Virtual Talmud

Virtual Talmud


Homosexuality and Halakhic Debate

posted by Virtual Talmud

Rabbi Waxman is correct that the recent decision by the Conservative movement to pass two diametrically opposite positions, one permitting and one prohibiting same sex relations, does in fact leave the decision to local rabbis and their congregations. This is a good thing.

I understand and sympathize with Rabbi Waxman and all those who may feel this was a failure of will or moral rectitude. On the other hand, Orthodox critics charge that the Conservative movement has abandoned our commitment to Jewish law (halakhah) in supporting any position permitting gay ordination and commitment ceremonies. Neither charge is true.

What is true is that, as with the law of the land today, there is a great divide about how to apply and interpret law: Rabbi Joel Roth and his supporters are strict constuctionalists: they do not go beyond the predominant position or the plain meaning of the Biblical text or rabbinic record. Rabbi Waxman and I would probably agree that morality is not relative: that each individual is equally precious and deserving of equal treatment. Having been privileged to participate in these discussions on the Committee on Jewish Law and Standards, and as a matter of record, I personally did not vote for or support Rabbi Roth’s position. However, even the decision by Rabbi Roth, which prohibits same sex relations and the ordination of rabbis who engage in such, distinguishes between accepting an individual whose orientation is gay and banning a prohibited behavior, namely same sex relations.

Rabbis Elliott Dorff, Avram Reisner, and Daniel Nevins, whose position permits gay ordination and commitment ceremonies, are loose constructionalists. They use traditional rabbinic methods to interpret and apply Torah in a very narrow sense (that the only thing the Torah prohibits is anal same sex relations, based on the exact words of the verse that prohibits a man lying “with a man as with a woman”), thereby allowing them to apply meta-halakhic Torah values, the dignity of each individual, also ensconced in rabbinic legal precedent.

What is also true of both positions is that they deal with the same basic question: Are there behaviors Jews should not do? Both answer yes. As Conservative Jews we hold that there is a body of law we are bound to that begins in Torah and continues through the record of Jewish precedent law in the Talmud and Codes. There are things we can eat and cannot eat, individuals with whom we can have sexual relations and those with whom we cannot, ways to conduct business and ways not to. Every act in our lives is an opportunity to connect to our tradition and serve God. As Jews we do that through the observance of law as understood and applied in our community.

The historic challenge facing our movement has been that too few lay people have been caught up in this process of seeking to discern God’s will as understood throughout our precedent law and apply it to their personal observance. The homosexual ity issue though has provided an opportunity to begin to change that.

In response to media coverage on this issue, my congregants requested a full year of study in our Adult Education program on how Jewish law informs our decisions on a number of ethical issues. For the first time they wanted to study various teshuvot (positions) our movement has passed. The classes were well attended. I know similar programs are happening in congregations around the country, and not just on the issue of homosexuality in Jewish law.

The passing of two positions is important for another reason as well. Far from making the decision irrelevant to the average Conservative Jew, as Rabbi Waxman argues, the very dualism of positions makes the halakhic process extremely relevant by empowering each rabbi and congregational community to study and determine where they stand on the continuum of Jewish interpretation and practice. At the heart of this entire dialogue is a commitment to make a thoughtful and knowledgeable decision based on Jewish law on the congregational level in response to the particular needs and conditions of that community. Jewish law has always been local. As such, these decisions return us to the purpose and mission of the Conservative movement, to walk in God’s ways through our historic and communal living of Jewish law.

– By Rabbi Susan Grossman



Advertisement
Comments read comments(40)
post a comment
jethro

posted February 13, 2007 at 3:49 pm


IMHO, the Rabbi is wrong and both charges are true. Homosexuality is hard wired into people, and thus discrimminating against people because of a biological trait is wrong. Whether the Priestly author understood that or not, the moral position needs to be recognition and permission of homosexual relations and a ban on the prohibition of gay rabbis. As to whether the C movement remains one based on halakha, I guess it depends on how one defines halakha. I mean, if individual communities can make their own contradictory decisions based on their reading of Jewish texts and law, how does that differentiate the C movement from the Reform movement and her responsa’s?



report abuse
 

Dave

posted February 13, 2007 at 5:39 pm


1/ The ‘barrenness’ of a woman is also biological and yet Halacha makes it very difficult for her. Members of various tribes are forbidden to become members of the Jewish people-also biological. A man who wants 2 wives is forbidden this (now) even though that desire may be biological. Even a taste for various treif foods may be biological. 2/ The problem with admitting openly gay clergy is not solely an issue with Vayikra-it is also a problem with Beresheet, since we are commanded to be fruitful (not fruity) and multiply-a difficult thing for an openly gay person (adoption is not multiplying, and having sex with a non-wife is not permitted)



report abuse
 

Scott

posted February 13, 2007 at 11:32 pm


Dave, 1) The fruitfl (not fruity thing – perfect for a 13 year old. 2) My wife and I adopted a child. Did we violate Beresheet by not multiplying? She could have conceived but it would have killed her. Should we have done it anyway?



report abuse
 

Grethel Jane Rickman

posted February 14, 2007 at 2:29 pm


Human Genome Project. What about the discovery that every single human is 99.9% the same genetically as with every other single human on the planet!? http://www.genome.gov/10001772



report abuse
 

jethro

posted February 14, 2007 at 4:33 pm


Grethel I’m not sure what point you are making. while it is true that there is a huge amount of concordance of genes between all humans, there is also a huge divergence of behaviors. While I am not sure that all behavior is genetically structured ( such as whether someone likes westerns versus chick lit) I think sexual orientation is clearly biologically determined in most folks. So unlike observing shabbat, which can be encouraged and even halakhically mandated (it might go against our inclinations but it does not cut against orientation), I think that one cannot justify religious discrimination against gays.



report abuse
 

Mike

posted February 14, 2007 at 4:37 pm


From what I have read about Homosexuality from Mose’s law show no indication that would support and validate the hate and banishment that many homophobic peoples express towards Homosexuals. IF the hand of the almighty is not harsh and violent towards homosexuals, then what right do we have to violate these individuals.



report abuse
 

Mike

posted February 14, 2007 at 4:47 pm


To grethel: “I think sexual orientation is clearly biologically determined in most folks.” There is no clear evidence that would make this completely true, but if you consider the mind an aspect of biology (some do, some don’t)then Homosexuality may have roots in the psycho-sexual developement of an individual, or it may be the expression of a damaged or immature mind. some people think that individuals grow out of Homosexuality once they meet a physical or psychological need, then they can begin to have relations with the opposite sex. Who knows what the truth is. men are only 2% different then women, so genetics may play a role.



report abuse
 

windbender

posted February 15, 2007 at 1:18 am


The day has come when gay people can have children of their own. Now what? All folks 999.9% alike,eh? That would explain why my wife loves Richard Gere and married me.



report abuse
 

windbender

posted February 15, 2007 at 1:19 am


Overstated that by 900%, I believe.



report abuse
 

Grethel Jane Rickman

posted February 15, 2007 at 3:24 am


GLBTs raising kids? So what?! Think of all the kids out there being raised by straight parents who are living under extreme home environments. There are straight parents who abuse their children. I do not feel that sexual orientation has any bearing on if a person is a good parent or not.l The inner workings of the human brain is extremely complex. I feel that both genetics and nurture are part of the puzzle. I also see no solid ethical foundation for religious discrimination against GLBTs. Shalom, Grethel



report abuse
 

Vince Yeoh

posted February 15, 2007 at 8:22 am


Homosexuality is not wrong – it is a biological trait, a handicap for those born as one. No sane person would purposely ask to be homosexual, just like we wouldn’t ask to be less than normal in any other way. To be homosexual is not a sin, but to engage in homosex, or any sex outside marriage for that matter, is.



report abuse
 

Mary

posted February 15, 2007 at 11:01 am


The Blind leading the Blind ! Mendl



report abuse
 

Tafari

posted February 15, 2007 at 2:09 pm


Homosexuality is prohibited by Torah, not only on motives of right or wrong sexuality, but because it was a practice of the Canaanites, who were famous for their cruel and antisocial behaviors. The primary example is Sodom, a city which has forever been linked by name with homosexuality. In Sodom, the Midrash tells us, people were especially cruel to the poor, and were into self indulging into pleasures of all kinds. Later on, the Roman Empire became the flame carriers of Sodomite philosophy, replete with child abuse on small boys, a feat for which Roman Emporors were notoriuos. The Torah sages were making a direct link between the homosexual tendencies of these cultures and their cruelty as well as their denial of the woman’s central role in society ; they interpreted the word TO’EBA, abomination, mentioned in the Bible about homosexuality, as TO’EH BAH , ” mistaken about her(the woman)”…. Isn’it true today, that when poor people in America protest about their grievances, it is rare to find high officials to protect their rights, as in the case of the Mexican laborers, whereas for homosexual marches you will always find city officials, even governers and senators, to march along? The Torah is more concerned with righteousness due to those who are unquestionably in need rather than cater to the indulgences of those who think this or that form of deviant sex should be accepted by all. Think about the men in Jail for whom allowing homosexuality is tantamont to allowing rape by other men. Think about the prisoners of war in a society which has accepted that intercourse between men is allowed. And then think about the 80% of gay men who admit that their first homosexual encounter was an abusive one, at the hands of an older male. Think about these things and you will understand why Torah calls it an abomination i.e. a way to turn away from the plight of the true sufferer, the one who needs bread and shelter today, who is not just fighting to have the right to indulge in anal sex with another man.



report abuse
 

Grethel Jane Rickman

posted February 15, 2007 at 3:24 pm


I disagree with what is written above. In my opinion, it is taking a Jewish understanding of what happened with Sodom and Gomorrah and blending Christian understanding with it. Jewish understanding about Sodom and Gomorrah: http://www.myjewishlearning.com/daily_life/Tzedakah/TO_Tzedakah_Th_and_Th/Judaism_on_Greed.htm Note in this commentary that the crime of Sodom and Gomorrah is “selfish economic behavior.” More: http://www.fairwisconsin.com/faith/jews/Jewish_tradition.pdf http://www.jewishworldreview.com/hillel/goldberg_teshuva.php3 http://www.ujc.org/content_display.html?ArticleID=199359 http://www.jewishsf.com/content/2-0-/module/displaystory/story_id/1224/edition_id/12/format/html/displaystory.html



report abuse
 

jethro

posted February 15, 2007 at 3:35 pm


Tafari I fail to see the logic in your connecting homosexual sex with lack of concern for the poor. Why would indulging in anal sex rather than performing tikkun olam be worse than indulging in penile-vaginal intercourse rather than tikkun olam? I agree that the prohibition is probably related to concerns for not emulating the idolatrous practices of the now defunct Canaanites, but I seriously doubt that homosexual Jews are about to start worshipping Baal. If we are to have compassion on the poor and the widows and the orphans, I think we should have compassion on homosexuals and allow them to be a full member of the covenantal community rather than exclude them for biological traits that they did not ask for. But to assume that male on male sex is hedonistic in some way that male-female sex is not bewilders me. Unless you think that the sole reason to have sexual relations is for procreation.



report abuse
 

Dave

posted February 15, 2007 at 6:43 pm


1/ I’m not 13 (wish sometimes I were), but if I was that would make me a Jewish adult, and therefore eligible to make comments as one. 2/ Openly gay people can have biological children of their own only when they commit some form of adultery or non-marital sex (which is also forbidden). 3/ The prohibition on gay male sex is eternal and not related to Canaanites, Canadians, Kentuckyians or whoever.



report abuse
 

Marian Neudel

posted February 15, 2007 at 7:43 pm


There is no prohibition on non-marital sex as such, only on sex with somebody else’s wife, or sex with close relatives. Surrogacy is permitted (that’s what the story of Hagar is all about–it also, of course, implies that surrogacy doesn’t always work very well, but we already know that from modern examples.)Concubinage is permitted. The prohibition on polygyny is about to expire (I don’t know anybody who’s sitting around watching the clock, but there is probably somebody someplace–”five, four, three, two…”) And, whatever the story of Sodom is about, it is clearly about what some people DID, not about what they WERE.



report abuse
 

Grethel Jane Rickman

posted February 15, 2007 at 8:02 pm


Dave, perhaps you should ask your rabbi about where in the Torah “prohibition” is located? What is before it and what is after it? Just asking your rabbi in general is a good idea.



report abuse
 

Al Eastman

posted February 15, 2007 at 10:13 pm


My opinion! We Jews are in a sense fundementalists with regard to what is written in Torah. Thus the prohibition against anal intercourse between men in Leviticus is part of our “laws”. The creation of the heavens and the earth as related in Genesis is what our religion teaches us. Now, we are also educated in things “non-religious”, such as the life and physical sciences. Modern geology tells us that the earth is billions of years old, in direct contradiction of our religious teachings. Modern biology tells us that homosexuality is not an individual choice, but genetially determined. Where we get into “trouble” is when we try to redfine our religion to agree with the current scientific discoveries. We tend to make decisions based on what makes us “feel comfortable”. When we do not make decisions based on the tenets of our faith, I think ouf faith is the the loser. The few whose circumstances make them religiously unable to fully particiapate should not dictate new directions of our faith.



report abuse
 

Grethel Jane Rickman

posted February 15, 2007 at 11:03 pm


The trouble comes when Jews begin to think of Judaism as “religion.” Is “religiousity” what HaShem is looking for? Hmm…was God pleased with Avraham Avinu because of “religiousity”?



report abuse
 

NightLad

posted February 16, 2007 at 9:35 am


…but if you consider the mind an aspect of biology (some do, some don’t)then Homosexuality may have roots in the psycho-sexual development of an individual, or it may be the expression of a damaged or immature mind. That quote and the rest of the accompanying message was practically a direct excerpt from Freud s opinions on homosexuality. They ve since been disproven. (Actually, many people don t realize just how many of Freud s opinions have been disproved. He was still an intelligent man who started the ball rolling on a lot of new ideas, but he was not infallible.) Due to this type of thinking, homosexuals endured a quiet holocaust of our own; we were shipped off to insane asylums, physical and mentally tortured, exposed to radical brain-washing techniques, lobotomized, castrated all in an attempt to make us normal. In the end, and after decades of this type of research , the Psychiatric Association (acting as objective 3rd party medical association) had no choice but to declassify homosexuality as a mental illness. They had no option but to admit that gay people, much like left-handed people, are no less natural or capable of living a healthy, happy life simply because we don t hold the monopoly on sexual identity. (I m paraphrasing!) In fact, the APA has drafted a formal statement about human sexuality. If you d like to read it, you may do so http://www.apa.org/topics/orientation.html >here. On a final note; homosexuality is not based on actions. I assure you that, just as you knew you were straight long before loosing your virginity, I ve known that I m gay ever since I can remember. It has never been a question; it has never been a choice. If I were to remain celibate until the day I die I ll die just as gay as I am now. Perhaps this is why your Holy Texts record admonishments to homosexual people in terms of sex-acts; perhaps the authors had no ability to understand the psychology behind sexual orientation as we do now? I could write more but I don t want to spam the conversation. Instead, I ll just issue an open invitation to anybody who believes homosexuality to be unnatural to view this cute little video clip; http://today.reuters.com/tv/videoStory.aspx?storyId=992d6c052c66ff68973855b562cb2e4fe8dbb029&isSummitStory=False >Gay Storks Raise Chicks (click here)



report abuse
 

curiouser and curiouser...

posted February 16, 2007 at 4:06 pm


“fruity”??? How old are you Dave? Why not try the “pansy” epithet? Or “sissy”? “adoption is not multiplying” But somehow you betterosexuals are allowed to do it. “and having sex with a non-wife is not permitted”??? Married Jewish women do it all the time.



report abuse
 

curiouser and curiouser...

posted February 16, 2007 at 4:08 pm


The true sin of Sodom is quite clearly delineated in Ezekiel, and it sure as heck ain’t homosexuality.



report abuse
 

Dave

posted February 16, 2007 at 5:44 pm


1/ A heterosexual who adopts is not multiplying-correct. According to the Torah we are all commanded to be fruitful and multiplying. As to legal prohibitions on gays adopting, I would say that to the extent, small as it may be, that environment has an effect on homosexuality, the ban should continue. 2/ The reason I used ‘fruity’ instead of ‘pansy’ or ‘sissy’, or for that matter ‘queer’, ‘faggy’, ‘girly-man’, etc. is that the word ‘fruity’ resembles ‘fruitful’, while being essentially its opposite. If however you can provide a mention in the Torah for any other similar situation I could have used that too, I suppose. 3/ Yes married people have sex outside of marriage. This is usually referred to as adultery (yes quibblers, there is an argument that only single women who have sex with married men are adulterers in Jewish Law) 4/ For more information and help, there is an organisation called JONAH (Jews offering new alternatives to homosexuality)



report abuse
 

Scott

posted February 16, 2007 at 5:57 pm


Dave, I asked you if my wife and I violated Beresheit by adopting, even though multiplying would kill my wife. You did not answer. As to our sticking our noses into civil laws, gays not adopting, JONAH, etc. – we’re not Xtian fundamentalists. We’re better than that. So get over it.



report abuse
 

NightLad

posted February 16, 2007 at 7:20 pm


Hi Dave, As to legal prohibitions on gays adopting, I would say that to the extent, small as it may be, that environment has an effect on homosexuality, the ban should continue. Gay people are not sterile. We can biologically multiple just as easily as you can, as my lesbian neighbors with 3 children and pregnant with a 4th can attest. So do you propose removing our own biological children from us too, Dave? I think it goes to show the extend of your bigotry that you d propose leaving orphaned children in loveless institutions rather than letting loving, supportive gay couples raise them in safe and nurturing homes. Do you really hate gay people so much that you d spite the innocent children just to hurt us? I hope your home is filled with adopted children Dave, else I ll have to call you a hypocrite. The American and Canadian Psychiatric Associations advocate same-sex parent adoptions, as does the American and Canadian Pediatric Societies. Both groups have conducted decade s long case studies which determined, lo and behold, there is no difference between children raised in same-sex parent families and male-female families or for that matter, single-parent families. Here is one such press release; http://www.cpa.ca/documents/GayParenting-CPA.pdf >Gay Parenting For more information and help, there is an organisation called JONAH (Jews offering new alternatives to homosexuality) Then it s a good thing that the organization http://www.truthwinsout.org/ >TWO (Truth Wins Out) exists to counter such ignorance.



report abuse
 

Sam

posted February 16, 2007 at 10:43 pm


Scott My opinion, although in these situations there are competent halachic authorities that you can consult, a person is not required to conceive a child if it will “kill” them. How you know this for certain, I don’t know, and it may be that you have not consulted the proper combination of doctors/rabbis(by the way, you could always ask Hashem to help, He did, after all, create the whole world, so one more baby wouldn’t be that big’a stretch, and He is waiting to hear from you.) 2) You keep harping on this Xtian fundamentalist crap, what is that? Just admit that you want to demonize Orthodox Judaism. The only reason Judaism survives today is because of pure “fundamentalist”, undiluted, practiced to the “T” Judaism of your great-great-4 times more-grandfather. Do you think that if all Jews at the time of Rashi decided to practice the Judaism of Abraham Joshua Heschel and Stephen S. Wise, there would be any Jews left today. There clearly would not. The conservative, and reform clowns-who-call themselves rabbis today get to play in their own sandbox of Judaism because there are, Baruch Hashem, real Rabbis and scholars, who believe in Hashem and are true the values of Torah handed down from generation to generation. Your soul was there on mount Sinai you heard the first commandment spoken directly from Hashem.



report abuse
 

Scott

posted February 17, 2007 at 2:05 am


OK Sam, 1) My wife has a very dangerous combination of high blood pressure and diabetes – not that its actually any of your business. I didn’t even think it neessary to pray. There were other children out there who were already born that we could give a good home to, that we could make into a Jew. And we did. 2) I “harp” on fundamentalist Xtianity because it is the best example of what happens when religion turns evil. They are our ultimate enemy – you should realize that and that it is not liberal Jews. I’m not trying to demonize the Orthdox – you’re doing a very good job of doing that yourself. The majority of Orthdox are not like you – they would not talk of the other movements’ rabbis (who are scholars and who do believe in HaShem, and thank Him for people like Abrahama Joshua Heschel, who did good for us and great things for others) as “clowns”. How dare you? How dare you talk of other Jews that way? Who came down from Sinai and told you you could talk about other Jews like crap? You – not other Orthodox Jews – are the one not worth talking to.



report abuse
 

David

posted February 18, 2007 at 2:20 am


1/ Gay people cannot multiply as easy as I can. Either they use (I assume) cumbersome and inconvenient artificial methods, or they have sex without attraction never mind love. And if there are gays having 4 children, well there are straights having 14. Not many in either case, but the straights are outbirthing the gays, especially among the fundies of all religions (see Kiryas Yoel as an example) 2/ For every orphan there are many Straight two-parent families waiting to adopt. People have to search the world to find babies to adopt these days. 3/ The APA used to say homosexuality was a sickness. As there became more openly gay psychiatrists it reversed itself. If more and more religious fundamentalists became psychiatrists would it be okay if they went back to their original decision? 4/ It is of course wrong to put one’s spouse’s life in danger. Nevertheless not multiplying is not multiplying. If I said otherwise it would not change any facts. 5/ Xian fundamentalism is evil? Have they been blowing up Jews, having government-run Holocaust-denial conferences, raining down missiles on Haifa, attacking synangogues, shouting down pro-Israel speakers, and more? Must be the corporate media that is causing me to think of another religion. 6/ JONAH as I explained is a Jewish group 7/ As to Heschel, what an overrated nobody. When he cam to the US he first started teaching at HUC, then surprise, surprise, found out it didn’t respect Halacha as much as he thought it should-what a genius. Yes he marched with Dr King-a long time after lots of other people did-late on the bandwagon in his case. Yes he marched against the Vietnam War-agin a long time after a lot of other people did, and had nothing to say about the non-trendy boat people who resulted from the war’s end. He was merely the Jewish version of the ’60′s trendy radical priest (eg ‘Me and Julio down by the schoolyard’)



report abuse
 

Scott

posted February 18, 2007 at 2:42 am


So you’re Sam also? For every orphan there are many Straight two-parent families waiting to adopt. People have to search the world to find babies to adopt these days. Really? And we just went to the next state. There are 10′s of thousands of children in foster care desperate for families. We didn’t need to shell out $40,000 for a Russian baby when we could have an American one – and for free. The APA used to say homosexuality was a sickness. As there became more openly gay psychiatrists it reversed itself. If more and more religious fundamentalists became psychiatrists would it be okay if they went back to their original decision? Ridiculous statement. Knowledge evolves over time. Research showed homosexuality is not a mental illness. Maybe religious fundamentalism is a sickness. My Orthodox grand-parents never acted or talked like today’s haredim. Nevertheless not multiplying is not multiplying. If I said otherwise it would not change any facts. Facts? What facts? That I should risk my wife having a stroke or heart attack? God wouldn’t want me to do that. Xian fundamentalism is evil? Have they been blowing up Jews, having government-run Holocaust-denial conferences, raining down missiles on Haifa, attacking synangogues, shouting down pro-Israel speakers, and more? Must be the corporate media that is causing me to think of another religion. No one said the Muslims weren’t killing us. But we would be well warned about who we throw our lot with. We should never forget who our ancient enemy is, whose holy book calls for our eternal deaths, whose patron saints inspired the Shoah. Trust the Xtians at your peril. But I will not. JONAH as I explained is a Jewish group Inspired by the Xtian fundies. To be discarded. As to Heschel, what an overrated nobody. You say. Most American Jews would not. Though I think you would dismiss most American Jews as quick as you would dismiss any other goyim.



report abuse
 

Grethel Jane Rickman

posted February 18, 2007 at 7:27 am


Let’s not forget the mitzvot relating to fellow Jews, eh?! Maybe it would be good if all of us meditated about the message of Amos 5:16-27? And Micah 6:8?



report abuse
 

Tzvi

posted February 18, 2007 at 7:16 pm


This is for sam who wrote: >>>2) You keep harping on this Xtian fundamentalist crap, what is that? Just admit that you want to demonize Orthodox Judaism. The only reason Judaism survives today is because of pure “fundamentalist”, undiluted, practiced to the “T” Judaism of your great-great-4 times more-grandfather. Do you think that if all Jews at the time of Rashi decided to practice the Judaism of Abraham Joshua Heschel and Stephen S. Wise, there would be any Jews left today. There clearly would not



report abuse
 

Tzvi

posted February 18, 2007 at 7:27 pm


David, you wrote: >>7/ As to Heschel, what an overrated nobody. When he cam to the US he first started teaching at HUC, then surprise, surprise, found out it didn’t respect Halacha as much as he thought it should



report abuse
 

Mike

posted February 18, 2007 at 9:26 pm


Nightlad, how has Freud been debunked? A change in the school of psychological thought by the general mental health community from Freudianism to Behavioralism, or any other theory or hypothosis, does not mean that the theories rejected or unacknowledged by the health community are wrong. I sympathize with you, many innocent people were tortured under the false pretense of medicine, and the people who were tortured where people who did not fit into the image or idea that the majority wished to live and project. Even if Freud was right, (If he was.), the treatment that was givien by the mental health community was not medicine it was torture and as you mentioned, a holecost of social cleansing acted out against homosexual individuals. I personally except homosexuality, simply because it exists and has exhisted, most likely, for as long as the human race has been here, and because it is harmless. These days many people use the defense that Homosexuality is genetic, but has there been proven scientific evidence that shows clearly that homosexuality is genetic and biological? From what I hear, the idea is more speculation. All and all though, it is denie Homosexuals the right to live.



report abuse
 

Dave

posted February 20, 2007 at 6:48 pm


1/ Fostering and adoption are not the same. 2/ ‘Research’ has shown that homosexuality is not a mental illness? Well as time goes on and as Fundies increase in number, including within psychiatry, watch as ‘research’ reverses itself again. 3/ Will the APA declate religious fundamentalism a sickness? Probably. But then see my previous comments. 4/ Arithmetic is not a moral subject, it just is. I am not advocating anyone cause anyone’s death. But I can’t change the facts 5/ Some people live in the past. I live in the present and future and the there is a far greater of my being killed by a M than by a C due to my being a J. 6/ Most American Jews know Heschel as-the-Jewish-guy-with-the-white-beard-who-marched-right-next-to-MLK-in-those-photos. They couldn’t tell you much more



report abuse
 

Scott

posted February 20, 2007 at 7:51 pm


1/ Fostering and adoption are not the same. Try reading more carefully. I said we adopted a foster child. If more people did the same, this world would be a better place. Maybe I should write it for you in Hebrew next time so you’ll understand. 2/ ‘Research’ has shown that homosexuality is not a mental illness? Well as time goes on and as Fundies increase in number, including within psychiatry, watch as ‘research’ reverses itself again. Won’t happen. Fundies aren’t interested in helping anyone except their own. Everyone else can rot. Besides, I don’t think their narrow little minds can handle the complexities of psychology. 3/ Will the APA declate religious fundamentalism a sickness? Probably. But then see my previous comments. And see mine. 4/ Arithmetic is not a moral subject, it just is. I am not advocating anyone cause anyone’s death. But I can’t change the facts. What facts? It would have been amoral for my wife to try to conceive as it would have brought harm upon herself. I know, she’s just a woman, but in non-haredi circles, woman are actually people too. 5/ Some people live in the past. I live in the present and future and the there is a far greater of my being killed by a M than by a C due to my being a J. Their bible has “his blood be on us and our children” and “you are of your father the devil”. They are the founders of Naziism and fascism. It doesn’t go out of their blood easily. Believe me, if the ragheads threaten to hit us with nukes if we (the U.S.) doesn’t give up our Jews – worry. 6/ Most American Jews know Heschel as-the-Jewish-guy-with-the-white-beard-who- marched-right-next-to-MLK-in-those-photos. They couldn’t tell you much more But I could.



report abuse
 

Telma Anijar-Andersen

posted February 20, 2007 at 9:13 pm


Reading all the pro and cons regarding the homosexual agenda, I have a few questions? Where in the Jewish books can you find a man marrying another man? Or for that matter a woman marrying another woman? When Hashem created the human race, did he make a man to be the companion of Adam or a woman? Are prostitues born this way, or it is a learned behavior? I read the following law in the Torah, Deut. 23.18 “No Israelite women shall be a cult prostitute, nor shall any Israelite man be a cult prostitute. You shall not bring the fee of a whore or the pay of a dog into the house of the LORD your G-d in fulfillment of any vow, for both are abhorrent to the Lord your G-d. Moses told our people to obey and observe all that the Lord our G-d commended. If we do not obey him, he shall curse us. To know more what G-d’s view on relationships read Leviticus 18. If you disagree with what the Lord is saying than you will have to take up with him. His laws and commandments have not changed. Let the world change and accept all the abominations therein. We are to be a people apart, consecrated into the Lord. An example to all the nations, and not to copy their behaviors. I for one will obey the Lord the G-d of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. He is the one that can judge me, and not a human. If you want to roll in mud with pigs, that it is your choice. If you love abomination then be careful that you also don’t become an abomination to the Lord. He knows all things, and when he gives us instructions about a matter it is because he knows. When Job questioned the Lord, the Lord asked him a question. Who are we to decide what is to be accepted or not by the Lord? He gave us his commandments and laws, and he expects us to obey it, without question. Pray to the G-d of Israel and ask him to show you his will in your life. Read his word to find out what he wants from you. In love and peace, Telma



report abuse
 

Scott

posted February 20, 2007 at 9:44 pm


You write like a Xtian, and we do not have to listen to you.



report abuse
 

amberglow

posted February 22, 2007 at 6:24 am


This makes me glad i was brought up Reform, where we have gay and lesbian rabbis and i can marry. (Now if only our country was as enlightened.) Regulating the sexual behavior of couples in the privacy of their own home is wrong. We are not here to deny ourselves non-harming pleasure that expresses love (and that others wouldn’t even know about, given that it’s private). If straight couples are allowed to have non-procreative sex–and all of them do–then it’s simply and clearly wrong and perverse to deny that pleasure to gay couples. Are you putting some people in a position where they’d have to lie? Or just to deny themselves (while others don’t have to) an expression of love and closeness? Is that right? Is that really why we’re here and sexual beings who love?



report abuse
 

David

posted February 25, 2007 at 7:03 pm


1/ The Fundies ‘little minds’ discuss and debate Talmud all the time. 2/ Fostering and adoption, wonderful things, neither represents procreation. 3/ Actually the non-Nazi fascists murdered infinitly fewer Jews than did the Nazis and they were more Xtian. But this is a very nice history lesson, here in the present and the future, its the M’s not the C’s whom are killiing the J’s. And that’s where I live



report abuse
 

Post a Comment

By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.



Previous Posts

The Task Is Never Finished
It has been heartwarming to read the warm responses to Rabbi Waxman's post asking Beliefnet to reconsider its decision to cancel Virtual Talmud. Virtual Talmud offered an alternative model for internet communications: civil discourse pursued in postings over a time frame of days (rather than moments

posted 12:31:46pm Apr. 03, 2008 | read full post »

Some Parting Reflections
Well, loyal readers, all good things must come to an end and we’ve been informed that this particular experiment in blogging as a forum for creating wide-ranging discussion on topics of interest to contemporary Jews has run its course. Maybe it’s that blogging doesn’t lend itself so well to t

posted 1:00:29pm Mar. 31, 2008 | read full post »

Obama's Lesson and The Jewish Community
There are few times in this blog’s history when I have felt that Rabbi Grossman was one hundred percent correct in her criticisms of my ideas. However, a few weeks ago she called me out for citing a few crack websites on Barak Obama’s advisors. She was right. I never should have cited those web

posted 12:09:08pm Mar. 31, 2008 | read full post »

The Future of Race Relations
As a post-baby boomer, it is interesting to me to see how much of today’s conversation about racial relations is still rooted in the 1960s experience and rhetoric of the civil rights struggle, and the disenchantment that followed. Many in the black and Jewish communities look to this period either

posted 4:04:41pm Mar. 25, 2008 | read full post »

Wright and Wrong of Race and Jews
Years ago, as a rabbinical student, I was one of a group of rabbinical students who visited an African American seminary in Atlanta. My fellow rabbinical students and I expected an uplifting weekend of interfaith sharing like we had experienced in visits to other (largely white) seminaries. We were

posted 12:50:11pm Mar. 24, 2008 | read full post »




Report as Inappropriate

You are reporting this content because it violates the Terms of Service.

All reported content is logged for investigation.