From: shimoff@umbc4.umbc.edu (Eliot Shimoff)
Subject: Re: Gay teens, suicide, Christianity, and Judaism
Organization: University of Maryland Baltimore Campus, Academic Computing Services
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 1992 13:20:47 GMT

In article <1992Apr15.210646.16347@gboro.glassboro.edu> kilroy@gboro.glassboro.edu (Dust In The Wind) writes:
>
>Justifying the hysterical flames that greeted Jack Carroll's earlier article
>about homosexuals, Leon Gross writes:
>
>> [S]ome charges are not worthy of answering.  [...]  A response that "this is
>> just nonsense" is appropriate. 

I might have had more respect for your response if _you_ had decided to
answer in a flame-free manner.

>If religious Jews have abused homosexuals -- and some certainly have -- then
>Mr Carroll's comments are not `nonsense'.
>
>If religious Jews have opposed gay rights legislation, essentially approving
>of discrimination against homosexuals -- and some certainly have -- then
>Mr Carroll's comments are not `nonsense'.

WHOA!  _Some_ religious Jews have abused homosexuals?  I don't know of 
any such cases; can you document that charge?

_Some religious Jews have opposed gay rights legislation.  I agree.  But
does that justify an attack on _Judaism_?  On all religious Jews.

I know of _some_ gay rights activists who have opposed Judaism.  Shall I
then attack _all_ gay rights activists?

>Homosexuals in the US face a lot of needless grief, for no reason having to do
>with public safety or welfare.  Opposing efforts to relieve these problems is
>tantamount to endorsing them.  Jewish & Christian groups have been opposing
>gay rights legislation, and will probably continue to do so for some time to
>come.  If I were homosexual, I would be wary of Jews & Christians myself.

_Some_ Jewish groups have actively supported gay rights legislation.
As I noted  above, some gay rights activists have attacked Judaism
on USENET.  Should I be wary of them?

>As I said, I'm a Christian: everything Mr Carroll said about Jews he said
>about me.  If I can understand why he feels that way, and recognise that other
>Christians have given him good reasons to be unhappy with Christians, I do not
>know why none of the Jewish people participating in this thread can recognise
>that some Jews have given Mr Carroll good reasons to be unhappy with Judaism.

I can see why Mr. Carroll might not like some  Jews.  His  postings
do  not justify his comments on _Judaism_.

>Do you really believe that no Jews have been vocal in supporting oppression of
>homosexuals?  None at all?  If someone's perception of your religion is skewed
>(as I believe is the case for both Christianity and Judaism), denying that any
>of your fellow believers has caused any problems won't help.  Like it or not,
>we're both saddled with with members of our respective religions who behave
>badly toward homosexuals.  Distancing yourself politely and indicating that
>you think those other members are misguided/a minority/idiots is a better way
>of responding than insulting people whose perspective of your religion is
>influenced by those other believers.  Flaming somebody for his perspective is
>`just nonsense'.

I know an opponent of gay rights legislation.  He is a male, Jewish,
went to Columbia, lives in a private home, is a registered Democrat,
has four  kids, drives an American car, likes  to program  in Forth,
is left-handed, hates Tetris, likes  Craftsman tools, etc. etc.
If I were to summarize by saying "I know a Jew who opposes gay
rights legislation," you would be justified in asking why I chose
to identify the person as Jewish.  ESPECIALLY since Jewish law  does
not sanction discrimination against homosexuals.


>Ken Arromdee asked:
>
>> Someone claims I'm a bloodthirsty killer, and I'm supposed to respond to it
>> _meaningfully_?
>
>If he called _you_ a bloodthirsty killer, he also called _me_ a bloodthirsty
>killer.  If I can respond without flaming, why can't you?

Christians in the US do not have a long history of being victims of
blood-libels; thus, it is easier for Christians (than for Jews) to
let such accusations pass as rhetoric.  If you were living in a country
in which Christians had suffered because of such rhetoric, you would
be more sensitive.  (Not meant as a flame,  but as an explanation.)


>In retrospect, though, I have an answer for the question based on what I
>learned from this thread:
>
>    No, you're suppose to flame hysterically and call people names and wail
>    about how persecuted you are.  This is a sure-fire way to improve the
>    perception of your group, and illustrate how tolerant you really are.

AHA.  Now, rereading the opening line of your posting, I understand
what you mean by a flame-free answer.

What _group_ do you figure I reprI'll say this; characterizing
my religion as bloodthirsty is,  IMHO, unfriendly.  Don't expect
polite responses to such an  accustion.

>
>Darren F Provine / kilroy@gboro.glassboro.edu


-- 
Eliot Shimoff                  |    n   n   n
   shimoff@umbc3.umbc.edu      |   X + Y = Z .  Easy to prove no solutions
Ashamnu, bagadnu, gazalnu ...  |   for n greater than 2.  Darn.  Can't fit
Better luck next year!         |   it into this little .sig file.  Oh well.