Do We Really Need This Kind of Bigotry?

[Jayhawker Soule]

That was a brilliant article. I apologize for lumping your post in with the anti-miscegenation camp.

Accepted … and thank you.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

I dare say what I think, yes.

But are we talking about mixed marriages as generally seen by the Jewish, or instead about the regrettable event that is the reason for being of this thread?

You know, the one that no one here finds acceptable? That group was indeed racist, as the article makes plenty clear.

You were talking about the couple at hand in the OP's article, right?

The woman is a convert to Islam. So she's a Muslim. If someone still objects to a Muslim who is of Jewish heritage marrying a Muslim who is Arab, then we must conclude that the reasons for that objection aren't really about religion and are instead about ethnicity and so can be called racist.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

... we must conclude that the reasons for that objection aren't really about religion and are instead about ethnicity and so can be called racist.

Not "we," you, because you're driven to do so. It's a myopia laced with bigotry.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Not "we," you, because you're driven to do so. It's a myopia laced with bigotry.

We = people with common sense. Oh, I'm a bigot? Oh, you're funny, Jay. Come back when you have something of substance to say.

 

[Levite]

I think several people have already expressed much of what I might say. But in the interests of clarity, my opposition to intermarriage is strictly concerning the marriage of Jews to non-Jews. What non-Jews do amongst themselves concerning the customs, ritual laws, and cultural practices of marriage is not my business, or the business of any Jew.

Intermarriage between Jews and non-Jews is significant for two reasons: one is that we are prohibited by our religion from marrying people who are not Jewish. The other is that when Jews do intermarry, the result is not only chaos because of the uncertainties introduced into our community vis-a-vis identity and affiliation, but also because the vast majority of intermarriages reflect assimilation of Jews into the secular culture, and intermarriage tends not to help this problem. The children of intermarriages are not Jewish if the Jewish spouse is the male; but even when the children are Jewish (the Jewish spouse being the female), intermarried families tend to either give children weak Jewish identities and vastly insufficient Jewish education and experience, or no Jewish identity at all.

In other words, it eats away at the fabric of Jewish existence. Some intermarriages actually lead to the formal apostasy of the Jewish spouse (such as the one apparently being protested in the OP article), which is not only a sin in Jewish religious teaching, but it is of course an even more violent ripping away at Jewish existence. But even the intermarriages that don't lead to apostasy overwhelmingly lead to secularist assimilation.

Judaism is a socioreligious ethnicity (ethnicity not in a racial sense but in a cultural sense): that is to say, it is an identity which incorporates elements of religion, of nationality, and of culture-- all inextricably linked with each other. Intermarriage not only transgresses the religion, it aids in destroying the culture as a whole, since Jewish identity requires not only blood belonging or adoption (i.e., conversion), but to be functional and meaningfully effective additionally requires education and experience of living a Jewish life. This nearly never occurs with intermarriages. The one or two examples of intermarried families I have encountered where it did occur, the non-Jewish spouse eventually converted to Judaism.

The requirement of endogamy has nothing to do with superiority or inferiority, nothing to do with wishing to exclude certain types or races or whatnot. It has to do with the Jewish People being preserved, with Jewish culture and religion continuing and with the Jewish family being a stabilizing and cohering force to keep the Jewish People and our tradition alive and effective.

If a non-Jew and a Jew wish to marry, Judaism provides a way to facilitate that happening: the non-Jew can convert to Judaism.

It's pretty to talk about love conquering all, but the truth is that everyone in any given society has responsibilities outside themselves and their own desires. No one should force a Jew to marry or not marry whoever they want using violence, abusive language, or public humiliation. But to be a Jew is to have responsibilities to the Jewish People, to our covenant with God, to our tradition, to our future. Those responsibilities can transcend even the romantic desires of our hearts. If a Jew chooses to marry a non-Jew, they must live with the knowledge of the wrong they are doing to the Jewish People and the Jewish tradition, and they must accept the consequences of their actions (their children not being Jews, their spouse being unable to participate in Jewish observance and ritual, etc.).

I don't say this lightly. Twice in my life, I was involved with a non-Jewish woman I loved and would have married. Both times, the woman refused to convert, and we ended the relationship. I accepted my heartbreak as the price of being faithful to the responsibilities I have to my people and my God; the women, being the excellent individuals they were, understood, respected, and supported my stance. It was hard, and so I know what I mean when I say this is what responsible Judaism can sometimes ask of us; but it would have been utterly selfish to do otherwise.

I can imagine that some of those who have expressed criticism (or intolerant vituperation) of the rejection of intermarriage do so because they believe in some sort of universalism, likely of the sort that makes light or condemns boundaries such as cultural or national divisions, or perhaps even religious divisions. Thus, any reason of identity affiliation that would prevent two people from being together is deemed offensive.

Personally, I think universalism of that sort is foolish. It devalues the uniqueness and specialness of our differences. I am much more interested in pluralism: wherein the different cultures, nationalities, ethnicities, etc. are valued for their singular and remarkable variations and individual natures, and each is tolerated.

If my desire and my dedication to preserve my people, my culture, and my religious tradition is unacceptable to you (whoever you are), so be it. I can live with that just fine. Feel free to call me whatever names you like because of it. But my people have struggled to persist through literally millennia of war, oppression, subjugation, attempts at genocide, and centuries of attempts to force us to assimilate or apostasize. We did it by sticking together, by valuing our culture, our religion, our tradition, and by reinforcing the responsibilities we have to one another over our own selfish desires. Like many of my colleagues, I work hard to counter with education and inspiration the soft threat of secular assimilation and spiritual apathy that is besetting our community; if part of that is having to get called stupid names by people for trying to keep my people going into the future, I assure you, I will not lose a moment of sleep over it.

 

[LuisDantas]

You were talking about the couple at hand in the OP's article, right?

The woman is a convert to Islam. So she's a Muslim.

Most definitely. I said as much, if you will remember.

All the same, she still has a Jewish heritage and history. And as long as both her and her relatives, friends and acquaintances decide to maintain it, she also has significant ties with the Jewish community.

That is what a community is, after all.

If someone still objects to a Muslim who is of Jewish heritage marrying a Muslim who is Arab,

It may be in any of several conceivable forms, degrees and for any of several motivations, many but not all of them not very respectable, most of them so very human.

then we must conclude that the reasons for that objection aren't really about religion and are instead about ethnicity and so can be called racist.

Sure. We can conclude most anything we wish to, as long as we surrender to prejudice and bigotry, facts be darned.

In this specific case, we may conclude that there is racism because it is stated outright in the article. But not automatically just because her relatives expressed any degree of disapproval for the marriage, not as a blanket judgement of the general class of situations. It takes a considerable degree of inexperience with people to fail to realize that.


Are you having that hard a time understanding things, or is it just your hurt speaking?

Are you truly denying that the Jewish community is entitled to feelings and preferences about what their own members do (but of course not to actually forbidding people their personal decisions)? And that converting to Islam and marrying a Muslim does not magically erase all the history and significance of the ties to that community?

If you are, then so be it. I will adjust my expectations accordingly.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Are you having that hard a time understanding things, or is it just your hurt speaking?

Are you truly denying that the Jewish community is entitled to feelings and preferences about what their own members do? And that converting to Islam and marrying a Muslim does not magically erase all the history and significance of the ties to that community?

If you are, then so be it. I will adjust my expectations accordingly.

I've made myself quite clear and I'm sick of the hypocrisy. If any other group made the same sort of statements, we'd all be decrying them but why is it different for Jews? If a white person says that, they are a racist. If a black person says that, they are a racist. If an Asian person says that, they are a racist. And on and on. And rightfully so, I might add!

I don't make exceptions when it comes to such things. Unlike you, I'm consistent. They don't get a free pass to be racist, tribalist, xenophobic, obsessed with controlling the reproductive choices of other Jews, etc. If you take issue with that, then that's your problem and you need examine your own inconsistencies and hypocrisy. I've said what I had to say to you and I'm not changing my mind. If Levite as will as all the other people who detest "intermarriage" have an issue with the concept of the universal brother/sisterhood of all humanity, then that's their own sin they will have to answer to God for. I will not be joining them in that sin.

So you can keep on defending it, Luis. I don't give a damn. That's your personal problem.

 

[Avi1001]

What will you do if your child enters an interfaith marriage ? Disown them ? Good luck.

I believe your position is outdated and destructive.

I believe many reform Rabbi's allow interfaith marriages:

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interfaith_marriage_in_Judaism

I think several people have already expressed much of what I might say. But in the interests of clarity, my opposition to intermarriage is strictly concerning the marriage of Jews to non-Jews. What non-Jews do amongst themselves concerning the customs, ritual laws, and cultural practices of marriage is not my business, or the business of any Jew.

Intermarriage between Jews and non-Jews is significant for two reasons: one is that we are prohibited by our religion from marrying people who are not Jewish. The other is that when Jews do intermarry, the result is not only chaos because of the uncertainties introduced into our community vis-a-vis identity and affiliation, but also because the vast majority of intermarriages reflect assimilation of Jews into the secular culture, and intermarriage tends not to help this problem. The children of intermarriages are not Jewish if the Jewish spouse is the male; but even when the children are Jewish (the Jewish spouse being the female), intermarried families tend to either give children weak Jewish identities and vastly insufficient Jewish education and experience, or no Jewish identity at all.

In other words, it eats away at the fabric of Jewish existence. Some intermarriages actually lead to the formal apostasy of the Jewish spouse (such as the one apparently being protested in the OP article), which is not only a sin in Jewish religious teaching, but it is of course an even more violent ripping away at Jewish existence. But even the intermarriages that don't lead to apostasy overwhelmingly lead to secularist assimilation.

Judaism is a socioreligious ethnicity (ethnicity not in a racial sense but in a cultural sense): that is to say, it is an identity which incorporates elements of religion, of nationality, and of culture-- all inextricably linked with each other. Intermarriage not only transgresses the religion, it aids in destroying the culture as a whole, since Jewish identity requires not only blood belonging or adoption (i.e., conversion), but to be functional and meaningfully effective additionally requires education and experience of living a Jewish life. This nearly never occurs with intermarriages. The one or two examples of intermarried families I have encountered where it did occur, the non-Jewish spouse eventually converted to Judaism.

The requirement of endogamy has nothing to do with superiority or inferiority, nothing to do with wishing to exclude certain types or races or whatnot. It has to do with the Jewish People being preserved, with Jewish culture and religion continuing and with the Jewish family being a stabilizing and cohering force to keep the Jewish People and our tradition alive and effective.

If a non-Jew and a Jew wish to marry, Judaism provides a way to facilitate that happening: the non-Jew can convert to Judaism.

It's pretty to talk about love conquering all, but the truth is that everyone in any given society has responsibilities outside themselves and their own desires. No one should force a Jew to marry or not marry whoever they want using violence, abusive language, or public humiliation. But to be a Jew is to have responsibilities to the Jewish People, to our covenant with God, to our tradition, to our future. Those responsibilities can transcend even the romantic desires of our hearts. If a Jew chooses to marry a non-Jew, they must live with the knowledge of the wrong they are doing to the Jewish People and the Jewish tradition, and they must accept the consequences of their actions (their children not being Jews, their spouse being unable to participate in Jewish observance and ritual, etc.).

I don't say this lightly. Twice in my life, I was involved with a non-Jewish woman I loved and would have married. Both times, the woman refused to convert, and we ended the relationship. I accepted my heartbreak as the price of being faithful to the responsibilities I have to my people and my God; the women, being the excellent individuals they were, understood, respected, and supported my stance. It was hard, and so I know what I mean when I say this is what responsible Judaism can sometimes ask of us; but it would have been utterly selfish to do otherwise.

I can imagine that some of those who have expressed criticism (or intolerant vituperation) of the rejection of intermarriage do so because they believe in some sort of universalism, likely of the sort that makes light or condemns boundaries such as cultural or national divisions, or perhaps even religious divisions. Thus, any reason of identity affiliation that would prevent two people from being together is deemed offensive.

Personally, I think universalism of that sort is foolish. It devalues the uniqueness and specialness of our differences. I am much more interested in pluralism: wherein the different cultures, nationalities, ethnicities, etc. are valued for their singular and remarkable variations and individual natures, and each is tolerated.

If my desire and my dedication to preserve my people, my culture, and my religious tradition is unacceptable to you (whoever you are), so be it. I can live with that just fine. Feel free to call me whatever names you like because of it. But my people have struggled to persist through literally millennia of war, oppression, subjugation, attempts at genocide, and centuries of attempts to force us to assimilate or apostasize. We did it by sticking together, by valuing our culture, our religion, our tradition, and by reinforcing the responsibilities we have to one another over our own selfish desires. Like many of my colleagues, I work hard to counter with education and inspiration the soft threat of secular assimilation and spiritual apathy that is besetting our community; if part of that is having to get called stupid names by people for trying to keep my people going into the future, I assure you, I will not lose a moment of sleep over it.

 

[columbus]

It is illegal for Jews to marry non-Jews in Israel. Why are you trying to shift the blame onto Islam?

Yes, it is possible she converted to be compliant with a twisted, backwards, bigoted and oppressive law: an Israeli one. Sharia law is not in effect in Israel.

Really? It is illegal for a Jewish person to marry the person that they want to in Israel?

As a gay man in the USA I'm accustomed to laws against marriage. But I thought Israel was better than that. I did not know that Israel had such laws. I am unpleasantly surprised.

I can understand Levite's position. I can't agree, but I get it. He thinks that the old tribal affiliations are more important than the living people. As long as he is only inconveniencing himself I don't have much problem. But this is a law? One party or the other had to change official religious affiliation or they couldn't get married?

How, exactly, does Israel figure out what someone believes(if anything) about god?

Tom

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Really? It is illegal for a Jewish person to marry the person that they want to in Israel?

As a gay man in the USA I'm accustomed to laws against marriage. But I thought Israel was better than that. I did not know that Israel had such laws. I am unpleasantly surprised.

I can understand Levite's position. I can't agree, but I get it. He thinks that the old tribal affiliations are more important than the living people. As long as he is only inconveniencing himself I don't have much problem. But this is a law? One party or the other had to change official religious affiliation or they couldn't get married?

How, exactly, does Israel figure out what someone believes(if anything) about god?

Tom

Israel only permits religious marriages. Marriages are performed by the clergy of the respective religions. Marriages between Jews and non-Jews are not allowed in Israel. There's a bunch of different rules for marriages of people of other faiths, too. It's shocking how backwards it is (well, it's shocking if you think Israel is a secular democratic country like Western nations are - it isn't).

Marriage Information | Embassy of the United States

*Advertisement (It's not an ad. Lol.)
Israel Civil Marriage Ban Blocks Those Not Considered Jewish From Wedding

 

[Flankerl]

Blablabla

People of different religions can marry outside of the State of Israel and upon their return the State of Israel accepts their marriage and its legal.
Boohoo thats racist.

So Gentiles and Jews cant marry inside the State of Israel. Well the same is true for Muslims and Christians.
Boohoo thats somehow not racist because it wasnt mentioned once during the last 24 pages.

This thread really shows whats wrong with some people on this forum.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Blablabla

People of different religions can marry outside of the State of Israel and upon their return the State of Israel accepts their marriage and its legal.
Boohoo thats racist.

So Gentiles and Jews cant marry inside the State of Israel. Well the same is true for Muslims and Christians.
Boohoo thats somehow not racist because it wasnt mentioned once during the last 24 pages.

Both situations are ******* stupid and shameful. Israel needs to fix its completely backwards marriage laws and break the control of the Orthodox rabbis over the institution in Israel. No one should have to leave their country in order to get married! But I won't hold my breath for change in that area since the government of Israel is run by a bunch of warmongering racists.

This thread really shows whats wrong with some people on this forum.

On that, we can agree.

 

[Flankerl]

Which part of "its the same for Islam and Christianity" did you not understand?

But of course its the yoke of the Rabbis and not the yoke of the Bishops and Imams.


Somehow this couple married just fine without a Rabbi keeping them from it.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Which part of "its the same for Islam and Christianity" did you not understand?

But of course its the yoke of the Rabbis and not the yoke of the Bishops and Imams.


Somehow this couple married just fine without a Rabbi keeping them from it.

I said that both situations are stupid and shameful, referring to the situations of Jews and non-Jews in Israel. The marriage laws in Israel need to be completely revised and they need to institute civil marriage. When it comes to the Jews, they're all under the authority of the Orthodox rabbinate, whether or not the Jewish person is Orthodox themselves. All Jewish weddings in Israel have to be officiated by an Orthodox rabbi.

 

[Flankerl]

How about we leave it up to the people living in the country? Last time i checked they were free to vote for any party they liked.

So they could kinda vote for a party to press for a change.

 

[Prophet]

Definitely.

And what of people who oppose gay marriage? Are they simply defending the sanctity of marriage in a manner completely devoid of any bigotry whatsoever?

 

[dantech]

Opposition to intermarriage = bigotry? Now I've seen everything...

 

[Prophet]

Blablabla

People of different religions can marry outside of the State of Israel and upon their return the State of Israel accepts their marriage and its legal.
Boohoo thats racist.

So Gentiles and Jews cant marry inside the State of Israel. Well the same is true for Muslims and Christians.
Boohoo thats somehow not racist because it wasnt mentioned once during the last 24 pages.

If you were required to leave your home to receive basic human rights, you might be slightly more sympathetic to the viewpoint you mock here.

This thread really shows whats wrong with some people on this forum.

And never so clearly and unintentionally as right now.

History's pages are filled with people who see viewpoints that differ from theirs as the problem with the world. They use this difference as a counterweight, using the apparent deficiencies in others to exalt themselves as all that is good and right in the world.

This viewpoint is defined as bigotry.

 

[Prophet]

How about we leave it up to the people living in the country? Last time i checked they were free to vote for any party they liked.

So they could kinda vote for a party to press for a change.

Isolationism is not a practical foreign policy. International criticism is the only reason these conflicts we're seeing don't reach Biblical massacre type numbers.

Mob rule is not a practical moral policy. If wise men won't rule, others who will be swayed with the changing of winds and opinions will.

 

[Revoltingest]

Opposition to intermarriage = bigotry?

Yes, it is.