Photo Credit:
In the sitcom "Will and Grace," homosexuals are portrayed as completely normal in every way as heterosexual.
I completely understand and even sympathize with those in the homosexual community who declared victory yesterday. The Supreme Court of the United States struck down key provisions of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). Taking us one step closer to the societal normalization of behavior that the Torah forbids.
There are two competing forces here.
One is the democratic force of fairness. It is indeed unfair to discriminate in any way against people who are different . This should apply to any differences that do not harm others. Same sex attractions (SSA) is one such difference. People with SSA who are consenting adults should be allowed to do whatever they want with each other in private without fear of sanctions or any other negative consequences.
The other competing force is the biblical prohibition against such behavior no matter how private… no matter whether there is mutual consent or not.
In a democracy that separates church from state, it makes sense to not allow biblical prohibitions to impede freedom to those who do not believe in the bible. So as much as my religion tells me that such behavior should not be sanctioned, I don’t blame the court for voting as it did – albeit in a split (5-4) decision.
What is interesting for me is the fact that the majority of Americans are basically a religious people.  Americans by and large believe in the bible… and yet they support homosexual marriage. I think their acceptance goes beyond the mere technical grounds of church state separation. I think they buy into the argument that there is nothing wrong with homosexual sex and that it should be accepted in the same way as heterosexual sex.
That means that they actually reject a clear biblical teaching in favor of our evolving standards of morality. In America of 2013, if one leaves out the bible, Homosexual sex is just fine. What happens in the bedroom between 2 consenting adults is nobody’s business. In other words, the American sense of fair play over-rides biblical prohibitions
Why is that? I think it is because perceptions of homosexuals have changed drastically over the last 20 or 30 years. As late as the 1960s homosexuality was considered a psychological disorder. Homosexuals hid their sexuality and were even ashamed of it. The embarrassment of being discovered and the stigma attached  to them and their families was unbearable.
But once the homosexuality was redefined as an alternative lifestyle and no longer considered a disorder, things began to slowly change. Celebrities came out of the closet.  Many of them are very nice people. They look and act normal and many of them are people of high moral character in ways not relating to their sexual attractions and behavior.
When people think of a gay person the image of comedienne Ellen Degeneres comes up. She is one of the nicest and kindest people in the entertainment industry. And she is as normal as could be in every perceivable way. No longer does one picture the flaming effeminate homosexual man. Hollywood has indeed contributed to the Ellen Degneres image in the dozens if not hundreds of TV shows and movies that featured homosexual people. They are portrayed as completely normal in every way that a heterosexual is. The TV series Will and Grace comes to mind. And the truth happens to be that homosexuals run the gamut of human behavior from good to bad, just like heterosexual people.
So – for example – when two homosexual women go before a camera and complain bitterly as to why society and the government so  badly discriminates against them, the public understandably sympathizes with that. I can’t really say I blame them. I often feel the same way – for a moment. And then I remember that I am an observant Jew and that no matter how good a person with SSA might otherwise be, there is no way I can consider an act of sex that the Torah finds repugnant and forbids – the same as an act of sex that the Torah permits.
How do I reconcile my two conflicted feelings? I pretty much agree with the OU statement that reacted to the Supreme Court’s decision yesterday which in part reads:

(W)e reiterate the historical position of the Jewish faith, enunciated unequivocally in our Bible, Talmud and Codes, which forbids homosexual relationships and condemns the institutionalization of such relationships as marriages. Our religion is emphatic in defining marriage as a relationship between a man and a woman.

We are grateful that we live in a democratic society, in which all religions are free to express their opinions about social issues and to advocate vigorously for those opinions. The reason we opt to express our viewpoint in a public forum is because we believe that our Divine system of law not only dictates our beliefs and behaviors, but also represents a system of universal morality, and therefore can stake a claim in the national discourse. That morality, expressed in what has broadly been labeled Judeo-Christian ethics, has long had a place in American law and jurisprudence.

We also recognize that no religion has the right to dictate its beliefs to the entire body politic and we do not expect that secular law will always align with our viewpoint. Ultimately, decisions on social policy remain with the democratic process, and today the process has spoken and we accord the process and its result the utmost respect.

As tolerant and compassionate as I think we ought to be to people with SSA, as a bible believing Jew, I am nevertheless opposed to equating forbidden behavior to permissible behavior. Which is the end goal of homosexual rights advocates. There is really no other position to take if one is an observant Jew and a proud American.

Visit Emes Ve-Emunah .


Previous articleNatan Sharansky Worries about US Jews
Next articlePalestinians: ‘No Jews Allowed!’
Harry Maryles runs the blog "Emes Ve-Emunah" which focuses on current events and issues that effect the Jewish world in general and Orthodoxy in particular. It discuses Hashkafa and news events of the day - from a Centrist perspctive and a philosphy of Torah U'Mada. He can be reached at


  1. you know, for so long in history the monotheistic religions have all claimed they have the PERFECT TRUTH, and everyone else is a liar, a heretic, a sinner, a criminal, etc. At least Judaism has never said others go to hell for not believing in their religion. True, one cannot change the Torah and halachah, but there has never been any OBLIGATION to hate and condemn others. I prefer the motto: "Don't judge others who sin differently than you do."

  2. I totally agree with the writer of this article. While each of us must hold fast to the beliefs he/she has, those beliefs shouldn't be imposed on others, especially other nations with other basis for their legal/moral system. In this case, DOMA was voted by an overwhelmingly religious Congress which simply forgot, not only about the separation of church and state, but also of the interdiction to pass bills of attainder, since they give different rights to different people.

  3. I am totally, 100% heterosexual, and am uncomfortable with two (or more than two) men have sex with each other. People such as myself are NOT the target audience for "Brokeback Mountain."

    On the other hand, who am I to impose my beliefs on others? I disbelieve much of what's in the Bible, starting with the first paragraph of the Book of Genesis, which science has been proven beyond a shadow of a doubt to be dead wrong. So why should I believe the rest of it. (I do regard it as a very important historical document, and I strongly believe in a Supreme Being, just not in the way the Bible describes him (or her).

    This brings me to the issue of homosexuality. If God created gays, then all the prohibitions against gay sex are invalid, as long as there are two (or more than two, your pleasure) consenting adults, and whatever happened to Sodom and Gemorrah are entertaining myths.

    Bottom line: One's being gay doesn't affect me in any way, shape or form, and should be just as legal and valid as being straight. I applaud the Supreme Court's decision.

  4. @Stewart Schwartz: It seems to me that you, Stewart, are an expert on rectal orifices, which is why you called me one. Either you're a proctologist or someone who's intimately acquainted with the Hershey Highway; I suspect the latter.

Comments are closed.

Loading Facebook Comments ...