Excellent job, Silas. Whatever your views on the matter, you correctly recognize that this is yet another import from the sick culture of the West to our lovely little neighborhood.

I have been unable to find my favorite barf bag, so I won't comment on the behavior of my Arab cousins on this matter, beyond noting that separation of mosque and state is a concept that has never developed in Moslem nations, post-Ottoman Turkey being the notable exception.

Israeli civil law does not discriminate against homosexuals the way much of American law has. But in Israel, there is no such thing as "civil marriage." This is an issue of 'personal status' under the Israeli Legal Code and falls under the purview of rabbis, priests and kadis.

The High Court here has been looking for a loophole to create civil marriage for a long time. This case may be just the loophole that court president Aharon Barak has been looking for.

A decision to recognize these made-in-Canada unions would not be a far stretch in terms of legal reasoning for the Barak High Court, an institution that sinks lower daily. In fact, based on the way Israeli law has been interpreted heretofore, even without the guiding left hand of Aharon Barak, it would not be a far stretch (in terms of legal reasoning) at all.

And we can be sure that the "reformím," the spawn of American "reform" Judaism, uill be weighing in on the matter with their Meddler-in-Chief, Eric Yoffie, swinging a gold laden bat.

But it will further the "disengagement" from the legitimacy of the State that Torah observant Jews (and many secular Jews as well) have been undergoing since the expulsion of Jews from Gaza in the summer. Whatever THEIR opinions on homosexual behavior are, it gets harder and harder to recognize as legitimate institutions that insist on de-Judaizing the country. And this issue, not the behavior of homosexual couples, will eventually tear the fabric of this nation to shreds.

When the "Israeli" state falls, the Jewish state will arise.

Nice work, Silas. I believe it is a "global" issue, certainly a human rights issue. What worries me most is any time a government (whether it is Islamic, Western, or whatever) decides to "outlaw" something, ostensibly violatiing human rights.

It is one thing to outlaw terrorism: that is a given. But to outlaw same sex unions is ludicrous. Ruvy mentions something about a "sick culture of the West," but must know truthfully that homosexuality was an issue in Biblical times (in the Middle East) and even before that.

Silas, you mention something about finding a signifcant other completing one's life. That is a very honest and compassionate statement. Who has the right to deny a human being the company of another human being to make bearable the every day grind (unless, of course, if that individual is a minor or incapacitated and unable to consent to such an affiliation)?

There are many violations of human rights in the world, and this is another example. Life is too short and precious to deny people happiness.

Victor,

I gotta make this quick - got to go on patrol. The issues that drive the desire to legaize homosexual unions in the States - money, health insurance, etc., legitimate issues that Silas has detailed elsewhere that make legalizing homosexual unions in the States a reasonable proposition as a matter of public policy, no matter what my opinions might be, do not exist here.

So the desire to legalize these unions HERE is more of an "in your face," issue, like an Israeli demanding a ham sandwich on a cruise liner that sells only kosher food. Go read the Y-net piece and you'll see this is so. It is indeed, like much that passes for feminism (girls stripping naked in the street in Tel Aviv to get free clothes) and other "isms," just an import from the sick west. There is nothing that stops two men from shacking up together here and setting up house. Period.

NO RABBIS HOLD NASTY HATE FILLED SIGNS AT THE FUNERALS OF HOMOSEXUAL SOLDIERS HERE! THIS IS NOT AMERICA!

Thanks Ruvvy & Victor. The bottom line is that two people should hold sacred their right to survivorship, insurance, property, etc. that traditional married couples have enjoyed. It's really not about marriage as the opponents would have you believe. It's more about the right to convey upon a domestic partner all of those privileges that married heterosexual couples have enjoyed for so long. If governments are that opposed to allowing these unions then they should throw out all the estate, tax and property laws and rewrite them so that all human beings, regardless of status in life enjoy equal protection and benefits under the law. The opposition can keep their marriages intact so long as we have equal rights where they count.

Oh and, Ruvvy, you are right. These hate-filled 'patriots' who hold these signs are not representative of America. Phelps and his ilk are a clear and present danger to American society. They may have their right to free speech; however, how they have demonstrated the same should be dealt with accordingly. There are ways of teaching these people a lesson via civil disobedience, shunning and refusing to do any kind of financial transactions with them. Treat them as they have treated others. Cut them off in their pocketbooks and see how fast they convert.

Charlize Theron has told EXTRA! that she and Stuart Townsend will marry the day gays and lesbians are allowed the same right. More straight couples in the public spotlight should take that stand. I've thought about how silly the whole debate has been but I also recognize that this is about more than just marriage.

Here, here, for Charlize and Stuart! Imagine Tom and Katie (oh, sorry, now it is Kate) making such a stand?

Anyway, there is too much hatred, bigotry, and intolerance in the world. If two adult people love each other, who has the right to stand in the way of that? Also, who is able to judge that?

I don't believe Jesus Christ would, so why should any of us? Remember: "Judge not lest ye be judged."

How long until women can toungue kiss eachother in front of horny guys at drunken parties in arab countries? seeing as alcohol, women not being completely covered head to toe, and hot lesbian action, are all against the law in islamic countries<--no wonder those guys are blowing themselves up, no hot drunk women in sexy clothes toungue kissing eachother = nothing to live for.

"no ... women ... kissing each other = nothing to live for"

Hell yeah. Especially for the women -- frankly, I don't give a rat's ass what men think about it unless they are on the side of justice and equality for justice and equality's sake.

What about the 75 virgins? Men can't multi-task, so while one is bopping a virgin the other 74 must have something to do! Geesh, we all know that the male won't be able to satisy those women.

Yeah seriously, some damn saudi oil baron has married 20 women or something stupid like that, and they're all just sitting there not doing anything till he gets home, they never even thought, hey, how bout we amuse ourselves with hot lesbo action till akbar gets home, and the stupid backwards fella came home one day and caught them getting nasty and instead of boning up and getting into the action, he'd have them all decapitated under islamic law, was a stupid stupid man.

Off Topic: Luke, you've now posted 250 Comments - there ought to be an award!

fr realz? awesome, how did you find that out, I wanna see

Give that man a lesbian porn film.

Now, back on topic. Ruvy, when you return, do you find the legitimization of same sex relationships another symptom of a sick West or do you see that people should be allowed self-determination in private matters? I understand where you are coming from on the Orthodox vs. Reformation movement. What I am trying to figure out is whether or not a Jewish state under religious law can coexist with a host of Islamic states? Can't there be any secularism or is that something that should not even be considered in the Holy Land?

Silas, what you are asking me to do is to tell you how to cook lasagna in a chicken soup.

To my knowledge, homosexual behavior is not criminalized at all here.

Under Israeli civil law, there is no real need to legitimize homosexual unions because the economic issues - issues that are quite legitimate - that drive the concept in the States are generally absent here. Heterosexual marriage is generally happiest when it is a love match, but its purpose is not to solemnize a love match, but to provide food and shelter for its members and to insure the legitimacy for progeny that result, as well as food and shelter for them. A homosexual union is not for the purpose of creating progeny - at least not to my knowledge.

Two men who wish to adopt a child here will go to the agency that is willing to place the child in a home with homosexual parents. The prospective adoptive parents vote with their wallet, take the legal arrangement that the law provides (which would probably seemn discriminatory to you - but I don't know), but the prime concern of the agency is that it get paid and that the child have a stable environment.

So the only value in recognizing homosexual unions here - creating a category by which Omri and Yoash can get married by a judge - is that it then creates a situation by which Tamar and Mustafa, or Katyusha and Shimon, or two Jews whom the Rabbinate refuse permission to marry, can demand to get married by a judge. The homosexual civil union is the stalking horse for the heterosexual civil union.

Create the homosexual civil union and you'll have thousands knocking on the door for a hetero civil union. That is the politics of the issue.

Thus the issue and its importation here is just more of secular Israelis buying into the cultural imperialism of the big Hellenistic power of the modern world - the morally sick west. If you really want to understand that, read my piece on Hanukkah.

Up until now, I've been discussing ISRAELI law. This differs from JEWISH law.

Under a legal code in which open homosexual behavior is a capital crime, creating a legal category for its solemnization borders on idiocy.

Now, there is a point I should make clear here. I am not an expert on Jewish law. The appropriate place to find precedent for all this is in the responsa (the written judicial decisions) of the rabbis who had to rule in the self governing Jewish communities in Europe and the Middle East, and in such records as exist of the sanhedrins of ancient Judea and the decisions they rendered.

I can read Hebrew and the Torah, but that does not make me a judge or an expert. I can explain the Hebrew text and make sense of things that seem strange to non-Jews, but that is a different from rendering a decision.

You've already seen my attempts to deal with these issues according to Torah law elsewhere.

You know, Ruvy, I'm starting to get a little concerned about this recurring riff of yours:-

"Create the homosexual civil union and you'll have thousands knocking on the door for a hetero civil union. That is the politics of the issue.

Thus the issue and its importation here is just more of secular Israelis buying into the cultural imperialism of the big Hellenistic power of the modern world - the morally sick west."

Why on earth would anybody seek to disallow civil unions, regardless of the gender of the couple involved? Are you against people being happy and having full legal rights to express and share that happiness and love? That would seem harsh on your usually quite sensible part.

Then you move on to that bigger idea, the "morally sick west". Having lived all my life here and being quite proud of the tolerant traditions here in Europe and, to a slightly lesser extent, the USA, I rather take offence at being so casually dismissed like that.

I really think it's time you had a little holiday...

OK, I'm catching the drift. It seems that in many ways Israelis enjoy benefits that we in the states haven't really considered. Forgive my ignorance but is open homosexuality a criminal offense under Israeli law? Also, how are Israel's laws with regard to beneficiary rights and community property? And would you consider the tax code under which Israelis live to be fairer than what we have here in the States?

Silas, I picked this up from Wikipedia, looking up gay rights and Israel.

"Israel and Turkey are the only countries in the Middle East where homosexuality between consenting adults in private is neither illegal nor persecuted by the authorities. Cyprus is being forced to follow suit as a condition of joining the European Union. Today, Israel remains the most advanced and tolerant Middle Eastern nation in terms of gay rights. In November 2005, a groundbreaking court decision in Israel ruled that a lesbian spouse could officially adopt a child born to her current partner, by artificial insemination from an anonymous sperm donor; this ruling was despite protests by the Jewish Orthodox parliamentary parties (which are a minority). Common law marriage has already been similarly achieved (which grants some of the official marriage rights to the spouse), but full official gay marriage has not been sanctioned."

I don't know all of the details to this, but you can find it under "Gay rights in Israel - Wikipeida, the free encyclopedia". There are plenty of links within the paragraph above.

Now you also asked about taxes. Bear in mind that Israelis carry a much heavier tax burden than Americans do. There is, in addition to a nigh confiscatory income tax, a VAT of 16½%, occupancy taxes (NIS 4,100 per annum for my apartment), taxes to provide for a cheap version of social security, unemployment fund, plus premiums to provide for a basic basket of health insurance benefits. Most Israelis pretty much need to buy additional health insurance coverage (at a relatively nominal cost). In addition, IDF reservists have to serve about 30 days in the reserves annually.

On the other hand, there is paid vacation for all workers, the requirement upon employers to pay for transportation to and from work, mandated sick pay and similar bennies that only uniuonized workers in the States have. Finally, there is universal health insurance.

Is all this fair?

I guess it depends. I paid exactly a goose egg for treatment for the heart attack I suffered. In my humble opinion, I got better MEDICAL treatment here than I would have gotten in the States. I paid a whole lot less than I would have paid for physio-therapy and drugs are dirt cheap compared to the States.

It is a system based on socialism, and I am a socialist. So, for the most part, I'm not complaining. If you own a business here, you may see things very differently.

A socialist? Don't get many of them these days...

OK Chris. My training is in political science and public administration. My analysis of the Israelis coming home to shove their court case in from of the High Court is a political analysis based on the political conditions that obtain here.

In the Ottoman Empire, which ruled this country before the British invaded it in the First World War, there was no such thing as civil marriage. Issues such as personal status (marriage, divorce, inheritance, burial, etc.) were handled by kadis, rabbis and priests. This was not changed under the British administration and still obtains here.

There are many instances where the Rabbinate will not allow two Jews to marry. Also, there are Jews who wish to marry non-Jews. In these instances, the couple buys a ticket to Nicosia and gets married there. Since the marriage was performed overseas, the Ministry of Interior will recognize it and the Israelis so married generally tell the Rabbinate to go to hell.

It is not a satisfactory system, but it works, as it discurages inter-faith marriages, something which plagued Jews in Exile. This is the big reason why there is no civil marriage now.

There are the Archie Bunkers and the limousine liberals of this country (Shinui and the ruling establishment élite, respectively) who disagree and want to shove the system of the west down our throats kit and caboodle.

The fact that America is a place where 40% of the populace has no health insurance, where you find infants shoved into garbage pails, high murder rates, and (compared to Israel) a relative disregard for life and for the health of fellow citizens, does not matter to these witless wonders. The Archie Bunker types hate religion, and the ruling élite has ceased to think of people as human beings. They are mere units of human capital.

Now I can't talk about the UK. I've never been there. But I'd much rather live here than the States in spite of war, in spite of a weak economy, etc., etc. I look at the ads from the west, from Europe and from America, and I conclude that these are sick places indeed.

My personal view is that people are free to believe whatever they want. BUT, the very instant one clique starts telling other people what to do in their lives, I have a problem with that.

If your "Rabbinate" are making people's lives harder because of their partner preference or value system, that is a bad thing. If enough people subscribe to the Judaic view, inter-faith marriages won't be a problem for the adherents.

I think Dave Nalle can best delineate differences between the USA and Europe. All I can say is that I did once consider, in kinder, happier times, moving to the USA. Nowadays, well, I'd sooner join you in Israel frankly!

A large part of the, to my mind, deluded mindset of Americans is that they actually do believe in the land of the free and the primacy of the market whilst having way more laws, limits, permits and prison population than would EVER be considered socially acceptable here in Europe.

And don't even get me started on their frankly backward policies on health and other issues. Or the stunted minutiae-obsessed babble that passes for serious political debate most of the time.

I'm sure there's going to be a line of Americans forming below to kick my butt about this because they just can't believe it.

Before they start, I'd just like to say that the USA is a great country full of mostly wonderful people and many of the cultural, social and natural attractions to be found there are rightfully considered some of the best in the world.

I'm not actually sure if the majority of Americans even really know (or care?) what it is that the rest of the world likes about them. I am fairly sure that it isn't the things they think it is!

Personally, I don't hate religion at all, I just fail to find any personal relevance there but, as long as religion respects my space, I'm happy to respect its and yours.

I'm sure there's going to be a line of Americans forming below to kick my butt about this because they just can't believe it.

Not me! I'd just as soon kick the butts of the Americans out to kick yours. What you say, Chris, is true in many ways. We Americans resent it when 'outsiders' try to point out our inadequacies but we have no problem imposing all that we believe on the rest of the world. For the most part, we're a good people. We're just lazy and have allowed the political machinery in conjunction with huge corporations to snowball us. There will be a Judgement Day for America but it won't be the kind that the Fundamentalists predict.

Chris, I'm not in line to kick your butt (though I do seem to see a line forming off on the horizon....) I will say this in defense of the United States.

It provided a refuge to millions of my co-religionists at the beginning of the last Christian century. My grandfather emigrated from the Russian Empire to New York in 1910 and my father, grandmother and siblings followed in 1921. My mother's family emigrated from Germany and the Russian Empire, and my wife's family emigrated from the Russian Empire. Had they not gone to America, they might well have died in Hitler's death ovens and some other fellow would be typing in my place right now.

In the middle of the last Christian century, the United States was the most prosperous place on the planet, and I was privileged to live there then. I grew up in the biggest and best city on earth at the time, the City of Greater New York, and went to one of the finest school systems of the day, the New York City public school system. Every time we passed the Statue of Liberty, my dad pointed it out to me - never failing to point out that it was a Jew, Emma Lazarus, who penned the poem about the Golden Gate that is on it. The irony is that the Golden gate is not in New York Harbor, nor in San Francisco Bay, but walled up by a Turk - here in Jerusalem.

But that place has died and will not be replaced, at least not for a while.

Speaking as an ex-pat, I can tell you that once you leave the States, you realize the huge shadow that they cast. You realize that this huge shadow is not always benevolent or benificent. Until recently, American imperialism was cultural and commercial imperialism, overwhelming the locals with mere size and energy. And the locals resented being overwhelmed, even as they got sucked into its vortex. Of late, it has become military imperialism as well, with bases all over the world. The reaction of Iraqis to your soldiers is just symptomatic of a world that is beginning to resent your presence. Those body bags going home to your country daily? Well, someone got snotty and told the Iraqis, "you don't like us? Deal with it" They're dealing with it.

I don't want to hear about all the "aid" that America feeds Israel - 95% of all the money stays in the States, forced purchases of American products - often second rate - with American money. Does it benefit us when tanners in Beersheba are unemployed because second rate boots are bought in Ohio? No. Does it benefit us to use an M16 or M1 when a Galil would be just as good, if not better? No. Does it benefit us to beg for American jets when we can build our own and do a better job? No.

But we have the best leaders YOUR money can buy. They work hard - for you. The purchase of leaders here stretches across party lines, so that it often matters little whether it is "left" or "right" taking his orders from Condaleeza Rice.

Bit by bit, reality is seeping through here. Israelis realize that America is NOT a "friend" in spite of what their own media snd leaders say daily. Israelis are realizing, bit by bit, that while your country is a great place to make money in the short term, it is a poisonous influence on Israel.

All that is lacking is the solution to the problem.

But hey, let's get back to Silas's original article. If Americans can spread their influence world wide, and send their soldiers to every nook and cranny on the planet, maybe they should consider making the Moslem world safe for gay people.

But we have the best leaders YOUR money can buy. They work hard - for you. The purchase of leaders here stretches across party lines, so that it often matters little whether it is "left" or "right" taking his orders from Condaleeza Rice.

So basically what you're saying is that the U.S. has bought off political leaders in Israel who really don't have the best interests of the Israeli people in their hearts. If that's the case, then it's still bad money spent. You've opened my eyes about certain things in Israel, Ruvy. And, in reading your stories about being in New York, I am reminded of my own grandmother and her stories about the Warsaw Ghetto and what it was like to live in the Russian occupation. Unfortunately, this new generation has no clue what pains forebearers went through to get us to this point. That, in itself, is tragic.

RUVY: Thanks for reminding me of both the USA's once gloriously welcoming immigration policy and New York's pivotal role. It's still such a fantastic city. My father's father also left Germany, although a little later that century.

If Israel is going to grow a little away from the USA, does that not increase the urgency to find peace and focus on obvious common interests with the other countries in the region?

I would have thought so, unless you're going to plan a mass return to Mesopotamia - they sure could use some well organised folk out there! (joke)

Chris, to answer your question, and Silas' at comment #14, the issue runs this way. If Moslems, Jews, Christians and Druze, all decide to forget about what their respective faiths demand of them, an agreement to kick out the foreign imperialists should be relatively easy to reach. And frankly, no insult intended, for all the differences between the sons of Israel and Ishmael, we can still out-do the non-Semites of the world and leave them panting in the dust.

But I don't think that is a realistic prospect. If you don't take your religion seriously, why waste the time believing in it at all? Abandoning our own faiths means embracing another - either pan-Semitic notions of unity or the dominant American culture. The first solution seems unrealistic, the second unsatisfactory. The reason you need to embrace another religion of some sort is that nature abhors a vacuum and agnosticism is a philosophical vacuum.

So the deal will have to be worked out within the framework of our respective religions.

If this can be done, it can only be done with great difficulty. If Moslems can be convinced that their Qur'an gives us the Land - it does, by the way - then they can be viewed as Sons of Noah, from our point of view. The price we Jews need to pay for this is to actually practice our faith and put G-d first and foreign culture last.

The Druze have already declared themselves to be Sons of Noah.

I honestly do not see a solution to local Christians hooking up with all of this. Part of the solution would have to entail cutting their ties with Rome and Istanbul, but the theological issues are mud that I can see no way through.

But let's take a stab at it anyway. There would be a State of Israel running from the Litani to Eilat, and from the Jordan to the Mediterranean. There would be a Kingdom of Arabia, including Syria, Jordan, Mecca, Medina, Nejd, and the Sunni part of Mesopotomia. There would be a small Christian State in the Lebanon. Kurdistan and South Mesopotamia (where the Shiites live) would either be independent or loosely federated. Northeast Israel and Southwest Syria would be a Druze District. Call the whole mess of pottage, the Noahide Federation.

If this were to work at all, we now have to deal with the problem posed by Silas' article. This system would be working under religious law, as opposed to civil law, unless the contracting parties saw fit to maintain certain aspects of the civil law now in force. I guess a look at the book he proposes would be a help, but the point is that homosexual behavior is condemned as a capital offense in Leviticus. I find executing homosexuals for being what they are to be abhorrent, but there is Leviticus 18. The solutions, such as they exist, is to basically declare homosexual behavior to be a capital offense within Israel, and to have the High Noahide Council decriminalize it OUTSIDE of ISRAEL and outside of Mecca and Medina.

I realize that this does not seem like a great solution, and it is not one, but it is the best I can do for an hour's contemplation.

All the solutions to "peace in the Middle East" that you read in the papers are top down solutions that will fail because foreign troops will always have to be on hand to enforce them - or a portion of the populace will have to massacred in its entirety to achieve it. The logical choices for massacre victims are Christians and Jews. I find that problematic. My carbine finds it even more problematic.

Attempts to impose sloutions from the top down, Road Map, Shmoad Map, or whatever you try to call it, will result in world war.

Sorry guys, that's how it looks from my little roost in Armon haNetziv.

Back to topic. Gay unions achieve legitimacy under the law in Great Britain starting December 21. Elton John will be marrying his partner and George Michael announced that he will be doing the same.

Im sure that will go over well in Islamic countries. I bet they would throw a mock "union" or "wedding" then bury the pair up to their heads in sand and stone them to death

Two more just got executed in Iran.

okay so I'm in ireland and only a teenager so you might totally disregard all that i say but does it not just all come back to the right to equality? all rational thinkers must believe in this right and i dont see an ''except for gay people'' in brackets beside it. therfore homosexual couples should have all the rights of those who are heterosexual. there we go, problem solved!!!...

First off, Aoife, Ireland is a great country rich with history, legends and lore. Beyond the Guiness and cabbage lies great stories and a subtle wisdom in many an Irishman. So, that alone would cause me to stop and listen. Being a tennager also has its perks, especially if you are wise beyond your years. You are correct it's simply about equality. I wish everyone else realized the simplicity of the matter!

South Africa's highest court has paved the way! The court has ruled that it is unconstitutional in their country to bar gay marriage! The first country on the African continent has crossed the political divide.