Supporting Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Intersex & Queer people in Melbourne's Jewish community. Founded 1995.
Please share the following statement:
The leadership team at Beit Aharon, together with Rabbi Shamir Caplan, want to make clear our views in light of the upcoming survey:
1. As a community we oppose all discrimination
2. Changing the law to have marriage equality will have no effect on how Judaism is practiced in our community or the broader Jewish community
3. Therefore a yes vote in the upcoming survey about Marriage Equality is the most consistent vote with our Shule values
Shira Hadasha is disappointed to read the statement of the Rabbinical Council of Victoria encouraging Australians to vote no in the proposed postal vote on same sex marriage. The issue is of civil law reform which will not compel any religious leaders or institutions to conduct marriages outside the parameters of their established practice. Accordingly the statement is not necessary and serves no purpose other than to further hurt and marginalise LGBTIQ Jews and their families.
The suggestion that same sex marriage being legalised in other countries had “concerning impacts on the education system and religious freedom” goes well beyond the scope of the proposed change to the law and we question its factual basis.
As an inclusive orthodox congregation, Shira actively seeks ways to welcome all Jews into Jewish life and community, and to honour the core Jewish value of kevod habriyut, respect for the dignity of all people.
CIVIL SAME-SEX MARRIAGE
For several years, this is the response I have given to people who have asked about whether it is acceptable for Orthodox Jews to support civil recognition of Marriage Equality.
Those who know me are aware of my strong stance on the importance of acceptance, inclusivity, and dignity for all people. Here, let me address the issue from a more legal-philosophical perspective, which I think has a broader appeal in the Orthodox community.
Let me begin by asking a different question. If we lived in a society in which Freedom of Religion was not enshrined in law, would it be permissible for Orthodox Jews to vote YES if asked about creating such a law? I think most people would say it is in fact permissible to support the enshrining of Freedom of Religion in law, even though practically, it legally allows people to do all sorts of things (such as worship idols) that would seem to be explicitly against the Torah. So how could we support this?
The answer is, in an open democratic society, the best way to preserve my Freedom of Religion, is to preserve EVERYONE’s Freedom of Religion. Even if it means, in the process of doing so, I am essentially defending the legal rights of people who will choose to use those rights in a way that I my find problematic. But that’s the way law works. It is meant to be consistent and impartial. So in the process of preserving my rights, I am also preserving the rights of others.
In fact, I would further posit that most would consider it permissible for Orthodox Jews to actively and publicly campaign for the instituting of Freedom of Religion in their place of residence, using the same rationale.
In my mind, the maximal expanding of rights for all, as a means of preserving one’s own rights, applies to marriage, as well. Let me give an example that is germane to Orthodox Jews. According to Jewish law, it is acceptable to marry one’s first cousin. Not that I specifically recommend this, but it is in fact one’s right according to our tradition, and it was not an uncommon reality in times past. Now, what would happen if our government were to decide one day that this should be defined as incest? (By the way, according to the Marriage Act in its current form in Australia, you are able to marry relatives. See here) Would we not protest that this was curtailing our rights to decide who we want to marry, as observant Jews? Would it not be better for the secular government to get out of the business of deciding who can and cannot marry (save for the protection of minors, etc)?
In this way, we can argue that the best way to protect our rights to marry whom we choose is to protect everyone’s rights to marry whom they choose…
It is for these reasons that I believe it is permissible for Orthodox Jews, regardless of their feelings about the permissibility of homosexuality, to vote YES in the upcoming survey regarding Marriage Equality.
Message to my St Kilda Shule community (and others):
Two days ago the Rabbinical Council of Victoria (RCV) issued a statement encouraging people to vote “no” in the upcoming postal survey on same-sex marriage. The statement caused significant distress and hurt in the community. Its President has since issued a sincere public apology for which I commend him and its Vice President has resigned in protest. Given my position as a past President of the organisation several members of the St Kilda Shule congregation and others in the community have inquired as to my involvement in the said statement.
I had no knowledge of, or involvement in, the drafting or approval of this statement. I believe the statement was ill-conceived and served no purpose in advancing the cause of Orthodox Judaism. Instead, it alienated many members of our community and caused damage which was entirely preventable. Members of my Shule and others have a right to know where I, as their rabbi, stand on this matter and I trust the above will allay their concerns. I note that at the time of writing this we are only hours away from the High Court’s ruling on the legaility of otherwise of the postal vote, but irrespective of its decision I believe the above information remains relevant.
Having regard to the above I have also been asked about the position of the federal Rabbinic body (RCANZ) over which I currently preside. Our position on traditional marriage and the exemptions we expect for religious institutions should the Marriage Act be amended was submitted to the Government in January as part of the Senate’s Exposure Draft into the Marriage Amendment Bill. It followed full consultation of all our member rabbis across Australasia and is publicly available online.
When the Government announced in August its plans for a postal vote my Executive Committee made a conscious decision that it would be unwise to issue any statement, let alone one telling the community how to vote. Our reason for remaining silent was simple – we viewed weighing into the debate in the current climate as counter-productive and I believe the events over the past two days have justified our decision.
Notwithstanding this, I have been criticized by some in the community for my silence. They have perceived this as a sign of weakness and a cowering to political correctness. I wish to state in the clearest possible terms that I catergorically reject this criticism. In the wise words of King Solomon “there is a time to speak and a time to be silent” and now is a time for the latter.
The fact is that we as rabbis choose silence over statements on a regular basis – and for good reason. There is any number of non-halachic behaviors occuring on a daily basis within the Jewish community. We witness rampant desecration of Shabbat, widespread consumption of non-kosher, soaring intermarriage rates and we can only wonder how many heterosexual couples use the Mikvah regularly before cohabitation (and as some have pointed out the current debate on same-sex marriage relates to civil law, not Halacha). Yet we don’t see Rabbinic statements, proclamations or sermons telling people how to live their lives – and the reason has nil to do with weakness or political correctness. It’s because we know instinctively that doing so will alienate the very people we’re trying to bring closer to Orthodoxy. Instead, we as rabbis focus on the positive and so it should be. I do not regret my approach to date and quite frankly I hope others will follow suit.
Wearing my St Kilda Shule hat I can only reiterate that which I’ve stated multiple times from the pulpit, in the newspapers, on the radio, on social media and in conversation, that our Shule has an open door policy for all Jews irrespective of their sexuality. I will never judge anyone for the way they live their lives and I hope others won’t judge me for the way I live mine.
https://www.facebook.com/yaakovsara.glasman/posts/1388868384550567
Statement by Anton Block, President of the Executive Council of Australian Jewry
“The President of the Executive Council of Australian Jewry, Anton Block, has rejected as “alarmist” suggestions that an amendment to the definition of marriage in Australian civil law will in some way open the door to a future infringement of the religious freedoms of those who believe in the traditional definition of marriage. He was commenting on a controversial statement issued by the Rabbinical Council of Victoria (RCV) urging Australians to vote “No” to proposed reforms to Australia’s marriage laws that would recognise same sex marriages.
“The RCV statement was issued without proper thought or understanding of the way Australia’s Constitution and legal system work”, Mr Block said. “There is no basis for believing that a change to the civil law definition of marriage would be a potential threat to the rights and freedoms of religious institutions and leaders to conduct religious marriages or to affirm religious teachings about marriage. Religious marriages are outside the scope of the Marriage Act, which relates only to civil marriages. It is alarmist to suggest otherwise, and wrong for the RCV to use its authority in religious matters in this way.”
Mr Block added: “All people are entitled to have their dignity respected, regardless of their ethnicity, religious affiliations and beliefs, sexual orientation, gender, or any disability.”
The President of the RCV and at least six other rabbis who are members of the RCV have since dissociated themselves from the RCV statement.
I would like to personally address the recent RCV statement on the upcoming postal vote and any hurt that it has caused in the community. The RCV should not have told people how to vote and refrained from making a divisive statement.
The statement has caused immense anger and pain and has alienated many who already feel isolated within the community. I deeply regret the hurt that has been caused and as President of the organization I sincerely apologise for this.
I feel that at this point any comment I make on inclusivity will sound disingenuous and I will take the overwhelming responses I have received as an opportunity to reconsider how future Halachik statements are disseminated in regards to sensitive community issues.
6 September 2017
15 Elul 5777Rabbinical Council of Victoria is out of touch
The statement released by the Rabbinical Council of Victoria on same sex marriage is wrong for many reasons. We believe the debate around same sex marriage and the associated legislation is a civil matter not a religious one. To interfere in a matter of civil law, and attempt to influence all citizens, goes beyond the scope of the RCV.
The statement has already caused deep distress to many across our community.
It is divisive and damaging and is also likely to further alienate many others from Orthodoxy, if not Judaism itself.Caulfield Shule members can be assured that Rabbi Genende was strongly opposed to the RCV releasing a statement at all on this matter. The Rabbi has since resigned from the Executive of the RCV.
Caulfield Shule stands by its reputation of being inclusive, speaking out about injustice, building tolerance and drawing people closer to Judaism in a way that is personally meaningful.
We take this opportunity to wish all of our members a Shana Tovah and may the new year bring health and happiness to us all.
Anthony Raitman – President
Caulfield Hebrew Congregation responds to the RCV statement on same sex marriage
Rabbi Genende – Senior Rabbi
ARK Centre Statement on Same Sex Marriage
Response to the RCV:
As an Orthodox Jewish Community Centre ARK Centre rejects the recent statement released by the Rabbinical Council of Victoria with regard to the upcoming Same Sex Marriage postal plebiscite “encouraging citizens to vote ‘no’ to reforming the Australian marriage laws.”
We do so for two main reasons:
First, the plebiscite is a secular matter, not a religious one. There is separation between church and state in this country and this vote poses no threat to our ability to freely practice our religion.
Second, as Jews we need to be sensitive to matters of discrimination. We must never take any freedoms for granted. We have fought for generations to ensure our own religious liberties and must never back down from advocating for the abolition of any and all discrimination.
This Monday (Sep 4 2017) the Rabbinical Council of Victoria (RCV) issued a statement (incorrectly dated Sep 9 2017) advising the Jewish community to vote “No” in the proposed postal survey on whether the Marriage Act should be changed to allow same-sex couples to marry.
Changes to the Marriage Act enabling same-sex marriages will not impact authorised ministers of religion, as the existing protections under the Marriage Act will remain in force, allowing them to refuse to solemnise those marriages they object to.
The letter issued by the RCV draws on misleading, inaccurate and irrelevant information, failing to cite any sources.
Civil marriage in Australia is not subject to the requirements of Jewish law (Halacha). Orthodox rabbis have no right to interfere in the lives of people who do not wish to engage in an Orthodox Jewish marriage.
It would be appropriate for the RCV to desist from issuing negative statements on civil marriage while there is no proposed impact to their ability to perform their religious duties.
Repeat Jewish offenders Rabbi Chaim Ingram and Paul Winter post their homophobia on J-Wire.
The following comments appear on a J-Wire article beneath a photo gallery captioned:
Around 150 guests attended the panel discussion dealing with Marriage Equality in Australia at NCJWA NSW.Moderator: Dr Justin Koonin; Panel: Justice Stephen Rothman, Professor Kerryn Phelps, Tiernan Brady & Lauren Reinhardt, organised by NCJWA NSW Social Justice Chair Nadene Alhadeff.
I absolutely concur. The call for same sex marriage on the basis of equality is deceptive. People who are fixated or regressed to that point in life when children play with those of their own sex are not equal to people who have attained psychosexual maturity. Many have many admirable qualities and abilities – and here Alan Turing comes to mind – but they have a developmental flaw.
And then there is the appeal to love – homosexual love is the same as the love of anyone else. But we do not know how others love, we only know how we ourselves love. And if the issue is love, why deny that to children, to siblings or to those who love many people. What makes same-sex relations so special?
And then we also hear of the gender fluid. How any person can feel like a person of the opposite sex was a mystery to me until my youngest grandchildren then 7 and 5 1/2 commanded my wife and me to “pretend” in a game they were playing. People wanting to marry should be beyond the pretending stage.
And then, why call it marriage? Why not a commitment contract? I submit, the same sex people are uncomfortable with their sexuality and by appropriating the term marriage, they seek to diminish their anxiety by their pretense that they are no different to anyone else.
My advice to them: accept yourselves before you demand acceptance by others; you are not disadvantaged in Australia – you are accepted as equals as human beings – so stop your agitation, fit in and grow up.
Rabbi I am in full agreement with you. You forgot to mention child bride marriages, so frowned upon by society. Those participating in that form of marriage, that are jailed now, will also want equality in marriage too.
POSTSCRIPT – 11-Aug-2017
J-Wire have unpublished these comments after they received a complaint about them. See the comments on an archived copy of the article here.
Enough with the euphemisms. The forum was dealing not with marriage equality but with same-sex marriage. Even if, G-D forbid, SSM is legalised in Australia, we shall not have marriage equality. Polygamists, polyandrists devotees of menage-a-trois and advocates of the right of bisexuals to be married to a man AND a woman simultaneously – not to mention other exotic varieties I would rather not name – will still feel disenfranchised. No doubt at least one of the above will be the next great cause for the so-called equality brigade to champion.