fbpx

One question for rabbis who perform same-sex weddings

For most supporters of same-sex marriage, the most persuasive, and certainly the most frequently offered, argument on behalf of same-sex marriage has been that homosexuals have no choice, that they could no more choose to be heterosexual than a heterosexual can choose to be a homosexual.
[additional-authors]
July 15, 2015

For most supporters of same-sex marriage, the most persuasive, and certainly the most frequently offered, argument on behalf of same-sex marriage has been that homosexuals have no choice, that they could no more choose to be heterosexual than a heterosexual can choose to be a homosexual. 

Although the argument, as I will explain, is a non sequitur, it is true. Especially in the case of gay men, it is simply silly to say that they have “chosen” to be gay. I ask heterosexual men who make this argument: If you were threatened with death unless you stopped being attracted to women and started desiring men sexually, could you do so?

The answer, of course, is no. Even under threat of death, a heterosexual male could not choose to have a homosexual orientation. (I have referred to men specifically because women’s sexuality is considerably more complex. For many women, though certainly not all, there is an element of choice.)

So, now, given the power of the “gays have no choice” argument, I’d like to ask rabbis who perform religious Jewish same-sex weddings a question.

If a bisexual Jew came to you for religious advice, how would you counsel him or her? Let us imagine a bisexual man asked you, “Rabbi, I am capable of having a fulfilling sex life with either a man or a woman. Does Judaism have anything to say to me on this matter? Should I confine my sexual activity to women with the aim of eventually marrying a woman, or should I continue to have sexual relations with both sexes and marry whomever I fall in love with?”

If this rabbi responds to the bisexual by saying that Judaism has no preference for heterosexual relations and heterosexual marriage, then the argument that gays have no choice is, as I described above, a non sequitur. It is so because this rabbi is saying that even for those individuals who do have a choice, Judaism doesn’t care if a person has sex with the same sex or with the opposite sex, or whether he or she marries a member of the same sex or the opposite sex.

It seems pretty clear that rabbis who wish to be consistent with their argument that not allowing same-sex marriage is unfair to gays because they haven’t chosen to be gay would have to counsel a bisexual to confine his or her sexual activity to, and marry, the opposite sex. Bisexuals, after all, do have a choice.

The bisexual forces rabbis who support same-sex marriage in the name of Judaism to confront the most important question: Does Judaism have a heterosexual ideal or not? The “gays have no choice” argument strongly suggests that Judaism does have a heterosexual ideal, but that gays simply cannot meet it.

No one who has ever argued for black equality based their position on the argument that blacks have no choice, that no black has ever chosen to be black. Why not? Because the argument would clearly suggest that being black is an inferior state to being white. The only argument ever offered — and indeed the only correct one — was that there is no difference between a white human being and a black human being. 

Why then was this not the primary or even the only argument for same-sex marriage — that there is no difference between heterosexual marriage and same-sex marriage — instead of “gays have no choice”?

Because even most of those arguing on behalf of same-sex marriage believe that there is a difference between heterosexual and homosexual marriage — that, for example, at the very least, it is best for a child to have a loving mother and a loving father. Yes, there are some people who argue that if there are two loving fathers, never having a mother means nothing, and that having two loving mothers and never having a father means nothing. But do most people outside of academia really believe this? 

This in no way dismisses the love or the sincerity or the goodness of same-sex couples. It is only an acknowledgement of the obvious. 

The bisexual question posed here forces people — in this case rabbis who perform same-sex weddings — to confront the obvious: that, of course, there is a Jewish ideal — namely male-female sex and male-female marriage. That gay men and many gay women cannot — through absolutely no fault of their own — meet this ideal is truly unfair. Therefore, one can easily understand why many people will conclude that it is worth denying the Jewish heterosexual standard. 

I do not agree with denying this standard, but I can respect those who are preoccupied with fairness for gays. I cannot respect those who deny that Judaism has a male-female sexual and marital ideal. 

Every rabbi who performs same-sex weddings needs to answer the bisexual question. Then we can know whether they are animated exclusively by sympathy for gays or whether they also deny the Jewish male-female ideal. 

Why is this important? Because religion without ideals and standards is no longer religion. Compassion is a major personal virtue, but it is not a standard.

Our task in life is to maintain both compassion and standards. 

Dennis Prager’s nationally syndicated radio talk show is heard in Los Angeles from 9 a.m. to noon on KRLA (AM 870). His latest project is the Internet-based Prager University (prageru.com).

Did you enjoy this article?
You'll love our roundtable.

Editor's Picks

Latest Articles

More news and opinions than at a
Shabbat dinner, right in your inbox.

More news and opinions than at a Shabbat dinner, right in your inbox.

More news and opinions than at a Shabbat dinner, right in your inbox.