kahn@crvax1.DEC (06/08/85)
> Rich Rosen says: > We have seen the Lies of absolutism and intolerance that >religions and dogmas of various types have foisted upon the earth. Only >through tolerance and acceptance of other human beings can we expect the human >race to survive. * I don't consider acceptance of those who are intolerant, >who would rid us of those they don't like, to be a part of that * . I would >think that you, being a Jew, would feel the same way. I'm sorry to find out >otherwise. >Abominable to you because you have some vested interest in believing that your >particular beliefs, * which rest on foundations no better than any other >religion * , ARE that absolute truth that you wish for. >Your personal tastes allow you to hate or dislike practices. To hate people >* not because of their actions * but because of their ancestry/heritage, or to >condemn other people simply because they engage in practices you don't like, >are things worth apologizing for. >* You should NOT tolerant things that advocate interference in the lives of >human beings * . Again, though you choose not to see it, BY YOUR LOGIC, Nazism >is JUST AS JUSTIFIABLE as your "fundamentalist Judaism", and thus Jew-hating >is no more unconscionable than your gay-hating. >* Murderers kill other people. By definition. What do either Jews or >homosexuals do that harms other people * ? Sorry, John Lind, but the >substitution argument holds very well, until you can show a difference >between hating Jews and hating homosexuals... >I reject Torah. OK? I thought I had always been VERY open about rejecting >arbitrary contradictory subjective and hopelessly presumptively written >religious documents. You have as much "objective" support for your >"tradition" as Dan Boskovich does with his presumptive nonsense to >"objectively" support Christianity (read his "objective proofs" in >net.religion). Given that both of you haven't a leg to stand on, what >right do either of you have to invoke your "traditions" to tell other people >what to do? It seems to me that the points of agreement and disagreement are becoming fuzzy. I think some definition here might help. Tolerate -- To recognize and respect, as the rights, opinions, or practices of others, whether agreeing with them or not. (American Heritage) Everyone has agreed that there are some things that we should be intolerant of: Y. Samet feels that anything the Torah prohibits should not be tolerated and this is to ensure a society based on a high moral plane. R. Rosen has also mentioned some things that are not to be tolerated: 1. "You should NOT be tolerant of things that advocate interference in the lives of other human beings." 2. People that harm other people (i.e. murderers) 3. You can be intolerant of people for their "actions", but not for their "practices" or "ancestry/heritage". I may be misunderstanding Rich, but I think he means to include 1 and 2 above in "actions", whereas homosexuality is a "practice". 4. You can be intolerant of people that are intolerant, because of their inherent harm to the world. I don't want to get into semantics here. It seems that the question is not whether one should be intolerant or not, but rather WHAT should we tolerate and what not. Rich rejects the Torah and is left in the unenviable position of having to decide what can be tolerated in a society for the common good of the entire society. Who can we trust to provide us with guidelines in this area? If I was looking for advice, I would take the following road: 1. Find a time proven system. 2. Failing that, find an expert, who may not have a good system, but knows the pitfalls of bad systems. 3. Failing that, try trial and error. Rich, for one, feels that all Jews, by their history of persecution, should be more tolerant than others. The fact is that Jews are more liberal and tolerant than other peoples. Does the Jewish system of law of over 4,000 years get any credit for that? I contend that the Torah fits into category 1 above. What Rich must rely upon is category 3, or at best 2. Is the Jewish religion different than other religions? Are its foundations more strongly rooted? These are questions dealt with in the Torah (Devarim) and by the Kuzari and the Rambam, among many, many others. Bli neder, I'll try to write something on that next week. To summarize, the question is not one of intolerance, but which value system do you choose for your society. By the way, some other topics that need research (by those seriously seeking answers) are: 1) Is a Jew allowed to hate a sinner? (There is a difference between hate and tolerate) 2) What are the laws relating to homosexuality? (Who is liable,what is his punishment,etc.) 3) Does Judaism rely on the "leap of faith" that other religions or beliefs rely on? (i.e. either you believe or you don't) (The answer is NO!) 4) What function do the commandments Bein Adam LaMakom (between man and G-d) serve? What if noone is being hurt? Here are some examples (where everyone is a consenting adult): a) prostitution b) incest (brother marrying sister) c) suicide Good shabbos everyone, I'm late already. dave kahn