I think it is safe to say that division on this issue can
be defined largely along denominational lines. The more observant a
denomination is, the more likely it is to oppose the LGBTQ agenda, particularly
the normalization of LGBTQ identities and behaviors. Conversely, the further
left one travels down the denominational road, the more acceptable that
normalization becomes.
Rabbis of the heterodox movements tend to enthusiastically
support gay sex as morally equivalent to heterosexual sex.
The Orthodox view of LGBTQ issues is more nuanced. We fully
embrace the Torah’s prohibitions and its repercussions for people who act in
forbidden ways on their desires. However, we do not reject those who struggle
with these issues. We respect their humanity and empathize with their
struggles.
What we do not do is legitimize behavior that the Torah
forbids. LGBTQ individuals who engage in Mishkav Zachar (gay sex),
cross-dressing, or surgical gender transition are, according to halacha,
violating serious prohibitions.
None of this is new. I’ve said it many times before — most recently in the context of Yeshiva University’s compromise with the Pride Alliance who filed a lawsuit demanding they allow the formation of an LGBTQ club on the YU campus.
As noted in a previous post, a compromise was reached. A ‘gay’
club would be formed that would strive to follow Halacha. My understanding was
that the purpose of this club was to allow LGBTQ students to share their
struggles with each other - and seek to overcome them.
Hareni was formed, operating under these conditions. It was
accepted by the Pride Alliance and apparently approved by YU’s most senior Rosh
Yeshiva, Rav Hershel Schachter. I thought this was a fair compromise — one that
would allow YU to maintain its non-sectarian status while remaining true to its
religious principles. I was happy to see the lawsuit resolved and both sides
reach this agreement.
There are some rabbis who completely reject this compromise
and view any club that identifies as gay — regardless of its halachic structure
— as a Chillul Hashem.
That rabbis on the right might feel this way doesn’t
surprise me. But when Rav Mayer Twersky, a Rosh Yeshiva at YU and someone I
greatly admire and respect, expressed that view, I was taken aback.
Apparently, the compromise that was publicly presented is
not the one that Hareni ultimately adopted. As Rabbi Twersky recently noted:
"The belated (April 3, 2025) publication of the Hareni Club Protocols (“Exhibit B”) has allowed us to clarify and, perhaps for the first time, accurately contextualize elements of the Hareni Club agreement...
The recent agreement contractually commits to, sanctions, and institutionalizes not only the LGBTQ nomenclature but its agenda as well...
The Pride Alliance embarked upon a heretical campaign 'to change Yeshiva’s Torah-based understanding of LGBTQ issues' and to make 'cultural changes.' They formulated a strategic plan to 'frame Jewish practices and religious events through an LGBTQ lens.'
Y.U., in the Hareni Club agreement, mind-bogglingly approved that insidious plan.
Effectively, Y.U. approved not only a social, professional gay club but one for kefirah (heresy)."
These are pretty strong words. I find it difficult to
believe that Rav Schachter would have approved of something like this. And yet,
if media reports are accurate, it appears that he did.
Rabbi Twersky’s primary objection seems to be the fact that
people who struggle with these issues want to turn that struggle into a source
of pride — not pride in who they love, but pride in how they love. And
that is entirely unacceptable to someone who believes in the Torah. And anathema to any institution that calls itself Orthodox.
I have to wonder, though, what Rav Schachter’s response to
Rabbi Twersky will be.