Artuz Scheva reports:
Rabbi Yehuda Levin, of the Brooklyn-based Jews for Morality organization, is now in Israel for the express purpose of trying to stop the parade from happening. He led a press conference on Monday, together with Israeli-Arab MK Sheikh Tzartzur, Rabbi Menachem Fruman and others, calling for a “hudna” [ceasefire] in the current Israeli-PA conflict in order to fight a common battle for traditional values.
If they have so many “traditional values” in common, then why are they engaged in armed, violent, and deadly conflict in the first place? Unless, of course, those “traditional values” don’t include peace, love, trust, and trying to live with people who are different from you. Given the fact that subtle threats are being made if gays are allowed to march, that sounds all too plausible:
Though several international news agencies showed up, Rabbi Levin expressed great disappointment that Al-Jazeera and others were not among them. “It’s important for us to get this message out to the Moslem world,” he said, “for several reasons. Their enthusiastic cooperation in this matter can be very helpful in convincing the police that there is a security risk involved in allowing the parade to be held.“ Rabbis from Italy, Russia and Venezuela also participated, as did Sheikhs Tamimi and Hamed Bitawi by phone.
Rabbi Fruman - a resident of the Yesha community of Tekoa - later explained to Arutz-7 that allowing the parade in Jerusalem would increase Moslem hatred for the “Jewish infidels who allow the Holy Land to be polluted in this manner. I have long felt that the conflict between us is a religious one... A prominent Sheikh just spoke last week very strongly against homosexuals - the Al-Alwatim, they call them, in the name of the Biblical Lot, even though Lot actually tried to prevent a homosexual attack... I feel very strongly that having the parade could increase the risk of Arab attacks against Israel - possibly on the day of the parade itself, and possibly afterwards.“ [emphasis added]
Let’s see: allowing gays to march will increase the likelihood of Arabs attacking Israel. Rabbi Fruman fails to condemn as a bad thing, but Rabbi Leven is disappointed that Al-Jazeera was not there to broadcast their message to the Arab world in order to make sure that they know exactly what is going on. I guess unless they are made aware, the risk of Arab attacks won’t increase the way Fruman expects — and perhaps even desires. I almost get the impression that he wishes he could engage in violent retaliation, but is hoping that Arabs will do it for him so his hands can remain clean.
Jewish Press reports:
Rabbi Menachem Froman predicted even worse. The shocking things that the world witnessed as a result of the publication of the caricatures of Mohammed in European newspapers would be nothing in comparison to the Muslim outrage that would be sparked if a homosexual parade takes place in the streets of Jerusalem, said Froman, the rabbi of the Jerusalem-area settlement of Tekoa who has been involved in Jewish-Arab contacts for years.
Israeli Knesset Member Sheikh Ibrahim Sarsur, of the Islamic Movement, said he backed the statements of Levin calling for peaceful protest but he agreed that holding the event in Jerusalem could bring a backlash worse than that sparked by the cartoons.
“Not only in Jerusalem, not only in Israel, [but] in the whole world [it] is the beginning of a catastrophe for the whole human community. I think every sane individual must oppose such a phenomenon,” Sarsur said.
So Sarsur supports peaceful protests of gays marching, but he doesn’t also protest violent riots and Arab attacks. This can only mean that gays marching peacefully is far worse than violent riots where people may die.
Rabbi Sharon Kleinbaum responded to Levin’s comments:
“Levin’s use of religion as a weapon of bigotry and violence is offensive to all who care about God and religion and morality. He blasphemer’s God’s name when he says that Jerusalem does not belong to all of us. Yehuda’s organizing of a Jerusalem conference attended by both Jewish and Arab religious leaders, expressing their violence and hate riddled objections to holding WorldPride in Jerusalem, should be offensive to all people of faith and those who believe in free expression and diversity.
“His comments, along with those of two leading Muslim religious leaders, Sheikh Taysir al-Tamimi and Sheikh Hamad Bitawi, clearly and bluntly advocated violence against LGBT people and are despicable and dangerous. Who are they to claim Jerusalem as only for those who agree with their divisive and bigoted views? These so-called “religious leaders” are the true disgrace to the true spirit of our diverse faiths. [Empty Closet]
I can understand why Kleinbaun would find the use of religion in this way to be offensive, but she has to understand that this is a pretty standard way to use religion. Jewish and Muslims fundamentalist extremists who use their religion to attack people they don't like is not only new, it isn't even necessarily newsworthy. What make this case interesting is that the extremists and bigots who usually use their religion to attack each other are suddenly finding common cause to attack a third group.
These religious leaders are a disgrace to civilization, morality, and humanity, but I don't think it's credible to say that they are a disgrace to a religious tradition which they are adhering to relatively faithfully. Granted, there are aspects of their tradition which they are conveniently ignoring, but then again so is Kleinbaum. They are all picking and choosing what to focus on, but they are all also picking and choosing legitimate and valid aspects of common religious traditions.
The fact that Levin and Fruman are focusing on more violent and less tolerant aspects doesn’t mean that they have adopted a less justified position — it just highlights the fact that their religion has a lot of intolerant and violent aspects to it. What, does this surprise anyone?
Marriage, Gay & Straight:
- What Is Marriage?
- What's The Point of Marriage, Gay or Straight?
- Marriage: Religious Rite or Civil Right?
- Interracial Marriage: Loving v. Virginia
- What Does the Bible Say About Monogamy, Polygamy?
- History of Marriage (Marriage)
- Benefits of Legalized Marriage (Gay Life)
Gay Rights, Gay Marriage, and Religion:
- Does Equality for Gays Threaten Religious Liberty?
- Does Religious Liberty Protect a Right to Treat Gays as Unequal?
- Is Religiously Motivated Discrimination Against Gays OK?
- Evangelical Christianity & Homosexuality
- Catholicism & Homosexuality
- Roman Catholicism on Gay Marriages (Christianity - Catholicism)
Gay Rights, Gay Marriage, and the Law:
- Why Ban Gay Marriage?
- Arguments for Gay Marriage
- Equal Rights vs. Special Rights
- Gay Marriage vs. Divorce & Remarriage
- Four Reasons to Support Gay Marriage (Civil Liberties)
- Where Can Gays Legally Marry? (Lesbian Life)
- Civil Unions vs. Gay Marriage (Lesbian Life)
- Civil Unions, Domestic Partnership & Gay Marriage (Gay Life)
- Gay Marriage 101 - Information on Gay Marriage, Civil Unions (Civil Liberties)
- 10 States that Could Legalize Gay Marriage or Civil Unions
Arguments Against Gay Marriage:
- Gay Couples are Unnatural
- Marriage Between a Man and a Woman: What is a Man? What is a Woman?
- Marriage is for Raising Children
- Gay Marriage Undermines the Institution of Marriage
- Marriage is Sacred and a Sacrament
- Definition of Marriage Can't be Changed for Gay Couples
- Reasons to Ban Gay Marriage (Conservative Politics)
Other Resources on Gay Rights & Gay Marriage: