- This topic has 57 replies, 20 voices, and was last updated 15 years, 6 months ago by .
-
Posts
-
I was hoping we could have a discussion about the ramifications of Toeiva and marriage.
I want to start out by saying that I am 100% against Toeiva and making it legitimate. I realize its 100% assur. BUT! I wonder if its fair to ask for freedom as a minority but not give it to other minorities.
What would happen if people voted on whether or not Jews could marry? In the not so recent past, interracial marriage (something 100% halachically acceptable) was not allowed. Should all restrictions to marriage be removed? Is there a reason the US government even needs to have marriage? Should marriage be restricted to a religious term? Is there a need for the government to regulate marriage?
To the mods: Can we please discuss this? I’m interested in how others view asking for rights for minorities but denying other minorities the same rights. You are allowing comments on the home page articles, so I thought this might be ok.
Gedolei Yisroel ztv’l and shlitta have made it loud and clear, on the public record, that we in klal yisroel MUST vigorously oppose this abomination even as it pertains to state recognition of non-jewish activity. The slippery slope of immoral recognition has no end.
If anyone supports this lunacy is any shape matter or form, they must at the same time publicly support polygamous marriage (which is far less immoral than toeiva), marriage between a man and a monkey, etc. There is no legitimacy for supporting one abomination over another.
SJS, I think this is a very important discussion. I wish I had time to really write now, bli neder I will later but the kids are home, etc. Many (political) conservatives are not against rights and civil unions, etc., but are against redefining marriage. And are very, very peeved that people who are opposed to redefining marriage are considered bigots and as prejudiced as racists. Hopefully someone will write on this meanwhile, cogently and reasonably going into why being against redefining marriage is not bigotry. We need to have a good vocabulary, for our kids who will be growing in the changing-at-a-dizzying-pace culture, and for us grownups as well.
tzippi: True conservatives oppose rights and “civil unions” for these immoral people. We as Yidden must doubly so oppose any such recognition, whatever the feel-good term used, be it rights, “civil union”, etc.
i dont understand what we are debating or discussing here
WHO’S WORLD IS THIS ???…………….
WHO’S WORLD IS THIS ???
i wish i could scream this question so loud it would shatter all the computer screens.
If anyone supports this lunacy is any shape matter or form, they must at the same time publicly support polygamous marriage (which is far less immoral than toeiva), marriage between a man and a monkey, etc.
Wow! Fight a lot of strawmen?
If you want to argue on the issue, that’s all fine and well, but how about sticking to the pertinent facts (as you did in the first paragraph)?
The Wolf
(And just to clarify before someone accuses me of something — nothing in my previous post should be taken as an argument for or against same-sex marriage. I was merely pointing out the overly excessive strawman use.)
The Wolf
if its fair to ask for freedom as a minority but not give it to other minorities.
This does not just effect a minority! It’s a decision which has far reaching ramifications!
Our culture is zooming down the slide further and further away from morality. By showing everyone that such an option, really can be a possible option for life, there is not telling how much further we can fall.
This is a complete Toeivoh and in an ideal Jewish state anyone who does it must get a couple of decades in the big concrete building with no windows (you guess what I mean) to consider his actions and how to rectify them!
PS: ‘interreacial marriage’ this is marriage between Jew and goy?
Thanks, David
wolfishmusings: If someone supports toeiva (either as “marriage” or as “civil union”), any logic they attempt to muster for it, means they must support polygamy to maintain intellectual honesty.
wolfishmusings: If someone supports toeiva (either as “marriage” or as “civil union”), any logic they attempt to muster for it, means they must support polygamy to maintain intellectual honesty.
Why?
Why can’t marriage be looked at as a two-person partnership?
One can make a good case for saying that marriage should involve two (and only two) people. Laws that currently exist defining property rights, inheritance laws, the ability to make medical and life decisions, the structure of insurance policies, etc. all exist on the basis of marriage being a two person partnership. All that gets “blown up” with plural marriages but not by same-sex marriages.
(Again, I’m not arguing for or against same-sex marriage in this post. Just pointing out the error of your reasoning.)
The Wolf
David S- I think by interracial she means between a white person and a black person. There would be no issur for a white Jew to marry a black Jew, so long as both are Jewish al pi halacha.
SJS- it is important to protest because when we allow these people to marry, we are, in effect, saying that those kinds of relationships are normal and acceptable. I know many frum people who struggle with a very strong yetzer hara to commit toeiva actions,they know it is wrong and they are always trying not to succumb (sometimes they do succumb, but they try to do tshuva for it and do what they can not to do it again) and such people deserve our consideration and support and any help we can offer in their fight against the yetzer; but the people pushing for marriage are not interested, they want our society to accept their lifestyle as normal, which is something no God-fearing individual can do.
This extends beyond marriage, and into “civil unions” too. What is marriage in the USA anyway, other than a piece of paper stating that you are married? Civil unions and domestic partnerships are basically marriage without the name. A rose by any other name…
Lastly, about minorities: the term minority, as I understand it, deals with religion and/or ethnicity. Blacks, Asians, and Hispanics are minorities; Jews, Muslims, and Hindus are minorities. These groups deserve certain basic rights- the right to practice their religion (so long as they’re not killing people of other religions…), the right not to be discriminated against at work, or in public places, etc. Practicing a deviant lifestyle does not make you a “minority” who needs protection! A white gay male, so long as he doesn’t flaunt it, or try to force his way on everyone, will probably have no problem finding a job, will likely not get beaten up in the street, and will probably not be excluded from parks or country clubs. A black gay male may need to rely on laws to protect him from discrimination at work or other places not because he’s gay but because he’s black; he is the minority because of his ethnicity, not his lifestyle. So, I don’t feel we are denying a “minority” anything in this case. Hope this helps.
wolfishmusings: We can reverse everything you said:
Why?
Why can’t marriage be looked at as a man-woman partnership?
One can make a good case for saying that marriage should involve a man and woman (and only such). Laws that currently exist defining property rights, inheritance laws, the ability to make medical and life decisions, the structure of insurance policies, etc. all exist on the basis of marriage being a man and woman.
(Again, I’m just pointing out the error of your reasoning.)
______________
One key point of yours deserves it own comment:
You wrote: “All that gets “blown up” with plural marriages but not by same-sex marriages.”
Incorrect. All of those points you mentioned CAN work within the framework of plural marriage. You that argument of yours doesn’t hold water.
Just curious about this: Reb Moshe said that the only hanaah of toevah is the fact that it is asur (i.e., the fun of breaking the rules). This is from a response to someone who asked how to do tshuvah for it. It seems that he feels that it has nothing to do with the biological make up of an individual. How does that fit with the science and the many people who claim that they wish they could be attracted to the opposite gender, but never were and cannot?
PashutehYid: Quite simple; Reb Moshe, and our Rabbonim are correct, and the (politicized) science on this is wrong:
[Devarim 32:16]
Igros Moshe (E.H. 4:113): Concerning the present matter [where the wife has discovered that her husband has had homosexual relations]
The Torah uses the word “toeva” to describe the act of homosexuality. It is the strongest word of condemnation the Torah has. The fact is that even many atheists find it completely repulsive. The thought is nauseating for normal people. It’s biologically wrong.I know people who hated the chillul shabbos protests by the chareidim, calling them divisive, but were fuming that the chareidim didn’t make a bigger protest about the toeva parade. There is a midrash that says that Mitzrayim’s fate was sealed when they legally recognized homosexual marriages. I will IY”H hunt it down. I did find a bereishis Rabbah dealing with the dor hamabul that they married animals and males. The Torah is quite explicit in Parshas Veyeira that the Anshei Sdom were wicked, and part of that wickedness is their desire to “know” the guests. This was also before Mattan Torah, and was clearly understood by all to be wrong.
Bottom line- there is no way that a frum Jew can condone toeva marriages. It is no more of a right than homicide.
This is not to condemn those who have thoughts, just as thoughts of homicide without action are not a serious crime.
??”? (????? ??:??): ??? ??? ???? – ???? ????. ??? ??? ???? ??? ??????, ???? ????? ????? ????.
Igros Moshe (E.H. 4:113): Concerning the present matter [where the wife has discovered that her husband has had homosexual relations]
One of the big problems with toeiva, is that you are broadcasting a ‘private’ matter and making it perfectly acceptable to be a ‘public’ matter. If chas v’shalom this type of marriage is acceptable, you will have no recourse – you will have to hire, live next to, rent to, watch signs of the relationship in public etc. etc. of such a couple. Meaning your kids will have to be aware of this, discussions will have to be formulated, and what was once private has become everybody’s conversation. Kedushas Am Yisroel can’t tolerate such a law.
I also agree with a previous commenter that once it is permissible, it will be easier to become a ‘viable’ option. I hate to compare it to ‘divorce’ – but i just mean it as an example, that, when it was so not an option, people stayed together, whereas when it is more rampant it becomes much easier to just say, I’m outta here, instead of working things out.
May Hashem help us, listen to our desperate cries to be redeemed so that we can once more be his ‘am kadosh’ and the Shechina can rest between us.
Have Kavana when you daven – it is the best tool we have.
Ya’ll missed the boat, it has already sailed with the outlawing of sodomy laws regarding the act itself. It is now on the books of law in the USA that you are allowed to do whatever you want! You will see it on the street either way, just like you see people driving on shabbos.
I personally compare it to amalgamation/miscegenation, which used to be on the books as a hanging offense but is now allowed. To many people in the USA, that is worse than Toeiva marriage! (agree with OP)
At this point, I believe the best we can hope for is to get the government out of marriage completely, and only create “civil unions”. Otherwise, everything will end up being allowed, due to “anti-discrimination”.
As per the recent ruling of the State Supreme Ct. of CA, as long as no actual rights are taken away, the removal of a specific word usage as a definition is permitted. However, many states have allowed it and will continue to do so. Either we move to a Midbar or learn to live with it.
gavraatwork: The views you espoused in your comment are too tolerant and too accepting of toeiva. A yid needs to ingrain within himself a total intolerance for toeiva the same way you should be intolerant of homicide, regardless if the non-jewish state you live in may be accommodating towards homicide.
chaverim:
We see/hear about homicide every day, and ignoring it will not make it go away either, just like it will not make women not dressed correctly go away. Either you can stick your head in the sand or do something about it that will not make Toeiva marriage legal. Civil unions do not presume the two people involved are doing anything, its just a business partnership.
SJSinNYC: As I pointed out, civil unions do not take away any rights (as per CA Supreme Ct.), so that would not be a problem. Its similar to saying no Yarmulkas allowed, but anyone can wear a beanie on their head.
The Greek and Roman societies Chazal lived in were very tolerant of homosexuality, pedophilia, bestiality, infanticide, etc. I don’t see Chazal wavering in their repudiation of said offenses merely because they were forced to live with it. Furthermore, as long as we can appose it, we oppose it, no matter how long the odds appear. Afilu cherev chada munachas…
Jothar:
Of course we say its assur, horrible, killing society, etc. It won’t do any practical good though, except to tell our children what is right. This is even when we can no longer oppose it (whatever that means). The gedolim will decide what the best tactics are to prevent Toeiva marriage, I’m just throwing out MHO (which is nothing, but was asked for).
gavra, wrong. We can’t give any legitimacy to homosexual relationships, whether it’s civil unions or marriage. Homosexual relations are forbidden, and that’s that. End of story. Saying that it’s ok to be gay is wrong, and allowing them to have an officially recognized relationship is worse.
We need to send a clear message that’s it’s not ok to be gay.
Feif UN,
Despite what you may think, they cannot change who they are. So, what do you do with them? Any ideas?
Feif Un:
Civil Unions have nothing to do with an action done, its a legal business dealing. I imagine many unrelated people will (and do) use it to get health insurance and/or get around inheritance taxes. The problem is saying the act is OK (as you point out), and that is done by allowing them to “marry” C”V.
The idea is similar to an “Adult Interdependent Relationship”, which allows any two adults to state they depend on each other (such as a parent & child), thereby creating a single emotional & economic unit. This relationship (as far as the state is concerned) is completely platonic and will include any example of the case (e.g. a single child taking care of a single parent at their home).
“Despite what you may think, they cannot change who they are.”
Despite what you may think, they can change who they are.
gavra-at-work:
Who are you kidding? “Civil unions” were designed for these abominable people practicing toeiva as an equivalent to marriage. Your supporting this abomination is an act against G-d.
From Wikipedia:
A civil union is a legally recognized union similar to marriage. Beginning with Denmark in 1989, civil unions under one name or another have been established by law in many developed countries in order to provide same-sex couples with rights, benefits, and responsibilities similar (in some countries, identical) to opposite-sex civil marriage.
gavra, wrong. We can’t give any legitimacy to homosexual relationships, whether it’s civil unions or marriage. Homosexual relations are forbidden, and that’s that.
An interesting side point: If any recognition of the legitimacy of same-sex unions is wrong because they are forbidden (even for non-Jews), then I find it very odd that the gedolim have chosen to actively align themselves with the Catholic Church in this fight. Doing so gives the Catholic Church a sense of legitimacy* which is just as forbidden.
The Wolf
* Working with them does grant them legitimacy. The gedolim have long forbidden Orthodox Jewish organizations from partnering with Conservative/Reform Jewish organizations in otherwise-worth endeavors because doing so would lend legitimacy to them.
lesschumras,
1. It is not entirely clear that they can’t change their netiyos. Organizations like JONAH help such people.Goyishe versions of what is known as reparative therapy exist too. Apparently they are affective.
2. Would you also say that someone with pedophilic urges can’t change who he is and just accept it, or would you tell him to go for therapy and get his act together? For these urges, everyone agrees that they have no right to “accept” it, and they should go for therapy. So the only difference is degree.
3. There is nothing more natural than a male and female. Yet, the Torah fully expects men to control themselves and not commit adultery. Why should this be any different? We have the ability to control our behaviors.
4. The melachos of Shabbos are perfectly normal behaviors for people to engage in. Yet, the Torah tells you that doing these melachos results in the punishment of death.
In sum,
1. No such thing as “can’t” change”.
2. No such thing as “can’t control myself”.
Hashem created various yetzer haras, and He created the Torah as a cure.
ames, something like this is worth fighting for, regardless of how futile it seems. We need to oppose it forever.
Chaverim,
I’d have to do the research concerning plural marriage. However, I don’t have the time nor the patience to do it now, so I’ll grant you the point arguendo.
Nonetheless, my point about you fighting strawmen still exists. One does not have to accept bestiality in addition to accept same-sex marriage to remain intellectually honest.
The Wolf
“We don’t try to stop goying from doing any of the other sins that they commit.”
Don’t we? If the US was close to passing legislation permitting murder, or kidnapping, wouldn’t we protest? I guess that avodah zara is a lost cause in the face of “freedom of religion”, but if it were a new thing you bet we’d be decrying it. And indeed we were back in the hippie days, when so many of our brethren were nebach lost to Krishn (outright avodah zara).
What sins do we not stop goyim from doing? Eating treif is not an issur for goyim.
chaverim:
Yes, but as long as its not specificly and only for that purpose, we are not legitimizing the relationship (AKA a “Teliya”).
No, we’re supposed to kill them when they commit it. But our laws are not dominant so we can’t enforce what they should be doing. We are able to voice our protest. We are not supposed to be tolerant. We should be doing what we know is right, to the limit that we are held to in galus.
ames, there is a difference between sins that don’t destroy a society and sins that do. Same-gender marriage is one of the latter. A Jew must protest, if only to avoid being influenced by society.
Unfortunately this sort of thing occurs among Yidden In Eretz Hakodesh too R”L in a form of a parade. It is definitely right to go and protest
-then I find it very odd that the gedolim have chosen to actively align themselves with the Catholic Church in this fight. Doing so gives the Catholic Church a sense of legitimacy* which is just as forbidden.-
Wolf, not gedolim, just Lou Levin.
Joseph, my apologies — you’re right, but my point remains.
You’re correct that the Gedolim did not get involved with the Catholics on this item. My memory was faulty.
They are, however, in league with the Catholics on the Markey bill. The point still stands.
The Wolf
“If we ignore this it will die down and it will do more for the sanctity of marriage than protesting. By law it is not considered indecent for men and women to be topless in NY. The law changed with little fanfare and zero protests. How many women have you seen taking advantage of this law? How many more would if there were major protests attempting to change the law?”
I would love to believe that you are correct, but I highly doubt it. If you think Gay people are going to “gay” avek, you are under a delusion. The gay lobby gets stronger all the time, and they are not going to lie down and be ignored. I am really disturbed by the idea that they may actually succeed in getting their relationships legally called a marriage, because it diminishes the kedusha of marriage when it is aligned with it.
I would prefer to see that people who are in same gender relationships of long duration are able to have certain rights under the law (medical care proxies for their companions, health insurance, and the like). I don’t want this to be equated with marriage, called marriage, or be considered as marriage. I hate the sin, but not the sinner. BTW, I did not hear about the topless law, but I guarantee you they cannot do that just ANYWHERE they please. It is still called indecent exposure in most places. Obviously there are specific areas that this is permitted, but not on the street.
Regarding a comment Jothar expressed:”Would you also say that someone with pedophilic urges can’t change who he is and just accept it, or would you tell him to go for therapy and get his act together?”
Jothar, in this one specific instance, it has been demonstrated over and over again that a pedophile simply cannot just “get his act together,” through therapy or anything else. There is only one place for a pedophile and that is not in normal society with the rest of us. Child molestation is a particularly heinous and despicable crime, because children are the most helpless of all victims, and often the person victimizing them is a loved one, or someone to whom they look up. I would never, never NEVER allow my child to be alone anywhere with someone whom I knew to have molested children, even if he were supposedly “cured.” It is not just the yetzer hara, it is the yetzer/nature of that particular person. We all have yitzrei hara in us. We do not all become pedophiles. Some of us eat treife, some are mechallelei Shabbos, some do not keep Taharas Hamishpacha, some don’t want to get up in time for morning minyan. THOSE are all potentially changeable. It is highly unlikely that a pedophile will ever change his nature. It might temporarily appear to be held at bay – for a while – but make no mistake, it is a sickness, and sometimes the only cure for that sickness is to contain it, quarantine it permanently, or something potentially far more drastic. It is no coincidence that even the most hardened, brutal, violent criminals in Riker’s Island or the like, despise and hold the pedophile as beneath even their contempt.
oomis – you are right on. Except for that last paragraph. I will differ from you in that I believe anyone can change – and saying otherwise is a cop-out.
SJS – By a non-Jew 2 witnesses and warning is not a prerequisite. I don’t know how a verdict is issued but the requirements are not as difficult.
As far as your commentary on religion goes:
A) Christianity is avodah zara. They believe a man is a deity (one of three). Most people don’t know this (if they did missionaries would have a much harder time – messiah is easier to swallow than god)
B) I wasn’t referring to the major religions but there are plenty of avodah zara cults/religions around. I mentioned one in my post earlier. All are legitimate in this country.
C) Atheism is not a religious status but a state of not thinking logically/substituting wishes for beliefs. Agnosticism is possible in a rational being. That is not avoda zara.
On the topic of avoda zara, there certainly is a widely accepted one in the US and that is the Dollar. Sadly, even practicing Jews have been known to worship this deity.
I understand your complaint in this issue and I can appreciate your analogy to organ donation. However, I believe that if we had to be consistent we would be required to choose to give up our rights in order to prevent legitimizing the abomination.
BS”D
Ah, but according to Torah there is no such thing as a “gay” person; there is a person who was caught performing a certain act in front of 2 edim (very hard I would say) and is therefore subject to the death penalty. There is also no such thing as a “thief” – there is someone who is caught stealing and therefore must make restitution.
It is only in decadent secular society that one is defined by the direction which one’s yetzer horo takes.
And “gays” are not a traditional minority – they are a group that chooses to define itself by their particular inclination. They are no more deserving of any special rights than self-defined “thieves” are.
However, at the end of the day marriage in the US secular system is worth so little that this is really one for the lawyers to make a mint on as if toeva marriage goes through they will now be able to handle divorces among those who define themselves as “gay”. It is also a problem for the insurance companies and for inheritance tax law.
Our problem occurs only if the law forces us to rent or sell homes in our communities to those who openly proclaim themselves as defined by that toeva.
Dr. Sorotzkin has written some papers on the topic, which may be enlightening for some. Google his site which is under his name.
wolfishmusings: Now that you admit that proponents of the homosexual lobby must support polygamy to be intellectually honest, the same point demands that these demagogues who support toeiva also support adultery. If one abomination (toeiva) is acceptable, then another (adultery) is no less.
BTW In NO CASE have the Gedolim or the organizations that follow their directives (i.e. the Agudah) been “in league” with the Catholic Church. Perhaps their positions coincided on some issues, but they certainly did NOT work hand in hand together on legislative or other matters. The Agudah (for example) worked on its own, even when the Catholics position was similar to theirs.
I agree with squeak that ANYONE can change, including pedophiles and homosexuals.
BS”D
As for this existing in the animal kingdom – we as human beings are supposed to rise above our animal desires – all humans are created betzelem elokim.
I had multiple pets at one time – and what I saw mirrored the worst in human behavior – fighting, theft, incest, even infanticide. If humans did what they did, they’d land Madoff size sentences or the death penalty pretty fast.
Oops, I meant to say exactly what you just said, ames. We learn that from the passuk “Ki Hishchis Kol Bassar es Darko al Ha’aretz” in Parshas Noach. Thanks for reminding me. The point is that it exists in the animal kingdom because mankind has become perverted.
wolfishmusings: Now that you admit that proponents of the toeiva lobby must support polygamy to be intellectually honest, the same point demands that these demagogues who support toeiva also support adultery. If one abomination (toeiva) is acceptable, then another (adultery) is no less.
BTW In NO CASE have the Gedolim or the organizations that follow their directives (i.e. the Agudah) been “in league” with the Catholic Church. Perhaps their positions coincided on some issues, but they certainly did NOT work hand in hand together on legislative or other matters. The Agudah (for example) worked on its own, even when the Catholics position was similar to theirs.
I agree with squeak that ANYONE can change, including practitioners of toeiva and pedophiles.
GAW: I looked into it, and civil union in the US aside from being invented to give these abominable people a marriage equivalent, the laws in all the states that have it (except one) specifically limit it to same sex couples. So it is specifically designed for these deviants.
Instead of supporting this outrage you should support reinstatement of the sodomy laws and even institution of the death penalty for these sodomites. (Just as our Torah describes and the Reb Moshe writes in the Igros Moshe [O.H. 4:115] “It is one of the most debased sins and it even is prohibited for non?Jews.”)
- The topic ‘Toeiva’ is closed to new replies.