Egalitarian Rights Versus Religious Rights

Israel is both a democracy of which egalitarianism is a prime tenet… and a Jewish state where Halacha should determine army protocol. As I’ve indicated many times. Judaism without Halacha is like a car without an engine. It might look like a car. But it isn’t.

These values have clashed in one of Israel’s most highly valued institutions, the IDF (Israeli Defense Forces). 

There is not a doubt in my mind that God’s protection of the Jewish people in Israel is being done through the dedicated hard work and sacrifice of the Israeli  army. However, the army is not just Israel’s means of defending itself from its enemies. While that is obviously its main function by far, it is not its only function. The army must also have integrity and honesty in how it presents itself to the world, and to God. It cannot therefore abide illegality or immorality by its soldiers. A Jewish solider must act in ways that will give glory to God and glory to His people.

Giving glory to God means following Halacha. Giving glory to His people is to behave in a manner that will cause the rest of the world to see us as an example for them to follow. In other words to be a light unto the nations

In our world today, these values often clash. That is evident in the constant battle between egalitarianism and religion. One that has caused a lot of conflict between the left wing of Orthodoxy and the right wing. 

The modern world places the highest value on egalitarian ideals. They are considered supreme -  to be honored at the expense of any other value. Judaism does not see it that way. Egalitarianism is a value as long as it does not contradict Halacha. So that in the work place for example, women should be given the same opportunities as men - as well as commensurate compensation for equal work.  

Judaism  also places a high value on Tznius (modesty). The question is , how is modesty defined in Judaism.

As most people know, (or should know) modesty is as much a function of our behavior as it is about how we dress. As the prophet Micah tells us (6:8): ‘Tzne Haleches...’ Walk modesty with God. In our day when promiscuity itself has become a glorified value (as so often depicted in the entertainment industry) the religious focus on Tznius has been in trying to avoid it. 

As such there have been many books written on the subject that have taken a hard line. (Which is OK as long as it is made clear that there are other legitimate views about modesty that are not as stringent as those books make them out to be.) Modesty also entails the idea of men not gazing at women with lascivious thoughts. Something that is clearly forbidden to do. And to avoid situations that are conducive to that. (Something that would in my view – reduce incidences of sexual abuse if adhered to. But I digress.) 

It is against this backdrop that a recent dust up occurred in the IDF. From the Times of Israel: 

That instructor was obviously insulted by seeing recruits turning their back when all she was trying to do was teach them their jobs.  On the other hand, these religious soldiers were just following their consciences - which are driven by religious values.

The army sided with the instructor and has pledged to be loyal to the egalitarian ideal. And ideal that was recently acted upon in a recent promotion of a woman to high rank and responsibility. That was followed by declaring it to the world with pride. The last thing the army wants is for the world to see a bunch of ‘religious fanatics’ undermining that strategy.

What was the right thing to do here? Honestly I’m not sure since I don’t know whether there really are any modesty issues that preclude a woman demonstrating to men - how to use a parachute. 

On the one hand I don’t see how that could possibly be immodest. Especially in that context. On the other hand I wasn’t there and I can’t imagine a group of dedicated religious soldiers turning their back to a female instructor without believing that - what she was about to do violated their religious values.

My thought is that common sense should prevail in situations where egalitarian values clash with religious ones.  In cases of doubt (like this incident) the IDF should make sure that a male instructor be the one demonstrating this technique to religious soldiers. 

Being egalitarian does not mean closing your eyes. There are plenty of soldiers that don’t have a problem at all with female instructors.  It is in those instances that the IDF can close their eyes and send a man or a woman to do the job. 

Why do something that will only generate controversy? Even if you don’t agree with the religious perceptive of those religious soldiers, what is lost by sending  a male instructor to teach these men? Is it impossible to do? I doubt it. I doubt that there are no male instructors available to teach parachuting technique.

Besides - the army now has Charedi units that actually honor these sensitivities. They have gone to great lengths to secure those soldiers religious rights and avoid having any women involved with them at all. That clearly demonstrates that it can be done. In my view it should always be done when religious sensitivities are involved and security issues are not affected.

One may ask why these soldiers didn’t just join a Charedi unit? That is a good question that I’m not sure I can answer. It surely would have solved all problems. 

I suppose that one answer might be that there just aren’t enough Charedi units to go around. They have limited space and cannot accommodate the increasing number of religious recruits. That should change in my view. Hopefully it will. But in the meantime I see no reason to not accommodate soldiers that have religious sensitivities – as long as it does not hamper the army’s mandate of protecting its citizens.

There is also the fact that many religious recruits might join the regular army instead of the Charedi units because they want to be trained in areas that are not yet available to the Charedi units.

That this is happening now and has never been an issue until recently is not really a question. There have been plenty of religious recruits in the army since the very beginning of  the state.  The vast majority of them being religious Zionists, who felt an obligation to defend their country. 

No where is that more evident that in Hesder units that had a reputation for taking the most dangerous assignments as a group. Hesder units are designed for religious Zionist recruits to alternate periods of Torah study and military service over a six year period. Hesder is done in regular army units. Not Charedi ones.

Hesder soldiers are as dedicated to their religious values as they are to the state. I do not recall hearing too many complaints (if at all) about their religious values being subverted. But that’s probably because women were not part of any type of combat units. Situations like the one under discussion would therefore never have happened.

(For the record, I oppose women serving in combat for reasons beyond the scope of this post. But that ship has sailed.)

There are some who might say to these recruits, ‘Stop being excessively Frum’ Just watch your instructor and learn. They will reason that female instructors do not behave in any way that would be considered immodest by just teaching them how to use a parachute. I might tend to agree with them (although – as I indicated – I’ve never seen such a demonstration and can’t know for sure.) 

It might be true that at a very basic level there is nothing immodest about a woman teaching men how to use a parachute. But it shouldn’t matter. If there are dozens of religious soldiers that see it as immodest their sensitivities should be respected. No one should have to concede to an egalitarian ideal that contradicts their religious values – as long as the ultimate goal of the army - protection of the Jewish people - is not undermined.