Gay Parade In Jerusalem

Parent Cafe
81

<p>First of all, homosexuals are accepted into any congregation including orthodox and hassidic. Second of all Conservative and reform by their very nature, is a watered down version of Judaism. I refer to them as less observant Jews because in reality thats what they are. There is one religion just many diferent forms of observance.</p>

<p>I accept and tolerate gays. I do not accept or tolerate their marriage. I accept and tolerate their parades, but not in Jerusalem.</p>

<p>Just because I am against them marrying or parading Jlem, does not mean I do not like them as people . I judge homos as I would any other person. I look at the behavior and choices of the person, and not the group</p>

82

<p>

</p>

<p>Wrong. Reform Jews don’t believe that everything in the Torah is binding. It’s not that they view they Levitican condemnation of homosexuality (along with shellfish, synthetic fibers, et cetera) is a valid law that they choose not to observe; it’s that they believe that each person should come to their own understanding of God. Biblical literalism is a very backwards idea. </p>

<p>

Wrong. Sexual orientaton is innate; people do not “choose” to be gay anymore than they choose their race. One may speak of a gay “lifestyle” only to the extent that one can speak of the black “lifestyle”, or the lifestyle of any historically excluded group. (Amusingly, most of the promiscuity that conservatives object to is a direct consequence of the religious establishment’s ostracism of gays; if they were accepted and allowed to marry they would soon become as boring as everyone else)</p>

<p>There are two reasons that gays want to have a pride parade in Jerusalem:</p>

<ol>
<li><p>There are thousands of gays living in Jerusalem, as there are in every other large city. Should they not be able to protest in their own hometown?</p></li>
<li><p>Think again about my Selma analogy. Why did blacks protest in white areas - why do American gays march all over the country and not just in San Francisco? Because they want to directly assert their claim to be just as moral and just as deserving of civil rights as everyone else, and not just in their own ghettoes. If you want to challenge people on an issue, you confront them directly. Whether for a just cause (MLK on the Washington Mall) or not (Orangemen in Catholic neighborhoods of Belfast) it is a valid means of political expression and should be respected. </p></li>
</ol>

<p>Also, learn to spell.</p>

83

<p>golani, if you don’t accept or “tolerate” their marriage, you don’t accept them. Period.</p>

<p>HH–I would say they are extremely analogous because then as now, people used the Bible to justify subjugation and maintaining the status quo. In the early 1800s, the Bible was even used to justify slavery!</p>

<p>Here’s another example you may find more analogous: women demonstrating for equal rights and the right to vote. They shocked men in those days by wearing, of all things, bloomers. Bible-quoters told them “women shall not wear men’s clothing” and “wives, be submissive to your husbands.”</p>

<p>Again, the Bible-quoters were wrong.</p>

84

<p>However which way you cut it, gays did not have a history comparable to blacks in this country. They were never considered 3/5 of a human being, they were never denied the right to vote. At the present time they are not being persecuted, in fact, as a demographic, they are being wooed by colleges and corporations alike. They are a very upscale marketing segment. They hold positions of power in government, media, business and academia. They are free to express their sexuality, in private and in public parades. They may cohabitate. They are afforded many legal protections. A sexual orientation is just that: a sexual orientation, not the fundamental essence of a person. It is also a choice, in so far as anyone can control whether to express their sexuality physically or not. Sexuality does not define a human being. A person can go for an job interview, and the interviewer never has to know about the sex life of the person in front of him. A black person goes for the same interview and it is the first thing the interviewer sees - race. A black person does not choose to be black. You may say a gay person does not choose to be gay (as yet unproven), but it is not THE defining characteristic of that person. A gay person can choose to be celebate, for example, as does any heterosexual person. A black person cannot choose to be a white person.</p>

<p>The majority of black Americans believe that homosexuality is a lifestyle choice. The majority also believe that equating the gay rights movement with the black civil rights movement denegrates their struggle. Is it any wonder?</p>

<p>As for gay marriage, many black pastors feel strongly that the black family unit was destroyed in this country due to slavery and has never fully recovered. As we all know there is an epidemic of fatherless families in the black community. Many people believe that to destroy the concept of marriage as between a man and a woman will destroy the black family even further than it is already. To me this is a rational objection to gay marriage.</p>

<p>But what caring liberal gives a darn about what black pastors–trying mightily to hold their communities together–think? What a bother to have to think about all that boring stuff, when we can feel good about ourselves by accusing people of victimizing gay people. I see gay activists are hard at work at ridiculing conservative black pastors for being discriminatory of other human beings, and deriding them for uniting with (gasp!) Republican conservatives on the issue of gay marriage. I’m sure they’ll work their magic there, too.</p>

<p>Some people seem to be incapable of maintaining two or three slightly unparallel thoughts in their minds at the same time. I.e., it’s possible to think parades are inappropriate in some cities and not in others; it’s possible to oppose gay marriage and not hate gays; it’s possible to want gays to have some civil rights and not equate their plight with that of black Americans. </p>

<p>Is it just willful incomprehension? I’m done hitting my head against the wall! Peace, out.</p>

85

<p>mommusic and pyroclastic, you’re in for a frustrating time attempting to discuss this topic with HH and golani. They’ve made their intolerant views very obvious in several such discussions on this forum. Every time the topic comes up, they trot out the same old comments, and yet, they still continue to believe that they do “not hate gays”. Some minds are not only closed, they’re locked.</p>

86

<p>HH–newsflash: doctors don’t believe homosexuality is a “choice” anymore. It’s the way you were born. And the Am. Psychiatric institute agrees it’s not a mental disorder, either. But don’t let the medical facts get in the way of your opinion. Do you also not believe in the germ “theory?”</p>

<p>We don’t want homosexuals to have “some” civil rights–we want them to have all the civil rights other persons have in this country.</p>

87

<p>I’m starting to see that. I think I’m done here.</p>

88

<p>So you, good liberal as you are, aam, think that the 58% of black Americans who believe homosexuality is a “lifestyle choice” and the 68% of black Americans who are adamently opposed to gay marriage don’t know what the heck they are talking about?</p>

89

<p>HH–You should know our laws exist to protect the minority from the majority. A plurality of people used to believe “separate but equal” was perfectly fine. Heck, a plurality used to believe slavery was fine. Were they right because they were in the majority?</p>

90

<p>I did know about that protecting the minority from the majority thing–thanks anyway. Anyway, as I said, peace, out. Just know I’m not a hate mongering person and I actually feel my thought processes on this subject are pretty rational (nuanced, even!). Ciao.</p>

91

<p>I have a little challenge for you people: take out the words intolerant, closeminded, non accepting, homophobic when trying to describe me and hereshoping. Then, here comes the easy part, try to show that we are the things you call us. Prove it instead of saying it. Define the terms you throw around, and then try to see f we fit this definition. My bet is you cant do so. Whenever you lose out on an argument resort to name calling. You move the focus of the issue to me and hereshoping as people. You try to hurt our credibilities and thus our arguments without ever actually attacking the argument itself.</p>

<p>Pyroclastic, you are right. I was not clear in what I mentioned about reformists and conservatives. I should have said they are Jews, who choose not to believe or follow, depending on the person ofcourse, in Judaism. Reform Judiasm and Conservative Judaism itsnt real judaism as evidenced by the label in front of the word Judaism. But that really is not important to this discussion.</p>

<p>"Wrong. Sexual orientaton is innate; people do not “choose” to be gay anymore than they choose their race. One may speak of a gay “lifestyle” only to the extent that one can speak of the black “lifestyle”, or the lifestyle of any historically excluded group. "</p>

<p>Actually it is you who are wrong, the gay rights movement IS about behavior, choices, and lifestlye. The gay rights movement is not about granting homos the rights of a person, or the right to be gay. Its about marriage, a behavior, a lifestlye. They want their behaviors of marrying the same sex to be granted. Its about adapting children. People dont have a problem with giving children up to adoption to gays BECAUSE theyre gays but BECAUSE of their behaviors and interactions with other people. Its about not being discrimminated against. But again employers do not discrimminate because they are gay, but BECAUSE of the behavior. Let me give you this example. If I were to open a Judaica store that sells Jewish religious items, and I am looking to hire an employee and in comes a person and he BEHAVES inappropriately by cursing, smoking, not dressing modestly, talking strangely and turns off customers i fire him. Now if someone comes to look for a job and they are gay and they behave in a certain flamboyant way or is not modest, or etc that would not be good for business, that would offend the religious that come to shop at my store, I would fire him.</p>

<p>Now you are going to say that in some cases people are turned off by black employees and they dont shop at stores. Valid point. However, skin color is not a behavior. If someone gay looked for a job at my store and behaved in the way that I want him too, which mite be not the way he regularly behaves, he would be acceptable. </p>

<p>So obviously this is about lifestyle and behavior. Hereshopping made an excellent pt about the status of gays in America. The only things they are excluded from are ones where behavior is an issues</p>

92

<p>golani–Gays who are “out there” drive you crazy, don’t they? :D</p>

93

<p>

</p>

<p>Glad to see you are not intolerant Mr. “Orthodox” Jew</p>

94

<p>

</p>

<p>Glad to see you are not intolerant Mr. “Orthodox” Jew</p>

95

<p>Way off the topic of marches in Jerusalem, but in response to mommusic’s post about the American Psychiatric Association, here is a presentation from 3 former presidents of the AMA at their 2006 convention decrying the political correctness run amok in that organization:
<a href=“http://narth.com/docs/cummings.pdf[/url]”>http://narth.com/docs/cummings.pdf&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>Information about the circumstances surrounding the removal of homosexuality from the DSM in 1973:
<a href=“http://www.narth.com/docs/normalization.html[/url]”>http://www.narth.com/docs/normalization.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>Information about behaviors that are currently being considered for removal from the DSM:
<a href=“http://www.narth.com/docs/symposium.html[/url]”>http://www.narth.com/docs/symposium.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

96

<p>Yeah, I know, there are all those shrinks suffering from Oppositional Defiance Disorder.</p>

<p>Is the opposite of “real” Judaism “fake Judaism”, “lying Judaism”, or “fantasy Judaism”?</p>

97

<p>Very simple mini. There is the Judaism that has survived for an extremely long time. The same Tanach now as then. The talmud has not been changed since the rishonim era, in which case, it was written as oral law in full accordance with Jewish law. Conservative Judaism, by contrast, begain in Europe, and i think in Germany, during the Jewish enlightment in 1700/1800. You might have heard the quote “be a jew at home and a man on the streets”. It was an attempt to assimilate easier. The difference bw Judaism and reform/conservatism is simple, just look at the name-REFORM. You might be interested to known that i am not a fully observant Jew, but I am not going to deny the obvious about the different levels of observance. Nevertheless I am waiting for someone to answer my last post. I guess its easier just to call me intolerant than to prove it. But at least people who are reading this will know whats right and whats wrong</p>

98

<p>You didn’t answer my question.</p>

99

<p>logosprincipal: homosexuality has also been observed in most animal species. And it’s not caused by bad mothers or distant fathers. Simply put, there are at least 3 genders, not two. Nature is very…interesting. And sexy. ;)</p>

100

<p>LOL! and again!</p>