(no subject)

[rymenhild]

Via one_in_a_minyan, (here, with fascinating discussions in the comments):

The Committee for Jewish Law and Standards (CJLS), which considers religious law for the centrist Conservative Movement of American Judaism, is meeting Tuesday for a formal reconsideration of its 1992 decisions prohibiting same-sex marriages and ordination of gay and lesbian (1) rabbis.

As a lesbian Conservative Jew, I have been watching what little bits of news emerged from the CJLS very closely. The 1992 decisions, which said that gay and lesbian congregants should be welcomed but refused to sanctify same-sex commitment ceremonies or to ordain gay and lesbian rabbis, were completely unsatisfying to just about everyone I've heard from. The several opinions all relied on dubious science to bolster their claims. I am not an expert on halacha (Jewish law) so I don't know whether the halachic arguments were any more convincing than the scientific arguments. (2) In any case, debate (often thoughtful and occasionally acrimonious) over the decisions has continued for the last fourteen years. About two years ago the CJLS chose to reopen discussion on homosexuality and Jewish law. Apparently (if we trust the Associated Press) the final discussion will be occurring this week. I don't quite know what this entails. Have the new responsa been written yet? Is the committee ready to vote? I would like very much to find out.

I pray that the committee finds a halachically valid solution that permits both some form of movement-recognized commitment ceremonies/marriages for same-sex couples and open ordination without reference to sexual orientation.

(1) The fate of bisexuals in the Conservative movement is not currently under discussion. Conservative Jewish leadership concludes that anyone who is attracted both to men and women could choose only to date/marry people of the opposite gender. I understand the position but I strongly disagree with it, for reasons I cannot articulate nearly as well as I would like.

(2)Summaries of all of the 1992 decisions, and links to the full decisions, are available here. Note that only items 1 through 5 on that list of decisions were officially approved as law.

Comments

[nuqotw.livejournal.com]

Interesting. I think that pre-Shulkhan Aruch, social progress in halakhah sort of crept along, except occassionally when someone (Rabbenu Gershom is a striking example) looked at the whole situation and issued a few well-considered decrees. Unfortunately, we wrote down, and thereby rigidified, our entire legal code, and then worse, organized it by subject. (Also bad was Rambam writing down the 13 principles of faith.) After that, we had on paper everything we could fight about, and more or less promptly set-to, with the happy result of denominational in-fighting. If Judaism today had half the brains of Judaism a thousand years ago, we would all be egalitarian, same-sex marriage would have been halakhically sanctioned, and we'd all all eat lentils on Pesach, via not halakhic hair-splitting, but rabbinic decree. And we wouldn't fight about it either.

As much as I think that same-sex marriage should be halakhically sanctioned, and that orientation should be irrelevant to ordination, I don't think there's a way to get to same-sex marriage with the halakhic process as it currently exists. The way to get there is for modern rabbinic authority to (1) unify (2) wake up and smell the 21st century and (3) recognize that halakha was never meant to impede justice. If these things happen, I smell a sensible takkanah on the horizon. Conservative Judaism might issue such a decree, but it wouldn't get the support it needs. The RA would never recognize it; indeed, if CJLS issued a ruling in favor of sanctioning same-sex marriage, it would probably be the worst possible outcome for gay and bisexual Orthodox Jews, since in addition the fanatical homophobia that pervades even modern Orthodoxy, the RA would have the additional need to disagree with the CLJS. That might subsequently cause a split in the current Conservative movement. Okay I'm rambling more later.

[elettaria.livejournal.com]

If Judaism today had half the brains of Judaism a thousand years ago, we would all be egalitarian, same-sex marriage would have been halakhically sanctioned, and we'd all all eat lentils on Pesach, via not halakhic hair-splitting, but rabbinic decree. And we wouldn't fight about it either.

Thankfully, at least some movements are doing this (well, the nearest to same-sex marriage is same-sex blessing ceremonies, but that's very nearly there). I'm frankly shocked by the homophobia I'm seeing in that link, I had no idea it was so bad in US Conservative Judaism. Is homophobia just worse in US Judaism in general?

[nuqotw.livejournal.com]

I'm not sure what Judaism is like in Edinburgh, so I can't assess "worse" in US Judaism. But here's my assessment of the general US/US Jewish take:

Right now, the US, not just US Judaism is still getting over the same-sex taboo. This social question has produced expressions of hatred that my primary education taught me were mortal sin. I thought we could generalize the lesson of the civil rights movement. I'm particularly appalled that so many people predicate arguments against the constitutionality of same-sex marriage on passages from Leviticus. The U.S. Constitution is very clear about the separation of church and state. Whatever else might be said about the book, Leviticus does *not* belong in any courtroom in this country. (Further, even should one be of a religious persuasion that bans gay marriage, it is still an absolute obligation to evaluate the question of the constitutionality of gay marriage in the context of the constitutional process. Accepting the privileges and benefits of US citizenship is a tacit agreement to uphold its constitution. If you can't or won't do that, you have failed your obligations as a citizen.) Against this backdrop, halakhic US Judaism is trying to figure out what it thinks about same-sex marriage.

Orthodoxy is rather hard-core in its homophobia, though they've come up with a terrific semantic explanation of how they're not homophobic: "We're not against homosexuals, we're against homosexuality." Steve Greenberg's courage not withstanding, I do not think I will live to see the day when Orthodoxy as we know it legitimizes homosexuality.

Conservative Judaism, on the other hand, is in the midst of a generational shift. I'm at a university, and we're all pretty young (18-late twenties). In this age range, it seems that one's attitude towards homosexuality and halakha is pretty clearly dictated by Liberal (includes observant Conservative)/Orthodox lines, though there are always exceptions. As far as I can tell, the vast majority of young observant Conservative Jews believe that homosexuality is not a sin, and that G-d did not intend Leviticus to be interpreted as it has been for so many centuries. I believe that within one generation, possibly two, the pendulum will swing, bringing mang changes, possibly a new denomination.

[elettaria.livejournal.com]

I always find it difficult to judge what general attitudes are in this country, because the society I move in (youngish, mostly middle-class, educated, liberal, largely queer or queer-friendly) won't be representative of the whole. It sounds like homophobia is more of a problem in the US, and the religious right is notorious for being more of a problem there. I've always been flummoxed by the way people try to argue against same-sex civil rights on religious grounds as well.

"We're not against homosexuals, we're against homosexuality."

How original. I reckon you're right about Orthodoxy not being about to legitimise homosexuality, it doesn't seem to be built with the flexibility to encompass that sort of shift. It may become less aggressive about it, though. I'm glad to hear that Conservative Judaism is changing. Its current state might be rather more prejudiced than I'd believed and hoped (the people who told me that it's the equivalent of UK Reform Judaism were way out), but it sounds like it is open to change in general, and let's hope it does indeed push forward with the new generation. It does sound like there's space for a new denomination, they tell me that US Conservative and Reform are much further apart than our Reform and Liberal are.

[rymenhild.livejournal.com]

It does sound like there's space for a new denomination, they tell me that US Conservative and Reform are much further apart than our Reform and Liberal are.

There is the tiny but enthusiastic Reconstructionist Movement, which mixes some of Conservative Judaism's focus on ritual, some of Reform Judaism's leftist social policies, a smattering of Hasidic mysticism and a decent amount of New Age spirituality and creativity. I like Reconstructionism. I was quite disappointed when I moved out of my childhood hometown (the movement's cradle) and discovered how hard it was to find a Reconstructionist shul outside the Philadelphia area.

Also, Conservative Judaism encompasses a wide range of positions, and there's a growing schism between Conservative Jewish leadership and the membership in most Conservative Jewish synagogues. The rabbis and movement leadership are all moving towards higher observance of ritual, while most of the rank and file is moving towards lower observance or complete lack of observance. (This is not a value judgment regarding the presence or absence of ritual. It's a statement of fact.) The Conservative Jews who hang around my journal are almost all unusually observant layfolk; we aren't representative of the movement as a whole.

[rymenhild.livejournal.com]

I would agree with nuqotw here; homophobia is disturbingly prevalent in the US, and the right wing of Judaism is just as homophobic as any other right wing religious group in the country. Conservative Judaism is indeed in the process of change. I believe that if the laws don't change now, with this week's meeting, they will certainly change by the time the students who are currently in rabbinical school take over the CJLS.

[rymenhild.livejournal.com]

The RA would never recognize it; indeed, if CJLS issued a ruling in favor of sanctioning same-sex marriage, it would probably be the worst possible outcome for gay and bisexual Orthodox Jews, since in addition the fanatical homophobia that pervades even modern Orthodoxy, the RA would have the additional need to disagree with the CLJS.

I'm a bit confused. The RA is the Conservative Movement's rabbinic arm, right? Where is the connection to Orthodox Judaism here?

That being said, I have met a decent number of Conservative rabbis whose views on gay marriage and gay ordination have changed substantially over the last ten years. I think there's hope. This may only be wishful thinking on my part, of course, but I plan to keep thinking wishfully until events prove me wrong.

[nuqotw.livejournal.com]

Oh sorry, I was thinking of the RCA.

[sovay]

(1) The fate of bisexuals in the Conservative movement is not currently under discussion. Conservative Jewish leadership concludes that anyone who is attracted both to men and women could choose only to date/marry people of the opposite gender. I understand the position but I strongly disagree with it, for reasons I cannot articulate nearly as well as I would like.

My personal point of strong disagreement is that, yes, bisexuality means attraction to both male and female: so theoretically I could find happiness as easily with a nice Jewish boy as with a nice Jewish girl (and for the sake of argument, we'll say they're both doctors). That doesn't guarantee that the person whom I wind up wanting to spend the rest of my life with is necessarily going to be a man. I'm attracted to people. Gender is secondary. So, sure, one could choose to date only people of the opposite gender. But since I can't choose to be attracted only to that group—because then the whole bisexuality bit would be a non-issue—the Conservative conclusion would seem both an unfair and uninformed imposition of someone else's idea of what's socially acceptable on my life.

That probably wasn't too well-articulated either . . .

[rymenhild.livejournal.com]

That was perfectly well-articulated. Also, it was what I wanted to say, except that I didn't know how to explain it. Thank you.

[sovay]

Cool.

You're welcome.

[nuqotw.livejournal.com]

With all due respect, isn't this obvious? Does the innate sense of what you just said really escape that many people?

[sovay]

I'd hope it's obvious: but I gather from the current Conservative opinions on bisexuality that the innate sense certainly seems to escape the CJLS. Or are you asking a different question?

[rymenhild.livejournal.com]

Sadly, yes.

[elettaria.livejournal.com]

Beautifully put, and I entirely agree. Mind you, they probably expect you to limit yourself to Jews as well. Living in a city where the last census recorded 774 Jews, this is not a practical possibility for me. I don't actually know any Jewish single men remotely my age, there are certainly none amongst the regulars in my community. Come to think of it, I know an accountant a couple of years younger, who's a nice guy and we chat now and again, and last time we met he said his relationship was on the rocks, but we're not remotely suited. Thankfully I belong to a community which is very supportive of interfaith relationships, as is the denomination (Liberal) we belong to (which is one reason why we chose it, along with its exemplary attitude towards sexual orientation). We'd lose half the community otherwise.

It's hard enough finding a soul mate without all these restrictions.