Gay Ketubah Offerings Let Same-Sex Couples Enjoy Jewish Marriage Tradition | Huffington Post.
Category: LGBTIQ+
Why Intermarriage Poses Threat to Jewish Life — But Gay Marriage Doesn’t | Forward.com
Madrid Chief Rabbi Calls Gays ‘Deviants’ | Forward.com
Danby defends silence on gay marriage | Star Observer
Danby defends silence on gay marriage | Star Observer.
By Benjamin Riley on July 31, 2013
Federal Labor MP for Melbourne Ports Michael Danby has justified his decision to abstain from last September’s marriage equality vote and subsequent refusal for more than six months to reiterate his support for the issue as “political gravitas or timing”.
Danby did not vote at all when Labor’s marriage equality bill was put to the House of Representatives last year despite indicating his support for equality before the 2010 election, angering many in the LGBTI community. Following the vote he was silent about his reasons until later this year, ignoring numerous requests for comment by the Star Observer.
Danby broke his silence and clarified the issue publicly in an interview on LGBTI radio station JOY 94.9 on May 25. He stated he would support any future marriage equality bills and justified his abstention under the conscience vote granted Labor members, saying that “my assessment was it wasn’t going to get through”.
The MP has now gone into detail with the Star Observer about his refusal to comment on the abstention for the first time, justifying his actions in terms of the current political climate.
“It’s the worst political crisis and ugliest Parliament I’ve ever been in, and there are lots of issues that people are involved in…the leadership in particular, and they took priority over some other issues. I can’t apologise for it because that’s just what happened,” Danby said, explaining Labor’s internal leadership struggles prevented him from engaging with the LGBTI community.
“It’s not that I didn’t have time, I prioritised what I thought was important. Survival of the government was — it was obvious at any minute that we could go under, and I was concentrating on stability inside the government and on other issues, which didn’t give this the priority that people in the LGBTI community wanted.”
A month prior to his interview on JOY 94.9 Danby sent a letter to a constituent named Tony Pitman explaining he abstained on the basis of “fairness,” not political manoeuvring.
In the letter dated April 11 he wrote that “I abstained from the vote on that bill because I did not think it fair that half the Parliament — the Labor Party — had a free vote, while the other half — the Coalition parties — were ordered by their Leader Mr Abbott to vote against the bill”.
Danby told the Star Observer his decision was primarily about politics.
“You can call it political expediency, I call it political gravitas or timing. You can have people who make their views — it just has to be done now or whatever — as clear as they like…it’s the MPs who understand how Parliament works who are the best judge of that,” Danby said.
“And I’m not saying we’re any superior breed but you have to make a judgement in our own circumstances and in this parliament, with Tony Abbot breathing down our necks and leadership challenges, I made the judgement that this was not going through.”
When the Star Observer asked what prompted his eventual decision to comment on the radio, Danby offered the following:
“When it became clear to me that people in the community were agitated about this…I thought, let’s strike while the iron’s hot. The issue was quiet, over, and it was time to make clear to people where I stood.”
Marriage equality groups and the Star Observer have lobbied Danby since the vote to comment on his decision. Although the statement on JOY 94.9 came just days after then-backbencher Kevin Rudd announced his support for marriage equality, Danby said his actions were “in spite of” Rudd, not because of him.
Danby said most of the lobbying on marriage equality in his electorate was in support, but said he was also being lobbied to oppose it by some religious groups, notably the Greek Orthodox community. However, Danby reiterated his support for marriage equality going into this year’s federal election, promising again to vote for future bills. He said he believes Labor would be able to pass marriage equality in the next government if elected.
“Now the opportunity is for Labor being elected and holding people like me to our pledges, and it’ll happen,” he said.
Danby is facing openly gay Liberal Party candidate and marriage equality supporter Kevin Ekendahl in the election, who he defeated in 2010 with an increased majority.
The Progressive Perspective on Same Sex Marriage | Galus Australis
The Progressive Perspective on Same Sex Marriage
July 24, 2013 – 8:00 pm
By Rabbi Jonathan Keren-Black:
Within Progressive Judaism, we start with a strong emphasis on the human position. We also believe that every human being is ‘made in God’s image’, and that God is a God of love, kindness and justice. Whilst the majority of people are predominantly heterosexual, it is clear that a significant number are not, and we do not accept that God wishes them to be forced into relationships and structures that are not as loving, healthy and supportive as they could be.
Since we believe that Torah is a revered but ultimately human document, written by our ancestors, inspired by God and seeking to answer the question ‘What does God want of us?’, we recognise the duplicated prohibition in Leviticus that ‘a man should not lie with another man as with a woman’ as one of those simplistic and time-bound human rules, developed in the context of needing to produce as many children as possible to create a numerous nation (and army) – and one that has, sadly and tragically, led to enormous prejudice, bigotry, hatred and violence against a particular group within all monotheistic religions over the subsequent millennia.
Back in Genesis 2, the observation is made, in the name of God, that a person should not be alone. However much you love your animals, they are not the same as another person. The context of the creation story on Genesis 1 is on reproduction – the trees and vegetation with their seed in them, the very first command – even before humans have been created – to the creatures and birds and insects: ‘Go forth and multiply’. When God created humanity – male and female at the same moment – they too received the same instruction – the first command to humanity, but with the added responsibility to ‘khivshuha’ – to ‘master’ or ‘care-take’ the earth. After Adam and Eve are expelled from the Garden of Eden (the naive innocence of childhood where everything is provided), they get down to propagation (chapter 4) – the explanation for the population of the world. Male and Female equals children!
So this relationship which produces children was seen as ‘God’s natural plan’ (though sometimes with more than one wife!) and was formalised in ‘marriage’ which was then seen as a ‘God given’ or ‘holy’ structure (the agreement to form such as unit is termed ‘kiddushin’, sanctification). Hence, as with homophobia, marriage as a divinely sanctioned heterosexual union has also drawn heavily on the Hebrew bible as it has become the norm in monotheism.
Today we acknowledge that we cannot be sure of God’s will, and that Torah scholarship does not spell it out definitively and fully. We view and review our generations of experience and scholarship with our wish for truth, right, justice and compassion and our understanding of psychology, history, coercion and oppression in the name of religion and God. We seek to do God’s will, as our ancestors did, but with the awareness that we may not be right, and can only do our best.
In March, 2000, the Central Conference of American Rabbis agreed that “the relationship of a Jewish, same gender couple is worthy of affirmation through appropriate Jewish ritual”. In Britain, too, homosexual Jewish couples were able to celebrate a Commitment Ceremony. In 2009, the Rabbis of the Union for Progressive Judaism (Australia, New Zealand and Asia) resolved to permit its rabbis to officiate at same gender commitment ceremonies between two Jews. At that stage we were not ready to use the specific term Kiddushin but could use the term ‘bestowing Kedusha’. A document may be used and referred to as a Ketubah. A Khuppah may be used as it may be understood to represent the Jewish home being established.
We have agreed not to call the ceremony Marriage for the time being even where we may be legally entitled to do so, but we have written to the government to call for full Marriage Equality – so that marriage may now be recognized as a binding legal and social commitment between two adults. Marriage serves as a recognised and long-term legal and social structure in the modern world. Those who live in a permanent relationship without the benefit of the formal recognition may still suffer from some social stigma and may be disadvantaged, for example in pension rights, and any such inequity is unjust and unacceptable. For these reasons, the Rabbis and leaders of the UPJ now wish to see marriage redefined as the permanent and exclusive relationship between two people, whether a man and a woman, two women or two men, and support Marriage Equality. We were the only religious group to provide supportive testimony to the two Parliamentary enquiries into it, but hope that others will soon join us! We also support Keshet (keshet.org.au), who are committed to challenging the ongoing prejudice and discrimination within the Jewish community against homosexuality.
Jonathan Keren-Black is Rabbi at The Leo Baeck Centre.
Untold Stories of the ‘T’ Folks in LGBT | Forward.com
First Generation of Transgender Rabbis Claims Place at Bimah | Forward.com
Schools defend right to expel gays | Sydney Morning Herald
Schools defend right to expel gays | Sydney Morning Herald.
…
Not all religious education authorities were opposed to removing the exemptions, though.
”While Jewish schools jealously guard against any incursion into our ability to teach the Jewish religion in a manner consistent with its tenets, and consider those tenets and that ability fundamental to our existence,” said Len Hain, executive director of the Australian Council of Jewish Schools, ”we do not see any practical limitation, or the imposition of any practical burden on that ability from the amendments deleting the specific exclusions to the Anti-Discrimination Act.”
…
