Marriage: Secular, Religious & Fraudulent.

A few weeks ago, Attorney General Eric Holder, in a letter to Speaker of the House John Boehner, announced that the Department of Justice would no longer defend the Defense of Marriage Act in court. Holder, in the name of the Obama administration, determined that §3 of DOMA (defining marriage—for federal purposes—as between a man and a woman) violates the 5^th Amendment (guaranteeing citizens equal status in the eyes of the law). He continued to explain that, because of the nature of the group affected—gays—the law needed to be reviewed with “heightened scrutiny.” On this standard of review, there needs to be an important government interest being furthered by this law. Holder stated that, because the administration deemed there to be no such interest, the Department of Justice would no longer defend the law in court (though the other departments of the executive branch will continue to enforce the act).

What are the actual effects of this decision? One friend of mine, an attorney, found this to be the most powerful progression towards gay rights that we’ve seen so far. I don’t really see that. This certainly sends a strong message to the legislature, Supreme Court and American people that Obama wants to see DOMA repealed. But Congress will go on to defend the act and the pending cases will hopefully find their way to the Supreme Court. This is progress, and will hopefully have some influence on courts’ decisions, but doesn’t really do too much for us right now. Basically, I’m still planning of moving to a state where gay marriage is legal.

The right to marry is very important to me. Though I did not always feel this way, I cannot imagine a future without a husband, someone with whom I will build a life and a family. DOMA was passed with the intent of promoting the religious idea that marriage is a union between one man and one woman. As a secular law, I expect this to be changed. That being said, I do not expect a change in Halacha to permit gay marriage, only secular marriage.

A few months ago, I attended a panel discussion regarding the respective attitudes of Reform, Conservative and Orthodox Judaism towards gay marriage. The divisions were pretty clear: the Orthodox rabbi saw no room for such a union within society; the Conservative rabbi was more open, expressing willingness to marry two Jews regardless of their sex; the Reform rabbi was willing to marry anyone, including intermarriages. I respect each of these opinions as they each correspond to the respective sect’s interpretation of the Torah. I agree with the Orthodox stance that, from a religious point of view, marriage is defined as between a man and a woman. Specifically, between a heterosexual man and a heterosexual woman. However, the religious attitude should not encroach on my right to marry as a citizen in a secular state. I also disagree with the contention that, because this is the theological definition of marriage, homosexual men and women should be forced into unions that meet this definition. If you are reading this blog, you have probably seen a number of other authors discussing the same point recently.

The Israeli newspaper Haaretz recently published an article about an attempt by some right-wing Israelis to wed gay men to lesbian women so that the couples would be able to procreate (through medical intervention) and lead “normal” lives. Some of the couples married through this initiative are divorcing one another. One of the “successes” described their relationship as platonic, compared it to a business relationship and said they chose this path because of their commitment not to violate Halachic prohibitions of gay sex and their desire to raise children.

The rabbi spearheading this movement recognizes that some of the individuals he marries do slip up and have relations with members of the same sex. He doesn’t, however, “see this as a betrayal. Generally, it's between them and their Creator." He is also quoted as saying that “a family isn't just sex and love. It's an instrumental partnership, though not just a technical one."

As a young man to whom a similar route was suggested, I am shocked and disturbed that there is now an organized front enabling these unions.  What I see when I read articles like this is a misconception that I had emphasized before: automatically correlating a same-sex relationship with a sin. This is not always the case. Moreover, we are willing to recognize that the act of one who transgresses Halacha is “between them and their Creator.”  I respect and condone the religious desire to help one shy away from sinning, which, I believe, is the intent of this rabbi. I disagree with his chosen approach. First of all, the individuals “slip up.” He recognizes this. Second of all, in his zealous attempt to purge society of one sin, he is filling it with another. Midvar Sheker Tirchak- Stay away from false words. These marriages are lies and promote a culture of dishonesty. Marriages such as these send a message to gay men and women around the world that the only way to live a religious life is to deny their true emotions enter in a heterosexual marriage. This is the very same course of action the rabbis and lay leaders around the US and the world decried in the Statement of Principles last year (¶12).

Furthermore, same-sex relationships are now capable of meeting the “instrumentality” aspect of a marriage.  The view that marriages are only recognizable if they can satisfy the requirement of procreation no longer preempts same sex unions. Thanks to technology, adoption and the foster care system, there is a growing number of religious same sex Jews who are raising children together. While these sham marriages are capable of producing children, they are lacking in the sex and love elements of a union and fail to meet the standard of marriage proposed by their advocates.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/49405403/DOJ-Letter-to-Speaker-Boehner-on-DOMA
http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/news/israeli-rabbis-launch-initiative-to-marry-gay-men-to-lesbian-women-1.348465

Esther: Queen of the Masquerade

The story and miracle of Purim focus on Esther’s ability to keep her Jewish identity secret. As the niece of one of Jewry’s most respected leaders this cannot have been a simple task. Her identity was surely known to many, yet no one exposed Esther as a Jew. The Talmud (Megilla, Daf 13a) tells us that Achashverosh sent gifts across his empire in the hopes of discovering her origins. Those who knew of Esther’s identity must have, on some level, appreciated the significance of her decision to keep it a secret. And Esther, surrounded by all the luxuries of the known world, lived in the fear of exposure.

She bid her time and, when the moment was right, approached Achashverosh with the truth, saving Jews across the Persian Empire from certain death.

Gay frum Jews are not something new. What is new is that now, in the 21st century, we are beginning to make others aware of our existence. Most recently, a young woman at Yeshiva University’s Stern College for Women wrote about her experiences in the closet (the entire article can be found here). Though YU has, over the past couple of years, served as an outlet for discussing homosexuality within Orthodox Jewry, this was the first time a lesbian spoke out. Her contribution is important because, by bringing the often overlook existence of lesbian frum Jews to the limelight and expanding the dialogue to reveal yet another layer of truth, her article offers more validity to our struggle.

I often find myself wondering “Why now? What is it about this point in Jewish history that makes this the right time for us to awaken Judaism to our existence?” Obviously, we gay frum Jews can only come out now because of the social progress made across the western world. Still, I think there must be both a purpose and a lesson to be learnt by Jews around the world in the fact that we are coming out. The veil Esther kept over her identity allowed her to save the Jews, what reason can G-d have for allowing all of this to transpire now?

I acknowledge that we can never truly know G-d’s master plan, but is there harm I curiosity?

I have some thoughts, but I would like to  challenge my readers to contemplate this question.

On a side note, I think this is the perfect opportunity to reiterate a point I have made in the past: If you are gay and struggling with that fact, revealing your true identity—coming out of the closet—should only be done when you are ready. Do not let people pressure you into making a rushed decision. This doesn’t mean postpone it forever, I don’t think that decision would be mentally sound, but take the steps necessary at your own speed.

"Can I swab your cheek?"

The past few weeks have provided me with ample material on which to opine. I am going to reserve the conversation on the Obama administration’s decision to stop defending the Defense of Marriage Act (“DOMA”) as well as the recent article by a lesbian at Stern for a later date.

Those readers affiliated with a Jewish organization will, I am sure, have at times come across a booth asking them for a donation for something that is seemingly odd: their saliva. “Gift of Life” is an organization that, in partnership with the National Bone Marrow Registry in the United States, seeks to catalogue the DNA of individuals across the country. This is done so that, when someone is diagnosed with a terminal illness and in need of a bone marrow transplant, a simple computer search can be conducted to find a genetic match. Through my various roles as a Jewish activist I have asked perhaps hundreds of people to swab their cheeks for this cause.

I myself have never been swabbed.

What possible reason could I have for abstaining from partaking? The reason is simple: while I can easily swab my cheek and add my DNA to the database, there is a good chance that I would not be able to donate my marrow—in fact that it would be rejected—if it was needed. Let me share a story to provide some background.

As a college freshman, I eagerly spent my first Halloween in the secular world waiting in line . . . to donate my blood to the American Red Cross. Upon entered the donor waiting area I was given a medical history form to complete and a sheet with a list of candidates whose donation would be excluded. On the list of rejected donors, amongst drug users and “working girls,” was any male who has had sex with another male since 1977. I spoke with the administrators at the site and they determined that I could not donate blood. My social security no. was entered into the database of prohibited donors. I was warned that, should I try and enter a donation site and enter my personal information, I will be removed from the premises. Not a good experience. Side note: I am NOT conceding to having violated Halacha. I vehemently deny that allegation.

The Food & Drug Administration (“FDA”) and the Center for Disease Control (“CDC”) regulate blood and organ donation. To be frank, gay men are excluded from donating. This exclusion stems from the HIV/AIDS epidemic that first took the world by storm in the late 70s and early 80s. The fear of this disease has, rightfully so, altered health policies around the world. While the FDA, as far as I am aware, does not permit the donation of blood from any male meeting these criteria since 1977, the CDC’s regulation are slightly looser. The CDC prohibits donations from men who have had sex with men within 5 years of donating an organ. However, in life threatening situations when there are no other viable options, the donee may be made aware of the risks that would accompany the donation and select whether to accept the organ and the risks to which they may be exposed .

I have not swabbed my cheek because there might come a time when I will be a match and I will be forced to label myself as “high-risk” of transmitting HIV to an individual. I will either be rejected outright or an ill individual and his/her family will be forced to scrutinize me and decided if they want to risk accepting an infection that I would, G-d willing, not even have.  Side note: Donors are often anonymous, but I assume that, at the very least, the donee would be given my history and basic information to assist them in evaluating the risks.

The policies requiring this disclosure, while based in an understandable fear, are ill formed. The promiscuous stereotype applied to gay men, the foundation of these rules, may have some basis in fact, but it is no more true than the rampant promiscuity and exposure to HIV and other STDs that exists in the general heterosexual  community. Among the most common carriers of HIV/AIDS are black women. I am not advocating for their inclusion onto this list. I concede that some of the activities undertaken on the list do represent unwise choices that, if persistent, create a higher risk for disease. However, in this day and age, when an HIV test takes less than 20 minutes to process and is considered fool proof (granted, the testee must not have engaged in any of these activities within 3 months prior to the test), the continued enforcement of these regulations is ludicrous.

Were the policy to be altered so that blood samples/tests determined the risk of a donor’s exposure to HIV on an individual basis that disregards stereotypes, I would register with “Gift of Life.” Until that day comes, I refuse to place a family in the position of deciding whether to save a loved one’s life while “exposing” them to HIV. And I refuse to face rejection of my marrow (or other bodily organ) because of an outdated policy that promotes the view of my body as one large vial of disease.

In the Hands of Fate

When I first acknowledged the fact that I am gay I was crushed by the realization that the tradition, symbolism and joy of the Chuppah would no longer be available to me. For a long time I thought I was destined to be alone, to live a life of shame and celibacy. After some time I recognized that being frum and being gay did not require emotional and physical solitude. I began to date, to try and find that one guy with whom I would spend the rest of my life.

The dating period In the Orthodox community in which I was raised is, more often than not, very short. An extreme example of this is a friend of mine that got engaged after one week of dating. The more common time frame would be two, maybe three, months of dating.

One of the character traits my friends look for when dating is that their significant other be Hashkafically similar (have the same view on issues of Jewish law and practice). This makes sense. How can you possibly marry someone with whom you disagree on fundamental matters?

When I first began dating I had my priorities out of order. I was trying to find someone with whom I could settle down, regardless of their Hashkafic outlook. In fact, I dated more gentiles and non-observant Jews than I did men that were on the same page as me. None of those relationships worked out. It took me…well, it took me too long, but I finally understood that I needed to find someone with the same basic approach to Judaism and life. And then I didn’t think that such a person existed. Until I met my ex. He showed me that there were other gay frum men looking to lead a life of Torah observance and love one another as truly and deeply as possible. It didn’t work out between us, but I left that relationship with the knowledge that my ideal mate is out there somewhere.

Still, I struggle. There aren’t many Jewish men who are Torah observant and out of the closet. I’ve found myself prioritizing aspects of Judaism and defining my own Hashkafic worldview. This way I know where I stand in Jewish observance. I also know in what areas I would feel comfortable becoming stricter—and if need be, laxer—in my observance.

There is someone out there for all of us, even the gay frum Jews. I know that. I believe in that. And it is this knowledge and belief that boosts my confidence over living as a gay frum Jew.I may not ever have a Chuppah or a marriage in the most traditional manner, but I will have love and a beautiful Jewish home.

Robert’s Rules

Having participated in the leadership of numerous organizations, I have always found Robert’s Rules (Parliamentary Procedure) to be useful in maintaining decorum. These rules were developed in the mid-19^th century by a military officer who sought to offer a system of order to be used by organizations. I suggest you purchase the book if you seek out more information.

I’m trying to have some fun with this blog and will therefore use structure offered by Bobbie’s Rules (as I fondly refer to them) in this post. I also think it will help emphasize a point I would like to make. This is my blog so I’m by default on the speakers list.

I recently attended a lecture on the topic of Judaism and homosexuality (what else is new?). I agreed with much of what the presenter said, but not everything. Here I am explaining my views and the rationale behind them.

I always argue for acceptance of homosexuality within a Halachic framework. This would, in a Robert’s Rules debate, beg the following motion:

“I move to divide the question.”

The debate centering on the acceptance of homosexuality within Judaism must be divided into two issues. The first is acceptance of gay and lesbian community members (with no distinction to be made between singles and couples). The second regards the actual act of anal sex prohibited in the Torah. I am purposefully not equating this with differentiating between the sin and the sinner because this assumes that the gay community members are sinning. The line to be drawn is between a homosexual orientation and one specific act.

The first issue is not actually a Halachic question. As Jews we are commanded to love our fellow human beings regardless of any aspect of their personality with which we disagree. Halacha offers no opportunity for the exclusion of an individual because of whom an individual loves. There is no tradition in Judaism that prohibits love and affection between members of the same sex.

Halacha does prohibit specific sexual acts, among these anal sex between two men. I cannot claim that I have an answer to how/if this Halacha should be applied to gay men. In fact, I am very torn. Traditionally the Torah has been read to prohibit anal sex between any two men. End of story.  I have heard a number of arguments (including at the recent lecture) proposing a limitation of the prohibition so that it would only apply to rape; men with both heterosexual & homosexual tendencies; cultic situations and others. These arguments are based on the context and terminology of the prohibiting verse (Leviticus 18:22 “Though shalt not lie with a man, as with a woman. That is an abomination.”). An example of one such argument is that when the term Toevah – abomination—is used in the Torah it most often refers to Idolatrous acts (those performed due to belief in other gods). According to this view, two men engaging in anal sex that is not directed towards the worship of a false god would be permitted.*^Note Ultimately, we are left with a question regarding the extent to that this prohibition is to be applied.

I see no space for debate in regards to the first issue. Gay men and women must be accepted as full members of Orthodox society. I am not a Halachic Posek (jurist) and will not offer a solution to the second issue, but I do have some thoughts on the topic.

I recently suggested, to a rabbi, the idea that the prohibited act of anal sex be viewed in a light similar to Taharat HaMishpacha (family purity; requiring limitations of relations between a man and a woman during the woman’s period). Judaism permits the union between a man and a woman and does not further inquire into the purity of their sexual relations. We are prohibited from assuming that anyone is sinning and in this case do not assume that the couple has violated these laws. These matters are between them and G-d. I argued for homosexual anal sex to be viewed in the same light. I proposed that a gay union be respected and that we offer no assumptions as to violations of the Halacha. The rabbi hearing my claim rejected it flat out. Simply put, he preferred to insert an assumption of violation into any relationship between two men. I disagree with him completely. Such an assumption is prohibited by the Jewish tenet of Dan Likav Zechus—giving every man the benefit of doubt . Furthermore, if we assume that heterosexual couples are capable of practicing restraint from sexual activity for nearly half a month, why do we not assume that a homosexual couple can practice restraint from one sexual act?

I am confused regarding the prohibition of anal sex because of the numerous voices on the subject and because I have yet to hear any rabbi address all the arguments surrounding the issue. If there is any issue to be debated it is this one. BUT, I think that everyone take their mind out of the bedrooms of others and examine their own lives before they cast stones.

Between the two questions posed to Orthodox Judaism, the first should be a non-issue and the second is a private matter best left to private discussions between a rabbi and his congregants.

*Note: I have not conducted my own survey of the use of Toevah—abomination—in the Torah nor am I endorsing this view.

Watch this.

I find the video below to speak volumes. I'll be publishing a new post soon In the interlude I recommend you consider the message this man is relaying.

Unwelcome Exposures

My original intention for this post was to write about the unique challenge of dating as a gay-Orthodox Jew (something that stemmed from a conversation I had with my father in the aftermath of my last post). Plans change. Tonight I had a conversation with someone very dear to me, Shane. This post will be about the subject matter we discussed.

A few short days ago one of my best friends, Devorah, told me that a friend of hers (an acquaintance of mine), Becky, had asked if I was aware that Shane is gay. I relayed this story to Shane, who had not come-out to Becky. Indeed, I knew of his sexuality. Not only have I been aware of Shane’s sexuality for a long time, he is my ex-boyfriend and someone who’s friendship I value dearly.

Shane and I both believe in something that is best termed “exclusive-coming-out.” We are aware of our sexuality, we live our lives as gay-Orthodox Jews, but we do not feel the need to share this fact with the entire world. We tell our families and others with whom we are close. This decision, one we had both come to before we were introduced, is based on concepts of Tzniut (modesty)—the lack of appropriateness in inviting others into our intimate lives— and the reality that many people in the Orthodox world are not prepared to accept our true identity. In some situations, announcing the truth could harm us in positions we hold. Our sexuality is the business only of those whom we decide to inform.

Shane was shocked when I told him of the inquiry. He had not told Becky and knew not from where she had heard. More disturbing was the fact that she felt this was a topic about which she could gossip. I do not suppose that Becky intended Shane harm. To her the conversation was probably no more than social. What she did not realize was that had her words fallen on the wrong ears Shane could face some very real, very harmful repercussions.

I have had similar incidents happen to me. Some time ago I was outed by someone I do not know to a family member of mine. Another time a friend inadvertently outed me in a conversation that followed her laughing at the suggestion of my being set up with a girl.

You may pose the following question: How if I, or Shane, intend to live my life as a gay-Orthodox Jew and perhaps one day settle down, do I intend to maintain an exclusive roster of individuals privy to my sexuality? Would this not become public knowledge? I speak for myself when I say that I am under no false impressions that there will come a point at which I will be able to exercise no control over who knows and who does not know of my sexuality. On some level I have already reached that point. This reality does not award people the right gossip about my private life and struggle. In fact, such a conversation is Loshon Hara.

Even if you, the reader, are accepting of the fact that a Jew can be both gay and Orthodox, sharing this information regarding an individual without the certain knowledge that this individual is completely out-of-the-closet is inappropriate, hurtful, potentially dangerous to this person in many ways and against Halacha.

Did Becky mean harm by her words? Probably not. Did harm occur in this instance? In some ways no, but in many ways yes.  Having yourself unwillingly outed is an intense emotional shock because of the violation and invasion of privacy that accompanies such a disclosure. The best way I can describe the situation is by calling it an emotional rape.

I urge you all to think long and hard before you discuss the private lives of others.