As you may or may not know, in the State of Maryland, several referendum questions will be presented to voters in the ballot box on Election Day. Question #6 asks the voter whether he or she supports “marriage equality” – in other words, whether we believe that the government should grant gay marriage the same status and recognition as traditional marriage in our state. 

In its latest edition, the Washington Jewish Week ran a piece entitled “The Kashrut of The Questions”, in which members of the staff attempt to identify the proper “text-based” and/or “Jewish” way to vote on several of the issues (a number of them, including one that will further legalize gambling and allow casinos to operate in Maryland, have a moral as well as a political dimension). 

It is worth a quick read of the piece to get a sense of the surprisingly cavalier approach that was taken to these very sensitive subjects. To the casual reader it is immediately obvious that, rather than research these topics from a Torah standpoint, the authors made up their own minds and then searched for Jewish texts and/or scholars to support their opinions.On the issue of “Question #6”, for example, the paper unequivocally states that the Torah and Jewish community fully supports marriage equality and that those who want to vote Jewishly based on Jewish texts should support it…In response, I wrote this:

Dear Editor,

I was profoundly dismayed to read the pre-election editorial piece in which your staff presented their conclusions as to the proper and text-based “Jewish view” on the various referendum questions that are set to be decided by Marylanders in the ballot box this Election Day.

In particular, I thought it was irresponsible and inappropriate for the Washington Jewish Week to speak for the “Jewish Community” and “the Torah” in its support for so-called marriage equality, without mentioning so much as a single dissenting viewpoint.

While correct in noting that companionship is a value promoted by the Torah, the author of the column failed to mention the most basic principle of all – namely, the fact that the homosexual lifestyle is clearly and unequivocally forbidden by Jewish law, both for Jews and Gentiles.

It is unfair and offensive of the paper to claim to represent the Jewish community as a whole – which should include those among us who are Orthodox, traditional and Sephardic – when its political and ideological views are squarely at odds with many of ours.

Personally, I am opposed to discrimination and prejudice in all forms and I strongly condemn any and all gay-bashing. I believe that all American citizens should enjoy the same civil rights and that our government should establish rules and regulations for domestic partnerships (not marriages) that do not involve endorsing, validating or rejecting anyone’s values, inclinations or personal choices. I would prefer if our legislatures didn’t handle marriage at all, restricting themselves to civil and domestic arrangements and leaving concepts like “marriage” to religious and social orders to define and regulate.

Moreover, I support efforts to make sure that Jews of all backgrounds and orientations have a home in the synagogue, whether or not their lifestyles are consistent with the principles upon which it is founded.

Nevertheless, I stand by the Torah’s definition of marriage and believe that it is an eternal, universal and inviolable one. I do not believe that it is the government’s place to redefine a sacred and time-honored institution by legislation or referendum in this manner. And I know that I speak on behalf of many laypersons and leaders of the Orthodox and Sephardic community as well.

In the future, kindly refrain from implying that the views and opinions of your editorial staff accurately represent those of the Torah or the Jewish community and please do not encourage people to act or vote based on a vision of Judaism that is purely your own and with which many of us vehemently disagree.

Sincerely Yours, 

Rabbi Joshua Maroof