At the 1998 Jerusalem Agunot Conference, Rabbi Mayer Rabinowitz, the Chairman of the Joint Bet Din of the Conservative Movement, explained the four approaches taken by leaders of Conservative Judaism to find remedies for the problem of the Agunah what follow is my summary of his remark, outlining four approaches to this issue:

One beginning in the 1950's, the inclusion of the Lieberman clause,in the Ketubah, requiring that a get be granted if a civil divorce is ever issued. Later, because some civil courts viewed the enforcement of a religious document as a violation of the constitutional principle of the separation of church and state, Conservative rabbis began to require couples to sign a separate letter, stating that the clause had been explained to them as part of pre-marital counseling, and that both parties understood and agreed to its conditions, recognizing that this letter would constitute a separate civil document, enforceable in a civilian court./ However, many Conservative rabbis, including some on the movement's own law committee, had growing concerns regarding the clause for religious reasons.

            The second approach was based on the concept of something called conditional marriages, t'nai b'kiddushin, and was based in part on past approaches used by both French and Turkish rabbis—but, according to Rabinowitz—had improvements gleaned from lessons learned from those past experiences. The ketubah was not changed, but a separate pre-marital agreement was signed, and in the presence of the rabbinical court, the prospective groom read it, and the prospective bride stated that she agreed to it. The agreement was that the parties understood that if a civil divorce were ever granted, then a get must be delivered within six months of that date. A refusal to abide by that agreement would give the court no choice but to consider the original marriage, and the original declaration of the groom, so flawed that it would be as if that marriage never occurred.

The third approach was to coerce the recalcitrant husband to grant a get. These included pressure on the husband with financial implications, liens from organizations of which he is a part of and through spiritual guidance.

            The final approach was adopted by a unanimous vote of the law committee, when it was decided that the Joint Bet Din of the Conservative Movement could annul marriages as a last resort, based on the Talmudic principle of hafka’at kiddushin – the same principle used to compel the husband to act in option number two. By doing this, the rabbinical establishment returned much of the power of the process of divorce to the rabbinical court, returning to its original source and giving woman clear recourse for contentious situations.

A great effort was made, and is still being made, in the Jewish world to speak in an acceptable and refined holy fashion. There is no room for slander in Jewish life. The expose, whether oral or in print, usually leaves the speaker more exposed than the victim. Our rabbis taught us that lashon hara "kills" three victims - the speaker, the listen- er, and the subject of the conversation. Uninhibited speech leads to bad consequences.

In fact the quality of our speech is exactly what distinguishes us from other animals in the animal kingdom, for it represents our capacity for intellectual capability. Judaism always has taught that this characteristic is a holy gift from Go. We should always work toward using it for good and not evil. Gossip, muckraking, slander, and cynical language all fly in the face of the purpose of this holy gift of speech. Even when one is speaking the truth, one is cautioned to avoid the pitfalls of lashon hara, for unlike the case of a libel action, truth alone is not a sufficient cause for speaking about others. Perhaps these words and guidelines of the tradition can help you draw the conclusion about Glenn Beck's harmful words and the words of others.

God built the rib that he took from the man into a woman, and God brought her to the man. The man said, 'Now this is bone from my bones and flesh from my flesh. She shall be called Woman (Ishah) because she was taken from man (ish).' A man shall therefore leave his father and mother and be united with his wife, and they shall become one flesh. The man and his wife were both naked, but they were not embarrassed by one another. (Genesis 2:22-25) 

Obviously, this story raises serious questions about gender equality in the Torah, but let's leave that discussion for the moment. It is important to note that all of the early characters in the Torah are sexually intimate in the context of a marital relationship. Sex, even as far back as the Bible within those confines is clearly a normal, natural and healthy part of the dynamic. In early Genesis itself we received the commandment “be fruitful and multiply” which obviously requires sexual intimacy. This intimacy is so critical to the Torah’s view of relationships a violation of the marriage covenant is condemned in the strongest terms:

Do not lie carnally with your neighbor's wife, since this will defile her. (Leviticus 18:20)

The later rabbinic tradition also strongly condemned acts of lust or non-marital sexuality. Marriage and family are understood as holy obligations; making a covenant with another human being is part of fulfilling our covenant with God. It is primarily within that context that sex is discussed. 

However, this is simply not the reality for most people today. People wait longer to start careers, they have access to birth control, and they have long, caring, committed monogamous (but non-marital) relationships, not particularly common in pre-modern society.

So how should we create a Jewish sexual ethic in this context? Well, although there is no document endorsing pre-marital sex there are certain guiding approaches we might use to create such a document. We should seek to create a document, which perhaps would recognize the possible holiness that might be created between two monogamous, consenting adults in a loving relationship in the context of their sexual relationships. A beautiful ethical framework for understanding sexual relationships is articulated by (my teacher) R. Elliott Dorff, in A Rabbinic Letter on Intimate Relations, published by the Rabbinical Assembly.

R. Dorff describes eight values that should affect Jewish sexual decision-making:

1) Seeing oneself and one's partner as the creations of God

2) Respect for others

3) Modesty

4) Honesty

5) Fidelity

6) Health and safety (including emotional safety)

7) The possibility of a child

8) The Jewish quality of a relationship

While R. Dorff, would not explicitly say that premarital sex is the Jewish ideal, premarital sex can be sanctified and made holy by applying these basic Jewish principles and ideals to those parts of our life. If a relationship is characterized by honesty, respect, commitment, mutuality, humility and modesty it can be seen within the framework of Jewish sexual ethics.

Though historically premarital sex may not have been the ideal, the reality before us is of import: young American Jews are waiting longer to get married and engaged in meaningful relationships outside of marriage well into their 30’s. Sexual and physical intimacy is an important part of these relationships and we want as Jews to sanctify even new, modern constructions of relationships. Much of Judaism’s wisdom comes from its ability to construct holy moments, holy encounters in the most basic parts of our human existence. Judaism’s ability to respond to new concerns and new needs in relationships is its greatest strength, always keeping in mind the basic values and ideals of respect, responsibility and commitment.