conservative jews to allow gay rabbbis and civil unions

puremagic

miller8966 wrote:

Which is why GWB is in office!

Yeah, and you're still waiting on that promised Constitutional law banning gay marriages

darkcrow

miller8966 wrote:

Most countries are probaly worse.

Just look at Canada and England.

how are we worse???

miller8966

darkcrow wrote:

how are we worse???

GWB: Tony i want you to jump.

Blair: how high mr. Bush

GWb: As high as i say.....

Uncle Leo

miller8966 wrote:

Which is why GWB is in office!

Really? Because he did not get a majority of the votes in 2000.

thankyougrandma

i think it's good news... definitly an evolution for them, although i don't know much about Jewish religion...

darkcrow

miller8966 wrote:

GWB: Tony i want you to jump.

Blair: how high mr. Bush

GWb: As high as i say.....

still havent said how we the british are worse. you have just stated how tony is a twat.

miller8966

darkcrow wrote:

still havent said how we the british are worse. you have just stated how tony is a twat.

Simon Cowell.

yosi1

I'll try and respond to several things:

miller8966 wrote:

Yes i know about the Mishna and basic concepts of judaism. But am not too familiar with all the sects.

Can you show me where in the Old Testament or jewish law it permits too civil unions between 2 men?

In the Hebrew Bible, it says nothing about civil union between men at all. The verse says, "A man shall not lie with another man the way he lieth with a woman, for it is an abomination". In my opinion, civil union and sex are very different things.

soulsinging wrote:

not to try and take a shot at you, and i mean no harm, but it seems a little messed up to me that someone would adhere to an immoral law solely becos it is tradition written thousands of years ago. i mean, do you still follow those old laws about slavery and prisoners and stoning unfaithful women? im not trying to insult you, im truly curious. if they can figure a way to get around that, how is this any different?

No offense taken. In fact, I think its a great and crucial question. The problem comes in, that I believe in Judaism and halacha and this legislation undermines Halacha. I think that there may be a way to come to this same conclusion while adhering to the law, but, because they did not pass this legislation in a halachic manner, it deligitimizes the Law Making body (in my opinion).

The question of morality is also complicated. You ask, and rightfully so, why someone who believes that this is immoral would still adhere to it. Well, the answer is, is that it is incredibly complicated what the verse in the Bible actually means, and what that means for gay men and women, and how to treat them while still adhering to halacha. For one to just say "fuck halacha cause I don't like this ruling" undermines all of Halacha, the entire system.

I personally do not know enough about this issue in Halacha to make a great argument for or against. But, if you'd like to browse, here is Rabbi Joel Roth's, one of the leaders of the Conservative movement, and often thought of as one of the more forwarding thinking, paper on Homosexuality in Judaism http://www.rabbinicalassembly.org/teshuvot/docs/19912000/roth_homosexual.pdf.

soulsinging wrote:

let's see... jewish leaders say they are going to allow gay unions. you tell them they're wrong and the bible prohibits it. clearly they know something you dont about how to interpret that book you tout so highly and read without understanding.

Not all Jewish leaders, just the majority of the law making body of the Conservative movement. This does not include the Orthodox movement (which DOES NOT only mean black hat, side locks... many people who you could not distinguish from secular Jews by looking at them, or just hanging out with them, consider themselves Orthodox).

If I haven't explained or said something clearly, please feel free to ask me more questions. Just don't attack (not that anyone has).

yosi1

thankyougrandma wrote:

i think it's good news... definitly an evolution for them, although i don't know much about Jewish religion...

Please don't call it an evolution without understanding the situation fully.

callen

miller8966 wrote:

I think this is terrible. The old testament strictly prohibits gay sex.

just tells you how outdated and wrong the Old Testament is. We have to evolve as a species..... (-;

darkcrow

miller8966 wrote:

Simon Cowell.

still doesnt explain how we are worse... just naming people doesnt do much.
what have we done... hmmm.. well we stopped the international trade in slavery, we allow civil partnerships, it is pretty much universal in our country that we recognise the rights of homosexuals, we are actually trying to do something about global warming rather than denying it, we have an national health service which helps everyone no matter how rich or poor you are, we have a living minimum wage................

thankyougrandma

yosi wrote:

Please don't call it an evolution without understanding the situation fully.

oooooo, ok master....

callen

soulsinging wrote:

i know. and why ive lost faith in the intelligence of america. we've proved twice now that the majority of americans are dumb.

they are coming around.....kinda slow..but they do eventually get it. Also fear not......there are lots of idiotic beliefs in this and other countries due to religion...but justice and truth are winning...we've made huge gains in our generation. This charade can last only so long. (-:

yosi1

thankyougrandma wrote:

oooooo, ok master....

Chill out. All I said was, don't come and make claims about something that needs "evolution", which is a deragatory thing to say, when you don't know about it.

thankyougrandma

yosi wrote:

Chill out. All I said was, don't come and make claims about something that needs "evolution", which is a deragatory thing to say, when you don't know about it.

huh!?! It's not deragatory.

Since i'm bad in english i'll quote webster:

Main Entry: evo·lu·tion
Pronunciation: "e-v&-'lü-sh&n, "E-v&-
Function: noun
Etymology: Latin evolution-, evolutio unrolling, from evolvere

1 : one of a set of prescribed movements

2 a : a process of change in a certain direction : UNFOLDING b : the action or an instance of forming and giving something off : EMISSION c (1) : a process of continuous change from a lower, simpler, or worse to a higher, more complex, or better state : GROWTH (2) : a process of gradual and relatively peaceful social, political, and economic advance d : something evolved
3 : the process of working out or developing

and it goes on and on... i wasn't saying it in a deragatory way, you're assuming stuffs...

yosi1

thankyougrandma wrote:

huh!?! It's not deragatory.

Since i'm bad in english i'll quote webster:

Main Entry: evo·lu·tion
Pronunciation: "e-v&-'lü-sh&n, "E-v&-
Function: noun
Etymology: Latin evolution-, evolutio unrolling, from evolvere

1 : one of a set of prescribed movements

2 a : a process of change in a certain direction : UNFOLDING b : the action or an instance of forming and giving something off : EMISSION c (1) : a process of continuous change from a lower, simpler, or worse to a higher, more complex, or better state : GROWTH (2) : a process of gradual and relatively peaceful social, political, and economic advance d : something evolved
3 : the process of working out or developing

and it goes on and on... i wasn't saying it in a deragatory way, you're assuming stuffs...

To say that it is an evolution means that it evolved from something worse to something better. That makes it deragatory. If that's not what you meant to say, you should have used a different word.

thankyougrandma

yosi wrote:

To say that it is an evolution means that it evolved from something worse to something better. That makes it deragatory. If that's not what you meant to say, you should have used a different word.

Wow, it doesn't mean it was bad, it could mean it wasn't adressed in the first places, but if you really want to debate about the meaning of words, then yes it's bad to have gays unequal to every other citizens (it's not exclusive to Jews, it's about almost every major religions), so in the end then yes, it's an evolution.

edit: example, It's an evolution for Canada to recognize gay weddings, it would be an evolution for the USA to recognize gay wedding.

yosi1

thankyougrandma wrote:

Wow, it doesn't mean it was bad, it could mean it wasn't adressed in the first places, but if you really want to debate about the meaning of words, then yes it's bad to have gays unequal to every other citizens (it's not exclusive to Jews, it's about almost every major religions), so in the end then yes, it's an evolution.

edit: example, It's an evolution for Canada to recognize gay weddings, it would be an evolution for the USA to recognize gay wedding.

I think that gay weddings should be recognized, but necessarily as a religious ritual. I don't consider anyone to be a citizen of a religion. In this context, I don't know if it's better.

Read my earlier posts cause I don't feel like retyping everything.

thankyougrandma

yosi wrote:

I think that gay weddings should be recognized, but necessarily as a religious ritual. I don't consider anyone to be a citizen of a religion. In this context, I don't know if it's better.

Read my earlier posts cause I don't feel like retyping everything.

Ok but also to make myself clear, i wasn't saying it in a deragotory way, it was not on my mind to say that Jewish religion is bad and need to evolve, just that the current recognition, is in my opinion an evolution, for gays and lesbians and human rights in general.

miller8966

callen wrote:

just tells you how outdated and wrong the Old Testament is. We have to evolve as a species..... (-;

There is nothing wrong about the old testament. It is a work of beauty.