Rabbi Danny Rich, chief executive of Liberal Judaism here, said the lower court’s ruling, if upheld, would help make Judaism more inclusive.
“JFS is a state-funded school where my grandfather taught, and it’s selecting applicants on the basis of religious politics,” he said in an interview. “The Orthodox definition of Jewish excludes 40 percent of the Jewish community in this country.”
a) the decision of the 40% non-Orthodox that left them excluded was theirs and not the Orthodox. They decided to alter their own definition of Judaism so why are they blaming the Orthodox?
b) religious "politics"? Politics or Halacha?
That twisting of the essence of the argument, no matter the merits, is so rich.
Posts
1 comment:
The Reform/Liberal argument is, ironically, similar to one I hear from Christian friends: why did you reject US? Of course, both groups miss the point, since both behaved identically; it was THEY that rejected normative Judaism and its mitzvot in favour of a Judaism (Christianity being a Jewish cult) which they perceived as 'easier', 'friendlier and directed toward the needs of the individual rather than the community. Both are also similarly perplexed that Orthodox Jews continue to reject the easy path in favour of Judaism's challenges, missing out on the sense of fulfillment these challenges bring. Perhaps they're right and we're wrong, but 2,500 years of sustained tradition (not to mention startling assimilation rates) tend to back us up.
Post a Comment