samet@sfmag.UUCP (A.I.Samet) (05/24/85)
> If the religious right were to make your sorts of statements about > those who practice the "abomination of Judaism", you would be rightfully > upset, no? Is there a reason why you can't have the same level of > tolerance for others and their ways that you would expect others to have for > you and your ways? It's your opinion that sexual practices other than your > own are abominable. Fine. There are those who have the same feelings about > the way you practice your religion. In what way are you any different from > them? The Torah refers to homosexuality as an "abomination" and, lehavdil, to those who keep the Torah as "Holy". That's the difference. Someone people pride themselves on being tolerant, but can't seem to tolerate those who believe in absolutes (like those of us who who view the Torah as the word of G*d). Tolerating only those who are absolutely tolerant would require one not to tolerate himself, unless he believes in hypocricy. Believing absolutely that there are no absolutes is contradictory. Believing in an absolute truth is consistent with not tolerating its antithesis (and with viewing the opinions quoted above as intolerably absurd.) Yitzchok Samet
wkp@lanl.ARPA (06/01/85)
It is unfortunate that people who claim to be Jews could be so guilty of the same intolerance that they themselves have suffered from.
schechte@csd2.UUCP (asher schechter) (06/02/85)
If Rosen wants to show that the Torah is not tolerant he is right.
The Torah is not tolerant to murderers,incest,homosexuals,sabath
desecrators,idol worshipers etc.......
Don't like it ?? Think it is wrong ??? Who are you against G-ds
infinite wisdom ??? Is your puny brain what decides right from wrong
and truth from false ???
Asher Schechterteitz@aecom.UUCP (Eliyahu Teitz) (06/03/85)
> >>First, Yitzchok, show us all the irrefutable proof that your subjective ideas > >>ARE in fact the absolute truths.... > > > I can discuss why I believe the Torah is the absolute truth, and > > in fact this is often discussed by me and others on this net. > > However, that issue need not be proven to refute your original > > challenge, and I don't intend to apoligize for my belief in the > > Torah every time someone disagrees with my views. [SAMET] > > Nor do Nazis, by your "logic", have to apologize for their views that preach > intolerance and hatred of Jews. What's the difference? Can you actually show > us any such difference in a demonstrable fashion? Your proof is no better than > that for any other religion out there, and though you need not apologize for > your beliefs, I would think you WOULD need to apologize for being as hateful > as those who would hate you, no matter how contortedly you choose to justify it. > Why do people assume, because the Torah said not to tolerate abominations, that we are hateful of them. I can try myy hardest to undo all evil and despicable things and actions without hatred and venom towards the person. As King David, in Psalms, says, ' yitamu chataim min ha'aretz' let the sins end in the land. Not the sinners, the sins. We should try to correct mistakes, not crush the person who erred. This holds true as long as the person made a mistake. However, if he is an evil person who sins just for the sake of sinning, then we must somehow wipe out the sinner as well, as the verse continues, 'urishamin od enam' ( and the evil until they exist no more ). The religious should not all be classified as haters of the non-religious. Manyy religious people belong to outreach programs where we try and open new horizons to the unaquainted. We do not preach religious observance; we just make the people aware of what we believe and let them choose for themselves ( in an effor to wipe out sins and not sinners ). > > Your question was how do I dare not to tolerate homosexuality and > > how can I take an intolerant stance, since anyone can take an > > intolerant stance towards me. > > Amazing how the last refuge of the blatantly intolerant is always "But you're > being intolerant of my intolerance, so there!" > Rich, you leave yourself wide open to the same criticism. So far, you have shown as much intollerance on this net as anyone else. But your's is of course in the holy name of tolerance. Why is tolerance so holy ? I agree tat we should not force religion on anyyone who doesn't want it. But we should state for the record that there are those who feel justified in not tolerating certain things. You yourself do not tolerate intolerance. Religious Jews do not tolerate what the Torah says should not be tolerated. Granted, some religious people take this too far, but there are certain areas where they are right. And homosexuality is one of them. It should not be tolerated. This doesn't mean we should hate the homosexual. We should try to educate him. Not force the religion on him. Rather, show him what religion is all about. I'm sure if you looked at Judaism objectively, without any preconceived notions, you, too, would see many beautiful things in it. The main thrust of Judaism is to be tolerant. But, there are things that cannot be tolerated. Surely, you do not tolerate falsehoods. The Torah too, does nottolerate it. I do not want to get into the argument of whether the Torah is authentic and whether it should be followed since neither of us would convince the other differently than we already believe. But, given that the Torah exists, and there are those who follow it, and you must, by your own standards tolerate them; then, they are justified in their intolerance. We all have to learn to be more tolerant. Even you Rich. Let's not justifyy ourselves by saying the other is more intolerant. Eliyahu Teitz.
teitz@aecom.UUCP (Eliyahu Teitz) (06/03/85)
> If Rosen wants to show that the Torah is not tolerant he is right. > The Torah is not tolerant to murderers,incest,homosexuals,sabath > desecrators,idol worshipers etc....... > Don't like it ?? Think it is wrong ??? Who are you against G-ds > infinite wisdom ??? Is your puny brain what decides right from wrong > and truth from false ??? > Now we are going to hear insults back and forth about who's brain is punier. X's for accepting ( believing ) the fact that G-D exists, or Y's for refuting it. Let's stop it before it starts. We are getting as bad here, with all the name calling, as our cousins on the other religion nets. I was always impressed in the past with the level of tolerance on this particular news group. The scholarship here rivals all other groups I have read. So, too, the sincerity of questionas and answers. However, recenly, I have seen a disturbing trend. People are reacting with too much emotion and not enough thought. This does not apply to only one side of the argument, but to all sides, in all arguments. Before we used to have discussion, now we have arguments. Let's get back to discussions. We can still have a nice, open forum to discuss all matters. Namecalling and insults do not add to the logic of an article; they only diminish the logic. If one sees flames jumping from the screen in an article, one tends to lose respect for the poster. If you are truly convinced of you side, you won't have to belittle the opponent to win. So, please, let's get n.r.j back on the right path. Let's put an end to name calling and insulting. If yyou can't control yourself, post to net.flame. You'll find pleasant company there. We just finished the counting of s'firat ha'omer ( counting the days between passover and pentacost ). The Talmud relates that during these day Rabbi Akiva lost 24,000 students in a plague, because they did not give each other the proper respect. Whether we are on the level of R. Akiva's students or not should not deter us from learning a lesson ffrom their deaths. Let usall give more respect to each other. This does not mean that we cannot have disagreements. But, these disagreements should be handled in a proper manner. Eliyahu Teitz.
rlr@pyuxd.UUCP (Arthur Pewtey) (06/05/85)
> If Rosen wants to show that the Torah is not tolerant he is right. > The Torah is not tolerant to murderers,incest,homosexuals,sabath > desecrators,idol worshipers etc....... > Don't like it ?? Think it is wrong ??? Who are you against G-ds > infinite wisdom ??? [ASHER SCHECHTER] Who are you to claim that we are talking about the word of such a deity? Can you prove that it is? Can you even show evidence that such a deity exists? In the absence of such evidence, please don't expect to impose your intolerant versions of right and wrong on others, thank you. > Is your puny brain what decides right from wrong and truth from false ??? No, apparently yours is... There's a big difference between murderers and others who HARM other people, and those who engage in other practices that are private matters that are none of your goddamned business. -- "Now, go away or I shall taunt you a second time!" Rich Rosen ihnp4!pyuxd!rlr
rlr@pyuxd.UUCP (Arthur Pewtey) (06/05/85)
> Why do people assume, because the Torah said not to tolerate > abominations, that we are hateful of them. [ELIYAHU TEITZ] Assume? I would say that seeking to punish those who engage in practices not harmful to other human beings that you simply don't like is quite equivalent to hatred. I would think a Jew would recognize those who would punish Jews for their practices as no different than this. >>> Your question was how do I dare not to tolerate homosexuality and >>> how can I take an intolerant stance, since anyone can take an >>> intolerant stance towards me. >> >>Amazing how the last refuge of the blatantly intolerant is always "But you're >>being intolerant of my intolerance, so there!" >> > Rich, you leave yourself wide open to the same criticism. So far, > you have shown as much intollerance on this net as anyone else. But your's > is of course in the holy name of tolerance. Why is tolerance so holy ? Precisely because it is the only way different groups of human beings can expect to share a planet without mass destruction. If that's not important, then just say so. Who was it that said "extremism in the defense of liberty is a virtue"? Moreover, notice that the only ones who label me intolerant would be those who advocate intolerance themselves. > I agree tat we should not force religion on anyyone who doesn't want it. But > we should state for the record that there are those who feel justified in > not tolerating certain things. You yourself do not tolerate intolerance. Above I have stated the difference between being intolerant of people who are doing nothing to interfere in others' lives and being intolerant of people who are doing PLENTY to interfere in others' lives. If you don't value freedom from interference in the lives of individuals, if you place higher value on what society would wish, then realize that if society is more important than individuals, a society that 'decided' that individual people were interfering in its operation could simply get rid of its people so that things would run smoother. And do recall what I said above about "the last refuge of the intolerant". You would seem to seek refuge in it yourself above. > Religious Jews do not tolerate what the Torah says should not be tolerated. > Granted, some religious people take this too far, but there are certain > areas where they are right. And homosexuality is one of them. It should > not be tolerated. Why? Because "it says so"? What is your basis for determining which things are being taken "too far" and which aren't. > This doesn't mean we should hate the homosexual. We should try to educate > him. Not force the religion on him. Rather, show him what religion is all > about. Right. Tell him to live his life your way, which is so obviously right while his is wrong. > I'm sure if you looked at Judaism objectively, > without any preconceived notions, you, too, would see many beautiful things > in it. The main thrust of Judaism is to be tolerant. But, there are things > that cannot be tolerated. Surely, you do not tolerate falsehoods. The Torah > too, does nottolerate it. Thus, because the Torah does not condone something I would find offensive, I shold thus take all of it part and parcel? > I do not want to get into the argument of whether the Torah is > authentic and whether it should be followed since neither of us would > convince the other differently than we already believe. But, given that > the Torah exists, and there are those who follow it, and you must, by > your own standards tolerate them; then, they are justified in their > intolerance. As were the Nazis justified in their intolerance that led to the slaughter of six million Jews. You can have one without the other. -- "There! I've run rings 'round you logically!" "Oh, intercourse the penguin!" Rich Rosen ihnp4!pyuxd!rlr
david@fisher.UUCP (David Rubin) (06/05/85)
> If Rosen wants to show that the Torah is not tolerant he is right. > The Torah is not tolerant to murderers,incest,homosexuals,sabath > desecrators,idol worshipers etc....... > Don't like it ?? Think it is wrong ??? Who are you against G-ds > infinite wisdom ??? Is your puny brain what decides right from wrong > and truth from false ??? > > Asher Schechter Rosen (and all of us) may have puny brains, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't try to use them... Yes, Asher, it's our puny brains that decide what's right and wrong, what's true and false. Whether those limited facilities decide that truth and right reside in orthodoxy or heterodoxy, they DO make that choice, including yours. Pretending that God has made that choice for you doesn't wash; after all, you still had to decide whether and what God had decided for you. Besides, if God's wisdom is infinite, it follows that Rosen and Schechter possess the exact same proportion of it. Rosen's virtue is that he does not pretend to speak for God while possessing 0% of that wisdom. David Rubin {allegra|astrovax|princeton}!fisher!david
wkp@lanl.ARPA (06/06/85)
Rich Rosen: >> Nor do Nazis, by your "logic", have to apologize for their views that preach >>intolerance and hatred of Jews. What's the difference? Can you actually show >> us any such difference in a demonstrable fashion? Eliyahu Teitz: > Rich, you leave yourself wide open to the same criticism. So far, > you have shown as much intollerance on this net as anyone else. I agree with you, Eliyahu, that more love and tolerance should be shown in this newsgroup. But I feel that you're a little too harsh on Rich. Don't forget that all three of us fought against Don Black's blind hatred, and to excuse or ignore the blind hatred of A.I. Samet is just as bad. Another point. All three of us scolded Don Black's co-religionists for not condeming him. Are we any less guilty if we ignore Samet's hatred?? Do you want n.r.j. to be the newsgroup famous for advocating killing homosexuals? -- bill peter ihnp4!lanl!wkp
matt@brl-tgr.ARPA (Matthew Rosenblatt ) (06/07/85)
Statements like "You should not tolerate things that advocate interference in the lives of other human beings" "What do either Jews or homosexuals do that harms other people?" "Thieves/rapists/murderers all do something nasty to other people that they don't like" seem to flow from a morality that assumes as a basic principle something like: "It is wrong to interfere in the lives of other human beings unless they are doing things that harm other people." This may be an admirable principle, and one widespread in the academic and intellectual community, but it is far from universally accepted. In particular, it has not been accepted by liberal constitutional democracy, as exemplified by the United States: You can't use heroin. You can't practice polygamy. You can't grow wheat on your own land for your own use without a Federal permit (Wickard v. Filburn). You can't engage in consensual homosexual acts in Virginia (Virginia law, upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court). If such a principle does not come from civil society, and it certainly does not come from Judaism or (l'havdil) Christianity or Islam, then where does it come from? Who says it's self-evident? Why should Jews adopt such a principle as a tenet of Judaism, especially since it has no basis in our Torah? Why judge other Jews' beliefs, or (chas v'sholom) the Torah itself, for failure to put the liberal idea of "live and let live" as the highest moral value?
ccrdave@ucdavis.UUCP (Lord Kahless) (06/07/85)
> > The Torah is not tolerant to murderers,incest,homosexuals,sabath > > desecrators,idol worshipers etc....... > Yes, Asher, it's our puny brains that decide what's right and wrong, > what's true and false. Whether those limited facilities decide that > truth and right reside in orthodoxy or heterodoxy, they DO make that > choice, including yours. Pretending that God has made that choice for > you doesn't wash; after all, you still had to decide whether and what > God had decided for you. G!d's word is VERY clear and very easy to understand, at least about the basic points like morality. You have the right to choose not to follow the commandments. You have the right not to believe the commandments. You have the right to not believe in G!d. But that doesn't change the commandments. Several people on this net seem, to me at least, to think that truth is determined by majority opinion. That isn't the case. The world was no flatter in the 15th century, despite the opinions of the noted men of the day. Popular opinion doesn't change the truth declared from the beginning. If you don't believe in G!d, that doesn't change the fact that G!d believes in you and wants YOU to keep his commandments. Today, many people think homosexuality is right. Some people in Davis are trying to pass a homosexual rights ordinance. Some of the supporters call themselves Jewish. None of this makes homosexual activity correct in the eyes of our maker. Arguing that lots of people break the Sabbath and that the penalties for Sabbath violations are severe is no excuse for homosexual activities either. Just because a large number of people, or even a majority of people, break a commandment doesn't invalidate the commandment.
brian@digi-g.UUCP (Merlyn Leroy) (06/08/85)
asher schechter writes: >If Rosen wants to show that the Torah is not tolerant he is right. >The Torah is not tolerant to murderers,incest,homosexuals,sabath >desecrators,idol worshipers etc....... >Don't like it ?? Think it is wrong ??? Who are you against G-ds >infinite wisdom ??? Is your puny brain what decides right from wrong >and truth from false ??? > > Asher Schechter Um, yes. But then again, my religion says people with initials A. S. are heretics and should be put to death. Does my religion bother you? Who are you against F--B-r's infinite wisdom??? Practice your religion all you want (at least until you get it right); just don't try to enforce ONE ITOA of it through law (and calling homosexuality a capital offense (like the posting that started all this) is certainly just that, since laws determine what is & isn't a crime, and states carry out the executions). Call it a mortal sin & I won't care. Call it a capital crime and watch the flames. Merlyn Leroy Keeper of the Untold Truth & Church of the SubGenius
rlr@pyuxd.UUCP (Arthur Pewtey) (06/12/85)
> G!d's word is VERY clear and very easy to understand, at least about > the basic points like morality. You have the right to choose > not to follow the commandments. You have the right not to believe > the commandments. You have the right to not believe in G!d. But > that doesn't change the commandments. [LORD KAHLESS] Wait a minute, let me get this straight. I have the right (as do others, I presume) not to believe in god. But that doesn't change the commandments? Are you implying "You may choose not to believe in god, but that doesn't change the fact that god exists and gave us these commandments"? If I have the right not to believe in god (especially given the lack of evidence pointing towards such a conclusion), then I have no basis for believing in the nature of the commandments as you see them. I think you've put your assumptions (the existence of god and the "holiness" of the commandments) before the horse. > Several people on this net seem, to me at least, to think that truth > is determined by majority opinion. That isn't the case. The world > was no flatter in the 15th century, despite the opinions of the noted > men of the day. Popular opinion doesn't change the truth declared > from the beginning. If you don't believe in G!d, that doesn't change > the fact that G!d believes in you and wants YOU to keep his commandments. As I said above. If you DO believe in god, then good for you. Whatever your basis for choosing to do so, it is neither obvious nor imperative nor evident that it exist. Your assumptions don't apply to the real world of other human beings, who have no basis for accepting what you accept. Assume anything you want. > Today, many people think homosexuality is right. Some people in > Davis are trying to pass a homosexual rights ordinance. Some of > the supporters call themselves Jewish. None of this makes homosexual > activity correct in the eyes of our maker. Arguing that lots of > people break the Sabbath and that the penalties for Sabbath violations > are severe is no excuse for homosexual activities either. Just > because a large number of people, or even a majority of people, > break a commandment doesn't invalidate the commandment. Given the lack of substantiation for the "divine" nature of the "commandment", on what basis can you impose your likes and dislikes on other people? If you can't come up with any, but still choose to do so, then that is no different from bigots and anti-Semites declaring that THEIR book says that YOUR beliefs are a "sin against our maker" and worthy of punishment. As always, it's that simple. -- "There! I've run rings 'round you logically!" "Oh, intercourse the penguin!" Rich Rosen ihnp4!pyuxd!rlr
buchbind@agrigene.UUCP (06/12/85)
> G!d's word is VERY clear and very easy to understand, ... What's not clear to me: How do you pronounce "G!d"? I understand that the Hebrew "'H" is pronounced HaShem; so for consistancy "G!d" should not be pronounced "God". (Also, when "God" does appear on the screen, is one in trouble if it scrolls of the screen or a file containing it is removed? (A CRT or a disk would seem to me to be more ephemeral than the fire usually used to 'destroy' the name ...)) [Sorry if I've missed previous discussion on this point.] > Today, many people think homosexuality is right. Today, many people think that, right or wrong, homosexuallity is noone (human) else's business. > Some people in Davis are trying to pass a homosexual rights ordinance. ... > [Some of these people are Jewish.]{Sorry. I edited this out and now want it > back. The quote may not be exact. - BUB} ... > None of this makes homosexual activity correct in the eyes of our maker. Many people today, and indeed the ancient Hellenistic society, believe that circumcision is wrong "in the eyes of our maker"; similarly, many feel kosher slaughtering of animals is cruel. Before you say that our right to practice shechitah and to give brisses to our sons is guarenteed by the 1st Amendment, remember that human sacrifice (even of volenteers) isn't so guarenteed and that Jehovah's Witnesses can be forced to receive transfusions. We would object to others telling us what our maker wants us to do or to not do; we should therefore be careful to not impose our beliefs on others. I, for one, can be tolerant of practices of which I disapprove but which do not affect parties not involved; many Jews feel they must promote this type of tolerance if we are to benefit from it. The issue in an ordinance is not judgement in heaven; the issue is housing and jobs on earth. -- Barry Buchbinder Agrigenetics Corp. 5649 E. Buckeye Rd. Madison, WI 53716 USA (608)221-5000 {seismo,ihnp4,harpo}!uwvax!astroatc!nicmad!agrigene!buchbind