the sign claim it is theft?

Sign in Hebrew precluding those with iPhone or the like from entering and claiming one who does violates theft and other serious sins.

  • 1
    If you consider trespassing a form of theft (which isn't entirely unreasonable, IMO), then someone who enters against the rules of entry (regardless of what the rules of entry are) is trespassing/committing theft. – Salmononius2 Dec 6 '19 at 19:21
  • @Salmononius2 that does seem eminently reasonable in cases where the person is banned. A shul which says baalei agunot can’t come in, the Baal aguna who does is stealing. But where it is “may not enter with iPhone” maybe my iPhone is trespassing but I am not. Granted, the sign may reflect a community that wants to ban iPhone users whether they have the phone on them or not. This gets to issues of cheftza-gavra. – Ze'ev misses Monica Dec 6 '19 at 19:29
  • I feel like we've had this exact question before – robev Dec 6 '19 at 19:40
  • 1
    I think I was thinking of this related question – robev Dec 6 '19 at 21:05

You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .