Naughty, naughty, Benjamin.

Seems like you've been infected by the Israeli perception of Reform, wherein there is no Judaism but Orthodox Judaism. Too bad, because that view has been and will continue to be a cancer within the body of Israeli society.

The assumption underlying your whole argument is that a religious movement must conform to a sacred text in order to be functional or legitimate. That may be true or not true, but you fail to explain why, and instead just conclusively state that an approach to religion that denies the truth of sacred text alienates the Reform movement from "other strains of Judaism" and from "Judaism itself."

Well, first of all, what "strain" of Judaism is not alienated from all other strains? No one would ever start a new movement in Judaism if they did not see an important distinction between the new movement and the other ways they see their religion being practiced. You can call that distinction an "alienation," or just a difference, but either way it's an inherent aspect of a movement, and is not necessarily a bad thing. In essence you're using a fancy term with a negative connotation ("alienate") to state that the sky is blue, and then you conclude without stating any basis for your conclusion that something is wrong with that color.

Next you claim that Reform is "alienating" itself from "Judaism itself." Once again, a conclusive statement assuming all sorts of things that may or not be true. First assumption: that some sort of monolithic "Judaism itself" exists from which Reform can be alienated. Second assumption: that this elusive "Judaism itself" must follow the letter of the law as stated in sacred texts.

Who's to say that Orthodoxy is not "alienated from Judaism itself," while Reform is being true to Judaism? Clearly Orthodoxy is truer to tradition, but why assume that "true" Judaism = traditional Judaism? Or do you mean that Reform Jews are alienated from other Jews? That's demonstrably false. I'm sure you know plenty of Jews from different movements (or no movement) who manage to get along fine.

So first come up with a real reason (and I'm not denying that such a reason can be found) for why textualism is a prerequisite to some necessary positive attribute of Judaism, and only then will you convince me why Reform Judaism can't be fully accepting of gays.

Otherwise, I see no reason why a movement that doesn't keep kosher, pray three times a day, or follow any number of halachic commands can't also have their own way of handling homosexuality.

--Z

Z,

There is a difference between eating ham and homosexuality. For the most part American culture has no concerns or taboos about ham--it's the other white meat. On the other hand, homosexuality is still a difficult subject for many Americans, especially outside the biggest cities. Sure, we've come a long way baby. But, it takes more effort to to handle homosexuality than it does ham eaters. Right?

I'm not sure I understand... are you saying it's understandable that people remain homophobic and intent upon refusing equality to gays and lesbians because, well, most other people do, too?

I'm not saying that Reform Judaism can't be fully accepting of gays.  I am stating that to do so alienates them from what has always been Judaism's textual and non-textual concept of normative behavior.  This may or may not be problematic to you or Reform Jews in general, I don't know.

I never said that a religion must define itself or is defined by its sacred texts (although to deny them outright seems, to me at least, self-evidently absurd).  I simply stated the obvious, which is that religiously, historically and culturally speaking, Judaism has never regarded homosexuality as normative behavior.  The Reform movement has now decided to do precisely that.  That is, Reform has split from -- that is, alienated itself -- from Judaism (or Judaisms, if you prefer) as it has previously existed, not only in the textual sense but in every other sense as well.  Again, you may think this is a good thing, but there is no sense in denying what it obviously is.

Incidentally, an amorphous or elusive concept of "Judaism itself" is, in and of itself, an idea embraced by Reform Judaism.  It has nothing to do with me or what I wrote, nor do I believe such a thing exists, there is merely a historical-cultural-textual continuum from which, on this particular issue, Reform has now broken away.

The Reform movement has already broken with what some believe to be "Judaism's textual and non-textual concept of normative behavior." Furthermore, many Jews (Reform Jews and those in other movements) have argued for a text-based, "traditional" approach to making many of the changes that are crucial to the Reform movement (like gender equality and GLBT inclusion). See, for example, Rabbi Rachel Adler's Engendering Judaism or Rabbi Steve Greenberg's Wrestling with God and Men. To argue that Reform Judaism's practices and policies simply "alienates [Reform Jews] from what has always been Judaism's textual and non-textual concept of normative behavior" assumes (incorrectly) that there is one, definitive, inarguable version of "Judaism's textual and non-textual concept of normative behavior."

Anon 12:27:

I never said they were the same thing. All I'm trying to say is that you can't criticize a movement's stand on a particular issue as being inconsistent with a sacred text if a movement declines to follow sacred texts in general.  

When I brought up kashrut and praying three times a day, I was simply illustrating random examples of how Reform Judaism does not strictly adhere to what the Talmud says.  

It could be that Reform Jews have general standards that cause them to adhere to certain Talmudic ordinances and not others.  And those standards might leave some people to follow the Talmud on homosexuality even as they ignore it with regard to Kashrut.  But I'm no aware of any such standard (I hope it's not the "American culture," or "rural American culture" standard that you imply) and I certainly can't think of any such standard that makes sense from a moral standpoint. 

Z

What is more alien to Judaism - a movement that abandons all dietary and Shabbat restrictions, or one that adapts traditional Hebrew prayers to sanctify commited same-sex relations?   21st century Reform Judaism is clearly far less alienated from Jewish tradition than its 19th century predecessor, which retained a strict privileging to heterosextuality.      

Ben's metric as what to what is Jewishly authentic seems to be textual.  If that's the case, let's go back to polygamy.  Rabbeinu Gershom's responsa on the matter did not "fit" with the established Biblical precedent was surely influenced by the cultural practices of monogamous Christians.     

Judaism however, is not merely a textual tradition; it is a lived tradition. Unless you consider opposition to homosexuality (as oposed to ethical monotheism) to be the central hiddush that Jewish civilization brought to the world, Reform's decision to reevaluate Judaism historic position on sexual morality in light of new scientific evidence of the genetic origin of homosexuality is not alienating.  To the contrary, homosexual Jews who live in committed, same-sex marriages, observing Shabbat, kashrut, chagim and Judaism's ethical commandments will be vital parts of ever evolving, but still ancient Jewish civilization. 

It doesn't sound like you know the difference between homosexuals and transgender/intersexed people. For your information there are approximately 60,000 individuals in the U.S. born EVERY year with some kind of gender birth defect but because we live in a society that mandates parents choose a gender most are mutilated at birth and assigned a gender. Doctors also take this into their own hands without notifying the parents. There are horrendous stories out there. Transgender and intersexed people CAN be homosexual but PLEASE do not make the mistake of linking them. Intersexed people are born somewhere between male and female or hermaphrodite (both genders). This is a literal hell on earth by the way. Knowing your true gender when your body says otherwise. This has no bearing on sexuality. That is a choice who you have sexual relations with. Homosexuality is condemned in God's Holy Torah, not being transgender. Please research your facts before spewing hated in all directions and lumping people together that do NOT belong together. Here's the website for the interesexed society of North America if you're interested in facts instead of "what you've heard from people" http://www.isna.org/. That's the same mistake so many people make in their understanding of HaShem's Word. They go by "what they've heard" instead of actually looking it up in the Bible themselves and studying and learning Hebrew and taking the time and getting into the deeper studies. Shalom aleichem.