I have always been told that Orthodox Judaism is the sect of Judaism that refuses to allow people with different beliefs have their own say. I have been told time and again by SJ and his whole group of friends that other movements allow opposition and treat dissension with respect. Even OTD has this viewpoint about orthodoxy. Well, since Conservative Judaism is so open and willing to hear other opinions I was shocked to read the following in the bible criticism section of Etz Hayim: Torah and Commentary published by The Rabbinical Assembly of The United Synagogue of Conservative Judaism,
Many of us naively assume that the Torah that we use today is an exact copy of one original text, but there are many versions of the text of the Torah.
It goes on to talk about different version of the translations of the Torah, not the original hebrew version mind you. The argument made in this section is that since there are different translations it can be the same book. Huh? There are different translations of Beowulf, Don Quixote and various other ancient documents but no one doubts their accuracy to the original text. Whatever. Moving on.
Beyond that I feel so stupid! I have been so naive! It’s so nice of the Conservative movement to point this out. Never-mind the fact that a bible sitting in the pews of a Synagogue has a section with bible critism, I am all for talking about the issues people have but to have a whole section in the book itself? Just plain silly. The constitutions people carry around don’t have a section ripping the founding fathers for letting slavery stay or having gun ownership as a right, nor is the standard Shakespeare sold with criticisms of his work. Those are sold in special volumes unto themselves, NOT in the standard print edition.
What really annoys me is that it doesn’t say “some believe” or even “there are some who think that” the Torah is the same. But rather it is naive to believe otherwise! How dare I, based on an unbroken chain since the giving of the Torah, KNOW that the Torah is virtually the same document (there is some issue with some LETTERS, just letters, not words, and certainly not content).
This is typical of people who are not as religious as others. They scream for the rooftops “how dare you try and force me to believe what your believe!? Its my right to believe what I want!“, but then when I believe something different? I’m naive or stupid or any number of insults.
Its very common…”You can believe whatever you want, as long as it’s what I believe.”
UPDATE: It seems that I was mistaken over DK on this, so I have removed his name above. See, unlike some other bloggers (SJ) I am willing to admit when I may have made a mistaken.
The Cheerer 
January 29, 2009 at 5:19 pm
I claimed that everything in Liberal Judaism was wonderful and tolerant? Where? This is a bogus accusation. Complete BS.
January 29, 2009 at 5:22 pm
No, but you act as if Orthodoxy is the ONLY movement that doesn’t allow dissension. Implying that others are fulling accepting. Never saw a post by you attacking the more left leaning part of Judaism for their censorship or denial of opposing views.
January 29, 2009 at 5:33 pm
No, I never said that. This is nonsense. I never said full, and I never implied full. I implied more, but never full.
This is what a straw man argument is. This is highly irresponsible and deplorable behavior.
January 29, 2009 at 5:36 pm
Here: http://kvetcher.net/2008/10/1635/if-only-the-reform-movement-was-as-progressive-as-uganda/
January 29, 2009 at 5:37 pm
One more: http://kvetcher.net/2008/09/1386/the-reform-movement-signals-future-inclusion-of-intactivism/
January 29, 2009 at 5:43 pm
That article doesn’t claim that they are intolerant of other views, merely that they are following the Orthodox tradition in circumcision. Maybe im missing it, but where did you say that they are not allowed other views? All you say here is they are lying to try and keep circumcision going.
Also, I have never seen you so defensive! SOme of the accusations you make are pretty irresponsible and deplorable (such as having a certain picture mislabeled as a certain NCSY person?) Does the street not go both ways?
January 29, 2009 at 5:54 pm
If you insist that you can’t tell the difference between what is CLEARLY satire and what isn’t, that’s not a game I am interested in playing. Sure, cheerer. the picture of Stalin was not REALLY of NCSY’s founder. You got me.
All you say here is they are lying
They are not allowing for other views, and they are not conceding conflicting evidence, and are not allowing for conflicting and sound evidence.
This would IMPLICITLY reject your deduction that I insist Liberal Judaism and her various departments are always open to dissension.
In fact, I have railed against feminism and its axioms within Liberal Judaism rather consistently. It was a sore point for many other writers on Jewschool, in fact.
Also, I have never seen you so defensive!
I don’t like positions being attributed to me that aren’t mine. When have I lied about the facts about NCSY, Ohr Somayach, or Aish HaTorah? Don’t complain about the jokes or “You just hate frum people” or nasty comments. The facts. When have I lied about an organization’s specific position or statement like you are doing about me?
February 2, 2009 at 5:49 pm
The non-religious movements are no more or less tolerant than the Orthodox they so love to criticize.
Discuss religion with atheists and they make it clear up front: the given assumption is that there is no God, chas v’shalom, and any debate can only proceed under that assumption. They will not consider they’re wrong.
At one of their big conferences a few years ago, the Conservatives debated on whether to allow a small group of traditionalists to have a small minyan in one of the side board rooms in the hotel they were meeting in. Apparently many egalitarians were offended by the possibility and demanded that all the attendees come to their service, regardless of their beliefs.
The Reform in Israel are fighting to stop El Al, a private company, from setting up specific flights with separate seating even though the regular schedule won’t change.
For these groups it’s very simple: all opinions are valid, as long as they agree with them. Otherwise, a dissenting view is automatically intolerant and they won’t stand for intolerance.
February 5, 2009 at 12:24 am
[…] Ironheart, on The Cheerer blog, attempts to prove liberal religious intolerance towards traditionalists, noting, At one of their big conferences a few years ago, the […]
February 5, 2009 at 8:45 am
Oh yeah? Well see my response there!
February 5, 2009 at 9:08 am
Garnel:
You’re insane.
February 5, 2009 at 9:17 am
And you’re a loser. Now go away and stop following me everywhere. Your adulation is annoying.
February 5, 2009 at 9:33 am
Garnel and OTD: let me remind you that there are no personal attacks here. First warning.
February 5, 2009 at 9:46 am
Thank you for the reminder. I’ll avoid anything further like this on your blog.
February 5, 2009 at 10:54 am
Thanks. Its nothing personal it just avoids problems.
February 8, 2009 at 5:25 am
Cheerer,
You say it’s an unbroken chain and so does Pirkei Avos, but are you just taking their word for it?
Garnel,
Atheists don’t necessarily believe there’s no God. They might say that there’s no proof of God, or they might say that the concept of God as set forth in Judaism or Christianity is incoherent.
March 9, 2009 at 11:53 pm
Liberals often so wacky its funny to see them act for stupid