Jerusalem Gay Pride Parade Cancelled
Reuters reports,
Organisers cancelled a gay pride parade in Jerusalem on Thursday which ultra-Orthodox Jews had threatened to disrupt, after police said they needed to divert forces to guard against threatened Palestinian attacks.
Instead of Friday’s scheduled march through the streets of the holy city, organisers said they will hold an event in a Jerusalem stadium. The move comes after Palestinian vows to revenge Israel’s shelling which killed 18 civilians in Gaza.
How convenient. The IDF’s been picking off Palestinian civilians one by one since the Gaza invasion began this summer and they’ve now suddenly taken notice of the Palestinians’ “renewed threats of violence” — which, mind you, they’ve renewed every day since, oh, I don’t know, the beginning of the second intifada. Now, just as with World Pride (which was scheduled to take place during the Lebanon War), the police claim they can’t possibly afford the expenditure of manpower.
This apparently wasn’t a problem during the Feast of Tabernacles Parade, however, when just four weeks ago thousands of Christian evangelicals marched through the streets of downtown Jerusalem in lockstep with the Israeli security forces while proclaiming “Christ is Lord.” But it would seem that avodah zarah [idolatry] — a crime also punishable by death according to the Torah, and which, unlike homosexuality, is a violation of the Ten Commandments — is not nearly as offensive to Hareidim as people of the same sex publicly proclaiming their love for one another and demanding their right to be treated as equals in the Middle East’s “only democracy.”
Clearly queer Israeli taxpayers and IDF veterans haven’t contributed as much to Israeli society as the people who are investing in Israel to fulfill loopy apocalyptic prophecies that conclude with the utter annihilation of world Jewry. There is obviously nothing hypocritical or unjustly bigoted about the ultra-Orthodox position on this subject, and we should not be so cruel as to wrongly condemn the Hareidi population for behaving like the Islamist radicals Jews and Christians routinely denounce for supposedly defending the tenets of the Islamic faith (despite the fact that gay rights are evidently the Hareidi equivalent of Muhammad cartoons). That would be uncalled for and quite possibly self-hating. I’m sorry I even brought it up.
But I think I know what will resolve this issue once and for all, and I’m surprised it hasn’t dawned on anyone else yet, because it’s now so painfully obvious: Queer Zionism. It’s just like Christian Zionism, but gayer. (I know, I know– what can possibly be gayer than Christian Zionism?) Just think about. I sure am. In explicit, graphic detail.
Mmmm, queer Zionists. Now that’s a special interest group I can get behind.
(No, really, I swear–I’m straight.)
“But it would seem that avodah zarah [idolatry] — a crime also punishable by death according to the Torah, and which, unlike homosexuality, is a violation of the Ten Commandments — is not nearly as offensive to Hareidim”
Touche. That’s a good point Mobius. However….
” as people of the same sex publicly proclaiming their love for one another and demanding their right to be treated as equals in a free, democratic society.”
the last gay pride I went to (Montreal ’99) was a sick display of simulated acts of sodomy and oral sex…at 2 PM on a Sunday afternoon. So you may see love, respect and intimacy…I see a display of promiscuity that’s best left in bath house. As such, it belongs anywhere but Jerusalem.
i marched in last year’s parade. there were no such displays of obscenity and the organizers of jerusalem’s parade are indeed sensible enough to prohibit such behavior.
The terrorists have won.
The terrorists have won.
YES, YES, YES, YES,Y ES. It’s called a civil war, the
Fort Sumpter of which was a bullet to chest of Yitzhak Rabin delivered by some inhuman monster, and the ultimate objective of which is the destruction of Israeli democracy. And the longer its intended targets keep their eyes closed to the caculated, organized, and ruthless character of this campaign , the less chance they have to ultimately prevail.
I still don’t get it.
What exactly is wrong with sodomy and oral sex?
What exactly is wrong with sodomy and oral sex?
‘wrong’ hole, to some people…
I have a relative who has worked for the Good Samaritan help line (Ezra Rishona Nafshit). There were enough Haredi callers who were so troubled with guilt and self-hatred becuase they were gay and could not reconcile thier natural urges with their unquestioned dogma, to merit founding a special training for religious listeners on a special help line.
three things.
#1. (this is for mobius) yes, gay relationships in men is considered adultry (not so with women) and is punishable by death according to the Torah. go check.
#2. christianity is one of the faiths that hold jerusalem holy. practicly, there is no way we could stop them from parading.
#3.my problem with these chareidim is , where were they when jews were being chucked out of their homes? we didnt hear from them. thats “bushes”.
only good news. shabbat shalom
Adultery is having sex with a man not your husband. All the rest may be prohibited but not adultery.
We don’t stop the christians because they give us money. of course we could stop them if we wanted to – we just have to stop taking their money.
And with the “homes”? that’s just nonsense.
(and we all know why: because the mere existence of those “homes” was a war crime)
#2. christianity is one of the faiths that hold jerusalem holy. practicly, there is no way we could stop them from parading.
Many of the participants in the pride parade also hold Jerusalem holy. That’s why they want to have the parade there.
“I still don’t get it.
What exactly is wrong with sodomy and oral sex? ”
One might say, smoking crack, on your own time, in your own house, is your own affairs. One might also say that consentual sex with adults and teens…hell, even pre-teens, might be ok. Ah heck, anything that doesn’t severly maim, kill and or insult minority groups is ok these days.
But I feel many of these things belong in a bedroom, and not in a parade on a Sunday afternoon. I believe overt sexuality harms, not promotes, intimacy, eroticism, etc. In other words, less is more…for our families, relationships and communities. My gay friends would disagree. But I’m not sure I’d ask the gay community for advice on monogamy and intimacy.
I’ve never been so ashamed to be Israeli, Jewish or Zionist. I’m actually on the verge of tears over the death of freedom and democracy in Jerusalem. If the Halutzim knew that religious facists and theocrats would hijack their work they may never have done it.
Someone please restore my faith in Israel.
“though shalt not covet they neighbor’s wife” ≠ “a man shall not lie with a man as he does with a woman”
don’t tell me “go check” — if you have a source, bring it. and if it’s not from the amoraim or tannaim or even the gaonim, i’m not interested.
“i marched in last year’s parade. there were no such displays of obscenity and the organizers of jerusalem’s parade are indeed sensible enough to prohibit such behavior. ”
Interesting, anywhere in the world gay pride parades are simulated public orgies (I live in Holland, I know what these parades look like) but only in Jerusalem do they behave normal.
If they realize why such obscenity is inappropriate in Jerusalem, they should realize how inappropriate this parade is for Jeruselam.
left and right keep announcing the death of democracy in Israel. I don’t buy it. Sure, there are battles, but death?
“But I’m not sure I’d ask the gay community for advice on monogamy and intimacy.”
And you actually have gay friends?
Do you know how often you inappropriately generalize people in these comment?
I can see it now:
“Jerusalem’s gay and lesbian synagogue attempted to hold their court-sanctioned community celebration and torah reading at the Western Wall yesterday. In response, thousands of angry haredim hurled soiled diapers, bottles and stones while screaming ‘gevalt.'”
Let’s face it… the haredim would go nuts even if a bunch of elderly married homos dressed in suits and silk kippot tried to read torah together. It would please me to watch the film clip of haredim beaten and defeated as proud Jewish police, including GLBT officers in rainbow hats with insignia, protect the gay worshippers at the Wall. The tears would be tears of defeat, signifying the emergence of a triumphant, tolerant Judaism….
This talk of “the charedim” as this monolithic group really has to stop.
R’ Ovadia, the whole Bada”tz, R’ Landau, the Yesh”a rebbeim — every rav who called for any type of hafganah strongly clarified their position with an explicit command, “Don’t be violent.” The statements then become: “Every able-bodied man should protest, but don’t be violent.” Bada”tz I believe were the ones who told people explicitly (gasp!) to adhere to the Shulchan Aruch, i.e., don’t even do so much as decrease the value of someone’s stuff. In the media, in the shuls, in the yeshivas, the Gedolei Yisra’el were saying not to be violent, and somehow a fake bomb shows up.
From what I’m hearing, the word on the street, according to my friends who live in Meah She’arim (charedi friends who live right off Rechov Meah Shearim) was that most of the real Chassidim (ppl striving to make their will into Hashem’s will, not gangstas-in-bekitsches with guns) were saying a lot like HaYom, shrei-ing “what is this violence going to accomplish!” And then some kids in Gan Sacher turn up with a loaded pistol.
Again, I’m seeing a lot of the same faulty thought process which equates terrorism to Islam — the actions of a group of people listening to one small group of “rabbis” against Torah, against the Gedolim, wayyy against halacha reflects on this group of people alone and not on a religion.
And why any group of people — because you know these people eat mehadrin min ha’mehadrin — would listen to Bada”tz to say “this meat is kosher” but not listen to Bada”tz saying “don’t kill people” is just tragic.
But blanket generalizations and this irrational fear and hatred of (what is looking more and more like all) charedi people passt nisht for Progressive mentschen.
In addition, it should not “please” anyone to watch anyone get “beaten” by Israeli officers.
I posted a bunch of photos from the rally to flickr:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/newjewisheducation/
Enjoy and Shabbat Shalom!
Saul
It seems, according to Haaretz, that R. Elyashiv and R. Ovadia Yosef were willing to negotiate a compromise. Now, I understand that isn’t what many want, but the fact is, this is quite different than condoning violence. It is, from where they are standing, perhaps quite a reasonable request, and more importantly, implicitly signals some level of tolerance.
See the “Ultra-Orthodox agree to compromise” section.
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/785989.html
Let’s note something:
There is a RIGHT in Israel to freedom of speech. That includes a parade through ANY neighbourhood.
Out of respect the LGBT community chose to ensure their proposed route would not go through religious neighbourhood. This is not something that they had to do.
The Orthodox Community DOES NOT HAVE A RIGHT to not be confronted by a peaceful demostration they disagree with.
I’m dont compromising with that community. It’s their turn to compromise.
TomC,
You said, “Out of respect the LGBT community chose to ensure their proposed route would not go through religious neighbourhood. This is not something that they had to do.”
But it was something that was proper to do. To not to do would be insensitive. Not a good idea when you are demanding sensitivity.
“The Orthodox Community DOES NOT HAVE A RIGHT to not be confronted by a peaceful demostration they disagree with.”
They have every right to peacefully request that their own space me respected.
actually, israel has no constitution. so the issue of rights are decided strictly by the court, as far as i understand it. this is problematic for a democracy.
Rarely do I find an occasion to give DK as much love as this.
Thank you for posting comment #20.
Y-love, it was wrong – it is wrong – to take joy in violence, or to see police beating anyone as a joyous event. My apologies. I used to think that violent language was useful way to vent; an alternative perhaps to violent acts. Of course, that’s a totally un-Jewish way to look at things.
Sigh. So much teshuva!
In North Dallas Forty, one of the great sports movies ever made, one of the football players was protesting in disgust at the team owners’ hypocrisy in rejecting their demands for fair salaries, on the one hand, yet cynically demanding their loyalty, on the other: “Whenever we say it’s a game, you say it’s a business; whenever we say it’s a business, you say it’s a game.â€
In commenting on the assertion that organizers of the parade compromised by avoiding a direct path through religious neighborhoods, Kelsey notes,
it was something that was proper to do. To not to do would be insensitive. Not a good idea when you are demanding sensitivity.
Fair enough. The problem, however, is that the time for compromise on the part of the Religious Right never quite arrives. Immediately following the demand for “sensitivity†on the part of their opponents, the focus suddenly shifts to the rights of the charedim to preserve the sanctity of their communities and their halachik proscriptions against homosexuality with all legal means at their disposal. Indeed, just after his insistence on sensitivity, Kelsey defends the charedim by stating,
They have every right to peacefully request that their own space me respected (emphasis added).
Sorry, but they doesn’t get it both ways. If the appropriate standard is the rights of the respective parties, the parade organizers owe the charedim absolutely nothing beyond the bare minimum required by law. If the standard is one of sensitivity – i.e., what is “proper,†as Kelsey says – then the charedim must compromise to the same extent as they demand from others.
They never do.
The Religious Right believes compromise is always appropriate for others, never for them. Of course, that is largely the inevitable consequence of their belief that every bowel movement, every whim, every preference of any kind is a direct expression of the will of God Almighty. (Funny, too, how Hashem always wants exactly the same thing they do.) Very much like the Republican Party; the Democrats are invariably expected to act in the spirit of compromise and consensus, in the interests of the nation as a whole, but when it comes to Republicans, the “Decider†is the one in charge, and gets to set policy for all of us.
Y-Love argues that the charedim are being unfairly portrayed as monolithic:
the real Chassidim (ppl striving to make their will into Hashem’s will, not gangstas-in-bekitsches with guns) were saying a lot like HaYom, shrei-ing “what is this violence going to accomplish!†(emphasis added).
Fine. But where is the very next logical step: if the murderous thugs are not the real Chassidim, then who the hell are they? I hope to God your not claiming that they’re merely some bad seeds, some random element being used to slander the peace-loving ultra-Orthodox community as a whole. If these are not the real Chassidim, then, from an insiders perspective, please let us know what we call them and what we do about them. Oh, yes, and what role exactly are the real Chassidim prepared to play in the fight against these thugs?
David Smith,
I think you know my general positions well enough to know that I am hardly generally a Charedi apologist. However, it seems to me that What R. Elyashiv and R. Yosef did was surprising. I expected a more categorical refusal for any negotiation or acceptance of a gay parade. So did the radicals who through rocks at the charedi mayor (a follower of R. Elyashiv) and denounced him as a “Zionist.” So I am writing on the premise that you do at least see the difference between the B’nai Torah (anti-chassidic charedim) and the chassidim, which it seems you do.
Now — as to the “real chassidim,” well, as an incorrible Litvak, I can’t tell you who they are, though I can tell you they should all probably give it up! (No offense, Mobius and Y-Love!)
But even if I can’t tell you who the “real” chassidim are, I do feel comfortable saying that one sect does not represent another sect.
So, for instance, when the Ger Rebbe (Ger is a major Chassidic sect) denounces all protest of any sort to the parade, clearly those committing violence do not represent Ger Chassidim, and we can expect that the Ger Chassidim will not be found among their ranks. So too, with say, the Sloanim Chassidim (a smaller but really interesting sect), who are well known for their tolerance of secular ideas (they scuttled yiddish in their schools in favor of modern Hebrew, a first among Chassidim.) and a preference for meditation, we can be pretty darn sure they aren’t rioting in the streets with those they are well known to look down upon as radical and unsophisticated.
My point, again, is not to claim that one group is more the “Real” chassidim than another. But what is clear by the language used as well as the area in which the violence occured most intensely is to say that those groups committing the violence do not represent many of the sects of Chassidim. And that even those who do sanction protest, and many do–if they are sincerely condemning violence to their flock, as many sects are, even most, and are not involved with the violence, then those who are committing the violence do not represent them.
Which doesn’t mean they will do the right thing and turn in those committing violence. That might not happen, and that’s a big problem. But that’s a different, if related, discussion.
So I don’t know if the rioters are the “real chassidim,” or if those not rioting are the “real chassidim.” What I do know is that most of those who call themselves Chassidim are having no part in the violence. And I would like to track those involved in the violence to their exact sects, and identify them, and let it be known to Klal Yisroel who resorts to violence. Because blaming all those who call themselves “chassidim” for the violence of only a couple of sects (and it is coming from somewhere!) seems to me to be not only unfair to many, but insufficiently aggressive towards those who are committing violence.
DK,
Yes, I’d agree that you’re points are well-taken; indeed, I think we’re almost completely in agreement, but that we were, to a degree, speaking at cross-purposes.
First, though I quoted your comments to illustrate my belief about the hypocrisy in the standards applied to the conduct of the charedim, I do not believe that you were engaging in or excusing such hypocrisy yourself. Clearly you’re no Charedi apologist, and I should have made that clear.
When I ask who the real Chassidim are, I meant ideology, not identity. In other words, I wasn’t referring to distinctions among assorted sects based upon doctrine, geographical origin, or the like, but to the assertion by Y-Love that the reliance upon or justification of violence is a perversion of authentic Orthodox belief, no matter who embraces it. Fair enough; but that’s just not enough. It strikes me as absurdly inadequate to note what the ideology of violence isn’t – i.e., real Chassidism – without also pointing out what it is, and what the hell we do about it.
You note the efforts of Rabbis Elyashiv and Ovadia Yosef to negotiate a compromise in order to avoid violence. That, too, is fair. Though I’d almost certainly find their views about homosexuality to be repellent, they are clearly entitled credit for actively trying to avoid the violent imposition of those views on others.
Alas, it’s my view that such gestures, though commendable, aren’t enough, and this is the main area where I disagree with your comments. You said,
[This] doesn’t mean they will do the right thing and turn in those committing violence. That might not happen, and that’s a big problem. But that’s a different, if related, discussion.
Frankly, this strikes me as being part of precisely the same discussion. After all, we’re talking about the coordinated activities of what is a pretty damn cohesive community, notwithstanding certain real differences, such as those referenced above. Accordingly, it’s hardly sufficient for the community’s leaders to say, “Sorry, but all we know is the rioters aren’t followers of our Rebbe or our doctrine. Sure wish we could be of more help.â€
David Smith,
It depends which Charedi leaders. If this is occuring even in predominantly B’nai Torah enclaves, your point stands, even if the instigators are Chassidim. But if this is occuring only in Chassidic neighborhoods, it is the sole failure of Chassidic leaders not stopping the violence, as the community simply doesn’t answer to R. Ovadia Yosef or R. Elyashiv, or any of the B’nai Torah leaders.
mobius: “lo tin’af” you shall not commit adultry, shemot 20: 13.
“lo takhmod” (“thou shalt not covet”) of verse 14, refers to jealousy. you actually intimidate me with your super self-confidance but never bother to check up the source.
but here i should admit, that rashi points out that adultry in this verse only refers to another mans wife. never the less, you can check up Va’yikra 18: 22-30. this may give you something to ponder.
never mind. here are the actual verses. this is important for all of you free thinking progressive liberals.
22. You shall not lie down with a male, as with a woman: this is an abomination.
23. And with no animal shall you cohabit, to become defiled by it. And a woman shall not stand in front of an animal to cohabit with it; this is depravity. 24. You shall not defile yourselves by any of these things, for the nations, whom I am sending away from before you, have defiled themselves with all these things. 25. And the land became defiled, and I visited its sin upon it, and the land vomited out its inhabitants. 26. But as for you, you shall observe My statutes and My ordinances, and you shall not do like any of these abominations neither the native, nor the stranger who sojourns among you. 27. For the people of the land who preceded you, did all of these abominations, and the land became defiled.
28. And let the land not vomit you out for having defiled it, as it vomited out the nation that preceded you.
29. For anyone who commits any of these abominations, the persons doing so shall be cut off from the midst of their people.
30. And you shall observe My charge, not to commit any of the abominable practices that were done before you, and you shall not become defiled by them. I am the Lord your God.
DK,
Of course, I have no reason at all to doubt your description of the internal dynamics of the communities at issue. I will say, though, that perhaps the salient issue is one of perception, as much as it is the actions of these particular leaders and their respective followers. By perception, I’m talking about the issue that comes up in a number of conversations I’ve had with TM and others at Jewlicious. To wit, when it comes to various expressions of extremist ideology among the ultra-Orthodox, the constant refrain is that those embracing such views represent a miniscule portion of the communities in question, just as Y-Love stated here:
This talk of “the charedim†as this monolithic group really has to stop.
Perhaps the extremsits are, indeed, no more than a tiny frange, but that claim seems rather implausible in light of the virtually complete absence of any publicly expressed dissenting voices from community members. Forget about “turning in” those among thier neighbors and customers and Yeshivot students responsible for acts of violence and incitement, but can you really point to any leaders within the ultra-Orthodox that have — beyond generic condemnations of violence — publically denounced attacks on “immodest” women and homosexuals as desecrations of Torah; as expressions of sordid bigotry; as intolerable violations of assorted halachik provisions? Any demands for unqualified allegience to the rule of law and democracy in Israel?
I can’t even claim that such public condemnations of fanaticism are few and far between.
Instead, the public responses from community members seem to range from enthusiastic approval of such conduct, to defensive pleas for greater understanding of those “driven” to violence by frustration and excessive piety. To put it mildly, such consistency hardly reinforces the assertions of ideological diversity among the ultra-Orthodox.
Yes, and I’m certainly no scholar, but I find it absolutely fascinating how the main excuse for the fanatical denunciation of Conservative Judaism as deviants, heretics, Jews for Jesus, blah, blah, blah blah blah, is its rejection of the fixed, divine origin of the Oral Law. Specifically, when liberal Jews cite Scripture in support of their beliefs regarding the obligations of social justice, or when atheists point to the barbaric savagery of assorted punishments prescribed in Leviticus, we’re invariably and condescendingly informed that we lack the capacity to interpret Torah for ourselves, and that such specific prescriptions have been transcended by the Talmud. When it comes to supporting their own pet bigotries, however, suddenly it’s Torah Jeopardy time. Apparently, they’ve never come across anything in the Torah or Talmud mentioning hypocrisy
oy, david smith, oy vay vay david smith. why the negativaty? all i did was quote a few verses and didnt interpret them at all. you can interpret them however you wish. i just put them up.
but as jews, we have a strict moral code first given on mount sinai and than broken down in detail by our rabbis (whom we’re obligated to obey according to the written law, from the verse “lo tasuru min ha’derech…..”do not stray from the path….wich they (the rabbis) command you).
if you dont want to listen to them, thats fine, but why get so upset when they protest a parade that symbolizes the very reason the jews were spit out of their land? (like in the verses mentioned above).
interpret ’till you’re blue in the face, the rabbis set the path, not you and me.
and if this country is a democracy, than just as the paraders are allowed to parade in this country, so are the opposition allowed to protest.
and in the states (not mecca) this parade can be categorized as defiling a holy sanctuary even though its a public domain. not allowed. although i would have to check that up.
my point is; this isnt 5th ave., its jerusalem. dont get so upset that the parade folded, what did you expect?
anyhow you have to lighten up.
orthodox jews arn’t as bad as you’d like them to be. shalom
David Smith,
No doubt that many of the Charedim have a negative view of secular living, and their large general base empowers and enables radicals, and will probably grow, since they aren’t willing to clamp down on them.
In light of the fact that David Smith is foaming with anti-Charedi prejudice, I feel some statements should be made:
a) When I referred to “real Chassidim”, I was referring to Chassidim as per the definition of “Chassid” from Sefer Chassidim by R’ Yehudah ha’Chassid, the main post-Chaza”l, pre-Ba’al Shem Tov definition of “what is a Chassid” that is extant. If you know of another post-Chaza”l definition of “Chassid”, please let me know.
b) As I noted on thisisbabylon.net, R’ Weiss of Bada”tz had to personally take himself to Ge’ulah to see to it that no further protests would be made. (For those familiar with the status of rabbis in the Charedishe velt, this alone is astounding, that he had to PERSONALLY go Kikar Shabbos to protest.) People didn’t listen to his words (evidently, b/c he said not to be violent) and he refused to just let the violence go on, so he wanted to “put a stop to it.”
I can’t imagine, beyond this, what you would “want to see”. A stinging condemnation in the secular Israeli media — the same media most Charedim emphatically do not patronize? A reconciliation vigil? What crime of omission are you decrying?
And, “radicals” and “violent radicals” are two different things. One is potentially not a rasha, the other is most likely violating chapter after chapter of the same Shulchan Aruch that Bada”tz said to uphold.
And yes I am claiming that these are bad seeds — although I would wager, not so “random”. Fringe elements arising against Torah leadership have plagued religious Jews since time immemorial. How could one blame the Torah leadership for the actions people doing specifically what they were told not to do?
In light of the fact that David Smith is foaming with anti-Charedi prejudice
I think, Y-Love, you’ll find that such accusations have rather lost their sting with constant repitition. Such whining aside, a couple of points of my own:
As to the issue of what was meant by “real Chassidim” — Oh, ok. I guess I was mistaken about your intent, but I hardly see anything perjorative in that error. Frankly, I’m still not clear on why it makes any difference whatever what sect the rioters are from, or whether or not they’re “real” Chassidim, or . . .what. . . contrived Chassidim? Whatever.
The fact that R’ Weiss of Badaâ€tz went to Ge’ulah? Ok, very nice. But am I really supposed to be “astounded?” I see nothing wrong with giving him credit for his gesture, but it’s hardly reasonable or realistic to expect the rest of us to view him with the reverence and deference of his own followers.
As to the ostensible sufficiency of such actions on the part of Charedi leadership, well, I guess that is precisely the problem. You’re actually asserting that showing up in the midst of a rioting mob whipped into a frenzy by weeks of incitement is the most we can expect of the community’s leaders? “Whoops, sorry; we gave it our best shot.” Not a single other sin of ommision comes to mind, huh? Well, here’re a couple of ideas. How about some public condemnation of the relentless propaganda in the weeks and months before the riots? How about some intervention in the community’s educational institutions, to inculcate the notion that, yes, homosexuality is morally wrong, but that it pales in comparison to violence and bigotry, much less to the bloodthirsty lawlessness witnessed on the streets in recent days? Oh, and here’s a radical one: How about if the Rabbi continuing his astounding behavior with, yes, a stinging condemnation in the secular Israeli media — the same media most Charedim emphatically do not patronize.” Trust me; word would spread rather quickly. And possibly with the salutary effect that the leadership actually menas what it says.
The reason I keep bringing up the prejudice thing is because I want you to see it as a prejudice just like any of the “major -isms”.
Obviously I wouldn’t expect everyone to view R’ Weiss from Bada”tz the same way a Charedi Jew in Yerushalayim would. But the point I was trying to bring out is that, to some degree, “what you would like to have seen happen” in fact was happening.
I will concede that the extraneous propaganda was tragically left largely unaddressed (even the actual bounty for killing someone got glossed over in the media and was ridiculed soundly in Meah Shearim as being the work of some external rabble-rouser and not indicative of an issue) but the rabbinical decrees contained the “don’t be violent” caveat.
That’s what Bada”tz does. They make decrees and decide on issues of Jewish Law. Already in 5766 they addressed the issur of Jew-on-Jew terrorism and codified that, so to come out and make a decree now would, from their point of view, be redundant and takeh insulting (“you mean the ppl STILL aren’t listening?”)
And about the educational intervention: the crying shame is that oftentimes they are intervening. And the fact that so many ppl just aren’t listening and are following these demagogues riling them up is just a wrist-slitting epic tragedy. For example — R’ Nosson Tzvi Finkel of the Mir gives a schmooze every week in his house for all Mir bochurim interested in attending. During the time preceding the rioting, attendance at the shiurim dropped — precisely during those shiurim where he addressed, quite negatively, the violence. (Perhaps they had to do more review or say Tehillim those nights.)
I think Bada”tz would probably like to take a rest from secular media for a bit. The epilogue to this story will most likely not be played out in view of the secular public, but rather around Shabbos tables and in pulpits.
Furthermore, exhibit B.
gay relationships in men is considered adultry (not so with women) and is punishable by death according to the Torah.
“The word tin’af used in the Ten Commandments is defined as adultery between a man and a married woman. No other immoral relationship is included in this prohibition.”
source