I have torn my garments in mourning for the great state of New York, despite our desperate cries to Hakadosh Baruch Hu and our desperate pleas and donations to supposedly moral lawmakers – they have committed a grave sin. They have violated the Torah and they will pay when they come to seek judgement at the end of their days. The end is coming my friend, when the State with the largest most religious Jewish population in the world could legalize such an insult to humanity as sodomy marriage we have to wonder where Moshiach is?
Some have told me they are building their arks, the mabul is near they say and with global warming and circumcision bans on the horizon I’m liable to agree. I call on all the frume yidden to build their arks, or at least to leave New York. Lakewood Ir Hakosdesh stands as a Beacon or Torah and Morality to all of us, where toevah will never be accepted as it has been accepted here. Brooklyn is no longer an Ir Halkosdesh, it is a place of filth where toevah supporters have begun to push for animal marriage rights and will take us down a path of immorality not seen since the days of the Romans.
We are to blame of course, our concentration on all things besides for the holy Torah has led us down this destructive path. Andrew Cuomo was actually supported as governor of New York by Jews who knew his views, yet voted for him anyway because frum leaders were in it for government handouts. Is it so bad to get a job? Surely it must be better than having sodomy legalized, I swear it’s happening in the streets and everywhere you look, the filth is creeping into our neshamas. We are to blame, we who are into gashmius and the physical world, we who do not devote our lives to Torah are damned to rot in a hell of married gays and lesbians.
I don’t believe in equality, equality is not a Torah value and I don’t care if the goyim and Jews who voted for this measure do not know what they are to keep, we are to educate them to be Torah followers, everyone needs to heed the true word of God. Equality is not the word of God, the word of God is to kill them, but since we don’t have a beis din, I would recommend that we all start building our arks.
The sad thing is your average VIN, YWN or Mishpacha reader could have written that bit completely seriously.
Exactly.
What a joyous Pride Weekend in New York State and NYC!
I am not a supporter of gay mariage, but then again, I don’t think government should be in the marriage business at all.
They should allow civil unions between any two people. There is no assumption of sex – could be elderly siblings, or parent and child. Just a way to acknowledge rights of survivorship and the like.
And marriage should be defined by whatever “church” someone picks. Then everyone can decide *for themselves* whether they accept marriage as defined by the O-U or the church of Steve and Bob. This should not be forced on us by the state.
You’re reading a website called Frum Satire, yet you don’t seem to understand satire.
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=satire
Read and then return.
“This should not be forced on us by the state.”
I’m unclear about exactly what was forced on you. Are you being forced to marry someone of the same gender? Are you being forced to officiate a marriage you don’t like? Are you being forced to do anything at all? No? Then great, you can sit back and stop worrying.
As far as I understand, the underlying reason why gays wanted to have gay marriage was so that other people would have to recognize their relationship as legitimate, under the auspices of a (presumably lifelong) marital commitment.
I’d like to retain the freedom to make my own judgment on what constitutes a legitimate relationship of marriage.
I do not like being told what to believe, or what I have to accept. Government should stay out of this entirely.
So you’re being forced to make a judgment that they are married, and you think that infringes on your right to think they’re not married. You realize that sounds absolutely ridiculous, right?
They are being treated as having the same legally protected social rights as everyone else. No one said you have to personally like it. Seriously, it’s not all about you. Stop complaining.
Why do you think you ever had that right? If a Jew marries a non Jew, as far as the state is concerned they are married, even if you disagree. Likewise any two people with a JOP appointment and a few bucks.
He’s the special sort of cock-socket who believes that “freedom” means everyone has to do what he wants. And “forced”means people are free to live their lives the way they want to even when he doesn’t approve.
Are my words in a foreign language? Or is there some kind of mental impairment requirement that I missed when I joined this site?
For the umpteenth time: I do not have a problem with people having free choice. I defend their rights to make their own choices, however right or wrong they are.
What bothers me is using *government* to define something that is EITHER something uniquely between two people (in which case civil union works), OR something that belongs under the auspices of a private organization (so that “marriage” is under those auspices).
If you stop to think AT ALL, you’d see that what I want actually gives people more choices, and much less opportunity to force themselves on others.
Why is this so hard for you to grasp?
huh?
society defines what marriage is. it used to define it as marriage between one man and many women. as do the morals of civilazation, so do its definitions – like marriage.
>it used to define it as marriage between one man and many women.
That is not what DEFINED it. It is simply what was done…and not even by all (Hence, it wasn’t DEFINED as you said). What it IS defined as, as a partnership between a male and female.
It is our fault.
I was speaking to a yeshiva administrator in a district that had a hotly contested senate election. He told the guys to vote for the democrat because “we have a relationship with him, and gay marriage is coming up.”
Idiot.
Then the frum finally have something to be proud of, if only inadvertently.
“the frum finally have something to be proud of”
Really? You think the frum have nothing else to be proud of?
I thought you were supposed to be thoughtful and intellectual. You sound like a redneck.
A redneck?
*snort*
*snigger*
*HAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!!!*
…. oh Lord, that’s hilarious.
Seriously, there are plenty of things frum people have to be proud of. The repulsive hypocrisy of their political positions is not one of them. “Conservatives” who have made a virtue of suckling off the Federal teat. Staunch hunters of anti-Semitism who happen to be some of the worst racists and homophobes around. Strong defenders of their rights whose aim is to create communities where nobody has any rights. Decryers of “special rights” for gays, Blacks, Latinos and so on who take smug pride in their private theocratic courts and thuggish paramilitary police forces.
There’s no sugar-coating it. Frum communities have the collective political maturity of spoiled five year olds. And the Chassidic cults have Kim Jong Il fantasies.
There are plenty of wonderful things about Orthodox Jews. This isn’t one of them.
Shouldn’t have said “thuggish paramilitary police forces”. That was wrong.
Groups like Shomrim are thuggish paramilitary forces. They are nothing like police.
So is Hatzola a thuggish paramedical force? And is Chaveirim a thuggish flat tire force?
This whole issue is a profound mistake. These choices of individuals should not be a matter of state.
Keep it simple: Allow civil unions between ANY two people. A civil union allows for rights of survivorship, legal partnership, etc. – without any assumption of sex. Elderly siblings, or a parent and child, etc. could all be civilly united. This is the only part the state is involved with.
Then take marriage out of the governemnt sphere entirely. Anyone can call themselves married as long as they quote the auspices. One could be married according to the O-U, or the Church of Bob and Steve.
This allows the rest of us to decide, for ourselves, what *we* consider to be an appropriate marriage. And voila! Others can choose to be married, and we can, if we like, choose to accept that or not.
Sounds good. Separate the civil marriage contract from the religious marriage ritual.
Of course, we’re going to have to do something about the “religious marriage only” fruma who use that to claim to be single and engage in massive government fraud. No more Section 8, Medicaid or WIC for them.
For them or for anyone else for that matter. All the government programs like those should be gotten rid of. Maybe then people will actually get jobs and stop using the government as a crutch.
100% agreement. Shut ’em all down!
who is john galt?
Official Statement from Telzers of the World inc.:
While we don’t condone this activity, we are aware that bucherim in our dormitories are experimenting with these feelings on a regular basis. We are proud of the Telz heritage. We hope that the selfless act of lending a hand does not lead to marriage, chas’vsholem. We await for the legislators in Ohio and Illinois to vote on this important matter, as it will have more impact on our local bucherim.
For the record, we oppose gay marriage, unless the couple can, by virtue of their marries status, extract extra government grants for the Yeshiva, get more food stamps, and qualify for other subsidies — in which case we’ll gladly turn a blind eye for a mere 20% of the take.
This statement was not endorsed by the League of Important Gedolim.
Take a look on YWN. There was a thread about that last night. (whether you could do it for tax purposes).
I’m not posting a link because it will get help up in moderation, but the thread is called “Is this muttar?”
if you just explain to me what equality has to do with something that is assur in the torah. equality to commit a sin? I know your post was written in jest, but im serious. I dont understand frum people supporting this. I know the defense. This is one sin, so what, there are many sins that frum people commit, murder, stealing, cheating, adultery, molestation … fine, but those things are also illegal, and just because frum people do them does not mean we should all legalize another sin and say “equality”, whats equality have to do with this? Do you support stealing? Do you support other sins from the Torah?
You can’t stop people from “doing what they want” but that doesn’t mean you have to condone it, legalize it, and call it “equal” to people getting married according to Halacha.
Unless your philosophy is that the Torah got it wrong on being Gay and it shouldn’t be a sin if two consenting males decide to commit this sin. But if thats the philosophy, then maybe the Torah got everything wrong so why be frum at all …
If I may, I think its sad that there is this mentality in many corners (including this one) that posits, if a rebbe in a yeshiva can molest a 12 year old and no one cares, stops him or helps to bring him down, then why can’t two men who consent live together and get married. The 1+1=3 Heter …
It’s quite obvious a simple: How would you like it if bunch of people who follow a different religion than you do tried to force their religious practices on you?
I reject the moral equivalence. Not all religions or positions are correct.
Let them do what they like. But don’t make me accept it.
Then why should anyone accept religious indoctrination centers masquerading as schools? I’m talking about yeshivas here.
Why should anyone accept barbaric, cruel animal slaughter like shechita?
Why should anyone accept medically untrained laymen performing surgery in unsanitary conditions and killing little boys when they suck their shmekeles and give them herpes?
Those and a hundred other things are all special privileges you demand because of your religious beliefs. But you, flaming hypocrite that you are, are offended when anyone you disapprove of wants basic human rights.
For the record nobody should be sucking little boys’ shmekeles. That’s just disgusting.
Parents can choose what is best for their children. When children grow up, they can make their own choices.
I don’t understand why you revert to calling names. You have no idea what I do, or who I am, and yet you call me a flaming hypocrite?
I do not demand special privileges. I demand free choice for all. If you can find a specific example of where I am being hyporcritical, then present it. Otherwise, I suggest you learn to exercise restraint.
You continue to ignore all the scientific evidence of shechita being perfectly humane, and you continue to support the unfounded notion perpetuated by European anti-Semites that shechita is somehow less humane than an animal having its brain rattled around by a bolt.
You mean because it is religious? Because you certainly don’t have a problem with the government imposing other moral decisions, do you?
Like say, the moral decision that I can’t torture goats. Or the moral decision that if I run an emergency room I have to treat people who can’t afford to pay.
Those are moral decisions, which society imposes on all members. And they are probably often motivated by voters religious beliefs even.
So why is this one so much worse to you? Because it isn’t your personal view? Welcome to democracy.
you are all missing my point. I’m not talking about states rights or civil unions or what the secular view on it is. I’m asking frum people how THEY can support something that is so clearly assur. How does any frum person believe this is the right away, when we know from Halcha its 100% wrong. I’m not asking you to answer as an American. I’m asking you as a frum person. I mean, we do still all agree homosexuality is a sin from the Torah, right?
I support that G-d wants us to make choices. Choices are only valuable if they are real – people have to have the freedom either way.
And so as a frum person I can support people’s rights to make decisions, decisions that are not “ben adom lechavero” evil. I support the rights of yeshiva bocherim to violate Shabbos. I want them to *choose* to be good people.
But as a frum person, I can be very unhappy about the fact that so many people choose to do the wrong thing.
Letting idolators – that would be Christians by frumadox standards – hold public office is 100% assur. So is theft, even theft by fraud from goyim. So is not paying your taxes by working under the table. So is treating a man like a god just because he’s the great grandson of a dead rabbi. So are a lot of other things. I’m betting you don’t fight against any of those.
You can be opposed to something in your personal life but believe that civil rights apply to people you don’t agree with.
If it were up to me Mea Sharim, Bnei Brak, Kiryas Joel and New Square would be reformed starting with bombs, a rolling artillery barrage, tanks and enhanced radiation weapons. They stand for abominations beyond anything the Taliban or Saudis dream of. The only reason the residents aren’t committing murder on a truly Biblical scale is that there aren’t that many of them and they’re pathetically incompetent at violence.
But since I’m a tolerant, liberal, live and let live kind of guy I’m not calling for the American and Israeli governments to take these common sense measures. I’d vote against that if I were a legislator even though their lifestyle is antithetical to civilization. That’s because I understand that private choices and public policy are two different things.
Nuran, you are wrong about much of this. Halacha is well adapted to living in a world where goyim set the rules and run the place.
I do not fight against things that are not wrong.
Anyone who thinks Mea Shearim is far worse than the Taliban needs help. Are you supposed to be taking something?
“If it were up to me Mea Sharim, Bnei Brak, Kiryas Joel and New Square would be reformed starting with bombs, a rolling artillery barrage, tanks and enhanced radiation weapons.”
For a “tolerant, liberal, live and let live kind of guy” you seem to have a lot of violence bottled up inside you.
I am in favour of less government interference in all walks of life, including in our private lives.
I want people to be as free as possible to make their own choices. And yes, this is true across the board.
And then I hope and pray and work to help people make good choices. But G-d only values the choices that are freely made.
It’s pretty simple to everyone except the hard-of-thinking.
You are free to live according to your conscience for the most part. “For the most part” means unless it interferes with someone else’s right to do the same thing. There are several rules we have which people can agree on regardless of religion like “Don’t murder people. Don’t burn down houses. Don’t pee in the public water supply. The guy who took the last beer refills the cooler.”
Since I know you’re immune to ethical arguments I’ll stick to the practical one.
The moment we start saying “You have to behave the way my religion says you should” you are guaranteeing it will bite you on the ass. Someone will say “Those sheep-headed kikes are filling their synagogues of Satan and blaspheming against Jeebus,” and outlaw bris milah, shechita, washing the dead, taking Shabbos off or just cut to the chase and make being a Jew illegal. It not only can happened, it has happened many times.
The choice is an established religion which will end up being one you hate or keeping religion out of the law which at least has a chance of keeping the law out of your religion.
You make so many great points, and you make them intelligently and clearly, . More power to you.
GAY IS THE WAY!!!
Stupid Flanders!
The Agudath Israel Of America’s position – Gay Marriage Not kosher. Protecting child molesters Kosher.
Is something really f****d up with this picture ?
Of course not. The important thing is the authority of the rabbis. You have to go to the beit din to get permission to turn in a baby-raper. Therefore protecting them is kosher. You don’t have to get permission from the rabbis to marry your same-gender sweetie. Therefore it’s not kosher.
Let Agudah and all the ‘frum’ molester protectors hook up with the catholic church….
They do. That’s why the last few anti-molestation laws have gone down in flames in NY.
Now if only they could all find a new religion to be… and be it in Antarctica..
Seen: If you don’t like gays then blame the straight people who procreate and make gay children. It’s really their fault.
I hate logic.
Get that off Reddit?
Ok, that comment rocked!!
Why get married at all just find a girl(guy) and do what. You want. Break up repeat.
By the way WHAT IS MARRIAGE ?
Just out of curiosity, is being gay against the noahide laws? Because I looked it up and couldnt find anything about it in the noahide laws, but I am not a scholar. If it ISNT there, then what is the problem? Jews dont expect the goys to follow the rules of being kosher or wearing tzit-zit, but all of a sudden we DO expect them to follow this rule? I dont get it. This is a serious question I am asking, not sarcasm.
Since you say that you are asking a serious question, I will give you a serious answer. There are differing opinions, but the majority of Orthodox rabbis will tell you that homosexual behavior is against the Noahide laws, falling in the category of sexual perversions. Not all agree, however.
Also, for “Seriously?” and others, not ALL Orthodox rabbis agree that homosexuality, per se, is a sin. The commandment that a man shall not lie with a man as with a woman is very specific. The Hebrew verb form that is used in the case of “lie with” means have sexual intercourse with. That is all it means in the Torah. Therefore, rabbis have asked, why is it necessary to add the phrase, “as with a woman”? Why doesn’t it just say, “A man shall not lie with a man.”? The answer given is that the commandment is specifically referring to the act of intercourse on the lower half of the body, or anal intercourse. Contrary to popular belief, while it is a common practice, not all gay men engage in anal intercourse. Therefore, the commandment would not apply in the case of gay men who are not engaging in anal intercourse, since they are not lying with a man “as with a woman.”
Why does everyone keep assuming that they know what I think? Why put words in my mouth?
I did not say that all Orthodox rabbis agree that homosexuality is a sin. Nor do I care whether a survey of Rabbis yields a certain result. My relationship is ultimately between me and G-d. Yours should be between you and G-d.
Each of us has unique challenges and issues. Let’s worry about our own, shall we?
Thank you for your answer. Then one would think making sodomy legal would be an issue. But getting married very often has little to do with sex, especially in the back door. It just makes me crazy that jerks like Jesse James can marry every woman he wants, have kids with them, and then cheat on the woman and leaving the kids in a broken family, and men like Neil Patrick Harris who has a committed partner and two babies, seem to be a problem. It just doesnt make moral sense to me.
Being gay is not against the noahide laws. Male-to-male sex is, however.
The seven Noahide laws listed by the Tosefta and the Talmud are:
1) Prohibition of Idolatry
2) Prohibition of Murder
3) Prohibition of Theft
4) Prohibition of Sexual immorality
5) Prohibition of Blasphemy
6) Prohibition of eating flesh taken from an animal while it is still alive
7) Establishment of courts of law
Male homosexuality falls under the 4th Noahide commandment.
Why does it fall under category four?
For non-jews, sexual immorality might not cover homosexuality. If you say it has to be what Jews view as a sexually immoral act, then you have to throw in Tzniut, Niddah, Yichud, Negiah, etc. which would make no sense at all. Since those things are immoral for us, including homosexuality, why would we assume that homosexuality is immoral for them?
Great question! I hadnt thought of that, will ask my Rabbi today.
Why aren’t we petitioning the government to ban marriages between Jews and non-Jews? Because that too is in the Torah. Why are we focusing on gay marriages?
We aren’t petitioning the government to ban any marriage whatsoever. The ban was already there. We simply are not lending support to the call to “un-ban” gay marriage.
Love your screen name. Do you also wank off at the thought of acting like your namesake and sticking your big hard spear into Jews who do *drool gurgle* disgusting things with voluptuous shiksas?
that screen name has me thinking that hes going to run some gay guy thru with a spear next week…cant wait to c that headline
Pinchas’ point was reasonable (and potentially logically consistent), and so, instead of discussing it, Nuran and Aliza resort to base ad hominem attacks on the poster’s screen name.
Pathetic.
My screen name is Pinchas because my real name is Pinchas. I’m not hiding behind a pseudonym. I’m sorry if my name offends you. Also, i’m not anti-gay. The fact that I don’t support every left-wing measure does not make me a homophobe. I’m sorry that you choose to ridicule my name instead of having an intelligent debate.
Hey, Heshy, how about some man on the street interviews??
What next? Soon New Yorkers will also be free to wear Shaatnez!
It all went downhill when they allowed the treifah McDonalds…. soon they all went treif…..and now, driving on shabbes (sic) ! Women in public! Better stick to flying Saudi airlines, they know how to frum out a place!…
I really don’t understand people like “Seriously” who have such a twisted sense of American democracy to think it merely means “I think a majority of us don’t like X, so X should be banned.”
One of the most serious concerns of the founders of this country was tyranny of the majority–i.e. mob rule. It was for that reason that they guaranteed civil liberties via the bill of rights, and it was largely for that reason they instituted the system of checks and balances they did.
Imagine 75% of this country become Mel Gibson style Christians, and they decided that Jewish marriage disgusts them. “A majority of us don’t want Jewish marriages permitted; let them convert or marry Christians. This is a democracy, so whatever the majority says is the law.” Or imagine a majority white area in the time of segregation. May they legitimately complain the government was “forcing integration upon them” against their majority wishes?
Is this really what you want to imagine? Of course not. But when it suits you, everything that makes this country great–everything you learned in those civics classes years ago–goes out the window in favor of “I don’t want this and I’m the majority!”
Exactly. Democracy is a fragile and wonderful thing. But it only works as long as the majority respects the rights of minorities. The problem is that totalitarians, authoritarians similar want everyone to be just like them. Any means are justified to that end.
If it means elections, elections are good up until they have 50% + 1 of the votes. Then you don’t have elections any longer. If it means dictatorship, dictatorships are great as long as they’re the dictators.
Like most evil ideologies it has the aim of turning everyone into copies of itself.
Nuran, you seem to think that a G-d-fearing libertarian is an authoritarian. You are entirely turned around. Please try reading the actual words that I wrote.
You, sir, are no libertarian.
Nonsense. I am a textbook libertarian, except that instead of being fixated on legalizing drugs, I use my belief in G-d to funnel my ambitions toward more constructive acts.
I believe, profoundly, in CHOICE. Not because I think that maximizing hedonistic pleasure is the goal in life, but because I believe that Hashem wants us to make free choices.
G-d wants us to be free, so that, on an ongong basis, we can choose to have and develop a relationship with Him. My G-d is a libertarian. And I can, of course, show why this is all in the Torah (if anyone besides me cares).
I’d just also add that these protections of the law are the very same ones that protect YOU, i.e. if someone wanted to make a law that discriminates against the Jews. Legislate over other people’s personal lives at your peril; don’t be surprised when others then try to legislate over yours and say the government is “impinging on their freedom” by protecting you. If you don’t want that, don’t do it.
JG, I am mystified that my argument is so hard for you to grasp that you have to start calling names.
American Democracy is indeed about protecting the minority, through the constitution. So far, so good.
But nowhere is the State assigned the task of determining what constitutes marriage.
What I am advocating is MORE freedom, not less. In my proposed formulation, *ANY TWO PEOPLE* could have a civil union. But people would be free to decide, for themselves, whether they accept someone else’s definition of marriage.
This entire issue would be off the table, because it is not a matter for the state to decide. We could go back to minding our own business.
Is that so bad?
Yes, it’s pretty idiotic. Freedom to be a bigot is not a protected freedom.
Of course it is! Speech is only free if it offends people (see Nuran, A). Speech which does not offend is not free at all.
The Constitution gives us the right to free association. We can decide whom we like, and exclude others. There are gay softball teams that have kicked out men who are bisexual. This is entirely in keeping with the right to be a bigot.
If you decide that you tolerate everything except intolerance, then all you do (as many have done here) is label opponents intolerant, and thus worthy of name-calling and hopes that people get carpet bombed and nuked.
>Freedom to be a bigot is not a protected freedom.
sure it is. Remember the Nazi march in Skokie?
It is a protected freedom to hate whomever you want.
Darn tootin’
See the recent court battle about gay softball league kicking out players because they had fathered children. 100% constitutional to decide whom we like, on whatever basis we like.
It is just like free speech. It only counts if it is offensive – otherwise, who would object? Nuran pushes this limit on every thread. 🙂
I think you know what I meant. Freedom to express bigoted views is protected. Freedom to impose bigoted views on others is not. The fact that Jews are allowed to live in the same city as the Nazis does not infringe upon the “freedom” of the Nazis to live, in accordance with their beliefs, without Jews nearby.
Bigotry is in the eye of the beholder. You think I am bigoted. I think you are.
The only way out is to keep both of us from using the government to coerce the other. Ergo, less government intrusion.
We should not even care about it, the majority of America are not Jews and our laws do not apply to them. I have absolutely no issue with this.
I agree that in the pantheon of troubles we are in right now, this is a very minor point, and maybe a mere distraction from the real issues (Iranian nukes, economic disaster, debt, other freedoms infringed, etc.). But since I was asked, I suggested what I think would ease tensions.
Most folks, it seems do not want to have tensions eased by taking the state out of it. Instead, they want to stomp on the other guys, using the state as their boots.
Our well rounded governor of the ” great “state of New Jersey has stated that a similar law would never pass in New Jersey. He will continue to support civil unions because of his religious beliefs.. I agree with him, but believe that he has no business taking that stand when we have separation of church and state. If you are frum and shomer mitzvahs what difference does it make if you are living in a state that allows gay marriage? In any event, no need for arks in the Garden State.
The only one to blame for all of this is the parents. They just have to stop having gay children.
Well, DADT *was* just repealed. We had to have these big briefings (or de-briefings? har har!) done to talk about the new implementation of the policies. The times are a-changing.
PowerPoint that so far just say, ” hey assholes, stop calling people “fags” .. Which, incidentally, has always been the rule.
it should be called AIDS marriage.
If civil law can allow people to intermarry, why not allow them to gay marry?
THEY MISSED ONE!!!!
Theodore Olson, a former solicitor general under George W. Bush, sued California over Proposition 8 – a ballot measure banning gay marriage in the state constitution. In his opening statement he declared:
hehehe