(Sorry. Travelling meant someone who was on an overland trip, by foot or by mule, to a distant country; or someone who was a multi-week boat trip. It doesn’t refer to someone who was on a voluntary cruise or was travelling by air.) 

 

Then the Torah states (9:13): But if a man who is clean and not on a journey refrains from offering the Passover sacrifice, that person should be cut off from his kin, for he did not present the Lord’s offering at its set time… 

 

My guess is that this question will get different responses from Reform and Conservative rabbis, and I am Conservative. From my perspective, the question is this: can we arrange Jewish life around our schedules, or must we arrange our lives around the Jewish calendar? This question, in turn, goes to the heart of religious practice. 

 

I see Jewish observance as a discipline, a set of rules by which to live that, taken cumulatively, bring us to live a holy life – in modern terms, a sense of spirituality. As with other disciplines, the rules don’t always make sense and are often inconvenient. But unless they are offensive, they must be kept. When it comes to Jewish practice, there must be a surrender of one’s own will to God’s will in order to achieve that sense of holiness. 

 

At the same time, we do live in 2010 when attitudes toward religious life have changed. So, here’s what I’d suggest: Have seder(s) on their appointed nights, even if small ones. And then to another one when family arrives. While it is surely more time in the kitchen, you can still maintain Jewish law and then have your family join you. You can see the first s’darim as preparations for the big one. 

CAN ISRAEL BE BOTH A DEMOCRACY AND A JEWISH STATE?

 

As resources for this question, I refer the writer to Contemporary Jewish Ethics and Morality, edited by Elliot Dorff and Louis Newman, specifically chapters 29, 31 and 32 by Irving Greenberg, David Hartman and Einat Ramon respectively. I will quote from Greenberg’s entry, “The Ethics of Jewish Power.” 

 

The question implies another: is it moral for the Jewish people to live without a state of their own? In the aftermath of the Shoah and the countless other massacres of Jews throughout our history, I would say the answer to the latter question is a resounding “no.” To be unable to rescue or protect Jews in distress; to be unable to provide a haven for all Jews would violate the words of Leviticus 18:5, “v’chai bahem,” “You must live by them.” We now have the power to protect the lives of Jews. It would be sinful not to use it. 

 

It is also immoral to demand that Israel be perfect in all ways. Greenberg writes, “to insist on perfection – that Israel must never fail the highest standard – is to deny its right to exist.” (p. 417) The messiah has not come yet. No state will be without blemish in its execution of power. 

 

What are necessary for the moral exercise of power – and what Israel has – are three related and essential elements of a democracy: the right to question and challenge the government and its leaders openly, without fear of reprisal; mechanisms to correct faulty policies or replace those leaders who impose them; and an independent judiciary. Greenberg writes: “the ethical health of a society is judged not so much by its ideal procedures or potential ability to do good but by the excellence of its corrective mechanisms.” (p. 411) The freedom of the Israeli press, the ability of Israeli citizens, Jews and non-Jews alike, to protest government policies in the  streets, the appointment of government commissions to investigate the actions of public officials, and the ability of all people to get a fair hearing in the courts all testify to the openness of Israeli society and its freedom. 

 

All this said, Israel cannot be Jewish and a democracy if it rules over a majority population of non-Jews. I believe that Israel must disengage from the West Bank – the contours of the borders being negotiated by Israelis and Palestinians – and end its rule over the Palestinians of this territory. In doing this, Israel is justified in making sure its borders are secure in order to protect its citizens. This should happen as soon as the Palestinians are prepared and willing to govern themselves, including policing terrorist cells, but not before. 

 

As for Muslims and Christians who are citizens of Israel, they must be afforded all the rights of citizenship. Israel has much room to improve in this regard. But, as I wrote above, I believe it already has the “corrective mechanisms” to make this happen. 

 

Rabbi Dorff writes as follows (p. 141f): “There is no evidence that children growing up with gay or lesbian parents are, as a group, any less well adjusted than children growing up with heterosexual parents… the percentage of children who themselves become homosexual adults does not seem to differ whether the households are headed by homosexual or heterosexual adults… in general two parents, whatever their gender, are better than one.” 

 

In other words, there are no psycho-social reasons to prohibit a homosexual/ lesbian couple from adopting. Nor should there be any Jewish reasons. The question posits that the couple is halakhically observant in their home and wish to give their child(ren) a Torah education. Neither Rabbi Dorff nor I see any objection to such an adoption. Indeed, it should be celebrated for providing a stable and loving home, rooted in Jewish values, to a child. 

 

The second question, about a Jewish school refusing admission to a child of a gay couple makes me shudder! Even should the lay or professional leadership consider homosexuality sinful – and the question as it’s presented, with its mentioning of families that are not shomrei Shabbat, suggests that this is indeed the case – why deprive the children of a Torah education because of the perceived “sins” of the parents? 

 

The prophet Ezekiel asks the rhetorical question, (18:2): “Parents eat sour grapes and their children’s teeth are blunted?” Speaking to the Israelite exiles who were living in Babylonia after the destruction of the First Temple, Ezekiel is saying that children are not punished for the sins of their parents. In his case, the prophet was saying that children are punished for their own sins, not those of their parents. In our case, we can extend the thought of the prophet, as the rabbis surely did, and say that each person and each generation should bear responsibility for his or her own decisions. Even if the leadership of the school considers the behavior of the parents wrong, it is equally wrong to hold the children responsible for the actions of their parents. If the family lives in a community where there is only one Jewish day school, as is often the case, then the leadership of that school would be depriving a child access to a quality Jewish education. That is unconscionable!