   |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
||||||
|
||||||
|
|
|
 |
||||||||||||||
|
On the other hand, there are those, not
all, who believe that the traditional laws against homosexuality
originated in a more ritual context, since, for the most part,
the word "abomination" was applied more in the ritual
sphere of life than in the ethical. The Torah seems to see homosexual
relations in a cultic context rather than something more parallel
to the interpersonal context of heterosexual relationships. Although the sin of Sodom and Gemmorah
is apparently homosexuality, later Jewish tradition, including
the Biblical prophets, makes no reference to homosexuality and
see the sins of Sodom and Gemmorah as cruelty and lack of hospitality
to the "stranger" - xenophobia, as it were. Is Judaism capable of doing such an "about-face"
on a position which has been so firmly founded in the tradition?
Some have made an analogy to the tradition's disqualification
of deaf people as valid witnesses, a disqualification which was
later nullified when people learned more about what it means
to be deaf. This reasoning would allow us to say that, since
we now have more and better knowledge about homosexuality and
no longer see it either as an abomination nor as mental illness,
we have reason to reevaluate the tradition's negative posture
vis-à-vis homosexuality. I may be overstating the case, but in my
experience during the last few years, it seems that many, if
not most, Reform Jews seem to be willing to make no great distinction
between homosexual and heterosexual relationships, although it
remains an emotionally charged question on all sides and there
are still many "hot" issues. As a whole, however, the
Reform Movement, both the "lay people" and the rabbis
have come out very strongly in favor of civil rights for gays
and lesbians. You will see this reflected in the resolutions
below. As for the sensitive issue of whether or
not rabbis should or should not, could or could not, perform
rituals affirming same-sex unions, be they called "weddings,"
"commitment ceremonies" or "ceremonies of affirmation,"
or something else, the CCAR indeed took a stand on this issue
at our national convention which was held in March of 2000, in
Greensboro, N.C. Preceeding the discussion and vote were years
of studying the issues from traditional as well as psycho-social
literature. Clearly, the official arms of Reform Judaism
have taken a most welcoming stance vis-a-vis lesbian and gay
Jews who wish to learn, worship, give, live and love as Jews.
One final note; if you are interested in
learning more about Reform Judaism's stance vis-a-vis welcoming
gays and lesbians into synagogue life, I would highly recommend
you looking at the UAHC's publication entitled "KULANU -
All of Us," a guide to making our congregations even more
inclusive. I have shared with you both my own understanding of this question. It is in no way official. The resolutions listed below, both of the Union of American Hebrew Congregations (UAHC - the umbrella organization of Reform Congregations in North America) as well as the Central Conference of American Rabbis (CCAR - the organization of Reform Rabbis in North America.) speak for themselves.
In light of this background, BE IT RESOLVED,
that the Central Conference of American Rabbis support the right
of gay and lesbian couples to share fully and equally in the
rights of civil marriage, and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the
CCAR oppose governmental efforts to ban gay and lesbian marriage.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that this is a matter of civil law, and
is separate from the question of rabbinic officiation at such
marriages.
In 1987, the Union of American Hebrew Congregations
(UAHC) reaffirmed its commitment to welcoming gay and lesbian
Jews into its congregations and encouraging their participation
in all aspects of synagogue and communal life. In 1993, Rabbi
Alexander M. Schindler, President of the UAHC, called upon the
Reform Movement to support the right of gay and lesbian couples
to adopt children, to file joint income-tax returns, and to share
in health and death benefits provided to heterosexual couples
by federal, state, and local governments and by both large and
small corporations. Following Rabbi Schindler's call, the UAHC,
in 1993, resolved that full equality under the law for gay men
and lesbians requires legal recognition of monogamous domestic
gay and lesbian relationships. In the years since first the UAHC and subsequently
the CCAR gave their support for full equality for gay men and
lesbians in congregational life, gay men and lesbians have increasingly
come forward to participate in the life of Reform Judaism on
national, regional, and local levels. No less than heterosexual
couples, gay men or lesbians living in monogamous domestic relationships
have demonstrated, like their counterparts, love for one another,
compassion for the sick, and grief for the dead. The UAHC has for decades provided moral
leadership to the Jewish community and to our nation, recognizing
our differences and diversity, but acknowledging that we are
but one family, equal before God. In this spirit, the UAHC must
now move more forcefully to support the monogamous domestic relationships
of gay men and lesbians. Legal recognition of monogamous domestic
gay and lesbian relationships and congregational honoring of
these couples will together provide these men and women and their
families with dignity and self esteem. A separate secular movement is proceeding
to recognize these monogamous domestic relationships judicially
and statutorily and to grant to gay and lesbian couples nondiscriminatory
economic, legal, and social rights equal to those under law enjoyed
by monogamous heterosexual couples.
In 1977, the CCAR adopted a resolution
calling for legislation decriminalizing homosexual acts between
consenting adults, and calling for an end to discrimination against
gays and lesbians. The resolution called on Reform Jewish organizations
to develop programs to implement this stand. In 1990, the CCAR endorsed the report of
the Ad Hoc Committee on Homosexuality and the Rabbinate. This
position paper urged that "all rabbis, regardless of sexual
orientation, be accorded the opportunity to fulfill the sacred
vocation that they have chosen." The committee endorsed
the view that "all Jews are religiously equal regardless
of their sexual orientation." The committee expressed its
agreement with changes in the admissions policies of the Hebrew
Union College-Jewish Institute of Religion, which stated that
the "sexual orientation of an applicant [be considered]
only within the context of a candidate's overall suitability
for the rabbinate," and reaffirmed that all rabbinic graduates
of the HUC-JIR would be admitted into CCAR membership upon application.
The report described differing views within the committee as
to the nature of kiddushin, and deferred the matter of rabbinic
officiation. A 1996 resolution resolved that the CCAR
"support the right of gay and lesbian couples to share fully
and equally in the rights of civil marriage," and voiced
opposition to governmental efforts to ban gay and lesbian marriages. In addition to these resolutions, two CCAR
committees have addressed the question of same-gender officiation.
The CCAR Committee on Responsa addressed the question of whether
homosexual relationships can qualify as kiddushin (which it defined
as "Jewish marriage"). By a committee majority of 7
to 2, the committee concluded that "homosexual relationships,
however exclusive and committed they may be, do not fit within
this legal category; they cannot be called kiddushin. We do not
understand Jewish marriage apart from the concept of kiddushin."
The committee acknowledged its lack of consensus on this question.
Although not specifically mentioned in Torah, our Oral Tradition expanded this prohibition to women. Liberal Judaism, being a movement that is informed by tradition but not directed by it, takes a somewhat different approach. Although there are rabbis and individuals who take the more stringent view, many in our movement use the research of modern science to understand that homosexuality may not be entirely a chosen state of mind or behavior. If this is the case, some feel, there ought not to be this firm prohibition. Our ancient scholars certainly did not know about the things that our scientists are discovering about the human mind, and some feel that they would not have made such a grand, sweeping cautionary law if they did. Therefore, many liberal Jews believe, as different from some people, that our society should accept homosexuals, if for no other reason, because they are God's creatures, God's creations, and we are instructed by our tradition to love our neighbor as ourselves. (paraphrase of Leviticus 19:18) Written by Rabbi Jonathan Biatch,
Beth El Hebrew Congregation, Alexandria, VA.
|
|||||||||||||||
 |
|||||||||||||||
|
Have your own question? Ask us!
|
What is Judaism's view on homosexuality?
Traditional
Judaism has seen - and continues to see - homosexuality as an
abomination (Refer to Leviticus, chapter 18. Interestingly, neither
the Torah nor the rabbinic tradition has much to say concerning
lesbian relationships. It is the male's "spilling of seed"
anywhere other than in the usual "place" that is seen
as a sin). Many in the traditional community today will say that
they accept the homosexual person as a Jew, but they cannot condone
what they understand to be sinful behavior nor can they that
say that homosexuality is on the same level as heterosexuality.
