Legal Challenges Of Gay Marriage
Defending his position that Jews collaborate in same-sex marriage, Rabbi Michael Broyde, in his exchange with reader Avi Goldstein (Letters, June 26), presented, I believe, two facetious examples of anti-Semitic discrimination: a bris without bagels and a wedding outside a hotel.
Tziporah circumcised Gershom without bagels more than three thousand years ago (Shemos 4:28) and weddings in synagogues or homes were once the norm.
Rabbi Broyde also suggested that non-collaboration will “legally permit conduct that would undermine the economic condition of the Jewish people,” although he did not specify what type of conduct that might be.
Would he advise a Jew to bake a wafer for a communion in order to avoid economic difficulty? Or arrange a floral spray for a baptism? The fact that communions and baptisms are religious rather than civil acts, as same-sex civil marriages are, is irrelevant. Both are proscribed activities for Jews.
The Supreme Court’s unfortunate decision to mandate same-sex civil marriage in all fifty states will present poskim with major problems as they advise observant Jews on how to avoid collaboration in those activities. Observant Jews may be required to limit their business activities in order to avoid such collaboration.
Seymour Kleiman
Baltimore, MD
Rabbi Broyde responds: Mr. Kleiman raises two different issues: the first is a matter of policy and the second a matter of halacha.
My view of the policy issue is that in light of the 5-4 Supreme Court decision mandating same-sex marriage nationwide, we confront a set of hard political choices. The most important one is whether or not our community should endorse economic discrimination when one’s faith opposes the conduct of another person or persons.
All agree that religious institutions may discriminate, but historically American law has not allowed the butcher, baker, or candlestick maker to refuse to work at a Jewish wedding, even if his faith demands such of him. He would need to find another calling, just as a doctor whose faith prohibits touching Jews would be (and should be) driven from his profession.
This rule applies to members of all faiths: the law never permitted a seller of wedding rings to refuse to sell a ring to a customer just because it would be for an intermarriage. I would not change that rule. I recognize that others do not agree and favor allowing discrimination against same-sex couples. I do not think this is a wise approach.
The second issue is halachic and Mr. Kleiman’s use of words like “collaborate” and “collaboration” is much too harsh. The rules of lifnei ever are nuanced and complex and recognize many different categories: unique enabler, enabler, facilitator, assister, encourager, and many other categories.
There are many situations where Jewish law allows one to assist in sin, so long as one does not enable or encourage, but as the Rama prudently notes, pious people should avoid such conduct (although the Shach and Dagule Merevavah do not think that applies to willing sinners).
The exact parameters of whether or when one can assist in a wedding party connected to a same-sex marriage awaits an exacting analysis of the many halachic issues involved.