Does a Mikvah Dunk Make Pre-Marital Sex Kosher?

over a cheeseburger.

yes, human sexuality is treif treif TREIF, anonymous.  you got it.  well done.

my friend says about this: it's so frustrating how the rabbis have such an opportunity to create a holy way for people to do this sort of thing, but they're balking.  jews are having lots of premarital sex.  fact.  by balking at finding a kosher way to do something that is not really even forbidden is simply a missed opportunity to have jews follow halakhah. 

To Elisheva--thank you for your honesty. I moderate a group that may be of interest to you--see http://mikveh.livejournal.com.

 All the best,

RSH 

Though I’ve always been fairly religious, I don’t exactly look the
part, what with pink highlights in my hair, black nail polish, and a
pierced nipple. I couldn’t imagine how a mikvah lady would respond to
my body, and found myself worrying obsessively that I would be called
fat.

This reminded me of something I'd read in Zeek:

Hearing Beneath the Surface: Crossing Gender Boundaries at the ARI Mikveh 

It's quite a different perspective, but possibly one of interest. 

Elisheva,I am quick to compliment you on the fact that are asking if what you have done is kosher although it is clear you know the answer quite clearly--it is not.

The fact that most Jews do not honor the law (almost any Jewish law) is true and this is no excuse to find and seek new standards--unless there is evidence that a law is unfair, unjust or counter-productive. The sexual standards have served the Jewish people well over time and it is a matter of character that brings Jews to follow the standards today. Sadly, I engaged in pre-marital sex and it is clear to me that in retrospect--it was a big mistake.

Absent in your long detailed entry, is any discussion about the reasoning that brought you to have sex with Ben in the first place. It just happened. I am so pleased that you had guilt and anxiety about being asked about your marital status by the mikvah lady since this demonstrates you knew you were missing the mark. Your ending is quite puzzling and this is why I need to challenge your positing in the same way as I have challenged Tamar's. You write that "most people do not wait to have permission to have sex" and you end on a note disparaging the Rabbis since you believe that their reactions are "naive" and the law will not stop more people from engaging in pre-marital sex.

But the fact is that the law DOES stop religious Jews from engaging in pre-marital sex--it simply fails to prevent secular minded Jews. And this is where the trouble begins with your writing. What was so important to be gained by not waiting--didn't you both feel pressure to wait--especially since the relationship seemed like it is going in the direction of marriage? You see, it is no wonder why a secular Jew would fail to say a bracha before eating. It is no wonder that a secular Jew would violate Shabbos. On the other hand, It is a wonder why a serious religious Jew would violate a sexual law and this is precisely why the editors of Jewcy are so pleased to invite you to speak so openly about your experience.

Indeed, it can be argued, if even the religious are having pre-marital sex--why shouldn't all of us?

You conclude that the mikvah was great--so why no specific remorse about the subterfuge? Perhaps that will come in the years ahead--in the meantime, Jews on the fence can read your article and conclude that the red light that was before them that turned into a yellow light is now a green light.

"Invisible hand" wants to make pre-maritial sex holy but a bath is not the problem. Sex is holy in the context of a marital relationship and not in any other context. The "fact" that Jews have a lot of pre-marital sex, a lot of Jews do not keep Shabbos, a lot of Jews do not study Talmud/Torah-- is not relevant to the efficacy of the law in the first place.

...does the law stop religious Jews from engaging in pre-marital sex?  Many of the "religious" Jews i've known have been just as likely to have premarital sex--not to mention cheat--as "secular" Jews.  I've also known plenty of "secular" Jews (and others) who abstain for personal principles.  Religious Jews may aspire to something higher or different, but in the end, they're just human beings with desires, faults, and flaws, like everyone else. 

No one is truly virtuous. We just look toward virtue and try our best.

Truly, Chevy, some people do a much better of a job than others and further--some make an effort and others do not.  The suggestion that "no one is virtuous" indicates that virtue is an unachievable commodity when this is not at all true.  It is the very opposite of the fundamental pre-requisite of having good moral character and being a holy nation.  Holiness does not mean that we have NEVER missed the mark.  It means that we accept the standards and we make a good faith effort to hit the target.

Absent from the posting from Elisheva was any sense as so why sex just had to take place and if we all make an effort--some of us really go out of our way to have a Jewish life--why not in this major category of sin?

Temptation never ends and we all have opportunities to have one form of forbidden sex or the other--simply because I am married does not mean that the temptation is over.  Refraining is a baseline demand of Judaism and one cannot say, ,with good faith regarding a sexual affair, "it just happened"--surely, in defense of the action, one  would have to speak about overwhelming pressure and when a Jew is trained in a serious way, the pressure to cut Shabbos short for convenience or eat treif food or chase after one's secretary diminishes.

David, you're right that many people do wait to have sex.  All I can say regarding my relationship with Ben was that waiting didn't seem feasible to either of us when we started sleeping together, and it doesn't seem any more feasible now.  We were 20 when we met, it's been more than 3 years and neither of us is really thinking about marriage in the near future.  Certainly some people have no trouble waiting for much longer, but neither of us are prepared to wait any longer than we did.  I do understand that it wasn't a halachic decision, but it's not one I've ever regretted (I've never asked Ben, but I bet he'd say the same).  You think we're in the wrong here, and so does halacha and I guess that's just the way it goes.  

I'm not asking anyone--Rabbi Metzger included--to give Ben and me blessings and send us off to bed.  But at this point we're doing everything we can to stay within halacha, and as far as I can tell nothing is gained by the prohibition.

The argument here is essentially the same as the argument about whether condoms should be distributed in schools.  Do we think fourteen year olds should be having sex?  No.  But if they're going to have sex, which they are, despite our objections, should we do everything we can to make sure that they have safe sex and protect themselves?  I think so.  From everything you've written, David, I assume you don't agree, but that's just where we're going to have to part ways. 

"Kind of like making a bracha ...

over a cheeseburger"

Nu, so you think it's better not to say the bracha? What if the bread is kosher? Aren't half steps better than none?

I don't eat cheeseburgers, but I do say a bracha over food at my local shul, even if I might have doubts about the hashgacha.

Isn't there a bracha for saying over non-kosher food if one is forced to eat it to sustain life? The one I can actually find with a google search, bore nefashot rabbot, was used during the Shoah, and it would be trivializing it to use it over a cheeseburger one just wanted to have for the pleasure of it. I get the sense that saying it over non-kosher food neither rendered the food kosher nor made matters worse. That it allowed Jews of that time to survive with their dignity and faith intact, I think, means one should probably not be quite so flippant about it.

Likewise, if an unmarried woman is going to be having sex, but needs to maintain some kind of connection to G-d and to her own sense of the right thing to do, it seems to me like doing the mikvah is still a blessing.

You seem to imply in your article that you will become a regular visitor to the mikvah, but it wasn't entirely clear.  Was the experience good overall, and do you plan on going again in the future, or was once enough?

Thanks, Elisheva, for the response.

I am trying to separate out the issues and you have a way of blending them. Your reference to condoms must be at public schools and not in our  religious schools. 

Thanks for being so quick to agree that "many people do wait to have sex" and this contrasts with your stand that your choice to wait was not feasible.  Why not?  What is it about your situation that makes it not feasible but a reality for others?

I a focusing on the problem by comparing it to other aspects of the law.  No doubt you are shomer Shabbos.  Often, it is difficult to keep Shabbos when one has a trip on Saturday night and there is difficulty in waiting.  Since I became observant, I wait and I do so because I have a lot at stake in observing as many mitzvot as I can. My guess is that you have the commitment to wait as well.  But as fundamental as Shabbat is for the Jew, I don't think that catching a plane before the end of Shabbos constitutes a real character test.

As my son knows, Jews tend to make quite a stink about the imperative to "make good choices."  We all make mistakes.  The controversy comes when a mistake is not recognized as one and you have taken the stand that you do not believe you could have made a better choice--even when such a choice directly impinges on one's character and I find this problematic.  You simply say, twice, that it was not feasible. It seems that often, it is not feasible to wait until the end of Shabbos to make a trip work out and yet, we always seem to find a way to make it feasible by waiting.  I just don't understand what there is a about a sex act that makes waiting for it to happen  infeasible and you make no attempt to explain it--except to say "that is just the way it goes."  Then, ,I just don't understand why you observe any of the halacha.

It seems you have a burden to argue the matter with an affirmative case concerning how one's character is not harmed by pre-marital sex.  You have taken a public stand against the law and I wish you could articulate a more persuasive point of view concerning why the law should be eliminated or amended.

Since you are quick to concede that some people have no trouble waiting much longer--including non-Jews influenced by the merit of the Jewish standard--your point is not at all helped by acknowledging this fact. 

David, I must take your long post point by point. It seems to me you have made quite a few
errors both in logic and in your understanding of halacha.

“The fact that most Jews do not honor the law (almost any Jewish law) is
true and this is no excuse to find and seek new standards--unless there is
evidence that a law is unfair, unjust or counter-productive.”

Let’s assume for a moment that the idea running through your post is true --
that pre-marital sex is actually against a strict interpretation of
halacha. Your understanding of when a
law can be superseded is mistaken. It is
not merely in a case of lack of “justice” in the law. You may be familiar with the concept of “G’zera
She’ein Ha’Tzibbur Yachol La’amod Ba” – a decree to which the community is
incapable of living up. Even in an
understanding that deems pre-marital sex against halacha, an honest understand
of the development and extension of halachic principles would show that this is
a later development. Elisheva is
absolutely correct that the tzibbur is having considerable difficulty (or
straight up no success at all) holding themselves to this standard. Thus a rollback of what is clearly a halchic extension
would seem appropriate.

“The sexual standards have served the Jewish people well over time and it is
a matter of character that brings Jews to follow the standards today. Sadly, I
engaged in pre-marital sex and it is clear to me that in retrospect--it was a
big mistake.”

This is your hypothesis and your experience.
It is impossible to turn your own experiences into an ironclad
rule. “Served well over time” – says
who? A historical approach to halacha
will show very clearly that these morays have changed considerably over time in
a variety of different directions.

But the fact is that the law DOES stop religious Jews from engaging in
pre-marital sex--it simply fails to prevent secular minded Jews.

Let’s take just a moment to remember that “religious” means, roughly,
infused with a spirit of belief and connection to God. It does not mean halachic. A good word for that in English would be
observant. And your use of secular is
exceedingly presumptuous. The thought
that Jewcy is a bunch of secular Jews is frankly ridiculous. There is a tendency in some observant circles
to be sloppy with terminology. Let’s not
do that here. You mean to say that
observant Jews understand that pre-marital sex is against halacha. But even that assumption would be
wrong. As evidenced by the Jews who do claim
to be bound by halacha and who claim – with help from textual sources – that pre-marital
sex is acceptable within halacha. Now
you and many others would say they are “wrong” but that’s nothing more than a
good faith Makhloket L’Shem Shamayim (dispute for the sake of heaven/God/Jewish
understanding)

“It is no wonder that a secular Jew would violate Shabbos. On the other
hand, It is a wonder why a serious religious Jew would violate a sexual law”

Your premise cannot be accepted for the reason stated above. There is no monolith when it comes to permissible
sexual contact pre-marriage. Once can
honestly observe halacha and engage in pre-marital sex. The fact that some people deny this
possibility does not matter except when those people control the levers of
power (like the shameful, scandalous, and intellectual lightweight Metzger) and
try to force their narrow view of halacha on an non-consenting mass of people

“You conclude that the mikvah was great--so why no specific remorse about
the subterfuge?”

Why show remorse when it is none of the mikva lady’s business who chooses to
immerse in a mikva? The idea that these
women should be the halacha police is ridiculous and the evolution of this
custom is anathema – a microcosm of everything that is wrong with the halachic
world today

“Sex is holy in the context of a marital relationship and not in any other
context. The "fact" that Jews
have a lot of pre-marital sex, a lot of Jews do not keep Shabbos, a lot of Jews
do not study Talmud/Torah-- is not relevant to the efficacy of the law in the
first place.”

Ahh…a very nice intellectual sleight of hand. Sex is holy in a marital context – says you. But not to everyone who believes in
halacha. And that is exactly why this is
issue is different than not observing Shabbat.
Many orthodox like making this connection but they ignore the fact that,
quite simply, there is no agreement on the nature of permissible pre-marital
sexual contact. If you look in the
sources, you may even find for yourself that the issue is not so cut and dried.
Your adamant insistence that halacha forbids
pre-marital sex does not make it so.

Thank you for this lovely post.  I have often considered going to mikveh but it is likely one experience I will never have.  I quite appreciate your honesty.

David, it's funny that you're saying Elisheva is blending points and confusing the issue since, as far as I can tell, that's pretty much your full time job. But let's looks at the highlights of your response and see if we can make any sense out of them. (And props to Dov--welcome to the foray! You rocked that comment out).

First, you're questioning this concept of feasibility. Why is it feasible for some and not others? Well, let's say I told you that I'm going to start training for a marathon. I might have a friend who trains with me, and though we both say we're going to start out by running three miles a day four days a week, and slowly build up, she might not have the stamina to keep it up, or she might not have the will power to make sure she gets out of bed and onto the running track every morning. It may be feasible for me, but it might just not be something she can keep up at this point. Same goes for sex. It's going to be much harder for some than for others. That's not such a diffcult idea to grasp.

Not only do I not understand what your point is in regards to traveling on Saturday night, but I've been shomeret shabbat my entire life and I've literally never had the dilemma you seem to be concerned with. But let's give you the benefit of the doubt and assume somewhere you have a point. It seems to be built around this idea that having premarital sex impinges on one's character, which is simply not true. What is it about having sex with someone she loves that has made Elisheva any less of a good person? I think what you'd like to be saying is that not following halacha makes her less of a good person, but then Dov has some bad news for you: pre-marital sex is not anti-halachic. There are plenty of reputable halachic sources that have no problem with a couple engaging in pre-marital sex if the woman immerses in the mikvah. You have yet to cite a source in defense of your position, but I'll give you a few places to look with detailed analysis of the issue:

First, you'll want to read Rabbi Tzvi Zohar's article from Akdamot (it's 70 pages long and in Hebrew, btw. I'm planning on tackling it with a chevruta, and I suggest you do so as well). I also suggest that fascinating and fantastic translation of Rabbi Yaakov Emden's responsa regarding this issue. It was translated into English for the publication of Sacred Secrets by Gershon Winkler, which I highly recommend. You can download both sources online. The Zohar piece is at http://www.bmj.org.il/pdf/akdamot/17zohar+.pdf

and the Emden piece is at http://pilegeshpersonals.com/Rabbi_Yaakov_Emden's_responsa_on_Pilegesh.pdf

though I seriously encourage you to have a look at Sacred Secrets as a whole.

At the end of your bizarre and convoluted argument you write to Elisheva, "I just don't understand why you observe any of the halacha." So, because you don't understand why she observes halacha, she has to hold by your standards? Or maybe, if her reasons for observing halacha aren't solid enough she just shouldn't observe at all? What utter crap. She's not obligated to observe in a way that you understand.

Finally, your point (again) that if some people can do it why can't she is ridiculous and empty. Some people can sing and dance. Some people can make perfect souflees. Some people can learn all of shas in seven years, and some people can wait to have sex. That doesn't mean everyone can or should do any of those things. And I don't think the non-Jews who are waiting are doing it because of an influence from Judaism. There are, of course, Mulims who wait to have sex, and Buddhists, and people who are just plain afraid of intimacy.

I'm sorry that you regret your sexual past David, but imposing your regrets on others is unfair and disrespectful. Elisheva has told us that she doesn't regret her actions. We have every proof that she's thoughtful and engaged and responsible in regards to this issue. I'm not sure what more we can ask of the young people in our community.

Why not just marry the guy? You have liked each other for three years, which is enough time. Work on your self esteem. Gee wiz. Fat my eye. If you have self esteem issues, work on them, and have a nice marriage. Piercings are icky but it comes out. Your hair color doesn't matter. Do you know how lucky you are to have found a nice man who likes you, and whom you like? Go for it. If you're a little flabby, figure out a brief stretch routine to do every day, standing in the shower, with your muscles loose and warm from the hot water. Walk more. Take the stairs. Go easy on fattening foods. It's not rocket science. Get a new make up, and some cosmetic dentistry. You can TOO face his family.

Elisheva,

 I was mostly with you until you compared the whole mikveh issue to giving 14-year-olds condoms. The question of whether government should make it easier for young people to have safe sex is one of public policy, the key word being public.  It's an issue government decides based on what would best protect the rights and welfare of the population at large.  So government naturally has to act with the understanding that people can be weak, standards can be broken, and not everyone will agree with those standards in the first.  When laws or other social policies are made without regard to those considerations (i.e.: the drug laws), the laws prove to be disastrous.  

Rabbi Metzger has different goals then the government.  Sure, he may care about the public welfare, but his job (at least when it comes to halachic prohibitions) is to enforce his interpretation of halacha within the orthodox community.  I'm not taking a stand on the argument about whether pre-marital sex is halachically permitted--I don't personally care and don't have nearly enough information to decide who is right.  But if you disagree with the prohibition, you don't need to remain part of the orthodox community. 

Jews in America have so many options when it comes to religion--apart from Orthodox, Conservative, Reform, you can try New-Age, Integral, Humanistic, Reconstructionist, and probably 25 other types of Judaism, as well as countless other spiritual traditions and non-traditions.  And if none of those movements suit your fancy, you have the right to get together with friends and start a community (mikveh included) that conforms to your beliefs.  So while I have no problem with Elisheva and her boyfriend having sex, I don't see why she needs to make the orthodox bend to her way of thinking. 

Also, it's a bit pathetic for Elisheva to compare her dilemma to that of a 14-year-old about to have sex.  14-year-olds are children who need to be cared for and protected from the consequences of their naturally immature decisions.  Elisheva is an adult and therefore should be able to make conscious decisions about her personal life and face whatever consequence they bring.

--Z

When you swim in the sea,

And an eel bites your knee,

That's a moray! 

I'm going to work backwards in my responses to people. 

First, Zbird--I'm not orthodox, and I never claimed to be.  I grew up in what I referred to as a "religious community" and I refer to myself as observant, but I'm not now nor have I ever been Orthodox.  Caring about halacha is not a right limited to those who are dues paying members of an Orthdox shul.  And, mikvaot are generally not defined as exclusively for any one denomination.  If I told the mikvah lady that I was Conservative or unaffiliated or Reform I think she would likely have still encouraged me to use the mikva.  That said, there are more open communities with their own mikvaot for this express purpose, and when I have access to such mikvaot I fully intend to utilize them.  I'm not asking the Orthodox world to encourage my behavior.  I know they don't approve.  But when you get down to it, preventing me from using the mikvah is allowing me to commit an aveirah (sex while still in a state of niddah) which I wouldn't do if I was allowed in the mikva.  I don't know many (or any) Orthodox rabbis who encourage people to do aveirot they have a way of avoiding.  

I wasn't saying that my behavior was like that of a 14 year old, I was saying that when you're dealing with a situation that you know is unavoidable, there's a more mature and effective way of dealing with the issue then just prohibiting it.  

Anonymous--thanks for your encouragement (I think) but I don't think Ben and I are ready for marriage anytime soon.  We both have professional concerns to take into account (it's not clear how long we're going to get to be in the same country) and I'd really like to see how long this honeymood of sorts lasts before I make lifetime commitments. 

 David--Tamar and Dov have pretty much covered everything I might have to say to you, but if you respond I'm happy to continue the discussion.

Andoatnp--Though I didn't love my mikvah experience, I do plan on making this a regular part of my routine, and generally observing the laws of tahara.  To what extent has yet to be determined.  I'm excited to use the Conservative mikvah at Beth Hillel next time I'm in Chicago.   

Somebody else could catch his eye. Someone who is more beady-eyed and target-focused. Without a marriage, he is up for grabs. Why not? He is good material. You may be frustrating him. It is not a compliment to him, your foot-dragging. He may become hurt. Many would. Someone may be watching for just the moment to throw her harpoon. Of course, lots of nice people have a completely easy time finding a husband in their middle thirties. Sure they do. No problem. As for your career, well, gee. That really counts. Are you famous? Internationally important? Wow. Definitely don't jeapordize that. Endless moving is so broadening to the mind. If someone else getting him would just be a three-week bummer, sure, wait and see. If it would be  one hundred percent unacceptable, a call the police, burn down the building, problem, then make your move. Stuff happens. As you have a career, surely you know what it means to close a deal. If you ever want to have a baby, that is a whole other hurrier. Of course, lots of nice people have babies in their forties, very easily, and then sprint around after their ten-year olds in their yoga-supple fifties. Sure they do. No worries, mate. No worries at all.

There are web sites to explain what a "baby" is. It's too gooey to go into here.

OK, Tamar, to your last point first, yes I am willing to tip my hat to Elisheva who is looking at the issue and she is thoughtful and engaged. As for not having regrets, I must object. As I have said to you, my best guess is that one day you will be very happily married and the relationships that you do not regret today you may well perceive differently.  I am saying that this is a very common part of maturity and even if it does not apply to every traditional minded Jew--it applies almost all of the time.  It is very rare to look back at one's life and regret not have more lovers. I am not imposing my regrets--I am simply a messenger for the news that these relationships lack vitality as time fades and marriage takes place.  I am also familiar with the popular perception that pre-marital relationships are exciting and wondrous--I simply ask you to consider the source. I am aware of the common thought that one must kiss a lot of toads to find a prince--I am here to say that this is not the Jewish way. Are these relationships helpful or hurtful for the future married Jewish woman you will be?

You are stuck with a lack of a principle here, Tamar.  For what greater good, for what utility, for what principle is there a defense of hanky-panky--YOUR punch-line?  The commitment that comes with marriage is substantially different than the kind of pre-marital relationships that commonly exist in our non-traditional community.  As I explained, this is why it is correct to assess the choices of the various communities and it is understood that the halachic standards of the Orthodox community lead to life-long marriages while the individually-conceived standards in the non-Orthodox community lead to far greater pain, a much greater likelihood of divorce, broken homes and far worse.

I must react with outrage to your contortion of my point made to Elisheva--completely misrepresented.  I reacted to her cold conclusion concerning her rejection of the  law by saying "that is just the way it goes"--it is one thing to not live fully up to the standard--but to reject the law coldly leads one to honestly wonder if "that is just the way it goes" for one thing--how can one support any of the law?  To say that one has difficulty with one law--is not surprizing and I am not imploring her to observe anything.  Even the best Jews miss the mark in one area or another. All Jews deserve respect who make a good faith effort.  This is not the same as having opposition to a law--or when asked to explain, to say--"that is just the way it goes."  This is not the kind of response that goes with a solid effort to honor the law and she can defend it or not--fine.  

Finally, we have already agreed on another board that the ban on pre-marital sex is not a Torah-based law and is rabbinic.  Surely, you and Elisheva scrupulously hold many rabbinic-based laws (the entirety of which is called halacha) so I must ask you about this apparent bit of hypocrisy. The rabbis needed to explicitly create laws regarding shomer negiah and pre-marital sex to lessen the chances of promiscuous sex in the community.  In our day, we have the sight of a young Jewish woman named Monica Lewinsky having oral sex and other sexual conduct with a President of the US in the Oval office--need I say more.  I will say that Clinton echoed the claims of some on this blog very closely and denied that according to his understanding of morality, he did not actually have "sexual relations" and he did nothing that was improper under Biblical terms. Reasonable people can easily conclude that this is a man of poor character who is trying to employ vagaries in the law to excuse conduct which is obviously immoral.

You spent way too much time making an impossible argument, namely, that having the character to wait to have sex is like having the talent to sing and dance or having the talent to run a marathon.  These are dreadful analogies since having good character is not a talent like singing and dancing--some people can sing and some people can't while all of us are required to have good character.  Elisheva was quick to admit that some people can wait until marriage and she cannot.  This "feasibility" requires some explanation and our Rabbis are very open to individual cases of special needs.  

The burden of unmarried women using the mikveh is a problem and the "don't ask don't tell" solution  which has been proposed is a sure way to divide the community.  

Elisheva-- I appreciate the fact that you say that you do not expect the Orthodox world to encourage your behavior.  Like ZBird, I was led to believe that you were speaking as an Orthodox woman--I apologize and I regret the confusion and this explains much of what you said and requires me to amend some of what I said to you.

 Surely, you can find a mikveh at an Conservative shul that will finesse your situation.  I need to ask you if you believe that this is a good thing for the community?  As for Torah-based prohibitions, the Conservative movement is quick now to strike from the Torah any distinction between heterosexual and homosexual among its ranks and as a matter of policy.   My question to you is given the stakes, do you have any fear that a differing policy among the Jewish communities regarding unmarrieds in a mikvah or married homosexuals is a good thing or a bad thing?  Can you see that these kinds of conflicts can have devastating impact on a community already needlessly fractured? --now we also have good reason to not like each other.

Your comment please. 

As explained previously, we agree that the prohibiton against unmarried sex is rabbinic and it is still halacha.  That it is not sourced in Torah is correct, as I explained to Tamar, much of what all Jews honor very scrupulously is rabbinic.

I never suggested it was the mikveh's lady's business regarding Elisheva's reported guilt and subterfuge. I was asking about her state of mind.  The mikveh is entitled to assume the women are married and I don't think Elisheva has a disagreement about this standard for an Orthodox-run mikvah.

Your parsing of the word "religious" misses the mark.  The law keeps the Orthodox world from having pre-marital sex--obviously.

Regarding changing a law --I said what you indicated and since the mass of Orthodox Jews can live with the standard, as Elisheva admits (it is simply not feasible for her--she did not argue it is not feasible for the observant part of the community at large) when we have split Orthodox opinion about these matters--then we can talk about supercession of the law.  Today, it is not one Israeli rabbi with the opinion--it is almost every Orthodox Rabbi one can get to go on the record who agrees with the prohibition.

Oh man.  A lot to say.  I'll quote and then respond:

"As I explained, this is why it is correct to assess the choices of the
various communities and it is understood that the halachic standards of
the Orthodox community lead to life-long marriages while the
individually-conceived standards in the non-Orthodox community lead to
far greater pain, a much greater likelihood of divorce, broken homes
and far worse"

Back up your assertions, man.  Not only didn't you cite anything here but you happen to be dead wrong on this issue.  I have heard quoted by rabbis and doctors who have investigated this that in fact the rates of a whole host of societal "problems" remain the same between observant and non-observant communities.  This includes spousal abuse, rape, child abuse and molestation.  I can't opine specifically on divorce, but considering the host of ills above, do you really want to go there and make this argument.  Bad idea -- research the issue first.

"The burden of unmarried women using the mikveh is a problem and the
"don't ask don't tell" solution  which has been proposed is a sure way
to divide the community"

About as much of an issue as me smoking crack cocaine in my house.  Maybe it's against some communities' definition of "The Law" but how can you argue that it tears apart a community when the community does not need to enter Elisheva's bedroom -- and shouldn't

"As explained previously, we agree that the prohibiton against unmarried sex is rabbinic and it is still halacha."

Again, not true.  We don't agree.  All we can determine is that many halachic authorities have read the sources as forbidding pre-marital sex.  This does not mean that it is "Rabbinic Law."  It means there are many poskim who feel that way.  Other poskim are free to disagree.  Jewish law is fun--and fluid--like that.

"The mikveh is entitled to assume the women are married."

And the government can assume I'm not getting high as a kite in my house.  This is exactly why the government can't barge into my home and check for my crackpipe.  Similarly, the mikva lady shouldn't ask questions.  Communal services should be communal services.  Halacha, though incumbent on the Jewish people, is necessarily a personal issue and a daily personal struggle.  Perhaps if rabbis decided to act as spiritual guides instead of as the secret police, we'd have a more vibrant, spiritual community.

"The law keeps the Orthodox world from having pre-marital sex--obviously."

Really?  You think so?  Unfortunately, I can't show you how wrong you are here.  It certainly dampens the numbers.  But it does not stop Orthos from having sex.  I grew up in an Orthodox school in Maryland, went to a Dati Yeshiva in Israel, and have many many Orthodox friends at college.  Here's what it does: 1) diminishes the number of people having actual intercourse.  2) infuses sexual life with tremendous (and undesired by those feeling them) feelings of guilt.  3) leads to early, early marriage before either partner has had a chance to establish him/herself in the real world.

Here's what it does not do: Prevent kids from sexual experimentation!  Shomer negiah is a crock and even the people that want to follow it struggle mightily with it and often end up breaking it.  This is because people have perfectly normal desires and needs -- to feel loved, both emotionally and physically.  If it's against halacha then they are doing a sin.  If it's not then they aren't.  That's not even the issue.  The issue is that the rabbis have an easy way of not compounding sins that are being done anyway (if we can call them that).  The rabbis have a responsibility to help us sin less!  Not make barriers that make us sin more!

"almost every Orthodox Rabbi one can get to go on the record who agrees with the prohibition."

Much to my dismay, this is true.  And I sincerely believe that the attrition from traditional orthodox ranks toward open orthodoxy (think R. Weiss), traditional Conservative (think R. Roth et al), and non/post-denominational Judaism is coming from two sources: 1) issues of women's role in the community. 2) issues of sexual mores (yes, morays was wrong -- typing quickly and on little sleep).  And it's a shame (for you guys -- not for us!) that Orthodox Rabbis' willful act of sticking their collective heads in the sand is driving a committed, vibrant flock of young (and attractive!) Jews over to join our ranks.  This is an ideological war -- and y'all are losing.

Losing.....?  You know perfectly well who has the most children.

People should imagine themselves at sixty. Childlessness waits for us all. Jewish grandchild-lessness waits for us all. One problem is that the people who are sixty today don't seem to mind! Baloney. See through their lies! Don't end up like them! It is agony, my young friends. I escaped, but not by much. I alone survived to tell you... (Job)

I wanted to say mazal tov on going to the mikvah -- I'm glad it's working for you.  Still, I see the rabbi's dilemma on this one - it's a tough dance between encouraging people to commit the lesser aveira and being seen as actively encouraging people to go against halacha. Staying quiet and looking the other way would have been a far better response than being so vehemently against a practice that in its end result will do more good than harm, halachically speaking. Women who aren't having premarital sex aren't likely to be going to the mikvah on a whim, after all.

Having said that, it makes me sad to see that so many people are taking the accurate view that halachically premarital sex isn't such a big deal, and using that argument to extrapolate that multiple partners isn't such a big idea, either. And that's not really the case. The overriding assumption is that sex happens in a monogamous unit, with marriage being the legal tie that formalizes it. People are going to do what they're going to do, and in our society having sex with more than one person until you find "the one" is considered not only normal but even preferred. Elisheva writes that she wants to wait to see if the honeymoon lasts. And if not, okay, bye Ben and our future, and hello new guy. Being ready for marriage used to be (and in some communities occasionally still is) much simpler. Do you love the person? Is there chemistry? Do you want to be with them when you're 90? Or even, if you turn 90 and you have no contact with this person, will you feel like something is missing in your life? If the answer is yes, you take the leap and get married. If it's no, then why rush into sex?  Leaving aside the answer that sex is fun and a good way to connect and makes you feel incredible, etc -- I'm asking from a religious perspective, not a common-sense one. And I mean "religious" and not "observant" -- after all, why wait at all if there wasn't some Big Guy saying so, regardless of whether you're Orthodox or Reform or Catholic? I doubt atheists hesitate before jumping into bed with people they love. Why bother if you don't see a structure saying it's better to wait? But if you DO see the structure, and accept it, it shouldn't be so hard to see monogamy as an ideal in its own right. It's totally not my business (except for fulfilling my function as a random internet commenter), but I have a much harder time with "why get married" than "why have sex." People had premarital and extramarital sex since the beginning of time, and will continue to do so no matter what rabbis say. People have also married the wrong people and ended up divorced or worse, trapped in abusive relationships. But people have also had wonderful fulfilling marriages with their first partners. And you can't have that without the same exact leap of faith that yes, sometimes goes in the wrong direction.

Having sex with your boyfriend/girlfriend because that's where you are in the relationship and it feels right is the easy choice. Nowadays it's even become the safe choice. And caring enough about halacha that you'd rather put a band-aid on the relationship by incorporating some aspects of TH just makes that decision more comfy. But it's far more adult - and far more in the spirit of Torah - to play for keeps. The purpose of TH is children. Mikvah night is timed to coincide with women's most fertile days of the month. And if you don't want to have a kid with someone (whether you inevitably choose to have children or not), if you don't see a future with them, wouldn't it make more sense to move on and find the fairy tale, so you can be a part of it for as long as possible?  

I'm not trying to be judgmental about making the choice to have multiple partners. I just think that being realistic about sex and relationships while treating halacha as purely nuts-and-bolts practice is a surefire way to lose sight of the joy that is built into doing it as written. There's a magic to mikvah night. It's not just a gateway to sex. And I'd hate for it to become that.

Not sure why I care, I do think it's each couple's business and not mine, but I do.

Dov has already addressed many of David's points, and I concur.  A common theme (and I must note that this theme has recurred in previous exchanges with David) is that David asserts things, both halachic and sociological/psychological, without substantiating them.

    1. "As for not having regrets, I must object.  As I have said to you, my best guess is that one day you will be very happily married and the relationships that you do not regret today you may well perceive differently.  I am saying that this is a very common part of maturity and even if it does not apply to every traditional minded Jew--it applies almost all of the time.  It is very rare to look back at one's life and regret not have more lovers. I am not imposing my regrets--I am simply a messenger for the news that these relationships lack vitality as time fades and marriage takes place."  

    If I were Tamar, I'd find this condescending, but she can speak for herself.  I can say that it's presumptuous.  David, why are you so confident that Tamar (or any other traditionally-minded Jew who's had sexual relationships before marriage) is likely to regret them?  You leave yourself an out by saying that your generalization does not apply in every case, but what's your basis for saying that it "applies almost all of the time"?  (Your statement that people don't often regret not having _more_ lovers is irrelevant -- the question is whether they regret having those that they did have.  Likewise irrelevant is your last statement that old relationships "lack vitality" as one goes through married life -- the gourmet (kosher) meal that I ate three years ago "lacks vitality" three years later, but there was nothing wrong with enjoying that pleasure then.  And don't respond that premarital sex isn't permissible -- first, Dov and I and others have challenged that assertion, and second, it isn't the point here.)  

    In sum, if your argument is that experience shows that people generally regret premarital sexual relationships, provide some evidence other than your own individual case.

    2. "Surely, you can find a mikveh at an Conservative shul that will finesse your situation.  I need to ask you if you believe that this is a good thing for the community?  As for Torah-based prohibitions, the Conservative movement is quick now to strike from the Torah any distinction between heterosexual and homosexual among its ranks and as a matter of policy."  

    First, David, your characterization of the Conservative movement's views on homosexuality is factually wrong.  There were three responsa that were approved by the movement's Law Committee.  Two of them would maintain the traditional proscriptions on _all_ homosexual relations.  One would allow those whose sexual orientation was homosexual (but, I think, not bisexuals) to have same-sex sexual relations _except_ for male anal sex.  That responsum would allow commitment ceremonies but not kiddushin for same sex relationships.  You are welcome to disagree with that responsum, but you cannot say that even it, let alone the movement as a whole, is eliminating all distinctions between heterosexual and homosexual.

    Second, what do you mean in asking whether Elisheva's opting to use a Conservative mikveh (if she were to do so) would be good for the community?  Are you suggesting that the use of a Conservative mikveh rather than an Orthodox one is, per se, bad for the community -- why?

    I'd also like to address a couple of Michal's points:

    1. No one here has argued for permitting "multiple partners," in the sense of having multiple partners simultaneously.  I don't recall any post or comment that argued that sex should happen _outside_ a "monogamous unit."  (Surely you don't think that a sequence of partners is any more problematic than a single partner -- if it were, then Judaism would not allow remarriage after divorce or widowhood.)

    2. "The purpose of [toharat hamishpaha] is children. Mikvah night is timed to coincide with women's most fertile days of the month."  And if you don't eat pork, you won't get trichinosis.  Post hoc ergo propter hoc is a poor method for determining ta'amei hamitzvot.  Mikveh night does coincide with the beginning of most women's most fertile days, but that hardly shows that fertility is the "purpose" of these laws.

OK, Tarfon, your points are too easy to refute.

It is interesting that you harp on the point that pre-marital sexual relationships are primarily regretted and that could have and should be avoided in retrospect, in the eyes of most married, traditional Jews.  Are you a married person?  A Jewish marriage is very intense and the bond is total.  Kissing and sleeping around creates a lot of negative baggage which can easily harm a full marital bond and this is why the more secular part of our community tend to be the most divorced.  It is revealing that the promoters of sexual adventuring love to say that one's sense of self is created by the combination of all one's previous lovers.  This is dangerous and incorrect--it is not self-fulfillment and it is not healthy if one is striving for a Jewish marriage.  I honor Tamar and I do not condescend to her.  I trust that she wants real intimacy and life-long marriage. Let's stick to the principle, please.

I am making the point from a place of wisdom and from the other side of the goal line and all married people understand this intuitively--this is why it is good for young people to model from people like their parents. Understanding what is a regrettable choice and a mistake can only be seen in retrospect--indeed, if you think Tamar's choices are sacrosanct--I could call Tamar as a witness concerning her suitors this year--all regrettable in her eyes.

When married--how do those past flings seem in retrospect--can any of them look good?  This is unlikely and seeing them as refinements is a delusion--people are never made better or more attractive by failed pre-marital relationships except to the extent they can have MORE failed relationships in the future and make different mistakes. I ask you to consider the psychological damage of sharing one's sexuality with a string of lovers and then attempting to reveal oneself in the deepest way when the committed spouse is a reality.  Comparisons become destructive, the reflexes created by untrustworthy past lovers become precisely the kind of "learning experience" no one should suffer so that a level of trust and intimacy is much harder to have and maintain.  Please direct me to even one Orthodox Jewish father who is quick to tell his daughter to go out and play the field so as to learn and grow from the experience--just make sure he has a condom.  The danger is extraordinary and the benefits are very pale by comparison.  Hanky-panky has become a Western norm but it has come at a great cost and is contrary at the most fundamental level to our tradition.  Jewish parents desperately want what is best for their children and if the only defense is "that is the way it is"--this is not nearly the kind of defense that will overturn thousands of years of Jewish wisdom in this area.

Regarding the Conservative movement and its stand, please, I understand the "facts." The FACT you should consider is the one I directed to Elisheva, please consider how destructive its outreach to homosexuals has cost and will continue to cost the Conservative movement.  Thousands have left and will continue to leave  and now are Orthodox because the Conservative movement has taken it upon itself to proclaim that they are no longer associated with halachic Judaism.  This is why it is preferable for Elisheva to go to as mikvah at a conservative shul--but I asked her opinion.

Michal says:

I doubt atheists hesitate before jumping into bed with people they
love. Why bother if you don't see a structure saying it's better to
wait? But if you DO see the structure, and accept it, it shouldn't be
so hard to see monogamy as an ideal in its own right. It's totally not
my business (except for fulfilling my function as a random internet
commenter), but I have a much harder time with "why get married" than
"why have sex." People had premarital and extramarital sex since the
beginning of time, and will continue to do so no matter what rabbis
say. People have also married the wrong people and ended up divorced or
worse, trapped in abusive relationships. But people have also had
wonderful fulfilling marriages with their first partners. And you can't
have that without the same exact leap of faith that yes, sometimes goes
in the wrong direction.
Having sex with your boyfriend/girlfriend because that's where you
are in the relationship and it feels right is the easy choice. Nowadays
it's even become the safe choice. And caring enough about halacha that
you'd rather put a band-aid on the relationship by incorporating some
aspects of TH just makes that decision more comfy. But it's far more
adult - and far more in the spirit of Torah - to play for keeps.

Michal is right on target and this is because Michal lacks the kind of ideological bigotry popular on the Jewcy blog.

Thanks for the clear-headed common sense, Michal! 

Oh, David, you haven't refuted my points at all.  I asked you to provide evidence that people (even traditionally-minded people) generally regret having had premarital sexual relationships.  In response, you cite nothing but blithe generalizations.  

    "I am making the point from a place of wisdom and from the other side of the goal line and all married people understand this intuitively--this is why it is good for young people to model from people like their parents."  No, it isn't so that all married people know this.  I'm as old as you are; I've been married for nearly 30 years; I'm _quite_ traditional; and I do not regret my own premarital relationships.  

    "I ask you to consider the psychological damage of sharing one's sexuality with a string of lovers and then attempting to reveal oneself in the deepest way when the committed spouse is a reality."  Again, you've been challenged repeatedly for evidence that having relationships before marriage is psychologically damaging, and you've provided none.  You're entitled to your view that it's immoral; you may even be "entitled" to your view that it's psychologically damaging.  But if you assert the latter view in a public forum, you have an obligation to explain your basis; you haven't.

    I also noted that your characterization of the Conservative Movement decisions about homosexuality was factually wrong, and I explained how.  You respond by saying, "Regarding the Conservative movement and its stand, please, I understand the 'facts.'"  But you acknowledge error nor try to explain how my point was wrong.  

    Instead, you change the subject:  "The FACT you should consider is the one I directed to Elisheva, please consider how destructive its outreach to homosexuals has cost and will continue to cost the Conservative movement.  Thousands have left and will continue to leave  and now are Orthodox because the Conservative movement has taken it upon itself to proclaim that they are no longer associated with halachic Judaism."  

    There are two points that must be made in answering this comment.  First, whether the Conservative movement will lose more from the departure of the folks you describe, or whether it will gain more from the continued affiliation of folks who, whether themselves gay or straight, believe strongly in the legitimacy and desirability of the permissive view among the Law Committee, and who are quite traditional in their practice in other areas of halacha is pure speculation, and is hardly "fact" (let alone "FACT").  

    Second, it just isn't true that the Conservative movement has proclaimed that it is "no longer associated with halachic Judaism."  The Conservative movement -- including both the rabbis who supported the permissive responsum and those who supported the non-permissive one -- maintain that they _are_ adherents of halachic Judaism.  You may disagree with the permissive responsum; you may even think that that ruling departed very substantially from traditional halachic reasoning.  You would be in good company -- even the chief author of the non-permissive responsum thought that.  But committing error as to the legitimate bounds of the halachic process (if that is what it was) is different from proclaiming oneself divorced from halachic Judaism.  That characterization is not only inaccurate; it's irresponsible.

Plainly, I meant to say, "But you _neither_ acknowledge error nor try to explain how my point was wrong." 

First, btw, that was my compliment to Michal, posted anonymously by accident.

Dov, please consider how one might read your arguments when you contend that I am wrong in asserting that a prohibition against pre-marital sex is Rabbinic halacha and then, a few paragraphs later, you agree that all Orthodox Rabbis of today agree that pre-marittal sex is to be prohibited.  Huh?

Documenting that observant households have far less socially destructive problems is not necessary since this is obvious and so well documented.  There could hardly be a bigger contrast between the communities and it is clear when one sees yeshiva life in the US or in Israel and compares it with secular counterparts.  For example, I am a big fan of EFRAT-CRIB in Israel that encourages young women to not kill their babies because they lack the financial resources to take care of them.  Shockingly, many thousands of children are aborted every month in Israel.  As a percentage of the populations, it is clear (based upon what I was told) the overwhelming number of out of wedlock births come from non-observant households.

I respect the fact you come from an Orthodox background--I do not and I am a BT. First you claim I am wrong that the prohibition helps the Orthodox to not engage in pre-marital sex, then one sentence later, you say that the law "diminishes the number of people having actual intercourse."   Ok--so this makes me wrong--or right?  Perhaps you mean to say that the law does stop the Orthodox from having intercourse but they are total demons about *oral* sex--is this your point?  If so--(I am guessing since I am trying to find a way to figure how you can disagree again by agreeing) you want ME to document my points when they are commonly known and you want to just let that one fly without documentation?

But your final broadside is interesting. You state:  1) issues of women's role in the community. 2) issues of sexual mores
(yes, morays was wrong -- typing quickly and on little sleep).  And
it's a shame (for you guys -- not for us!) that Orthodox Rabbis'
willful act of sticking their collective heads in the sand is driving a
committed, vibrant flock of young (and attractive!) Jews over to join