Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site allegra.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!jay
From: jay@allegra.UUCP (Jay Hyman)
Newsgroups: net.religion.jewish
Subject: Re: Answer to Rich's X-Y logic challenge
Message-ID: <4610@allegra.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 8-Jul-85 16:43:54 EDT
Article-I.D.: allegra.4610
Posted: Mon Jul  8 16:43:54 1985
Date-Received: Tue, 9-Jul-85 06:46:21 EDT
References: <277@ucdavis.UUCP> <329@mhuxi.UUCP> <611@sfmag.UUCP> <612@sfmag.UUCP> <1137@pyuxd.UUCP>
Reply-To: jay@allegra.UUCP (Jay Hyman)
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Murray Hill
Lines: 72
Summary: 

In article <1137@pyuxd.UUCP> rlr@pyuxd.UUCP (Rich Rosen) writes:
>
>Try this little test:
>
>Group X has a book that they consider to be the absolute truth.  That book
>says that another group, group Y, is abominable and worthy of being killed.
>
>Prove or disprove the validity of the claim using these examples:
>
>1) X = Jews, Y = homosexuals
>
>2) X = Nazis, Y = Jews
>
>NOTE: claiming that in example 1 the book used really is the absolute
>truth while this is not the case in example 2 gets you an automatic zero
>on the test unless you can prove that claim...

Let's start with game 2.  Here I think we all agree the claim is true.
Group X, based on some arbitrary book that one of them wrote, has
decided to wipe out group Y, which has not indicated any willingness
to accept the contents of said book.

Now for game 1.  Let's go back to the revelation at Sinai.  No, this
is not based on my personal beliefs alone, but on well documented,
almost universally accepted fact - some sort of revelation DID take
place at Sinai, and was witnessed by some 3 million people: the entire
Jewish people.  And the gist of what happened there, in practical
terms, is that these people, as a unit, accepted the Torah as the
document which would govern their lives.  Not all of it makes sense to
us; the laws of Kashrut or of ritual purification make even less sense
than those against homosexuality, and also can carry severe
penalties.  The point is, that this code of law was accepted by the
entire Jewish people, and as such constitutes government by consent of
the governed, which is perfectly legitimate whether or not you feel
that this fits your idea of what is "moral".  (What is morality?)
Thus, your claim is false, unless you change it to read "Group X
agrees among themselves to abide by a certain code of law, which
deems a certain practice P punishable by death.  Group Y, composed of
members of Group X, decides to adopt practice P."  Note that I did not
even mention the divine nature of the covenant, which would strengthen
the argument, but is not crucial here.

This, you may say, is all fine for homosexuals living 2300 years ago,
but nobody alive today ever signed an agreement to live by the Torah.
This is true, but then again, no Jewish court today is killing anyone
for anything.  So let's define what we're questioning here.  The
Torah's injunction against homosexuality is no different than any of
its other laws, and clearly has nothing to do with anything remotely
connected to Nazism.  Let's please agree on that, and stop beating this
ridiculous notion to death.  The main issue seems to be the
relationship between the Torah and those Jews who today choose not to
accept it.  The Orthodox viewpoint is that the commitment made by our
forefathers at Sinai was binding on their descendants for all time;
anyone else will doubtless contend that this is ridiculously unfair.
I contend that this is the root of the disagreement which has led to a
month of drivel in this space - homosexuality and Nazism are good
eye-grabbing buzzwords, but the real question is "Do orthodox Jews
have the right to assume that the Torah applies to all Jews?"  
Of course, this is where divinity and belief come in, so it gets very
difficult to prove anything - but I think a discussion of this topic
directly would be much more productive than the current rank-out
session.

Apologies for the length of this piece, but I suppose it fits right
in.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
this is a religion group, right, Rich?   so...
"Like a clergyman (Gasp!), defrocked for the very first time..."

Jay Hyman
allegra!jay