 |
| An ultra-orthodox rabbi and LGBTQ Jews (Ha'aretz) |
That there are people that violate these laws is not a question. That they may not be able to change that about themselves has been rather well established by the medical community. That being the case, expressing sympathy for people that are LGBTQ is – is not only valid, but a mandatory function of the Chesed that every Jew is required to have. It should be a natural character trait inherited from our patriarch, Abraham whose very essence was Chesed.
The question then becomes how we can reconcile the sympathy we should all have while understanding the severe violations of Halacha that they are inclined towards and often act upon..
This is the issue of our time. Where Judaism was once in sync with societal attitudes we are now no longer are. To be absolutely clear, societal attitudes are not evil. They are based on a new understanding about LGBTQ people combined with a sense of sympathy and fairness, But this attitude is increasing becoming the polar opposite of Torah law.
It is that sense of sympathy and fairness combined with the strict Torah law that gives me conflicted thoughts over this issue. For purposes of simplicity I will address the homosexual component of the LGBTQ issue
This issue was practically nonexistent not too long ago. As I have mentioned in the past homosexuality was considered a mental disorder before 1973. Gay people were either embarrassed about their ‘abnormal’ feelings or were afraid of being ridiculed and even attacked. Homosexual acts were even outlawed by state law in many states.
Although, Judaism saw homosexual acts to not only be abnormal but a violation of God’s will, hurting them mentally or physically was a violation of biblical law as well. As serious a crime as homosexual sex is, in our day - we are not able to apply the consequences to people caught in the act. I would even be willing to bet that even at a time where we did hae the authority to do so, capital punishment was rare. The requirements for mandatory execution are very precise and rarely fulfilled.
Ever since the APA declassified homosexuality from being a mental disorder, the public attitude slowly moved from one of intolerance; to sympath;y to finally acceptance as normal This is where we are as a nation today. It is why for example gay marriage is now the law of the land and supported by the majority of the American people.
This puts Jewish law at odds with American law. What we have today is broad acceptance of gay people as equal in every respect to straight people - considering any sexual act between 2 consenting adults perfectly fine. The problem with that for the Jewish people is that it does not to conform to the religious standards of the Torah.
It has also emboldened the gay community to seek complete normalization and accpeptance to every aspectof their lives. As though the biblical prohibition against gay sex never existed. Which for Jews is of course a non starter.
The normalization sought by the LGBTQ community advocates has unfortunately given rise to attitudes by some Orthodx rabbis to find innovative ways to ‘accept’ their behavior without actually accepting it. This has mostly been the case with the left.
In one sense it is laudatory to have sympathy to the extent that they try to remove any and all stigma LGBTQ people. But distorting what the Torah says to assure that goal is not the way to do that. Trying to distort something the Torah says is forbidden into something that is permitted (whijh some on the far left of Orthodoxy have attempted to do) is clearly wrong.
Strange as it may seem there is a Chabad rabbi that by implication is trying to do the same thing. Although he may be technically honoring the Torah’s prohibition against gay sex, his attitude sends the opposite message - implying that gay sex is perfectly fine .He may not actaully be saying it. But his attitude strongly suggests it.
As part of a delegation of Congregation Beit Simchat Torah in New York (the world’s largest LGBTQ synagogue) Rabbi Mike Moskowitz traveled to Israel and addressed attendees at the recent Jerusalem Gay Pride Parade. He did so in order to show solidarity and support for them and their families.
This is not OK. That he is ultra Orthodox by his own defintion does not change anything. What he has done is to strongly imply that what the Torah prohibits as a serious violation, is not. Which in essence places an Orthodox ‘seal of apporval’ to gay sex.
I’m sure that he would deny that. And say that he just wants to show love and acceptance of a people that are still viewed negatively by large segments of the American and Israeli people and simply wants to put a stop to a public attitude among Orthodox Jews that has generated violence. Which in one case a few years ago ended up with the murder of one LGBTQ supporter.
I agree with his goal. But it is impossible for me to support his methods. You cannot only say you are expressing sympathy but do not endorse gay sex if you enthusiastically and publicly embrace an event whose goal is - at least in part - to normalize forbidden sexual acts.
! know that parades like this are for purposes of giving gay people positive attitudes about themselves and convincing the public to reject any animosity they might have towards them. But the ends in this case do not justify the means. Clearly the bi-product of this well intended goal is not anything Judaism can accept. We cannot accept something theTorah explicitly forbids.
I don’t know how Rabbi Moskowitz deals with this obvious conundrum. It seems like he’s just ignoring it. I also realize they he too has good intentions. But we all know where that road often leads.
It saddens me to no end that there are people in the world whose natural tendencies so drastically conflict with Torah law. I believe we must do everything we can to relieve the pain of Orthodx gay people who know this.
But we must never sacrifice Torah law to that end. Even implicitly. This is what Rabbi Moskowitz has done. That saddens me too. He needs to stop it and find another way to support the gay community without implying that the impermissible is permissible.