"I kind of have a crush on Eric Yoffie now. But don’t worry, I promise not to have meaningless sex with him."

What makes you think that even if you offered, Eric Yoffie would want to have meaningless sex with you?  Or even meaningful sex?  Or even just talk dirty to you?  How can you besmirch his name by implying that anything you wrote would be attractive to him at any level?  I guess, to summarize my quandry, the best question to ask is "Where do you get off?"  And no, I don't want to know how you do it.

A comment of the week, this will not be.  But I'll survive nonetheless.

Tamar, I'm glad to see you reevaluating your position on the Reform Movement. I don't recall everything you've ever said about Reform Judaism, so if I implicitly or explicitly accuse you of something you never actually said, forgive me.

It seems to me that you never really gave Reform Judaism a fair chance. By writing off Reform Judaism, you've disenfranchised an entire group of their right to express and practice Judaism in a way that is meaningful for them.

Granted, there are Reform Jews who don't really practice Judaism. There are Reform Jews who ignore Kashrut simply because it's inconvenient. There are Reform Jews who have never studied a passage of Torah, let alone a page of Talmud. The problems within the Reform Movement are myriad, but it is precisely the committed Jews within the movement who are the first to speak up and say, "This is a problem." The outside world doesn't get to see those people fighting from within for a Reform Judaism that is meaningful.

I found it interesting that it was the URJ-ISNA alliance that made you change your tune. Of all the things Rabbi Yoffie spoke about on Saturday morning, that was the least surprising for me. The initiative that shocked me (in quite a good way) was that which Rabbi Yoffie presented about Shabbat. As he said, Shabbat Shacharit has become more about worship of the Bar/Bat Mitzvah child than of God. His proposal is to find ways of returning the true meaning to Shabbat worship. The Reform Movement has long been known for its political and social activism, but not always its commitment to religious principles. Why then, does the initiative which really stays on course get highlighted, as opposed to the one(s) which indicate a new, positive direction?

Perhaps I'm imposing my own religious priorities on to you, but it seems superficial to repeal all your negative sentiments about Reform Judaism because of one political action initiative. If I, practically a poster child of the Reform Movement, have issues with the Movement and the way its members practice Judaism, then how can you, who seems to be somewhat more traditional in her observance than I, suddenly profess to completely vindicate the Reform Movement?

I suppose it sounds kind of weird that I'm telling you to continue being critical of Reform Judaism. The point I'm trying to make is that Reform Judaism is much broader than each of its initiatives. So, just because the ISNA initiative is great, that doesn't mean that everything else is awesome too. But, by the same measure, when Reform Jews or the Movement do something you don't like, please avoid totally writing them off, as there are still valuable aspects to Reform Judaism. But please, continue to criticize Reform Judaism, and uphold those criticisms that you have held before, because the Reform Movement is definitely not perfect. Do take the time, though, when you have criticism, to take some time to look into the reasoning behind that which you're criticizing, and maybe you'll understand, if not necessarily agree with, why the Reform Movement does things the way that it does.

Tamar's comment was much less directed at Rabbi Yoffie, and more directed at a particular individual who frequently posts here and tends to accuse her of being a whore.  You can think what you want, but I wouldn't read too much into that comment.  I really don't think Tamar was implying that she could seduce Rabbi Yoffie.

Sheesh Jonathan, have you never read this blog?  63% of it revolves around ME!  Tamar was referring to the fact that I accuse her of being a whore every now and then, (though I really don’t think she is, I just know that it gets under her skin).But Dan, you bug me.  You sound like one of these very articulate well educated people who says absolutely ridiculous things: ”By writing off Reform Judaism, you've disenfranchised an entire group of their right to express and practice Judaism in a way that is meaningful for them.”

 What in the world does her disagreeing with Reform Judaism have to do with their "right" to express and practice it?  I think Reform Judaism is at best irrelevant and more of a liberal political position than any semblance of Judaism, but you have every right to be as reform as you wanna be in spite of my lack of esteem for it.  Stop trying to stop judgments, its perfectly valid to make values judgments as long as I don’t physically force you to do anything you don’t want.  Dammit

 <Tamar, what place am I in for comment of the week this week so far?>

Whuttup with this new format that it has boxes around each post and the name of the author at the top of the posting & # of comments?  My favorite part of reading thsi blog was figuring out who wrote it as I read it.  99% of the time I could tell you that a given post was a vintage Tamar but the third or fourth line!  Often even just by the title!  I would also have fun at guessing which post would get no comments (most) and which would light it up.  Now, no more fun.  Entertain me suckaz!

but what does lascivious mean?

Bring the posts and Ill bring the comments, u know Im good for it!

Soccer....

Yes, I know Tamar's sex life is a topic that is discussed on the blog ad nauseum, and I don't really care about that.  (How interesting can Tamar's sex life really be?  The old adage about "Those who talk about it generally have nothing to talk about" fits here.)  It's when some non-related third person is brought into the mix that I think it crosses the line, and I question the taste of a person saying something like that about someone they supposedly admire.

I admit that my language was unintentionally vague, and didn't convey what I meant.  Let me attempt to clarify.

The statement I made was intended to refer to something very narrow: Tamar's (or anyone else's) personal views about Reform Judaism.  Clearly she, and most anyone else, has no coercive force about who has the legal right to practice their religion how they wish.  The point was rather that, in Tamar's own mind, she is viewing Reform Judaism as an illegitimate expression of Judaism, and is therefore unwilling to accept that Reform Jews, however much she might like them as people, are practicing Jews.  This is just what I interpret from a statement like "just when I write off the Reform movement."

If, then, my interpretation is correct, then the point was simply to urge Tamar, and anyone else with similar views, to reevaluate their position.  My hope is that they will say, "You know, I may not want to practice Judaism that way, but I can still recognize that Reform Judaism is a vibrant and beautiful (and legitimate) expression of Judaism."

I hope that clarifies.  I doubt you, Soccer, will be changing your opinion about Reform any time soon, but hopefully others will. 

And "Rabbi" Yoffie is the biggest kapo of them of all!

Whether you're surrounded by Reform Jews, Orthodox Jews, or davening in a Conservative Synogogue, it's all the same. People have their opinions of what it means to be Jewish, what makes a "good" Jew, what makes a "bad" Jew (and, really, what <i>is</i> a good/bad jew?) There are those who keep kosher, and those who eat a sausage and egg McMuffin every morning. There are those who fully prepare for and observe Shabbat, and those who drive to work a double shift every Saturday.

No matter where you go, someone will always have an opinion about you and the people you surround yourself with. The thing I admire the Reform Movement for, as a whole, is the fact that they seem to not really care what anyone thinks of them. Their Judaism and Tamar's Judaism might not be the same Judaism, so there's a clash there, and Tamar has a valid opinion on it (I'm curious as to the opinion of Reform Jews for Tamar). I don't, however, think she's judging them and saying they are any less of Jews for being Reform, which is what seems to be coming across in the comments.

And I agree. I think the idea of coming together to learn about eachother's cultures and where we stand on things is an excilent idea. Now, if we could only do the same within our own community...

Jonathan, I never talk about my sex life here.  I talk about sex in general, but not my sex life.  But really man, that was pretty bitter and mean.  WHat did I ever do to you?  And I was not implying that Rabbi Yoffie has any interest in me, but I'm allowed to be attracted to him, even if you don't like it. 

Uriah--Reform Jews hate me.  Check out the comments at http://www.jewcy.com/faithhacker/do_you_hate_reform_jews

Soccer, lascivious means: of a person, revealing an overt and often sexual desire.

Dan--I think Reform Judaism is a completely valid way of practicing, but unfortunately I think most people who associate with Reform Temples aren't interested in Reform Judaism, they're interested in tickets for the high holidays.  But I hope I'm wrong about that, and I'm encouraged and excited by Rabbi Yoffie's remarks.