Dragged into this
July 1, 2009 JTS, Jack Wertheimer, Judaism
Family members of mine are going to attend a wedding of two Lesbians (neither is family). They are not thrilled about this, and like me, see no rationale for same sex marriages in so-called “traditional” Judaism. (Note to my social-Left readers: not seeing a rationale for same sex marriages under traditional Jewish auspices is not the same as stoning gays to death — thanks in advance for recognizing this subtle, but important distinction.) What I find so grating is that the Conservative Movement has moved towards endorsing same-sex marriage even as they continue to rail against intermarriage. That’s just weird. At least the Reform are consistent in their absolute rejection of the need for any semblance of a traditional Jewish family unit. (I guess).
Of course, the Modern Orthodox are not exactly consistent either. They have little problem with adoption of half of Korea by Orthodox Jews who can’t have kids and dumping them in the mikvah, but God help you if you marry out.
Then there are the haredim, who are so busy keeping converts who don’t reject an “Old Earth” science or macro-evolution, that they are destined to accept no one but freaks, and will then dutifully whisper to each other how converts tend to be nuts, even worse than BTs (baal teshuvahs).
The fall of the Conservative movement to this nonsense was quite natural, of course. Their young rabbinical types are frequently dour, humorless types whose only pleasure in life is pushing the envelope on social revolution issues against dour, sometimes quite funny people whose only pleasure is differentiating the Conservative movement from the Reform.
25 comments
actually, the punishment for lesbianism is lashes. it’s only homosexuality that gets the death penalty.
Actually, Mohammed, the death penalty can apply to lesbianism if repeated:-
“Article 129. The punishment for lesbianism is a hundred lashes for both parties to the act.
“Article 131. If the act of lesbianism has been repeated three times and punishment has been carried out each time, the death penalty shall apply if the act is committed a fourth time.
(Islamic Penal Code was passed by the Judiciary Committee of the Islamic Consultative Assembly on 8 Mordad 1370 (30 July 1991) and was subsequently approved by the Council on the Determination of the Regime’s Welfare (Majma’-e Tashkhis-e Maslehat-e Nezam) on 7 Azar 1370 (28 November 1991) and was received on 30 Azar 1370 (21 December 1991) by President Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani for implementation)
mohammed, I wrote gays in regard to the death penalty for that reason.
It seems only the sephardic Jews are what you would call “normal”.
It seems that being immersed in christian culture correlates with an increasingly dysfunctional Judaism.
Thank G-d then, despite all the problems, that Israel is surrounded by islamic countries. Something good has to come from that. For example, had these countries been christian they would have made peace already and then sent missionaries posing as tourists.
G-d works in ironic ways.
What I find so grating is that the Conservative Movement has moved towards endorsing same-sex marriage even as they continue to rail against intermarriage.
Well, as long as they’re both Jews…
Well, as long as they’re both Jews…
Such a terribly confused movement…why oh why are they losing adherants and even congregations at such a rapid clip?
When the feminists at Jewschool are the least disgruntled of the bunch, you know it’s a house on fire.
you know it’s a house on fire
People who belong to Conservatve shuls always talk about the warmth of their congregation. Now you know why.
Judi, gays are also called what translates as “warm brothers” in German…
Are they losing adherents? Again, I haven’t seen figures. I don’t know whether or not any exist (or any reliable ones, at any rate).
Ruth Messinger was up here some weeks ago, and she spoke during services at both a Reform and a Conservative shul, both large, and I went to each. They were very different from the way they were when I was young – much more animated, a lot of audience (especially child) participation. The houses were pretty full, too. I was rather impressed, actually. People seemed genuinely to want to be there. If I were interested in the communal aspect (and if I could put aside my lack of belief), I’d go back.
Regarding same sex marriage, I’m in favor for two reasons:
1) Life is very hard, especially if one is going through it alone. It isn’t my place to tell someone (nor have I any interest in doing so) where s/he can or cannot find love. You know I don’t believe in “God”, I certainly don’t believe that marriage is divinely ordained, and I have no problem altering a social construct. The fact that it’s assumed a certain form for thousands of years bothers me not at all.
2) Anything that pisses off the evangelicals must, by definition, be a good thing! I get so little pleasure out of life, David.
Anything that pisses off the evangelicals must, by definition, be a good thing!
Be careful about infuriating your enemy as a goal. If your goal is to anger–instead of route– your oppenent, the former will be achieved at the latter’s expense.
Gay marriage isn’t for free. Recognize that. There’s a big price tag on that one.
Oh, I don’t know that I’d call them my enemies. I don’t have that much respect for them.
What kind of a price tag – social, monetary, other?
What kind of a price tag
Environmentalism, stem cell research, irresponsible energy policies, Creationism/Intelligent Design as “science” education alternative, Bob Jones University grads as policy makers…a Republican house and senate — the socially religious kind, not the fiscally disciplined, realpolitik kind even you kind of respect and we have seen less and less of in office because of this exact issue.
We will lose the moderate Christians.
So not worth it. The social-Left will sacrifice the welfare of the country for this issue. As patriots and responsible citizens of the world, we cannot.
David, the conservative evangelicals will never give in on any of these issues. They see their world view as being under attack (victimhood is an integral part of it), and they’re terrified. A few of their leaders – James Dobson is one – are admitting, grudgingly, that they seem to have lost this battle. All one can hope for is that they’ll retreat into a position of sullen, relative silence. (We can always distract them with more dinosaur bones.)
As a subculture, they’re losing ground. Their young people are defecting in increasing numbers. They are in much the same position as the Hareidim. Of course, I think it’s already too late, certainly for America (which they have turned into a planetary laughing stock), and probably for the entire world, but if I’m wrong, and we have more time, they’ll be largely irrelevant within two generations.
The moderate Christians – if you mean moderate evangelicals, I don’t think it’s as much of a problem for them, and, in any case, same as above. If you mean moderate Christians in general – I think it’s even less of a problem for most of them.
In any case, I’m not going to be the one to tell a gay person that he can’t have the same legal and financial protections for his life partner that a heterosexual person has. Now, if we gave them those, and civil ceremonies, but left the individual religions to define marriage on their own terms – that could be a different issue.
I should probably throw this in as well – the Left (again, I’m really not even sure how to define these terms any more) probably has less power right now than it has had in the past thirty to forty years, yet same-sex marriage is gaining ground. Even Iowa has ratified it (who saw that one coming?). This is happening, in part, because the “moderates” are coming around.
I think, also, that many secular conservatives are both distancing themselves from the evangelicals, and have become disenchanted with the Republicans, and are trying to focus on fiscal conservatism. My impression (and subjective experience) over the past thirty years has been that a lot of them were never really all that conservative on social issues – abortion, gay rights – in the first place; they just went along for the sake of unity. Now that we’ve had eight years of wastefulness under a Republican administration, and they’ve seen how batshit insane the Christian fundamentalists are – how they behave when they get a little power, how they’re attempting to cripple our educational system (and have partly succeeded) – I think it’s really put them off. They’re too busy worrying about America going under; they don’t really care about these other issues, so they’re breaking ranks.
The difficulty with gay marriage is (are) the implications for the sociological future of the family. I mean, sheesh, do we really want to tinker with things that much? If I feel a need for a deeper, more obligatory relationship with, say, my toaster, is it really best if laws and social norms are changed for me?
CS, how does it affect the sociological future of the family? Conservatives keep saying that gay marriage threatens the family, but they never explain how. Do they imagine that if same-sex marriage is made legal, formerly heterosexual people will flock to marry people of the same gender?
I’ve long thought that the people in the Christian Right camp who are the most vocal in their condemnation are those who are the least secure about their own orientation. Ted Haggard comes to mind.
Jeff,
I agree that the hardline secularists within the Conservative movement are not against states having the right to allow for gay marriage, but the fallout will be had when the far-Left uses all its muscle for affirmative action for gays.
PTA’s will need to be more “diverse.” Adoption agencies will need to prove they have no bias against gays. Advertising studios will be sued for not showing enough gay couples to promote products. Society will be made to suffer for their “historical legacy of oppression” against gays and lesbians. Law firms will have a brand new market to make a killing.
There is good reason to not want to call civil unions “marriage.”
Let me get this straight. Denying gays fundamental civil liberties because
“Environmentalism, stem cell research, irresponsible energy policies, Creationism/Intelligent Design as “science” education alternative, Bob Jones University grads as policy makers…a Republican house and senate — the socially religious kind, not the fiscally disciplined, realpolitik kind even you kind of respect and we have seen less and less of in office because of this exact issue.”?
Your saying you are willing to sacrifice them for the good of the liberal movement. Your sounding like a orthodox rabbi now with their treatment of certain groups
Your saying you are willing to sacrifice them for the good of the liberal movement
No. I am saying I am NOT willing to sacrifice them for gay marriage. That should have been inferred by my statement, “So not worth it.”
No, you misunderstood ME, sorry my fault.
You are willing to sacrifice them (meaning the gay american citizens) for the liberal movement. How is that any different from the rabbis who do things for “the good of the jewish people”
<i.You are willing to sacrifice them (meaning the gay american citizens) for the liberal movement. How is that any different from the rabbis who do things for “the good of the jewish people”
Not sure of the question. I am anyway not a big fan of gay/lesbian marriage. I am also of the belief that the cost for such “progress” will be quite high. So I am supporting the status quo. What are you trying to compare, exactly?
I’m trying to compare your sacrificing of gay citizen’s rights to be married just like any other citizen of this country (and it only makes me more sad to see that its not only political but also that you are “not a big fan of gay/lesbian marriage”)
While you attack haraedi jews for minimizing the rights of women in their culture.
How is this not a massive double standard?
Gays have just as much right to get married as women do to be on a bus.
Freely, you are right — forcing women to sit on the back of the bus and beating them if they refuse is exactly the same as not allowing gays and lesbians to marry. Great point, let’s all go be haredi now and listen to the Gedoylim.
Note to my social-Left readers: not seeing a rationale for same sex marriages under traditional Jewish auspices is not the same as stoning gays to death — thanks in advance for recognizing this subtle, but important distinction.
as with immigration there seems to be no subtly with the left. You’re either for opening borders that will result in half a billion people in this country by the century’s end, or you’re goose stepping with the nazis.
“Freely, you are right — forcing women to sit on the back of the bus and beating them if they refuse is exactly the same as not allowing gays and lesbians to marry. Great point, let’s all go be haredi now and listen to the Gedoylim.”
Happens to be im not saying that at all, you are using sarcasm rather then actually addressing the point. I’m addressing the oppression of the homosexual part of our society, and that you are just as guilty as the haredim are. I’m not saying we should act like them, i’m saying you already are with homosexuals and its very inconsistent and highly hypocritical.
They have EVERY right to marry and unless u are religious there is NO reason they cannot be allowed to
Leave a Comment