Jump to content
MURDERcomplexx

Marriage Equality and Other MOGAI/Queer Rights

Recommended Posts

I don't mean to be funny here - but I thought this thread was a discussion of gay marriage/rights, not of the Jewish religion - fascinating though that is.

 

This is the 91,000th viewing of this thread though - is that a record ?

Well, it's talking about the homosexual support/ non support from the Jewish religion. Doesn't seem out of place to me.

Share this post


Link to post

That the verses stand alone, dear.

 

However:

 

[it is only since medieval times and the expanding power of the Catholic Church that Judaism began to forbid Homosexuality. We see in many writings prior to that time, men who referred to each other as the other's "perfect mate" or "most perfect love." Homosexuality and the Torah, 1990]

 

 

 

No, because it doesn't in the oldest texts, nor does it in scrolls from temples.

 

 

 

The three generations were what it took, living the laws, to be considered Jewish in that time. If you want to argue with Torah, be my guest, but that is what the text says.

 

 

 

The entire section is discussing the same thing. Sex for a pagan religion.

 

 

 

"In the Jewish scriptures, for example, we see the Jews forbidden from sexual contact with the sacred male prostitutes of Molech and the animal rights for fertility, under the guise that these constituted "spilling one's seed" to a foreign god, and we have evidence that this was enforced even in Asa's reign; even if the prostitute was Jewish by birth or tribe." [Early Religion of the Levant, 1986]

 

"What many outsiders see as a condemnation of homosexuality in Leviticus, chapter eighteen, is actually a condemnation of sex acts that were common among the Ammonites and Kenites native to the land, as well as the fertility cults, like that of Min, which the Jews had observed while in slavery." [in the Land of Milk and Honey, 1995]

 

 

 

I never claimed it wasn't a sexual act. I said that the acts it's talking about are related. And I have already cited several.

 

 

 

Some do, some don't, just like Orthodox Jews everywhere. That's why the discussions regarding homosexuality were so debated in Orthodox circles.

 

 

 

Do you having anything from a non-biased site that would no have reason to minimize it?

 

Also, if you read the opinions of the rabbis in the discussion I mentioned, you might see that they don't stop being considered frum by being gay.

 

 

 

You would be incorrect.

 

78% of Orthodox Jews in Israel view homosexuality as biological.

69% believe that being homosexual is not a sin.

72% Feel that the Orthodoxy should recognize gay relationships.

 

[Attitudes in Israel Towards Moral issues, 2008, study by Orthodox Jews for Israel]

 

 

 

That's the Babylonian Talmud, it's not as old. I quoted the Jerusalem, which is where Haredi default if the two disagree.

 

 

 

Yeah, sorry, I'm going to take what books written by rabbis say over an internet page.

 

 

 

Except, for a supreme court decision to be valid, it has to be recognised by the majority of the rabbinate.

Im sorry but I cant keep going back and forth like this.

Every time I ask something you dont answer it but instead throw a random sentence with the name of a book/study/something which I cant read nor address anyhow.

 

1. You say I havent proven that two verses arent linked, I showed you one of the oldest writings from 14th century where there is indeed seperation between the two verses, you have claimed you are using an antique which is actually 400 years younger than Soncino edition, so if you have a more valid edition or scripts that indeed show lack of seperation please link me to the source instead of throwing random names around as I cant do anything with those, I can read both Hebrew and Ancient Armenian so its not a problem.

If you cant do that I cant really see what it is that you're talking about hence cant examine the validity of your claims.

 

2. You claim that Tanakh supports interfaith marriages yet almost all religious jews marry only jews, almost all jews period, marry only other jews, even in the USA, furthermore in Israel a jew cant even marry a non jew - explain the logic behind it if marrying other religions is perfectly fine according to God ?

 

3. 80% of religious jews support homosexuality, thats what your study claims, please do link me to that study as I would love to read it, while you're at it explain this logic as well - 80% of religious jews in Israel support homosexuality and gay marriages, almost all non religious jews support it as well since there is no reason not to, simple math => 90% or more of jewish population supports gay marriages, why aren't gay marriages allowed in a democratic country where 90% of its people support it ? Please do explain the logic.

 

4. Supreme court doesnt need Rabbinate's permission, two are different entities.

If you've read something else, please do link me to the source claiming that supreme court needs Rabbinate's majority when making a ruling.

 

Please try to address these questions in your own words, you are smart enough to express yourself, quoting things I cant check nor am familiar with accomplishes nothing nor makes your stance any clearer to me.

 

I have read all three holly books and the more I've read the more I saw hatred instead of tolerance, religious jews residing in Israel are one of the most racist groups I have encountered and I've been around a lot of places, I am more than willing to listen, I welcome new facts which will show me a different picture from the one I know to be true, explain it in a manner which will make sense to me and I will accept it, that I can promise you.

Edited by The Evil Doer

Share this post


Link to post
Well, it's talking about the homosexual support/ non support from the Jewish religion. Doesn't seem out of place to me.

It seems to be more about the linguistic niceties and translations of the Torah and Tanakh than about Judaism.

 

In ANY religion there are members and priests taking various positions. SOME Jews are OK with homosexuality and SOME aren't. SOME Christians too. Priests/rabbis in both cases. LEADERS in both cases. Even some Muslim imams are OK with it all. What the various people here take from the Tanakh and so on is NOT the same as debating the issue as a whole. As I and others have said - there are loads of rules in the Bible - in the Tanakh too, I believe - that NO-ONE tries to follow these days.

Share this post


Link to post
It seems to be more about the linguistic niceties and translations of the Torah and Tanakh than about Judaism.

 

In ANY religion there are members and priests taking various positions. SOME Jews are OK with homosexuality and SOME aren't. SOME Christians too. Priests/rabbis in both cases. LEADERS in both cases. Even some Muslim imams are OK with it all. What the various people here take from the Tanakh and so on is NOT the same as debating the issue as a whole. As I and others have said - there are loads of rules in the Bible - in the Tanakh too, I believe - that NO-ONE tries to follow these days.

Yeah, it seems like some people like to generalize and say that ALL of a group oppose or do not oppose something, while this is clearly untrue.

 

There is going to be differing opinions on just about anything in any group. Not all Americans are uninformed idiots, not all Christians are bigots.. it goes on and on. You can't just say everyone in a group does or does not do something, because that statement is going to come out being wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Yeah, it seems like some people like to generalize and say that ALL of a group oppose or do not oppose something, while this is clearly untrue.

 

There is going to be differing opinions on just about anything in any group. Not all Americans are uninformed idiots, not all Christians are bigots.. it goes on and on. You can't just say everyone in a group does or does not do something, because that statement is going to come out being wrong.

I agree with you. Of course a stereotype isn't always (or even often) true. People just defy categorization that way tongue.gif. Many Christians I've met are kind people who wouldn't be bigots to anyone, after all. So yeah, I gave my meager little two cents about that...

Share this post


Link to post

not all Christians are bigots..

 

I rather resent being labeled a bigot because I have a moral objection to something others find acceptable. I'm not forcing my beliefs down anyone's throat, but being labeled a bigot for those beliefs? That doesn't sit with me. I avoid this thread as a matter of habit because I don't feel like airing unpopular views and having to defend them over and over and over again to people who will never accept portions of my reasoning or beliefs, but I don't like being labeled a bigot because I believe a certain action is sinful. My political and pragmatic views on homosexuality I'm sure would be accepted here. So I think it's far from bigoted to continue in my beliefs when I'm not trying to shove my opinions on you, unlike the other camp who labels me intolerant, bigoted, homophobic, etc etc etc for not accepting THEIR beliefs.

Share this post


Link to post

I rather resent being labeled a bigot because I have a moral objection to something others find acceptable. I'm not forcing my beliefs down anyone's throat, but being labeled a bigot for those beliefs? That doesn't sit with me. I avoid this thread as a matter of habit because I don't feel like airing unpopular views and having to defend them over and over and over again to people who will never accept portions of my reasoning or beliefs, but I don't like being labeled a bigot because I believe a certain action is sinful. My political and pragmatic views on homosexuality I'm sure would be accepted here. So I think it's far from bigoted to continue in my beliefs when I'm not trying to shove my opinions on you, unlike the other camp who labels me intolerant, bigoted, homophobic, etc etc etc for not accepting THEIR beliefs.

To be fair, I don't think you're a bigot. You're not hostile and/or completely intolerant, and that's what a bigot is.. a hostile, intolerant, prejudiced being. Says so in the dictionary and everything. So yeah. :3

Share this post


Link to post

While we're on the topic of religion, anyone want to comment on what Catholic schools teach about homosexuality?

 

I go to a Catholic school, but am Atheist. Last year in theology class, we reached the topic of homosexuality. We were taught that homosexuality in and of itself is not a sin, but actions due to homosexuality are. In other words, homosexual acts are sin.

 

I commented on being against this and the teacher practically glared at me. xd.png

Edited by BirdSpirit

Share this post


Link to post

So hey, celibate homos are totally fine yeah? smile.gif That's fine with me, I don't plan on getting in on that sexual stuff for a while anyway. That means my relationships are good and dandy right? C:

Share this post


Link to post
So hey, celibate homos are totally fine yeah? smile.gif That's fine with me, I don't plan on getting in on that sexual stuff for a while anyway. That means my relationships are good and dandy right? C:

But dear God, the world will end if you start having sex!! O.O

 

*faints*

Share this post


Link to post
We were taught that homosexuality in and of itself is not a sin, but actions due to homosexuality are. In other words, homosexual acts are sin.

Cannot....comprehend....

 

*head explodes*

Share this post


Link to post

Which again, Christianizes the issue, as unless they simply never find anyone, celibacy is a sin in Judaism as well. The notion that one sin makes a perceived sin okay is just ridiculous.

 

A rabbi listens to two Jews bicker about an issue. He is called to solve the dispute. He listens to one of them and says, “You’re right”. He then listens to the other and declares, “You’re right, too.” An onlooker yells out, “How can they both possibly be right?!” The rabbi sighs and replies sadly, “You’re right, too.”

 

Since the rabbi thinks homosexuality is prohibited, the celibacy argument applies to heterosexuals. Edit: Note: It depends. I've seen Christians say homosexuality can be biological but at the same time sinful, so I think it's the same for some Jews. If they don't believe it's biological, they probably think it's something that can be overcome. *shrugs*

 

If you retort back that it's obviously biological, I'm making no claims that the Torah is right on science. That's just their belief in what it says. *shrugs* It's really no different than someone making the case that free will is an outdated concept according to science, so there's little reason to say celibacy etc. is a sin.

 

You can’t have it both ways, Noble.

 

“Since we know now that not all male homosexuals even consider anal sex, the idea that Leviticus means all homosexual relationships is ridiculous”

 

We also know that not all people want a help meet.

 

Sanhedrin 105 R.” Tanhum stated in the name of R. Hanilai: Any man who has no wife lives without joy, without blessing, and without goodness. ‘Without joy’. for it is written. And thou shalt rejoice, thou and thy house.27 ‘Without blessing’, for it is written, To cause a blessing to rest on thy house.28 ‘Without goodness’, for it is written, It is not good that the man should be alone.29”

 

user posted image

 

xd.png

 

You speak as if this is new, Alpha. In Romania there had been an inclusive Orthodox synagogue since 1860, prior to WWII, where it was destroyed. One of the biggest arguments against the Jews in Eastern Europe in the 1930s and 1940s was that they "consorted" with the Romany and homosexuals -- both hated groups.

 

They said a lot of things. I’d like to see concrete evidence otherwise it is just hearsay.

 

Because one can't have a ketubah for a commitment ceremony. The ketubah is a centerpiece of any Jewish wedding, because it enumerates the various rights to the marriage. No ketubah? Not religiously valid.

It would depend on whether or note the state unions reflected all the rights in the ketubah.

 

I’ll go at a different angle this time. What would he think of the Lieberman Clause?

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/1989-02...octrine-nowicki

 

“Ditkowsky, who said he would appeal the ruling, said the only rulings on the issue have been made by courts in New York, New Jersey, Ohio and Minnesota. The New York and New Jersey rulings required the men to grant the get because they had entered into a ketubah, while the Ohio and Minnesota courts refused to require the man to grant the get on grounds that such a decision would be an intrusion on the separation of church and state, Ditkowsky said.”

 

So, many state court systems haven’t taken up the issue and a few have refused to require the man to grant the get.

 

What you get is “chained” wives. How are many of these marriages valid to begin with if he’s going to take that strict stance on state law?

 

That entire passage has zero to do with homosexuality. It has to do with hospitality, which is/was of the utmost importance in the Torah. The people of the city wanted to terrorize the visitors, humiliate and dominate them.

He offers his daughters to try and spare the guests, because as a host in that time, that was what one did. When the Tanakh talks about the sin of Sodom, homosexuality is not mentioned.[…]

 

Judges 19:22-30

 

In this case, we see the patriarchal society again offer their daughters and concubines. This time, it doesn’t end well at all. Why can’t he sacrifice himself? They wanted a man again!

 

Look at the city’s name. user posted image

 

In Israel's Orthodox shul Yachad, they gave full acknowledgment to a gay marriage two women’s joint role as parents of the bar mitzvah boy in a bar mitzvah in 2011.

 

The first unofficial municipal wedding took place in August 2009 following the Tel Aviv Pride Parade; five couples were married by Mayor Ron Huldai.

 

2011? 2009?

 

How does this help your case? It wasn’t until 2006 when the High Court of Justice instructed the Interior Ministry to register same-sex marriages of couples married outside Israel into the Population Registry.

 

You would be incorrect.

78% of Orthodox Jews in Israel view homosexuality as biological.

69% believe that being homosexual is not a sin.

72% Feel that the Orthodoxy should recognize gay relationships.

[Attitudes in Israel Towards Moral issues, 2008, study by Orthodox Jews for Israel]

 

Who did this poll? There’s no way roughly 70% of Orthodox Jews believe in recognizing same-sex marriage.

 

How do you explain the poll I posted with 61% of all Israelis (unsure if they’re only counting Jews) supporting same-sex marriages?

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angus_Reid_Global_Monitor

 

"In November 2010, Angus Reid Public Opinion covered a U.S. election for the first time, offering accurate predictions of the contests in California, New York and Ohio.[6]

In May 2011, Angus Reid Public Opinion once again offered the most accurate prediction of a Canadian federal election.[7]"

 

Here’s another poll:

 

http://hiddush.org/article-2107-0-_Israeli...y_marriage.aspx

 

“Hiddush’s Religion and State Index, conducted by the Smith Research Institute: 53% of Israel’s Jewish citizens, including 74% of secular Jews, are in favor of letting same-sex partners get married”

 

[it is only since medieval times and the expanding power of the Catholic Church that Judaism began to forbid Homosexuality. We see in many writings prior to that time, men who referred to each other as the other's "perfect mate" or "most perfect love." Homosexuality and the Torah, 1990]

 

I thought slaves didn’t adopt victor beliefs? user posted image

 

What civilizations accepted same-sex marriages on the same level as heterosexual marriages?

 

user posted imageHere's the faithful sheep providing sufficient verbiage to allow this to post.

Edited by Alpha1

Share this post


Link to post

That rabbi is spot on. He is saying - in effect - everyone's views count. So CAN we get back to the general issue - which I THOUGHT was what WE thought about all this - and not which Jewish laws are and aren't valid in which translation ?

Share this post


Link to post

In my opinion it's your choice whether or not you support gay marriage- there's no reason to force your values upon someone else. Homosexuals don't propose laws banning straight marriage. Why should we do that to them? It's not hurting you in anyway, so why try to stop it? I support gay marriage, but if you don't- fine. I won't think less of you for it.

Share this post


Link to post
I go to a Catholic school, but am Atheist. Last year in theology class, we reached the topic of homosexuality. We were taught that homosexuality in and of itself is not a sin, but actions due to homosexuality are. In other words, homosexual acts are sin.

 

I commented on being against this and the teacher practically glared at me. xd.png

It's probably blazingly obvious, so much so that the teacher didn't feel the need to comment on it, but the vast majority of heterosexual acts are a sin in Catholicism, too. It's not like the straight people are given a free ride to act on their every urge.

 

A lot of Christian sects are not at all clear on expressing this--it's the sex outside of marriage that is considered the sin, not the orientation. Some get it confused themselves. But that's what it is.

 

For myself, as a Christian, I am not convinced that homosexuals cannot be married in God's eyes; it's a question that bears further investigating on my part, and one I'm not likely to find an easy answer to. I am, however, very convinced that that those, gay, straight, bi, whatever, who have sex without committing themselves one to another to live as spouses (regardless of what anyone else says they legally can or cannot do) are having sex outside of marriage and therefore sinning. Seeing, however, that I am not currently a judge, I shall not condemn them of anything. My eyes are too full of 2x4's to start condemning a whole bunch of people about their sawdust, y'see.

Share this post


Link to post

I do find it amusing that it is so widely believed that being gay = sex, sex and more sex. I don't know about anyone else, but I don't want to tackle every girl I see. wink.gif

 

Even if it won't cause pregnancy, it's not something I want to have willy nilly. I'm not religious in any sense of the word, but I do believe it's something that should be saved for someone you've created a deep relationship with, and done to show your utmost devotion to them.

 

The 'gay people are promiscuous and would make divorce rates skyrocket' argument makes me sad. sad.gif

Share this post


Link to post
I do find it amusing that it is so widely believed that being gay = sex, sex and more sex. I don't know about anyone else, but I don't want to tackle every girl I see. wink.gif

 

Even if it won't cause pregnancy, it's not something I want to have willy nilly. I'm not religious in any sense of the word, but I do believe it's something that should be saved for someone you've created a deep relationship with, and done to show your utmost devotion to them.

 

The 'gay people are promiscuous and would make divorce rates skyrocket' argument makes me sad. sad.gif

The sad part about this (and I grit my teeth as I say this) is while I am just as certain that just as many straight people act like horndogs as gays do, because of the... I suppose 'highlight' on the gay agenda that there is, it's more 'seen' than that of straight people who act the same, because being straight is *ahem* 'normal'.

 

Using it as an arguement for making divorce rates skyrocket however, is ridiculous.

Share this post


Link to post
The sad part about this (and I grit my teeth as I say this) is while I am just as certain that just as many straight people act like horndogs as gays do, because of the... I suppose 'highlight' on the gay agenda that there is, it's more 'seen' than that of straight people who act the same, because being straight is *ahem* 'normal'.

 

Using it as an arguement for making divorce rates skyrocket however, is ridiculous.

I find it's a case of cherry picking. 'One gay person is a cheating jerk' becomes 'all gay people are cheating jerks' when you don't personally know anyone who breaks the stereotype.

Share this post


Link to post
I find it's a case of cherry picking. 'One gay person is a cheating jerk' becomes 'all gay people are cheating jerks' when you don't personally know anyone who breaks the stereotype.

That's generally the case for most paranoia involving a group of people, sadly.

Share this post


Link to post
It's probably blazingly obvious, so much so that the teacher didn't feel the need to comment on it, but the vast majority of heterosexual acts are a sin in Catholicism, too. It's not like the straight people are given a free ride to act on their every urge.

 

A lot of Christian sects are not at all clear on expressing this--it's the sex outside of marriage that is considered the sin, not the orientation. Some get it confused themselves. But that's what it is.

 

For myself, as a Christian, I am not convinced that homosexuals cannot be married in God's eyes; it's a question that bears further investigating on my part, and one I'm not likely to find an easy answer to. I am, however, very convinced that that those, gay, straight, bi, whatever, who have sex without committing themselves one to another to live as spouses (regardless of what anyone else says they legally can or cannot do) are having sex outside of marriage and therefore sinning. Seeing, however, that I am not currently a judge, I shall not condemn them of anything. My eyes are too full of 2x4's to start condemning a whole bunch of people about their sawdust, y'see.

In the same chapter we were taught that sex was good though (after marriage of course)! Although they don't support gay marriage so that was probably where the problem was.

 

The teacher made it sound like homosexual acts included purposely fantasizing about someone of the same sex and kissing, which were apparently sins.

Share this post


Link to post
The teacher made it sound like homosexual acts included purposely fantasizing about someone of the same sex and kissing, which were apparently sins.

I don't think those count. Maybe if it gets to the point of leering and such, but that's not cool for anyone to do to anyone. Never did see a 'thou shalt not have an imagination'.

Share this post


Link to post

Honestly, to me, if it's love, it's love. I don't think anyone should not be aloud to get married because someone thinks that it's wrong. One person's beliefs shouldn't rule over another person's life. Also, just because you're gay doesn't mean you're not a human being. They should still have the same rights as the rest of us.

And these people who are supposedly "pro personal liberties" are mostly the ones who are taking away freedoms of the gay and lesbian people. Personal liberties is for EVERYONE.

Share this post


Link to post

People should be allowed to marry no matter what their sexuality is. If you're in love and wanting to commit to someone - you should be allowed to do it. If people think it's wrong so what. Let them look the other way.

Share this post


Link to post
In the same chapter we were taught that sex was good though (after marriage of course)! Although they don't support gay marriage so that was probably where the problem was.

 

The teacher made it sound like homosexual acts included purposely fantasizing about someone of the same sex and kissing, which were apparently sins.

The key is "purposefully" fantasizing which means realizing you're doing it and then continuing to do so, which is a sin no matter who you're fantasizing about wink.gif

 

Honestly I agree with PrincessArtemis up there who said "My eyes are too full of 2x4's to start condemning a whole bunch of people about their sawdust, y'see." If people are going to hell for loving someone of the same sex, well, that's a better excuse then I've got!

Share this post


Link to post

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.