Amazon.com Widgets

TorahJew2

Joined: Jan. 13, 2012

No bio


Most recent posts by TorahJew2:     (See all of them)


No posts yet


Latest comments by TorahJew2:     (See all of them)


Re: Interfaith statement on marriage issued

Jan. 13 at 2:17pm | see this comment in context

TorahJew, Jan. 13 at 1:49pm

Good point. We really just want to be left alone. So the Agudah and O-U signed this letter because the situation is so dire that minding our own business is NOT legal anymore.

Which is more realistic:

  1. Winning the argument 
  2. Wielding political clout to "win"
  3. Separating government from marriage

?

.Agreed. But there is no argument we can win. The clash of values is too fundamental. There is almost no common values language. #3 is the only available door, imo.

Without Torah (or some other foundational text) you only have 'ethics.' Ethics, as defined by Marxists are just ever-changing community standards - they do not connect to morality.

Because of this, secular hedonists see hypocracy as the worst sin. We see it as moral aspiration that came up short (unless, as with Spitzer heavy hammers [like government] was selfishly swung).

For us, failing to even aspire morally is a greater problem than hypocracy.

Re: Interfaith statement on marriage issued

Jan. 13 at 1:19pm | see this comment in context

I suppose, TorahJew, that we on the observant Jewish spectrum tend to withdraw from these debates. We don't try to convince people of our faith or (except for the most basic) our values.

Because of this, I don't see this as an argument that needs to be won.

Rather, the term marriage should be pulled away from government (where it has long been controversial).

We can have various government rights for unions (whether platonic or not). Heck we can support multiple unions (like co-dependent siblings).

I think marriage is a term reserved for religious organizations. Using it with homosexual unions suggests approval - refusing to use it suggests bigotry. There is no magic bullet to fix this. Progressive churches should be able to recognize it - and I should be allowed to ignore it.

Interestingly, this is the path of divorce. It went from prohibited (although it was never prohibited for Jews) to pro-forma. Nonetheless, even as civil authorities have taken over the civil aspects, religious groups have maintained their impact on it.

Stay informed

Latest comments

  • Re: Is all confusion evil? A Socratic thought.
  • By: Jules van Schaijik
  • Re: Is all confusion evil? A Socratic thought.
  • By: Katie van Schaijik
  • Re: Merry Christmas, You Miserable Pagan!
  • By: Devra Torres
  • Re: Merry Christmas, You Miserable Pagan!
  • By: Gary Gibson
  • Re: Factions
  • By: Katie van Schaijik
  • Re: Personalism and the Judeo-Christian tradition
  • By: Katie van Schaijik
  • Re: Too Much, Too Little, Too Late
  • By: Peter
  • Re: Too Much, Too Little, Too Late
  • By: Peter
  • Re: Too Much, Too Little, Too Late
  • By: Peter
  • Re: Too Much, Too Little, Too Late
  • By: Peter

Latest active posts

Reading circles

Lectures