Tag: Senate Enquiry

AJN Letters: Maurice Sendak + Chaim Ingram on Marriage Equality – May 18 2012

18 May 2012
The Australian Jewish News Melbourne edition

Letters to the editor should be no more than 250 words and may be edited for length and content. Only letters sent to letters@jewishnews.net.au will be considered for publication. Please supply an address and daytime phone number for verification.

Wild thing made my heart sing

THE death of Maurice Sendak takes me back to my childhood, on a journey that many of us could share similarly. I recall turning the pages of his Wild Things book with wonderment and enjoying the scariness of the story and illustrations.

Not knowing until today that Sendak was of Jewish heritage, it is but one of the many things about him of which I was previously unaware. Another is that he had a male partner of 50 years, Eugene Glynn, who pre-deceased him in 2007.

I’m confident that Sendak’s diverse legacy will live on and enrich the lives of future generations, as it did mine.

MICHAEL BARNETT
Ashwood, Vic

Rabbis opposition to same sex marriages

DIKLA Blum (AJN 11/04) need be neither surprised nor baffled by the Rabbinical Council of NSW submissions (in consort with those of the Organisation of Rabbis in Australasia and the Rabbinical Council of Victoria) to the Senate and the House of Representatives opposing a change in the law that would recognise samesex marriage.

As a self-describing “mainstream” Orthodox Jew, Ms. Blum ought to be aware that the concept of homosexual marriage – and indeed homosexual relations – is incompatible with Orthodox, i.e. halachic Judaism.

Moreover since homosexuality is outlawed in the Noachide Code which is the basis of the JudaeoChristian ethic that has governed modern Australia since its inception, rabbinical organisations as guardians of that ethic have seen fit to fight to guard and protect that ethic.

Regarding the RCNSW’S use of the word “mainstream”, our president Rabbi Ulman has already clarified (AJN 27/04) that “by its very definition Reform/progressive theology deviates from the mainstream” and therefore it is an adjective we are fully entitled to use.

As for the representation issue: the rabbinic bodies in Australia purport to represent Torah and Torah values as is our mandate.

If this happens to conflict with the dogmas and mantras of the modern age which have turned some heads 180 degrees on this particular issue within a single generation, we the teachers of Judaism cannot be held to blame.

As it happens, I believe that were a survey of the opinions of the Orthodox community, and for that matter the wider Jewish community, to be conducted anonymously Ms Blum would again be surprised.

RABBI CHAIM INGRAM
Bondi Junction, NSW

AJN Letters: RCNSW & Marriage Equality – May 11 2012

11 May 2012
The Australian Jewish News Melbourne edition

Letters to the editor should be no more than 250 words and may be edited for length and content. Only letters sent to letters@jewishnews.net.au will be considered for publication. Please supply an address and daytime phone number for verification.

RCNSW should be careful what it claims

IT is with much surprise that I read the statement by the Rabbinical Council of NSW on the topic of same-sex marriage and their assertion over “mainstream Judaism (AJN 27/04)”.

For the record, I support same-sex marriage wholeheartedly.  And for further clarification, lest it be thought that I am a Progressive Jew, I can abate the Rabbinical Council’s fears that I have never ascribed to this stream of Judaism.

So, as a self-selecting Orthodox, thus “mainstream” Jew by the Rabbinical Council definition, I am baffled by the Rabbinical Council’s desire to manufacture such conflict around this issue.

One might think that our community faces sufficient challenges – anti-Semitism, anti-zionism, the threat of BDS, assimilation to name but a few – [without needing] to voluntarily create conflict and attempt to marginalise significant sections of our community.

The reality is that we are a pluralistic community with a variety of different beliefs and customs, from political beliefs, through to religious customs originating from our respective countries of origin, as well as our views on Jewish expression.

I wonder, as such, where the Rabbinical Council draws the line of what constitutes “mainstream Judaism”.  What can we expect next?  Is Ashkenazi tradition the “mainstream”, or should we look to Sephardi custom?  Is Hebrew prayer the “mainstream” expression of the right way to connect with God, to the exclusion of those who cannot speak or read the language?

And in putting forward the Senate submission, under the assertion they represent “all mainstream synagogues in NSW”, did the Rabbinical Council seek input from the members of these so-called “mainstream” synagogues?

So confident is the Rabbinical Council in its position of representation that surely the council would not object to such an action of surveying the opinions of its members? Perhaps we should put that to the test?

DIKLA BLUM
Glebe, NSW

The definition of ‘mainstream’ Jewry | AJN

27 Apr 2012
The Australian Jewish News Melbourne edition
GARETH NARUNSKY

The definition of ‘mainstream’ Jewry

THE well-publicised difference of opinion between Progressive and Orthodox Jewish representative bodies on the issue of same-sex marriage has led to an argument over whether Progressive congregations are part of mainstream Jewry.

A Rabbinical Council of NSW submission to the recent parliamentary inquiry into marriage equality stated the council represents “all mainstream synagogues in NSW”, a claim that has raised the ire of the Union for Progressive Judaism (UPJ).

In a note submitted to the Senate after submissions had closed, UPJ executive director Steve Denenberg said the Rabbinical Council’s claim to represent “all Orthodox and mainstream synagogues in NSW” was “far from the case”.

“They do not represent the many thousands of people in the state who are affiliated to the Progressive, Conservative, Reconstructionist and Renewal denominations of Judaism,” he said.

“These synagogues are definitely part of the ‘mainstream’ of our community, even if their views may differ from the Rabbinical Council.

“While there are a range of views on this topic in the community, there is no question that the views of the people who are members of the synagogues that are not Orthodox are undoubtedly better reflected in the comments included in the submission made by our organisation.”

In response, Rabbinical Council president Yoram Ulman said: “By its very definition, Reform/progressive theology deviates from the mainstream. It is quite surprising that they are even suggesting otherwise.”

Denenberg was the only Jewish representative when a federal parliamentary committee held a consultation on the same-sex marriage issue at NSW Parliament House on April 12.

“I was able to say that based on our beliefs that each person is created in the image of God, … each person is equal,” he said.

“Therefore, their rights for full participation in society should be equal, including the right to marry. Equality would dictate that same gender couples should be able to marry.”

The Rabbinical Council has lined up alongside the Organisation of Rabbis of Australasia in opposing any changes to the Marriage Act.

The Senate inquiry will present its findings in June.

Jewish submissions to Senate enquiry on Marriage Equality

The following Jewish organisations have made a submission to the Senate Enquiry into Marriage Equality:

This list may be incomplete.  If you are aware of other Jewish submissions to the Senate Enquiry, please contact Aleph Melbourne.

[ View related articles here. ]

Union for Progressive Judaism corrects Rabbinical Council of NSW’s submission to Marriage Equality Senate enquiry

The following note was sent from the Union for Progressive Judaism to the Senate committee on the morning of April 3 2012:

“Good morning

I am aware that submissions to the Senate enquiry have closed.  However, I do hope that it is possible to provide some clarification regarding a submission that was made to you by the Rabbinical Council of NSW Inc.

In their submission they state that “The Rabbinical Council of NSW represents all Orthodox and mainstream synagogues in NSW”.  However, this is far from the case.

It is true that they represent a number of Synagogues that have an affiliation to the Orthodox denomination of Judaism.  However, they do not represent the many thousands of people in the State who are affiliated to the Progressive, Conservative, Reconstructionist and Renewal denominations of Judaism.  These Synagogues are definitely part of the “mainstream” of  our community even if their views may differ from the Rabbinical Council.

While there are a range of views on this topic in the community there is no question that the views of the people who are members of the Synagogues that are not Orthodox are undoubtedly better reflected in the comments included in the submission made by our organisation to the enquiry panel which is totally supportive of Marriage Equality.

I do hope that this clarification can be shared with the committee,

With thanks for your assistance”

[ View related articles here. ]

Submission to Senate on Marriage Equality by Rabbinical Council of NSW

[Senate link] [PDF]

RABBINICAL COUNCIL OF NSW INC

All correspondence to
The Hon. Secretary

President:
Rabbi Yoram Ulman

Vice-President:
Rabbi Eli Feldman

Honorary Secretary:
Rabbi Chaim Ingram

Honorary Treasurer:
Rabbi Paul Lewin

31 March 2012

STATEMENT FROM THE RABBINICAL COUNCIL OF NSW ON SAME SEX MARRIAGE

To the Honorable Members of the Senate Legal and constitutional Affairs Committee:-

The Rabbinical Council of NSW represents all Orthodox and mainstream synagogues in NSW

The Rabbinical Council of NSW Inc (RCNSW) states and affirms as follows:-

1)      The definition of marriage as stipulated in the Marriage Legislation Amendment Act 2004, namely that “marriage means the union of one man and one woman to the exclusion of all others” is consistent with the traditional definition of marriage expressed in sacred Jewish texts and accepted through the ages by the other major world faiths.

2)      At Mount Sinai, the giving of the Torah included reiteration of a set of key universal laws and values binding and adopted by civilised societies throughout the world since time immemorial.

3)      Central to the key universal values expressed in the Torah are norms relating to human sexuality which endorse the stable sexual union of a man and a woman in a socially recognised relationship of mutual commitment whilst rejecting other sexual unions notably adultery, incest, bestiality and homosexuality.

4)      It has been proven and demonstrated globally throughout history that the institution of marriage is central to the formation of a healthy society and to the concept of family.  By virtue of their physical make-up, human beings are able to achieve self –actualisation through participation in the higher union of man and woman within marriage resulting in the production of offspring who are raised in a stable and moral home and who possess an innate and close connection with the mother and father who conceived and gave birth to the child.

5)      The Torah mandates that all human beings, created as they are in the image of G-D, are to be cherished and loved by their fellows.  The lifestyle choices made by individuals do not affect the precept that they be treated with respect and love.  Nevertheless it is our firm conviction that all humankind remains bound by the aforementioned universal moral code handed down by G-D at Mount Sinai 3,300 years ago.

6)      The RCNSW views with profound concern efforts to redefine marriage and thus legally sanction same-sex marriage.  It urges most earnestly that the integrity of marriage in its traditional and time-hallowed form will be preserved.

For further information please call RCNSW Honorary Secretary Rabbi Chaim Ingram.

Differing views on marriage inquiry | AJN

30 Mar 2012
The Australian Jewish News Melbourne edition
PETER KOHN

Differing views on marriage inquiry

COMMUNAL organisations representing Orthodox and Progressive Jews are at odds in their submissions to a parliamentary inquiry into gay marriage.

Christopher Whitmont-Stein and Scott WhitmontChristopher Whitmont-Stein and Scott Whitmont were the first same-sex couple in Australia to have a commitment ceremony in a shul. In its submission, the Union for Progressive Judaism (UPJ) has called for same-sex marriage to be introduced in Australia.

The UPJ quoted biblical references in support of a universal right to marriage, which it believes the Senate probe should adopt.

But a submission to be made by the Organisation of Rabbis of Australasia (ORA), representing Orthodox Jewry, will oppose amendment of the Marriage Act.

Invoking the Book of Genesis, the UPJ submission, made to the Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs Committee Inquiry into the Marriage Equality Amendment Bill 2010, stated that “all people are made b’tselem Elohim, in the image of God, and each person should be treated with dignity and respect, regardless of race, gender or sexual orientation.

“The UPJ therefore condemns all forms of homophobia and discrimination based on sexual orientation. There is no justification for such abuse and disrespect and it is essential that all perpetrators of homophobia are prosecuted and held responsible for such offensive comments, both in the eyes of society and before the law.”

The UPJ submission claimed legislative changes made in recent years to acknowledge same-sex partnerships have already helped to decrease discrimination in Australia’s legal system, but “these changes must be part of larger changes to make same-sex partnerships the equal of heterosexual partnerships”.

However, Rabbi Moshe Gutnick, president of ORA, told The AJN his organisation opposed the changes because they seek to alter the definition of marriage, and this will form the basis of ORA’S submission, to be made in the next few days.

“Judaism is against discrimination in all forms, including discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. However, the position of Judaism, and indeed all Abrahamic faiths, on marriage is clear.

“The institution of marriage is fundamental in that it shapes the entire human race, and it is divinely mandated as being only between a man and a woman. It is an institution that dare not be tampered with. The invocation of biblical verses in support of same-sex marriage is simply a shameless distortion of biblical teaching and tradition,” Rabbi Gutnick said.

The Senate last month launched its inquiry into marriage equality after Greens Senator Sarah Hanson-young introduced a private senator’s bill to amend the 1961 Marriage Act to embrace same-sex marriages.

The Senate inquiry will take submissions until April 2 and will report on its findings in June this year.