Uncategorized

Conservative Jews consider gay rabbis

The associated press reports on next week’s meeting of the Conservative movement’s committee on Jewish law and standards (CJLS) in Baltimore. One of eight topics discussed will be ordaining homosexuals:

Traditional opposition to gay sex is based on Leviticus 18:22, “Do not lie with a male as one lies with a woman; it is an abhorrence,” and a similar verse, Leviticus 20:13.
Rabbi Joel Roth, a Conservative expert in Jewish law based in Israel, has said that ignoring these prohibitions “would undermine the integrity of the very legal system which stands as the unassailable foundation of our movement.”
But Rabbi Elliot Dorff, the committee vice chairman and rector of the University of Judaism in Los Angeles, has argued that the verses in Leviticus refer to promiscuous sex, not monogamous relations between adults. He said telling gays to be celibate would be “cruel” and “un-Jewish” because Jewish tradition says sexual desires should be channeled into “legitimate modes of expression,” not completely suppressed.

It is important to note that the teshuvot (rabbinic rulings) supporting gay ordination have been written by members of the CJLS itself. Further, it takes only 6 of the committee’s 25 voting members to approve a teshuvah. If the teshuvah is passed, it will not require rabbinic ordination of homosexuals; rather it will allow for it within Conservative halakhah and the seminaries can choose to allow it or not. Currently, the (Conservative) Rabbinical Assembly does *not* revoke the membership of rabbis who come out.

53 thoughts on “Conservative Jews consider gay rabbis

  1. Wow. This brings me back to the early-90’s. I was in the process of applying to JTS, Sacred Fragments in hand and arguing with Ortho folks about the merits of Conser. over their own movements.
    They said: “One day Cons. and Reform will look the same”
    I said: “Never. The Law and Standards Committee won’t budge on the gay and matrilineal descent issue”.
    I was wrong.

  2. But Rabbi Elliot Dorff, the committee vice chairman and rector of the University of Judaism in Los Angeles, has argued that the verses in Leviticus refer to promiscuous sex, not monogamous relations between adults.
    So according to Dorff premarital/promiscuous gay sex is forbidden but committed or married gay sex is ok? Would one of the partners have to go to the mikva? What about tzniut? How would a gay rabbi be able to daven with kavannah while surrounded by hot, hot man meat?
    I’m not trying to be an intolerant dick but think of the complications! How does one deal with a mechitza – some conservative shuls have one ya know. How about the prohibition against spilling seed? Well, I guess we’ll see how that plays out. I suspect roundabout interpretations for getting past Torah-based prohibitions will become even more of the norm. Should be fun!

  3. Uhh…CK, got some bad news for ya. There are most certainly ALREADY some gay dudes on your side of the mechitzah, no matter where you daven.

  4. Shtriemel,
    wasn’t it so obvious? Once they said that our forfathers did not “really” hear the word of G-d on sinai – the movement was over – even before it started.

  5. Hi, CK,
    I really believe it’s time for the Conservative movement to accept gays and that it’ll be just fine having gay rabbis. I haven’t got a problem with it. Here are some of my answers to your questions (in a Conservative, not Orthodox, context). Mikva: if somebody thinks they need to go to the mikva, then they need to go. Tzniut: If it’s important to someone, there are rules for tzniut–go by these rules; what’s so hard about that? I mean, cover your elbows, cover your knees, watch out for the decolletage (including the “rear decolletage,” these days); what’s the problem? Davening with kavvanah among “hot, hot man meat”–lol! Straight male Conservative rabbis daven with kavvanah among hot, hot women all the time! My gay male friends tell me they don’t think their sex drives are any harder to control than those of straight guys–and your reservation, as stated, doesn’t even acknowledge lesbian Jewish rabbis, who can be assumed not to be interested in “hot, hot man meat” anyway!
    A synagogue that’s frum enough to have a mechitzah doesn’t have to hire any particular rabbi, does it?
    Spilling seed? Any man at all (gay or straight) to the left of Orthodoxy who doesn’t believe in “spilling seed” can choose not to spill any! I mean, I feel sorry for a guy who’s concerned with that myself, but if that’s his thing and he can manage it, fine–not my business.
    Finally, as far as “roundabout interpretations for getting past Torah-based prohibitions” becoming more and more common…lol, ask some of the Orthodox all about that one. Some of them are the real champs at that…what’s the “Shabbes goy” for, after all? Point being, this kind of interpretation is quite well accepted within Judaism!
    Conservative Judaism is based in Halakhah, but unlike Orthodoxy, isn’t fundamentalist (which is to say, 100% set in stone) in nature. It can change in order to accomodate our (fairly rare actually, I’d say) new realizations of moral right and wrong. It’s done this in many other instances already–ask your rabbi for examples. More and more Conservative Jews consider it right for the Conservative movement to change our interpretation of Halakhah to accept women, gays, and nonwhite Jews as absolutely equal coreligionists (and therefore permissible rabbi candidates), and I hope the movement does this as soon as possible.
    Cheers!
    Liron

  6. Yeah, I agree with Liron – we Reformim are already doing it, and I don’t see what the problem is. Of course, this issue may split the Conservatives on the coasts… will the UJ go off on it’s own? We’ll see.

  7. “…we Reformim are already doing it, and and I don’t see what the problem is”
    Son, than you’ve been locked up in a room for appx. 20 years. Welcome to 2005. Oh, and by the way, you may wanna visit your avg Reform Temple on any given Shabbat (if there’s services)…those crickets you’re hearing, well, they’re the only ones showing up.

  8. This is a very difficult subject, because it goes to the heart of denominational split: lines. I’ve essentially noticed that Reform Judaism doesn’t have lines– keeping kosher bothers you? away with it… keeping shabbat bothers you? do what’s comfortable. It really blurs the definition and boundaries of Judaism. Obviously the matrilineal/patrilineal descent issues are a major part of this too.
    On the other hand, the tradition does need to adapt to modernity to reach a point where Jews that are less-than very hardcore WANT to be involved with the community, and want to do mitzvot.
    I don’t have any answers, because we need flexibility and we need lines. Without lines, I feel we lose the essence of our ancient tradition, but I’m very confused as to how and where to draw them. I’d say we should leave it to the hahamei haTorah, but, with respect to the orthodox community, I don’t sense that there is any committment to change, and in the liberal streams, I don’t sense that there is any committment to lines.

  9. Liron, Isaac, Ronen,
    How very sad.
    Our Rabbis tell us that when the Jews left Egypt only 1/5 actually left – the rest the majority 4/5 who didn’t want to leave were killed during the plague of darkness so that the Egyptians shouldn’t see it.
    That is what has happening to us. 4/5 of us: Reform, conservative, reconstructionist …. and all of you amongst them are being lost.

  10. Should the Conservative movement refuse prospective Rabbis who admittedly have sex with women who do not visit a mikveh? Who admit masturbating? Who prefers male companionship? To me, these are comparable questions. As a Conservative, I would suggest we need to take a careful and slow approach to all questions like these. However, as a Conservative, I would also say we need to accept that our movement may answer these questions differently than Othodox do. Orthodoxy has no answers for gay men (and this is really only a dire issue with men). Conservatives need to find answers so that gay men can reconcile their orientation with their Jewish faith. That is a difficult challenge that will require a lot of debate and education if we are to find any answer. An otherwise frum gay Jew will make a better Rabbi than many straight Jews. I do not see why one issue should trump all others in making a determination in who can join the Rabbinate. Most Rabbis (and probably all liberal ones) are not shomer mitzvot. I don’t see why this sin should be singled out for special discrimination. Homosexuality should probably be a factor in determining whether one is qualified, but it is only one factor. And, if a man is in a long term monogomous relationship with another man, and has done everything he can to ensure monogomy and limit his transgressions (say, by refusing anal sex), I cannot say that his actions are worse than the average college student looking to go to rabbinical school.

  11. Yisrael – what happens if we do a little search-and-replace on your post:
    Conservatives need to find answers so that adulterers can reconcile their orientation with their Jewish faith. That is a difficult challenge that will require a lot of debate and education if we are to find any answer. An otherwise frum adulterer Jew will make a better Rabbi than many monogomist Jews. I do not see why one issue should trump all others in making a determination in who can join the Rabbinate. Open marriage should probably be a factor in determining whether one is qualified, but it is only one factor. And, if a man is in a long term open marriage several partners, and has done everything he can to limit his transgressions (say, by refusing concubinage or supporting the children of his mistresses), I cannot say that his actions are worse than the average college student looking to go to rabbinical school.
    – – – – – – – – – –
    There is growing evidence sexual preference is fluid, and that homosexuality is not a hard-wired identity. Repeated attempts to find genetic causes have not panned out.
    At the same time, we are now a generation after gay liberation. In most major cities – and moreso in Europe – an entire generation of gays has come up with only garden-variety antipathy. It is clear that most gays are not embracing the model of monogomous, committed relationships – it’s a decade (or more) since civil unions were made law in Scandinavia, Holland, and Germany, and only 10-20 percent of gays are availing themselves of marriage. A “thriving gay community” is still defined by venues for anonymous, promiscuous hookups – baths and bars.
    Those willing to look behind received PC opinion see a paradoxical situation: what gays have done with the tolerance already given them has confirmed not their normalcy, but the wisdom of the Torah’s prohibition.
    This means HOMOSEXUAL BEHAVIOR IS (STILL) A VALUES ISSUE for those of us who still view Judaism as a moral, and not just ethnic, legacy. Given the reality of overwhelming promiscuity, policies that talk about “good” gays who remain committed is pollyana-ish, wishful, and hairsplittingly unrealistic in a way that invites a slide down the slippery slope.

  12. LOL @ all of you who haven’t realized that ~90% of Jews in the US identify as Reform or Conservative…

  13. N. Onymous brings up a good point. And at the Cons. shul I worked at, as well as USY, we relished in the fact that our “dues paying” members outnumbered are Modern Ortho brothers and sisters. But then you show up for Sat AM services, in a shul that holds 1350, and their are 75 old people sitting there. And then you show up for Mincha and there’s 12. There’s only so long Cons/Reform can trumpet their “on paper” Jews. Both movements are lost beyond repair and they know it. How do I know this? Think of the last major Reform assembly and the issues discussed. Think of some of the issues Cons. Jews are discussing right now. Both movements are in major trouble.

  14. N. Onymous,
    Thats exactly why I point out the the 4/5 of Israel who never came out of Egypt. Passover is around the corner and Jews better start thinking about that at their seder table.
    Do you want to be part of the 1/5 who remain Jews or part of the 4/5 who together with their children will be lost.

  15. Being Gay and being an Adulterer is not the same thing. Loving someone, is not the same as cheating and lieing to someone. What the hell !!!!!!!!!. If you want to make a case against homosexuality, you need to come up with better examples, or more informed ones.
    Furthermore, I would love to know where you get your information on percentages of Gay marriages in Scandinvia. I don’t know if you’ve ever taken formal logic, something I remember taking in NINTH GRADE, but correlation does not equal causation. THere may be plenty of other reasons the gay population has a 10 to 20 percent marriage rate. Furthermore, I’d be interested to know what the straight marriage rate is.

  16. A lesson in LOGIC
    A quick search on the internet reveals that sixty percent of children born in Scandinvia are born to heterosexual couples out of wedlock. Furthermore, since the sixties, the trend in scandinvia has been that more people in get domestic partnerships then marriages. This is their cultural realtiy If it isan’t common to get married in those countries then why would it be anymore common for gay people to get married in those countries. I suggest reading .
    Nordic Bliss: Why gay marriage has been so successful in Scandinavia. By Darren R Spedale

  17. Ben-David, the difference is that suppressing adultery is not cruel, whereas suppressing homosexuality is. Gay men cannot does not have the alternative of relationships with women. To deny him any form of sexual relationship or lifetime campanionship is cruel. If we can push a gay man into a straight relationship, then we have done worse by denying that man a meaningful sexual partner and by giving the woman a poor sexual partner. Women should be treated better than that. To Jews, piety is not equivalent to sexual abstinence. I think most of us can agree that demanding Catholic priests abstain for life is a cruel demand. Why are you willing to impose the same on a homosexual?
    Of course this does assume homosexual orientation is not a choice. I know I do not have the ability to prefer men over women. My heterosexuality is not a choice. From what I have read the science on homosexuality suggests a similar lack of freewill for those who are homosexually oriented. To paraphrase Heschel, believing in a transcendent G-d does not mean that we have license to ignore reason and science. Reason and science point to the fact that gay men do not choose homosexuality. If so, we must be compassionate unless our compassion causes harm to others. Compassion means that we look at halacha and the context in which it is delivered. In context, the homosexual prohibitions in the Torah most clearly prohibit sexual slavery and same-sex rape. Indeed almost all homosexual events in the Torah (and during biblical through Second Temple times) involve male-on-male rape or sexual slavery. The words of the Torah even out of that context appear to apply primarily to anal sex. Compassion requires us to guide homosexuals to proper outlets for their orientation. That is why we require monogamy and encourage avoidance of anal sex. However, our compassion does not require that we provide ketubot for gay unions (ketubot presume male/female relationships). Our compassion does not require that we ignore abusive relationships (gay or straight).
    Additionally, adultery impacts marriage directly and is not victimless. Homosexuality impacts the two people involved and is victimless (unless it also happens to be adulterous). I find that man is a better judge when men are the victims of a sinner. When G-d is the victim, he is a far better judge. A kleptomaniac or murderer must be restrained because of the harm he does others, even if he has no choice. We are not harmed by homosexuals, and so the lack of choice is relevant.

  18. Joe Schmo
    You’re an ass. Don’t make assumptions about me– it really irks me. I’m not Reform, Conservative, Reconstructionist…. or Orthodox for that matter. I’m Jewish, of the people of Israel, and in case you forgot, Israel means stuggling with God. That’s what this is about. If you can’t appreciate that, then you don’t realize that your brand of “Judaism” is just as problematic as everything you’re criticizing.

  19. Ben-David, one other thing, your critique regarding gay promiscuity applies equally to heterosexuals. Heterosexuals have an equally hard time keeping their pants on. As for the fluidity of sexuality, is your sexuality really that fluid? Mine is not. I am skeptical is your assertion is that science suggests sexuality is a choice. I have known college students who experimented with bisexuality (which is wrong, and more conducive to promiscuity), but it mostly didn’t work out for them.

  20. Ronen,
    I don’t mean to upset you but your quote: “the tradition does need to adapt to modernity” – is the exact motto of all those groups who are almost lost to the Jewish people.
    Yisrael, I remember your previous lamentations of how difficult it is to get young Jews to care about Judaism….and now you are supporting this further abomination?!
    Forget it if I were you I wouldn’t bother trying. You will never convince any young Jew.

  21. Schmo, young Jews don’t like Judaism particularly because it is perceived as intolerant, inflexible and boring. I don’t know which young Jews you talk to who say that Judaism is too pro-gay.

  22. Joe Schmo,
    What a silly interpretation of my statement. I just read two essays by a modern orthodox rabbi dealing with questions of stem cell research and the issues of the Terris Schiavo case. You probably don’t use electricity on Shabbat. These are all examples of Judaism adapting to modernity.
    Similarly, questions of descent, homosexuality, etc have a very different impact on our lives today than they did earlier in Jewish life, and therefore Judaism must RESPOND. I’m not predetermining the response, but noting that is very appropritate for Jewish scholars and thinkers and just regular MOTs to consider, debate and formulate nuanced opinions on these matters. Like I said, lines must be drawn, but the question is where and based on what concepts?

  23. Responding is what we do best–if we forget that, we’re lost. It’s only by responding throughout history that we’re still here, i think. The recent Pope stuff has brought forward that most Catholics in the west have turned away from their religion due to that very inflexibility. A rigid stance in an era of (constant) change and flux does not work.
    Gay, Jewish and fine with both. (and great site, btw)

  24. The issue is wheather a Rabbi should be expected to be shomer mitzvot (in a conservative context). Just as JTS students must be shomer shabbat and keep kosher, so too must they obstain from forbidden sexual relations. While I have nothing against gay people, it is very clear that the torah forbids sex between two men. I gay person who agrees to be celebate should certainly be admitted.
    Although I do not identify as a member of the movement, as I understand the conservative halachic process. a tshuvah must made after evaluating sources. Emotional reasons, such as Rabbi Dorff’s argument that telling gays to be celibate would “cruel”, should not be relevant. While a child may not like to hear that they cannot go to a concert on friday night, that does not overrule keeping shabbat.
    Gays deserve the same love and support of any Jew. Hashem presents us with challenges in life. But our desires cannot be reason to trangress from the torah

  25. I don’t remember which one of you used it, but the (male) adulterer was a great analogy. Having a concubine, to which you refer, is actually a great way to get in touch with avoteinu (probably avoseinu to you–and actually to me too, for that matter.) The practice of Jewish men marrying more than one woman was common and licit for Ashkenazim at least into the middle ages and for many Sefardim, Mizrahim, Yemenites, etc, until about 1950. What got rid of it in Ashkenaz? Rabeinu Gershom’s basically foundation-less takana that he made in order to protect the women who ran his community and paid his salary. Point? The only authentic Judaism, the only traditional Judaism, is the one that is dynamic and puts tzelem elokim at the core of all its practices and laws.

  26. Shmuley,
    Comparing a gay person’s sexuality, something over which her or she has no choice or control, to a child’s tantrum on Shabbat is just not right. They deserve to have this issue treated with a bit more sensitivity and nuance.

  27. Ronen,
    You comparison electricity on shabbat and this abomination is wrong. The first one is something new and the question was a physical one – is electricity fire or not? The second one is old. Nothing changed now except for people’s attitudes.
    You are also wrong about them having no choice. They have as much choice as you have not to touch your neighbor’s wife.

  28. Electricity is not fire (though it can cause one), actually. But flipping switches does involve closing circuits.
    There are many new things beyond attitudes– specifically information. Scientific evidence seems to indicate that sexuality is not something we actually choose, that it is a result of our neural hardwiring. I have a hard time accepting the idea that a person who causes no harm to others should be punished for the outcome of their genetics (people who do cause harm, serial killers, pedophiles, psychopaths, are clearly in a different category).
    I don’t think nearly as much was known before, and therefore people tended to focus on homosexual activity rather than homosexual orientation. Choice of action and choice of orientation are two different things– and indeed, if your orientation is gay, you could, in theory, choose to avoid homosexual activity and even engage in heterosexual activity. But all this would be against your fundamental humanity. To me, it would seem un-Jewish to deny a person’s fundamental humanity.
    So do gay people have a choice? Sure, with respect to activity. But “just cuz the Torah sez so” isn’t enough to define justice in my world. And rejecting 10% of humanity on account of a single biblical statement seems intensely problematic to me.

  29. Yisrael – you deserve a detailed discussion, but I am just coming off of the exact same discussion on Jewlicious. I am all gayed out for now. In brief:
    1) Many of your assumptions about homosexuality – that it’s genetic and immutable, that it is normal (just with a different love object) – are all projections of the gay lobby that go WAY beyond scientifically established fact. The pattern of misinformation and “my way or the highway” suppression of dissent on these matters is taken straight out of the politically correct playbook.
    2) We now have a generation of statistics and reportage on the post-liberation gay communities of Europe and North America. Paradoxically, studies of this community have yielded AMPLE evidence that homosexuality is NOT inborn, not immutable, and that it results from very specific emotional traumas of childhood.
    The original analysis by Freud and the other major thinkers of modern psychology described homosexuality as a maladapted response to unmet emotional needs. THOSE THEORIES WERE NEVER DISPROVEN – only shouted down.
    3) The evidence of gay dysfunction is clear and damning – and much of it comes from studies of gay behavior conducted by the Gay Men’s Health Crisis and other impeccably pro-gay sources.
    Out-and-proud gays have rates of drug and alchohol addiction that are 4-5 times the general population – a strong indicator of mental distress.
    The vast majority of gay men are locked in patterns of compulsive promiscuity. When civil unions are made available, the participation rates are under 20 percent. An interesting point was raised in this thread, that in some European countries the general marriage rate is low. It would be interesting to compare the average length of hetero and homo relationships in these countries – most gay men are incapable of maintaining an intimate relationship beyond 18-24 months.
    Even “committed” gay relationships are open to other sexual partners as a norm. Gay “communities” are organized around bars, baths, and other hookup venues.
    3) This profile of behavior is obviously problematic for any Jewish sect that claims to adhere to Torah – even to “the spirit” of the Torah.
    What connection with gay Jewish clergy forge betwen gay notions of “community” and Jewish concepts of community? Will we be further “educated” about the more “progressive” approaches, like hookups and polyamory? What will Jewish communities be forced to “accept” in the name of “tolerance”?
    4) Up to 1/3 of teenage men will feel a sexual “crush” for another man during their adolescence. When left alone, over 99 percent of them go on to integrate a heterosexual identity. The homosexual lobby is pushing its agenda on these kids and their parents, hoping to draw them towards a homosexual life.
    What will happen to these youth if gay people are in Rabbinical and/or educational positions?
    5) Here’s a thought experiment:
    There is much more solid evidence of a genetic factor in alchoholism than for homosexuality – genes triggering strong reaction to alchohol have been identified and traced in families whose members have drinking problems.
    So maybe all these genetic alchoholics should parade in Jerusalem, too:
    “We’re Drunk! We’re Driving! Get Used To It!�
    Then a carefully-groomed spokesperson of the Drunk Lib movement can go on National Public Radio and say:
    “We were born this way. Why should we be penalized for who we are? Drinking is a great, natural pleasure shared by evey human being. Why must we be made to deny our G-d-given experience of drinking just because it is different? I’m tired of living in the shadows, tired of brutal policemen pulling me over for a breathalyzer test – do you know how degrading that is when I have been out with my fellow members of the Drunk Community?â€?
    We MUST see through the PC bullshit on this issue.
    Homosexuals don’t need tolerance. They need treatment. Young people – guys especially – need to be told that their incidental attraction to other guys is a natural part of adolescence, and not have the shackles of “gay identityâ€? slapped on them.
    Ben-David

  30. Even “committed” gay relationships are open to other sexual partners as a norm. Gay “communities” are organized around bars, baths, and other hookup venues… What connection with gay Jewish clergy forge betwen gay notions of “community” and Jewish concepts of community? Will we be further “educated” about the more “progressive” approaches, like hookups and polyamory? What will Jewish communities be forced to “accept” in the name of “tolerance”?
    You come out quite strongly against drunk drivers, but are there any obstacles to them becoming Rabbis? Your argument here is based on broad sweeping generalizations about the gay “community.” Well, I guess all Jews are money hungry nebbishes who eat bagels and lox and christian children, too.
    Jewish communities shouldn’t be forced to accept anything, except one another. It seems quite clear to me that a gay person is capable of high moral standards, and certainly a gay rabbi should be held to that. Not all gays are highly moral individuals, but it’s not as if hetero rabbis are morally infalliable either… so your argument is really just latching onto stereotypes for the sake of preserving itself. Kinda lame, really.

  31. Oh my G-d, I almost found your post interesting ( throughly misguided though) untill you went off the deep end with the crap about bath houses and what not. Yes, all Gay people are perverted motherfuckers. What the hell is wrong with you? I have many gay and lesbian friends, and each and every single one of them just wants to fall in love and have long term relationships. I could go on and on about the maladaptive behavior of hetero men. Should I rail against all straight men now.

  32. I have many gay and lesbian friends, and each and every single one of them just wants to fall in love and have long term relationships.
    – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
    How many of them achieve and maintain those relationships?
    Why can’t they?
    We now live in a society where (tens of) millions of hetero couples live out of wedlock. There is no social stigma, just as there’s little social stigma in the big cities that host “gay communities.” An entire body of law has been developed to handle all aspects of such relationships.
    So: Where are all the gay couples who are together because they want to be, availing themselves of these legal constructs?
    They don’t exist.
    Large-scale surveys by the Gay Men’s Health Crisis and other *gay-friendly* organizations indicate that 90 percent of gay men spend their adult life (20s to mid-40s) churning through adolescent “romances”. When they are no longer young/attractive enough to play the meat market, they “settle down” into sexually open “partnerships.”
    Even in today’s Sex-and-the-City environment, most heteros have entered into a committed relationship by their early 30s.
    I don’t doubt your friends’ sincerity – but 90 percent of gay people seem unable to fulfill that desire, unable to sustain the relationship they claim they want.
    At the same time, their private lives are driven by compulsive promiscuity. Again: the louchest Sex-in-the-City hetero “stud” will have, on average, 7 to 10 sex partners between their 20s and 30s. His gay counterpart can easily have that many in one holiday weekend on Fire Island – the statistics (again, from the Gay Men’s Health Crisis) indicate upwards of 75 partners (on average!) by the time a gay man is 40.
    So: 90 percent of gay men are unable to achieve mature, committed relationships, and their sex lives diverge starkly from any hetero notion of courtship, romance, or intimacy.
    This level of dysfunction indicates that there is an underlying problem. Freud and others describe this as an arrested development, the personality stuck in the narcissistic, romantic attitudes of adolescence.
    Yes, many heteros retain adolescent modes of behavior well into adulthood. But not to the same extreme extent. And certainly the Jewish perspective is not to view this as progress.
    Not every new development is positive. Nor must Judaism reshape itself to uncritically accommodate every such development.
    My posts are based on facts – statistical surveys and scientific studies published in peer-reviewed journals. The response is the classic politically correct denunciation – without a shred of evidence or reasoned argument.
    Ronen: if you don’t think Rabbis with drinking problems are not forced to step down – or at forced to get treatment and make a public statement of contrition – you should get a clue. My point was that the evidence that many drunks are “born that way” has not changed our assessment of alchoholism: it is maladapted behavior, not a “natural variation” that is to be tolerated or celebrated.
    The same is true of homosexuality – how much more so when the scientific evidence shows clearly that gays are NOT born that way, that homosexual attraction develops from a clear set of traumatic childhood experiences.
    But the clearest evidence that homosexuality is pathological comes from observation of the gay community, how gays have chosen to live their lives, and what they have done with the tolerance already extended to them.
    None of those choices are congruent with Jewish ideals of self, family, and community.

  33. Ben-David, I absolutely agree that promiscuity is a huge problem. Furthermore it is a problem that plagues the gay community more than the straight community.
    You also note, “The same is true of homosexuality – how much more so when the scientific evidence shows clearly that gays are NOT born that way, that homosexual attraction develops from a clear set of traumatic childhood experiences.” On this point I think that you accurately describe a large portion of the gay community.
    In other words, we largely agree. Where we disagree is how we should treat homosexuals AS A CATEGORY. Whether homosexuality is caused by genetics or childhood experiences, the person afflicted with homosexuality still has no choice. In fact, if a person is gay BECAUSE of abuse, we should be more sympathetic not less.
    That said, we cannot condone flagrant promiscuity. A gay man who has sex with many men and refuses monogamy is not qualified to be a Rabbi. This prohibition may exclude most potential gay applicants to the Rabbinate. That is fine. However, once a gay man recognizes that promiscuity is wrong, that monogamy is good, and seeks to correct his behavior, then AND ONLY THEN, can he be qualified as a Rabbi. We should not deny his service to the Jewish community because of the lingering effects of childhood abuse, so long as he commits to controlling those effects. The only reason why I do not add demanding that he refuse anal sex is that we while we must police public behavior in our public figures, demanding they reveal their bedroom practices goes too far. We do not even demand monogamy from heterosexuals in the way I am proposing. Although it should be clear that anal sex is wrong, I would no more want to police the issue with homosexuals than I would with heterosexuals.
    G-d gave each of us our own soul. We should be judged as individuals, whether by G-d or by men. You may be right generally about homosexuals, but even if homosexuals are generally promiscuous we should not presume all are. Those few who are not promiscuous should not be diminished because of the bad behavior of other homosexuals

  34. Dude, my gay friends are on average more capable and do often better at maintaining relationships then my straight friends. The straight friends are perhaps more concenrned about getting laid. You don’t know shit about the way most gay people are or act.

  35. “Scientific evidence seems to indicate that sexuality is not something we actually choose”…
    Show me the scientific evidence! What a joke.
    Now I will explain to you muddleheads why it is obvious just by logic alone that it cannot be inborn:
    Just as if somebody likes chocolate and salivates at the site of other good food- we know that that is learned. This was the experiment of pavlov’s dogs. You see chocalate cake is outside of our bodies. while the desire to eat is internal our knowledge of what we like is learned. Why if you thought that doo doo (forgive the french) was chocolate cake you might also salivate. It is all triggered by knowledge gained by experience.
    So too with this. We have an internal desire. When we reach adolescense if you remember we didn’t really know what to do with it – until someone told us or we figured it out. Once we realized it and thought about it for a period when we saw a girl we might automatically associate the external sight with the internal desire.
    The arousal from the sight of something external such as a guy, or girl for that matter, must be learned. The internal desire is inborn but the association is learned.
    If a person “trains” themselves they can become aroused at the sight of any object! Certainly one shouldn’t do that.
    That is why I say that it simply makes no sense to think that to be attracted to a guy is inborn – even to a girl it is not inborn!

  36. see this and this
    An important part of the second article is:
    The most important fact about ‘reparative therapy,’ also sometimes known as ‘conversion’ therapy, is that it is based on an understanding of homosexuality that has been rejected by all the major health and mental health professions. The American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Counseling Association, the American Psychiatric Association, the American Psychological Association, the National Association of School Psychologists, and the National Association of Social Workers, together representing more than 477,000 health and mental health professionals, have all taken the position that homosexuality is not a mental disorder and thus there is no need for a ‘cure.’ …health and mental health professional organizations do not support efforts to change young people’s sexual orientation through ‘reparative therapy’ and have raised serious concerns about its potential to do harm.
    time to leave the little world you’ve created for yourself, schmo

  37. Ronen,
    Time for you to simply think. I read those two links. They pretty much say nothing. They go both ways with a bunch of studies that come to nothing clear.
    Truth is if they would tell me 4+4=17 I wouldn’t care who said it because I would know they are wrong.
    In this case I explained how its impossible.
    Ronen, use your own head and argue the facts don’t just parrot what others say.
    It is simply impossible for the association of a “guy” with your internal desire to be genetic. Read what I wrote before and think about it. If my logic is faulty help me out and explain where my mistake is.

  38. It’s a nature vs. nurture debate, and it won’t get very far because the pool of evidence, as you noted, is shallow. It seems to me that there is a mounting case to suggest that neurology, biochemistry and genetics will eventually have a lot more to say about homosexuality than Satan or the morally loose culture we live in.
    My gut tells me that this is a function of different “wiring.” And, more importantly, any attempt at “conversion” is probably not going to do much other than foster a deep sense of shame and guilt in people who have done nothing to harm others. If your statistics are accurate, there may be indeed dysfunction in the homosexual community. But there is dysfunction in the hetero community too, so it’s just not very persuasive as an argument against allowing these people to live their lives according to their own orientation and in peace as full members of our community. Furthermore, I think that gays are certainly capable of functional relationships as well, and those who are committed to tikkun olam and derech eretz can do more for the sake of the Jewish community than many hetero but uninspired Jews.
    Your logic isn’t faulty, it’s just designed to shelter you from more tolerant opinions and to promote your contempt for people that are different from you.
    Except this: “don’t just parrot what others say”
    You ASKED me for scientific evidence, I linked to it and you call me a parrot? ass.

  39. Ronen:
    It’s a nature vs. nurture debate, and it won’t get very far because the pool of evidence, as you noted, is shallow.
    – – – – – – – – – –
    It is not a nature vs. nurture debate – we KNOW that alchoholism, depression, and schizophrenia have strong genetic components – yet we haven’t normalized them.
    And we KNOW that precocious sexuality, drug use, and depression result in children of divorce (a non-genetically determined behavior).
    Earlier generations classified homosexuality as pathology because of a VALUE judgement about what makes a fulfilling life. Now there is ample evidence – from the last 30 years of gay liberation – that the norm for homosexuals is compulsive promiscuity, an inability to form lasting intimate relationships, and retention of adolescent perspectives and behaviors into adulthood. There is ample evidence that homosexuals experience severe depression and turn to substance abuse at rates several times that of the general society – that is, even after liberation, there is strong evidence that this is in fact an unsatisactory, maladapted way of living.
    Yes, that is a “value judgement” as much as a medical assessment. That’s the way things work in psychology and sociology – that’s why alchoholism is still taboo and depression is still a tragedy even though we know drunks and depressives are “born that way”. That’s why we aren’t all “celebrating” the “creative difference” of schizophrenics.
    Judaism is, after all, a religion – and people turn to religion to clarify values. Judaism’s values are clear – there is no blind, primitive homophobia here.
    you wrote:
    It seems to me that there is a mounting case to suggest that neurology, biochemistry and genetics will eventually have a lot more to say about homosexuality than Satan or the morally loose culture we live in.
    – – – – – – – – – – –
    1) The evidence is mounting in the opposite direction from what you say – there is growing evidence of behavioral and environmental influences on sexual orientation. Again, much of this comes from study of the out-and-proud gay community. One example: as many as 80 percent of gay men report similar dysfunctional family patterns in childhood (estrangement from father and/or enmeshment with mother). And 40 percent of gay men report childhood sexual abuse – compared with just 7-10 percent of the general population.
    2) Nobody is explaining gay identity formation in terms of “Satan and loose culture”. You are setting up a straw man.
    But returning to the issue of values – it is definitely the case that curent sexual mores have blurred the clear distinction that used to exist between homosexual promiscuity and monogomous marriage. If many modern Sex-and-the-City straights see little difference between their own sexual free-fall and gay promiscuity, they may be right – but it’s not homophobic or hateful to point out that Judaism (and many secular people) don’t consider this coarsening of life to be “progress”.
    Exactly how does honoring homosexuality as “normal” help things? It cannot help but do (further) damage to Judaism’s nuanced and healthy insistence on commuited sexuality as the norm.
    You wrote:
    You ASKED me for scientific evidence, I linked to it
    – – – – – – – – – – –
    Wikipedia is a secondary source, and is notoriously uneven. The first article about genetic causation was very comprehensive and – surprise – therefore inconclusive about its (inconclusive) topic.
    But the second article – a “history” of homosexuality and medecine – is unfortunately larded through with propaganda and ommissions. It conveniently skips over the considerable debate – and political arm-twisting – that accompanied the declassification of homosexuality by the APA (it seems the 70s are omitted entirely – so much easier to project homosexuality as uncontroversially normal that way…).
    The APA’s decision was almost purely political, not scientific by any means – and in the worst tradition of special-interest victimology politics, that one decision was used like a crowbar to pry the same declaration out of other professional associations. So the list you quoted is not so impressive: it just reveals how adept the gay lobby is as political maneuvering – and how one-sided that Wiki page is.
    Regarding reparative therapy – increasing evidence shows that it is as successful as therapies for other addictive/compulsive behaviors such as drug and alchohol abuse. For a balancing list of peer-reviewed articles about the effectiveness of such therapy, look here and here. Note that the APA – which set in motion the medical normalization of homosexuality – is now publishing articles admitting that reparative therapy works.
    This is significant – because if addressing gay feelings like other compulsive/addictive feelings actually works, this is a substantial confirmation of earlier theories of homosexuality.
    Again – all this is germane to helping homosexuals. But the etiology of gay identity is irrelevant to the underlying question of values. Of course, the pro-gay lobby wants above all to distract the rest of us from the pathology of the gay world, and from any moral judgement – so they throw up a pseudo-scientific smokescreen and present themselves as victims.

  40. ck: “How about the prohibition against spilling seed?”
    So fucking your wife after her hysterectomy is an abomination before the Lord too.

  41. Ronen: “Jewish communities shouldn’t be forced to accept anything, except one another.”
    No comment, other than it bears repeating. Hear, hear.

  42. Dear Dr. Laura/Ben-David
    Thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding God’s Law. I
    have learned a great deal from your show, and I try to share that knowledge
    with
    as many people as I can. When someone tries to defend the homosexual
    lifestyle, for example, I simply remind them that Leviticus 18:22
    clearly
    states it to be an abomination. End of debate.
    I do need some advice from you, however, regarding some of the specific
    laws
    and how to follow them.
    a) When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a
    pleasing odour for the Lord (Lev. 1:9). The problem is my neighbours.
    They
    claim the odour is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them?
    b) I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in
    Exodus
    21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for
    her?
    c) I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her
    period of menstrual uncleanliness (Lev. 15:19-24). The problem is, how
    do I
    tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offence.
    d) Lev. 25:44 states that I may indeed possess slaves, both male and
    female,
    provided they are purchased from neighbouring nations. A friend of mine
    claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not Canadians. Can you
    clarify?
    Why can’t I own Canadians?
    e) I have a neighbour who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus
    35:2
    clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to
    kill him
    myself?
    f) A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an
    abomination (Lev. 11:10), it is a lesser abomination than
    homosexuality. But
    I don’t agree. Can you settle this?
    g) Lev. 21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have
    a
    defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses. Does
    my
    vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle room here?
    h) Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair
    around
    their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by Lev.19:27.
    How
    should they die?
    i) I know from Lev. 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes
    me
    unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves?
    j) My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev. 19:19 by planting two
    different
    crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing garments made of
    two
    different kinds of thread (cotton/polyester blend). He also tends to
    curse
    and blaspheme a lot. Is it really necessary that we go to all the
    trouble of
    getting the whole town together to stone them (Lev. 24:10-16)? Couldn’t
    we
    just burn them to death at a private family affair like we do with
    people
    who sleep with their in-laws (Lev. 20:14)?
    I know you have studied these things extensively, so I am confident you
    can
    help. Thank you again for reminding us that God’s word is eternal and
    unchanging.
    Your devoted disciple and adoring fan
    I can already see the responses now.

  43. Here are your answers:
    When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a
    pleasing odour for the Lord (Lev. 1:9). The problem is my neighbours.
    They claim the odour is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them?
    As long as they don’t interfere ignore them.
    b) I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in
    Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her?
    Its up to you.
    c) I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of menstrual uncleanliness (Lev. 15:19-24). The problem is, how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offence.
    If in doubt stay without.
    d) Lev. 25:44 states that I may indeed possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighbouring nations. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not Canadians. Can you
    clarify? Why can’t I own Canadians?
    You can own both.
    e) I have a neighbour who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus
    35:2 clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to
    kill him myself?
    bring him to the court.
    f) A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an
    abomination (Lev. 11:10), it is a lesser abomination than
    homosexuality. But I don’t agree. Can you settle this?
    the former is pubnishable by death the second only by flogging.
    g) Lev. 21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have
    a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses. Does
    my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle room here?
    It refers to a physical defect that other can see on you not vision.
    h) Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair
    around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by Lev.19:27.
    How should they die?
    They will be flogged.
    i) I know from Lev. 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes
    me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves?
    You will only be unclean from entering into the temple.
    j) My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev. 19:19 by planting two
    different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing garments made of
    two different kinds of thread (cotton/polyester blend). He also tends to
    curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really necessary that we go to all the
    trouble of getting the whole town together to stone them (Lev. 24:10-16)? Couldn’t
    we just burn them to death at a private family affair like we do with
    people who sleep with their in-laws (Lev. 20:14)?
    Mixed crops are only forbidden is in close proximity to each other – if done on purpose and willfully it incures a flogging.
    The only mixed materials forbidden are linen and wool.
    I don’t know who hes cursing but if he is cursing himself that is commendable.
    Publicly is better this way you wont follow you uncle.

  44. This Shit is Funny
    – – – – – – – – –
    … and very, very old. The Dr. Laura thing has been around for ages. This is really not up to Jewschool standards – here you are expected to be witty on your own, mate.
    Regards –

  45. OMG, get a grip dude. I know it’s old !!!! As for “Jewschool Standards” I did’nt know this site was soo discriminating when it came to making comments.
    Also, I don’t know what’s older, the Dr. Laura thing, or thinking that Gay people can be compared to Schizophrenic’s, Alcoholics and depressed people.

  46. Well, here i am. An attractive healthy gay male who is 39 years old and have been in the same monogamous relationship with a man 8 years older then myself for over 12 years, and have 3 cats and a very nervous parrot.
    My partner nor myself have ever had or engaged in anal sex, because the idea of it does not seem to appeal to us, while forcing one to be submissive and dangerous. Besides that, i dislike how this pro anal sex place gay men into a role witch to me, seems to mirror heterosexual sex. ( penetration) i admit, many gay men who are single, lonely, and searching for love in all the wrong places. bar flies lost in a sea of self hatred and drug abuse somehow do not seem like husband material to me. But i have never surrounded myself with people just because they are gay. i surround myself with people that i share the same passions and creative interests with. why would i care what and who they find attractive. Not that you care, but i am a voice-over artist in Los angeles and love what I do. It’s how i define a large part of myself. Just like I also see myself as a oil painter and sculptor when i have the luxury of time to return to the soul of who i am. i don’t see my sexual preference as the most important aspect of my life. but a small part that is a complex mosaic of the total package. My partner owns a popular restaurant in hollywood. he also is much more then (GAY) Oh, and yes, Please Note… My Partner is an identical twin who lived with his father while his brother grew up 3000 miles away with his Mother and her new Husband. Both are gay, and seemed to come have come to the same conclusion around the age of 8.
    I knew i was different, around the age of 9-10. Probably about the same time a heterosexual boy started to notice some attraction toward a girl in class or walking home from school you probably tormented and called names before slugging her in the shoulder for no know reason 2 years earlier, But now want to sit quietly with her at the lunch table because she makes you feel weird, but in a heart pounding kinda way.
    Both my partner and i have never been molested or abused. well, maybe the time my dad took me fishing… (sigh) yep… definitely abuse in my book. you could compare it to forcing a heterosexual man to sit through the Broadway musical “Cats” … Well, you get the picture.
    Sorry to burst you’re homo hating bubble, But i am going to bed early tonight, and bypass on my stereotypical STD Riddled Bath House and Urinal Glory Hole Truck Stop for a quick gang bang/ fist fuck like 90% of all us perverted Homo’s do before sneaking back home and spreading the virus to my child molesting sodomite hubby before he spreads it to me…. Night all

  47. Someone wrote: >>Even “committed” gay relationships are open to other sexual partners as a norm. Gay “communities” are organized around bars, baths, and other hookup venues… What connection with gay Jewish clergy forge betwen gay notions of “community” and Jewish concepts of community? Will we be further “educated” about the more “progressive” approaches, like hookups and polyamory?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

The reCAPTCHA verification period has expired. Please reload the page.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.