G
- Status
G
gardenswithkids
Guest
Earlier in the discussion, “beyond nature” verses “contrary to nature” came up. Homosexuality may exist in nature, but so is heart disease. Chastity is not contrary to nature, but it does call us to rise above our fallen human natures and use our sexuality properly. In that sense, living a life of chastity requires supernatural assistance–and God offers such grace to all of us so we can rise above our fallen instincts and live a life of grace.
V
Valke2
Guest
My view of Torah is not an orthodox view. It is a complicated thing to explain and probably best left for another thread. But the thumbnail would be that I believe Torah is the divinely inspired attempt by man to communicate the experience of God’s revelation to the people of Israel. And that it does so mostly though story, metaphor, simile and poetry. I understand that the express prohibition in Leveticus is none of that. But since I believe it is a human attempt to express GOd’s will, there is some “wiggle room” (how much wiggle room is the part that gets complicated).
And yes, I am in favor of homosexual marriages. I do not view homosexual relationships as promoting idolatry or otherwise being an abomination. Abusing those you love, sexually harming children, destroying relatinships through prohibited acts would be abominations.
Now whether Conservatve Judaism can address this issue within the framework of Torah in a way that allows for gay marriage remains to be seen. It is currently addressing the issues of gay rabbis and is expected to issue a ruling in December.
N
nydas
Guest
Disregarding ones sexual nature is not proper use of ones secuality. Chastity is not natural, and more and more studies are showing that chastity can have many negative side effects. And it does not require suprenatural power to live a chastful life. a good friend of mine, on of the most beutiful women i have ever seen, is still a virgin even though shes an atheist.
K
Karin
Guest
Ah so you are a Cafeteria-Jew…picking and choosing what to follow?
N
nydas
Guest
Dont even go there. Everyone picks and chooses what to follow. If you disagree, then please go outside and start stoning the nearest whore.Ah so you are a Cafeteria-Jew…picking and choosing what to follow?
I actually have much more respect for people like Valke2. Who are more open minded about their religion.
M
MilesXpisti
Guest
That’s the thrust of it that I’ve been able to discern. It’s amazing. Progressives call moral teaching into question by trying to devolve the morality into simple accordance of either “if you can, you should” or “the animals do it.” Never mind that animals also engage in cannibalism, pedocide (such as when lions or seals will kill cubs when taking over a pride). They say that we’re too enlightened to do this, but should still be free to do anything. But when we ask them to explain themselves, they say it’s too complicated.Ah so you are a Cafeteria-Jew…picking and choosing what to follow?
We go where we please, sir. This is a Catholic forum. If you wanted affirmation of a peverse world-view, then you should’ve thought better than to seek it here. If you want to start a heated debate, don’t get angry when you get it. As for picking and choosing what I want, believe nothing could be further from the truth. Life would be easier if I didn’t have to follow all the rules. Not better, but certainly easier. But on this and most every other issue, Rome has spoken and the debate is ended. I hear and obey.
V
Valke2
Guest
Conservative Judaism determines halacha through the appropriate committee. The Rabbis in the community are then generally given the discretion whether or not to follow which ruling.Ah so you are a Cafeteria-Jew…picking and choosing what to follow?
V
Valke2
Guest
And I gave you my opinion on homosexuality. I did not give you the Jewish law concerning it. In my opinion, the halacha should be modified. As I said, the ins and outs of conservative and orthodox Judiams regarding how the Torah is interperted and how the commandments are applied, is not the easies subject to put into a few neat little paragraphs. Generally, there are one or more responsa written regarding a halachic issue which is then reviewed by Committe on Jewish Law and Standards. The CJLS is made up of 25 rabbis (who vote) and 5 laypersons (who don’t). The responsa will be voted on and if they receive 6 or more votes, they are approved. So you can have two positions that are approved by the CJLS. Then the rabbis in each community are free to choose (more or less) which position to back. They can even decide differently or ignore the responsa, as long as they are not in violation of halacha. For example, there is a responsa that allows driving on shabbat, if you are only driving to shul. It is possible, however, that my rabbi would say no driving.
I’ll be happy to start a thread on Conservative Judaism and contemporary Halacha. But be careful what you wish for…
I’ll be happy to start a thread on Conservative Judaism and contemporary Halacha. But be careful what you wish for…
M
mercygate
Guest
I would love a thread on this. We have a great Jewish thinker where I work who has given seminars on current issues in medical ethics – quoting all the rabbis back to Hillel and beyond! But I often have the squeamish feeling that a lot of it amounts to figuring out how to come up with the answer you want rather than allowing the right answer to emerge from the facts/scripture/tradition. I would love to be proved wrong!
V
Valke2
Guest
An example of a Teshuvot (legal holding) that was apporved in 1990.
May a synagouge be rented or loaned to Christian groups for religoius purposes?
Reasons for permitting it:
Mishna Gittin 59b establishes that Halacha (law) requires that we do that which will assure long term good will toward us from non-jews. This is based in part on a commentary that says we do not prohibit the poor non-jews from gathering the gleanings after a harvest…to promote the peace.
The Tosfeta also states that we support the poor non-Jews along with the poor of Israel …in the interests of peace.
Conversely, we are prohibited from engaging in acts that will generate animosity toward a specific Jew or toward Judaism. Example: The leaders of the community would not fast on Sunday, even when Halcaha called for it, in order to not offend Christians by fasting on their holiday.
and so the responsa goes on… it will then list the reasons why it should not be permitted… Then it will makes its conclusion .
May a synagouge be rented or loaned to Christian groups for religoius purposes?
Reasons for permitting it:
Mishna Gittin 59b establishes that Halacha (law) requires that we do that which will assure long term good will toward us from non-jews. This is based in part on a commentary that says we do not prohibit the poor non-jews from gathering the gleanings after a harvest…to promote the peace.
The Tosfeta also states that we support the poor non-Jews along with the poor of Israel …in the interests of peace.
Conversely, we are prohibited from engaging in acts that will generate animosity toward a specific Jew or toward Judaism. Example: The leaders of the community would not fast on Sunday, even when Halcaha called for it, in order to not offend Christians by fasting on their holiday.
and so the responsa goes on… it will then list the reasons why it should not be permitted… Then it will makes its conclusion .
V
Valke2
Guest
ok, I’ll start a thread called “Teshovot” and I’ll list a series of potential topics. (These will be limited only by my access to the topics. Not all responsa are available to the public). You pick one and well go from there.
W
wabrams
Guest
What rights do they not have that a heterosexual has?
W
Wammy101
Guest
The right to marry.
G
gardenswithkids
Guest
First, both must be willing to marry the other person. Some want to marry but can’t since the other person refuses. Those wishing to marry must not already be married to others. They can’t be close family mambers. They must meet age requirement.
Beyond the legal requirements, there are moral requirements to maintain the dignity of the human person. Marriage is life long, therefore the Church does not recognize re-marriage if the first spouse is alive. And as already mentioned numerous times on this thread that marriages must be open to the transmission of life. Marriage is a life-giving, live-long covenant between a man and woman that forms the society by way of the family. Anything less than that is an offense to our human dignity.
My aquaintence and her homosexual husband whom I mentioned earlier, well they had a child together, so I’m quite sure they were really married. Too bad he didn’t honor the commitment he made to her; he might still be alive today if he had. Too bad more heterosexuals don’t honor and uphold marriage too. I suspect that many reading this thread come from or know families torn apart by divorce or whose parents never married in the first place. Such inappropriate use of sexuality and marriage robs children of the stable home that they deserve.
K
Karin
Guest
Not true…I follow to the best of my ability all the Church teaches…I do not participate in abnormal homosexual acts nor do I condone or accept these acts as “normal”…two woman “fisting” each other is not normal behaviour nor is two woman strapping on plastic male genitalia(sp?) to have sex normal…
you may pick and choose what to follow, that is your right but many of us do follow what the Church teaches
F
fix
Guest
How may one have a “right” to something that is wrong?
F
fix
Guest
Smoking is intrinsically wrong? I have no reason to conlude smoking in small amounts is evil. I do have proof homosexual acts, in any amount, are wrong.
To claim a “right” to commit an act which is always an evil would seem absurd.
- Status