Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site pyuxd.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!cbdkc1!desoto!packard!ihnp1!ihnp4!mhuxn!mhuxr!ulysses!gamma!pyuxww!pyuxd!rlr
From: rlr@pyuxd.UUCP (Rich Rosen)
Newsgroups: net.religion.jewish
Subject: Re: Re: Down to Brass Tacks
Message-ID: <1372@pyuxd.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 31-Jul-85 18:58:32 EDT
Article-I.D.: pyuxd.1372
Posted: Wed Jul 31 18:58:32 1985
Date-Received: Fri, 2-Aug-85 01:46:41 EDT
References: <11605@brl-tgr.ARPA> <1236@pyuxd.UUCP> <338@mhuxi.UUCP> <1315@pyuxd.UUCP>, <669@cvl.UUCP> <529@bu-cs.UUCP>
Organization: Whatever we're calling ourselves this week
Lines: 53

>>>What I am trying to demonstrate is the lack of rooting in actual fact
>>>it on others. [ROSEN]

>>It's hard to have a net.religion.jewish that satisfies everyone. It is,
>>however, fair to say that there should be some common ground among
>>members of the net. Nobody is imposing on Rosen or anyone else to 
>>contribute to n.r.j. , but let's have certain ground rules for those
>>who want to contribute. This net discusses different aspects of Judaism--
>>orthodoxy vs. conservatism vs. reform vs. reconstructionism vs. humanism ,,,,
>>,Israel,....etc. It has not, at least until recently, questioned the basic
>>underpinnings of Judaism itself, nor should it. If someone isn't sure about
>>what religion he belongs to, or chooses to affiliate with, let him discuss
>>it outside of this group (in net.religion or elsewhere). [GROSS]

We lost news for a couple of days, so I missed this article quoted here.
Is this the same "Gross" whose only retort was "bug off"? (I know there
are quite a few Grosses in this newsgroup.)  I'm quite "sure" about
which religion to "belong" to, thank you, my interest is as a person of
Jewish ancestry seeing other people of similar ancestry claiming the right
to tell other people how to live when for centuries THEIR (and my) ancestors
were vindictively told quite explicitly how to live (usually one of two
ways, 1) conversion, 2) not at all).  To whine about "But the Torah says
so" in response to charges that the same type of intolerance is being engaged
in strikes me as anti-human, anti-Jewish, and anti-everything that Jewish
learning and ethics are supposed to have stood for.  But, that's just me,
I guess.

> Why?  Because it is called net.RELIGION.jewish, not net.jewish.  Therefore
> we've got to assume some sort of religious concepts here.  We ought to
> discuss those religious differences, not the validity of individuals'
> beliefs themselves.

When you assume...   Similarly, let's not discuss the "validity" of the
beliefs of Nazis.  After all, if WE'RE entitled to these kinds of beliefs
abour "other" groups, so are they, right?  (No, I'm sorry, there's a
difference. ... ... ... ...)

> Since you constantly dispute classic Jewish belief, do you consider
> yourself a "non-religious" Jew?  If so, why not post the reasons why
> you still associate yourself with the Jewish people, rather than
> concentrating on why you don't.  And if you or anyone else on the net
> doesn't thing THAT'S an appropriate thing to discuss on the net either,
> than mail a reply to me. *I'd* sure like to know.

You would, eh?  "Associate myself with the Jewish people"?  What does
such a phrase mean?  By "associating" myself (by virtue of birth), do
I obligate myself to adhere to certain types of behavior?  Am I forbidden
from associating with certain people because I don't adhere?  I don't
understand your question.  If I did, though, I feel pretty sure I'd
resent it.  Judging from your "eagerness" to know.
-- 
Providing the mininum daily adult requirement of sacrilege...
				Rich Rosen 	ihnp4!pyuxd!rlr