Mail.Liberal-Judaism

• John Sherwood <rabjms@earthlink.net>

• John Sherwood <rabjms@earthlink.net>

• Bernard Rotmil <cussinjo@worldnet.att.net>

• edlipkin@gte.net (Ed Lipkin)

• Michael Pelletier <mike@aidoann.com>

• EditOnline@aol.com (David Howard)

• Yaakov Menken <menken@torah.org>

• Robert Kaiser <rkaiser1@msn.com>

From: John Sherwood <rabjms@earthlink.net>
Date: Sat, 03 Jun 2000 16:31:21 -0700
Subject: Gun Control: CCAR 1987 Resolution

This is the second CCAR resolution four on the subject.

Rabbi John M. Sherwood

			     Gun Control Lobbying

	     Adopted by the CCAR at the 98th Annual Convention of
		  the Central Conference of American Rabbis
				     1987

WHEREAS strict gun control laws endeavor to eliminate the senseless slaughter
of humans in our land by those who easily obtain unlicensed hand guns, and

WHEREAS the Central Conference of American Rabbis is on record as supporting
those laws, and

WHEREAS the CCAR stands firm in its opposition to the National Rifle
Association for its dedicated pursuit of unlicensed gun ownership, and

WHEREAS published figures indicate that the NRA has made substantial
contributions to the campaigns of individual U.S.  Senators and members of the
House of Representatives, and

WHEREAS there is a correlation between the NRA contributions and those
legislators' voting records,

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the CCAR call upon members of the U.S.  Congress
to eschew the support of the NRA and to vote their support of stringent
gun-control legislation.

Return to Table of Contents

From: John Sherwood <rabjms@earthlink.net>
Date: Sat, 03 Jun 2000 17:20:12 -0700
Subject: Gun Control: UAHC 1999 Resolution

This is the latest, and the most powerful UAHC resolution on the subject.  The
UAHC represents more than eight hundred reform temples in the United States
and Canada.  This is not a proposal by a committee, but an overwhelmingly
passed resolution of our plenary body.

Rabbi John M. Sherwood

		       Resolutions Adopted by the UAHC

			    65th General Assembly
				December 1999
			       Orlando, Florida

			     ENDING GUN VIOLENCE

BACKGROUND

Too many Americans, especially children, die as a result of gun violence every
day. The American people have been aroused by this ongoing, senseless
slaughter. Statistics strongly affirm that gun control laws prevent gun
violence. Canada's experience with decreasing gun violence after the enactment
of strict gun control laws has demonstrated, clearly and unequivocally, that
gun control works.

In prior resolutions, the Union has taken a strong stand in favor of gun
control. However, merely enacting resolutions has been ineffective in
advancing the cause of gun control in the United States.  The power of the
National Rifle Association (NRA) in controlling the debate on gun control by
raising money and mobilizing a determined minority has yet to be met with an
equal fervor on the part of those favoring effective gun control. Our
reticence allows the NRA to score victory after victory. The time has come for
us to do the same. We must counter the NRA with our own resources, our own
organization and our own passion.

Our task as Reform Jews is to challenge America's conscience and to heed the
biblical injunction that we must not stand idly by the blood of our
neighbor. We must embark on a moral offensive and send the message to our
elected officials that we care deeply about this issue and will hold them
accountable.

The next nine months are critical in the battle over gun control. When the
United States Congress reconvenes in January 2000, several gun control bills
will be on the legislative schedule. If the horror generated by recent
shootings across the United States is not enough to open the eyes of our
elected officials, it is likely that gun control will be consigned to the dust
heap for a generation, exposing our society to ever more violence caused by
guns.

THEREFORE, the Union of American Hebrew Congregations resolves to:

1. Call upon every congregation to organize a gun control advocacy effort and
   urge every congregant to write to his or her representative and senator
   demanding that effective gun control be enacted during the next
   congressional session;

2. Provide every congregation with a copy of the Religious Action Center's
   legislative action guide to implement their strategy for addressing gun
   control advocacy;

3. Urge our congregations to extend personal invitations to elected officials
   to appear in the congregation to explain their position on gun control; and

4. Urge congregants to become involved in broader anti-violence coalitions in
   their local communities that press for effective gun control at all levels.

Return to Table of Contents

From: Bernard Rotmil <cussinjo@worldnet.att.net>
Date: Sun, 04 Jun 2000 13:31:14 +0000
Subject: Million Mom March and Gun Control

Responding to the CCAR resolution Michael Pelletier writes:

> Wow, they've been missing the point since 1975 -- they must have been among
> the very first people in hundreds of years to blame an inanimate object for
> the crimes of human beings.  Doctors in the Dark Ages were commonly
> instructed to anoint a sword with oils and keep it in a warm, dry place in
> order to help treat the victim of a wound inflicted by that sword... you
> would think that we'd have grown beyond this absurd superstition.

Wow and double wow!!! It is amazing how totally committed polemicists
and ideologues--otherwise highly literate--completely lose the
obvious and hurt their own cause. The NRA has been pitching this point
for many years and by now one would think this particular cliche of
theirs had grown tepid if not maudlin. Recently, a young English kid
went on a rampage with a knife and managed to kill one person and wound
several other children. As bad as that sounds how much worse wouldn't it
have been had he had an Uzi or Magnum: All the wounded would surely have
been killed. What Pelletier and his NRA advocates--some on their pay--refuse to see, is that a firearm is a supra-efficient killing machine.
Of course, it is man that does the killing and there is much evil in the
world but, let us face it, no one will ever entirely eliminate evil so
why allow them the use of that supra efficient killing machine? If a six
year old came at me with a knife,  I have a chance but if this kid has
his finger on the trigger of a Luger, all he needs is the slight twist
of his index finger and I am a goner. The only legitimate case that can
be made-- and I personally support that view--- is to require the
licensing of guns and continuing education (as in the use of autos) in
order to keep them within the control of law abiding citizens and sports
enthusiasts only. The counter argument that it would create another
bureaucracy and government control is equally fallacious if not highly
suspect. In a democracy, and ours is 200 years old, the government is
accountable to the people and while I do not agree with everything this
government is doing, as a citizen I would still retain my trust in them
until it is proven untrustworthy. Any reasonable person would have to
agree that we are far from that threshhold-- regardless of the paranoia
statements of gun advocates. On the other hand,  let us be reminded that
where government abnegates its rightful responsiblity it falls into the
hand of some unaccountable, possiblky far more nefarious,  private
party, whose motives are not entirely enticing to me or any other Jew or
human being for that matter. I would be more concerned about these
unregulated militias, those week end warriors, that spawn these hate
killings. As Jews and law abiding citizen, we must support good and
practical legislation that allows honest citizens the means to defend
themselves but keeps these supra efficient killing tools-- the handguns
and such-- out of the hands of the criminals. It may well be a difficult
task to accomplish but it is one that reconciles the right of all human
being to defend their families and property and that of public safety.
Over time, it may not prevent hardened and professional criminals from
obtaining them but it would put some legal obstruction in their path. On
the other hand, it will greatly reduce those crimes of passion and
accidental firing.

Bernard Rotmil

Return to Table of Contents

From: edlipkin@gte.net (Ed Lipkin)
Date: 04 Jun 2000 00:33:11 -0800
Subject: Re: Million Mom March and Gun Control Issues

Apparently, there is as much chance of agreement on the gun issue as there is
on issues like abortion. For whatever reason, some folks are unwilling to
think through what is in their heart and look at the practicalities. Laws
outlawing the possession of guns, for instance. If I were to be of a mind to
commit a capital crime that would bring me a sentence of life in prison
without the possibility of parole, do you think that I would be dissuaded from
using a gun because it was against the law for me to have that gun? Why would
I? The violation of the gun law would bring me a lesser sentence than the
crime I would commit with it. The government buying back guns. The only people
who would turn in their guns would be the honest ones.  The bad guys wouldn't
sell the guns to the government when they could get a lot more money for them
selling them to other bad guys (or gals). Any decent machinist could make a
gun and sell it on the black market. Does anyone think that banning the
importation of guns would stop them from being smuggled in from abroad?  How
much of the importation of drugs have we been able to stop? Very little, when
there is such a profit to make. Maybe our moderator should end the discussion,
for I don't think either side will be changing their minds

[Moderator's Note: I'm monitoring the discussion, and I ask people to remember
Ed's point about changing minds. I think it is useful to understand the
various movement's positions, and to understand what are the Jewish aspects for
the issues, and from where the different movements draw Jewish support for
their position.]

Ed Lipkin

Return to Table of Contents

From: Michael Pelletier <mike@aidoann.com>
Date: Sun Jun  4  8:41:17 US/Pacific 2000
Subject: Perspective on the 1975 CCAR Resolution on "Gun Control"

> BE IT THEREFORE RESOLVED that the members of the Central Conference of
> American Rabbis call upon the Congress of the United States and all
> state legislatures to speedily enact such legislation as will
> effectively ban the sale of handguns to all citizens except <b>(1) the
> military, (2) duly authorized police officers,</b> (3) qualified and
> competent security personnel who will have possession of such handguns
> only in direct performance of their duties, and (4) sports target
> shooters duly licensed by local authorities, and
> 
> BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that such legislation shall make provisions for
> collecting and redeeming in United States currency all handguns now in
> possession of citizens, aliens, residents and visitors of the United
> States, other than those authorized and heretofore enumerated, namely:
> <b>(1) the military, (2) police officers,</b> (3) qualified and
> competent security personnel, and (4) sports target shooters duly
> licensed by local authorities, and
> 
> BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that individual members of the Central
> Conference of American Rabbis will assist and encourage organizations
> and individuals who are at present and who may in the future work
> knowingly and diligently for such state and federal legislation,
> namely to ban the sale of handguns to the general public and to
> collect and redeem those handguns presently in the possession of
> persons other than <B>(1) the military, (2) police officers,</b> (3)
> qualified security personnel, and (4) sports target shooters duly
> licensed by local authorities, and ...

R.J. Rummel, in "Death by Government" (ISBN 1-56000-145-3) notes than on an
international level, military and police have murdered an average of over
4,000 people per day for the past 100 years, a number many times greater than
the number of lives lost by violent crime, suicide, and gun accidents
combined.

J Simkin, in "Lethal Laws - Gun Control is the Key to Genocide" (ISBN
0-9642304-0-2) points out that in EVERY case of such genocide, the cascade
began with registration of firearms "to reduce crime."

Michael Pelletier.
http://www.firearmsfreedom.net/guncontrol/

Return to Table of Contents

From: EditOnline@aol.com (David Howard)
Date: Sun Jun  4  8:50:05 US/Pacific 2000
Subject: What is a Jewish Issue?

The problem is not to decide what constitutes a "Jewish" issue. As Rabbi 
Waskow suggests, everything of human relevance can and probably should be 
considered a "Jewish issue." Certainly where human suffering is at stake, all 
the variants of the tradition call for compassion and service, for a 
recognition along with the poet and clergyman John Donne that the bell tolls 
for thee.

The problem is political. In a democracy, reasonable people can disagree 
about issues like gun control, and the outcome of their disagreement will be 
resolved in the legislatures and the courts. In an authoritarian regime, 
however, or a theocracy, or a wanna-be theocracy, such decisions are either 
imposed by force (the medieval Church) or willingly accepted by those who 
have abdicated their potential role in the decision-making process.

What distinguishes 'liberal Judaism' from the earlier forms of Judaism it 
evolved from is its uncompromsing focus on self-determination and democratic 
process. In other words, the individual can decide what political issues to 
give priority attention to (gun control can matter more to him/her than 
kashrut) and s/he can openly and actively disagree with authority.

David Howard
Author of "The Last Gospel," a historical novel
Now available at www.disc-us.com or at fine bookstores everywhere!

Return to Table of Contents

From: Yaakov Menken <menken@torah.org>
Date: Sun Jun  4 20:01:07 US/Pacific 2000
Subject: What Makes Something a Jewish Issue?

Robert Kaiser <rkaiser1@msn.com> wrote:
>Eric Simon <erics@radix.net> writes:
> > I posed the following question to someone else, and did not ge
> > an answer.  Smoking kills more Jews than guns.  Is smoking a
> > Jewish issue?
>
>[...]
>For instance, Conservative rabbis have issued responsa banning the smoking of
>cigarettes.  The Rabbinical Assembly has backed these responsa with a
>resolution passed in 1982.  In the Orthodox community, individual rabbis are
>also concerned with this issue and have issued similar responsa banning
>smoking.  However, much of the Orthodox leadership has rejected these bans:
>For example, Rabbis J. David Bleich and Moshe Feinstein have ruled that
>smoking can not be prohibited... The Rabbinical Council of America
>(Modern Orthodox) later rejected R. Feinstein's teshuvah...

The RCA resolution, supported by R' Moshe's son-in-law Rabbi Moshe Tendler, 
MD, is not a "rejection" of Rabbi Feinstein's position, but addresses 
changes in medical knowledge and -- just as important -- societal 
circumstances. The RCA text says: "At the time that Rabbi Feinstein wrote 
this responsum, both of [his considerations] seemed to indicate Halachic 
license to smoke. Today, however, in light of the scientific evidence 
published in the decade since this responsum was written [in 1981], and 
based upon Rabbi Feinstein's explicit definition, it is clear that neither 
of these considerations obtains any longer."

Rabbi Feinstein's position, far from evidencing a "lack of concern" as 
Robert implies, was both rational and effective. One should not make an 
enactment which the people cannot follow, says the Talmud. While relying 
upon "G-d guards the fools" for those already addicted, Reb Moshe said 
instead that "it is certainly appropriate for every person, especially 
Torah scholars, to not smoke because it is a possible danger and serves no 
positive purpose... Certainly one must not accustom himself to this, and 
must not allow his young children to accustom themselves to this -- even if 
he himself is already accustomed to doing so." Instead of creating a 
situation where "Dad ignores the teshuvah, so I'll ignore the teshuvah," he 
denied teens license to begin smoking even while acknowledging that their 
parents would not necessarily stop.

It worked. R' Moshe was the chief Halachic authority for Lithuanian 
Orthodoxy in America -- and now it is quite unusual to find someone in that 
group under age 35 who smokes, though 30% of the US population still smokes 
(CDC data). Today an American yeshiva student is embarrassed to smoke -- 
which was clearly untrue 15 years ago. This change occurred despite a 
worsening crisis in teen smoking overall (FDA).

Does anyone know how many Conservative Jews actually stopped smoking 
because of the RA teshuvah? Could anyone say that the RA was as effective 
as Reb Moshe in causing a major societal shift within the appropriate 
population?

And that, for me, defines "where we draw the line." Eric asked the wrong 
question: it is not "is this a Jewish issue?" but "is this _the_ Jewish 
position?" Is this _mandated_ by Judaism? Is a teshuvah or resolution the 
result of patient leadership, or latest-fad activism which other, thinking 
Jews could dismiss as unrealistic? "Tafasta meruba lo tafasta" -- don't 
grab for too much. The RA attempted a total ban, Reb Moshe said "kids 
shouldn't smoke." Reb Moshe affected literally hundreds of thousands of lives.

When a resolution or ruling is unrealistic, it diminishes the authority of 
the ruling body. Rabbi Alfred Cohen, editor of the Journal of Halacha and 
Contemporary Society, called attention to this problem with regards to 
Orthodox Batei Din (rabbinic courts) in a challenging article printed in 
the Jewish Observer. Within a liberal context, I think the idea of a 
resolution on gun control or minimum wages carries similar dangers.

The CCAR Resolution posted by Rabbi Sherwood on gun control claimed that 
the loss of human life was "due to the proliferation of handguns." No 
matter what position one takes on the issue, that statement is _factually_ 
wrong. There are far more guns available today than there were in the 
1970's, yet the homicide rate has declined -- leading columnist Don Feder 
to comment that the numbers encourage handing out semiautomatics on street 
corners. Buford Furrow said that he chose the North Valley Jewish Community 
Center because five other targets were guarded. If an adult in the center 
had been carrying a weapon and used it, Joseph Ileto (the postal worker 
whom Furrow murdered shortly thereafter) might still be alive.

The resolution quotes no Jewish source which supports a ban or discourages 
ownership of guns or other weaponry (swords are also very dangerous in the 
hands of children). Gun control advocates argue that fewer 
legally-purchased guns equals protection of life, while the NRA musters up 
evidence that concealed-carry permits reduce crime. How can we claim that 
either position is mandated by Judaism and Jewish values?

Similarly on the minimum wage. Advocates for an increase talk about the 
poverty level for a family of four with one wage-earner, whereas those 
actually getting the minimum wage are, by and large, teenagers. Career 
employees get annual raises under most circumstances. Unless someone has a 
good refutation of the Cato Institute's claim that "only 2.8% of workers 
over the age of 30 are receiving the minimum wage," such activism is once 
again at the expense of reality, and provides no basis for the claim that 
Jewish mercy mandates a potentially counter-productive minimum wage 
increase. That teenagers will lose jobs with every minimum-wage increase is 
indeed mandated by Economics 101. For the sake of that 2.8%, advocates for 
an increase say that potential losses are minimal and can be ignored; 
_must_ Judaism take a stand on one side or the other?

The rush to (Rabbinic) judgement causes real disillusionment. In 1980, Lena 
Buckman came to Baltimore from Florida to visit her daughter's family, 
members of Temple Oheb Shalom. She was murdered -- stabbed 29 times by an 
assailant with 16 prior convictions, then on parole for breaking into 
another home, using a knife and tying up the owner. This butcher, Eugene 
Colvin-el, is now on death row in Maryland and scheduled to die this month, 
an event anxiously awaited by Buckman's family.

Many of us, for extremely good reasons, oppose the death penalty. However, 
opponents took out a half page advertisement in the Baltimore Sun last 
month, which made a litany of entirely false claims about the evidence and 
the trial of Colvin-el. "What does Susan Sarandon know about the case?" 
asked Mrs. Buckman's son, William.

Now, how you suppose the Buckman family feels, knowing that the UAHC signed 
onto this advertisement which lied about their mother's killer?

Yaakov Menken

Return to Table of Contents

From: Robert Kaiser <rkaiser1@msn.com>
Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2000 11:00:37 -0400
Subject: Xenographic copies of out-of-print books

Has anybody heard about the new way to get out-of-print Judaica books, and
out-of-print books on all topics?  It seems new advances in scanning, digital
storage, and especially extremely high speed printing have led to the
development of printing "books on demand".  When looking at a list of book on
the Reform Judaism website, I found that there was a note that many
out-of-print titles could be ordered from a university instant publishing
service.

http://wwwlib.umi.com/bod

They had dozens of Judaica books, and thousands of non-Judaica books.  When a
title is requested, they reproduce the book xerographically on acid-free
paper, in paperback or hardcover. The newly printed book arrive shortly
thereafter, even if it had been previously out of print for 10, 20, or 40
years!  The only downside is that although many companies are beginning to
offer this service, the one company I know of with a substantial Judaica
library is very expensive ($30 to $150 per book).  Does anyone know of similar
services for Judaica books that are less expensive?  I'd like to hear about
these!  For those who are interested in news articles on this topic, see:

"Out-of-Print? Not Anymore "
http://abcnews.go.com/sections/tech/DailyNews/instantbooks990602.html

http://www.writecontent.com/Publishing_Tools/Publishing_Links/Publishing_Links2/publishing_links2.html

Shalom,

Robert Kaiser

Return to Table of Contents

"It is not our task as liberal Jews to complain about the Orthodox attitude or to be bullied by it, but rather to choose our legitimate path according to the inner logic and development of liberal Judaism" (Rabbi Walter Jacob)

Previous Issue: v9n179		Next Issue: v9n181
MLJ Home Page	Return to Retrieval Form