Clowns.

Not this year; we did it last year at Simchat Torah.

Dress for a religious service, please. Forgive me for being flippant in tone but we need to address this issue in our community and beyond. We see far too many adolescent girls (and for that matter, grown women!) coming to synagogue dressed in attire more suitable for a nightclub. Yes -- the Bat Mitzvah is a simcha (joyous occasion) and yes, a simcha means a party after the service -- but still, some middle ground must be reached so that the sanctuary retains its sanctity. Wear clothing that covers more than it reveals. Gentlemen should dress respectfully as well -- slacks, dress shoes, a collared shirt, a sportjacket or suit, and in many places a tie. Black Tie attire is never appropriate -- if need be, change after services and come to the party in your party clothes. For a morning service, it is appropriate (but in our Reform Jewish community, not mandatory) to wear a tallit and/or kippah (yarmulke) as well.

I think it can be very limiting to think of God as a supernatural Being who controls the forces of Nature. We need not posit an external Deity to explain much (though not, at this moment in human civilization, all) of natural occurrences.

I prefer to think of God as Nature itself -- as the very Cosmos, the totality of it.

Or perhaps we can relate to God as the power animating the processes of nature -- not the "cause" behind the sun rising, but rather the force present in the laws of nature that permit our shabby little planet to whiz in its little orbit around the mighty sun, which itself travels in thrall to our little arm of the Milky Way Galaxy... and so forth.... Just a thought or two.

And Happy Thanksgiving to you! It is true, for a long time Jewish Law banned masturbation (and this approach is still in effect in many parts of the Orthodox Jewish world) based on the notion of "spilling seed" or "wasting sperm" as you put it.

This law is derived from the story of Onan (Gen. 38:7-11), who "spilled his seed on the ground" as a means of birth control to avoid a Biblical obligation of fathering a child on behalf of his deceased brother. For this sin, Onan is punished: God kills him! Although Onan's sin was not masturbation, subsequent Jewish law took a very broad view of the acts prohibited by this passage, outlawing any act of ejaculation outside of the vagina. (In fact, in some circles, the prohibition was so strict that one passage in the Talmud states, "a man's hand that reaches below the navel should be chopped off." (Niddah 13a))

Jewish Law categorized masturbation as practiced by women differently: because "wasting sperm" is not an issue, it is therefore not a violation of anything in the Torah. The only objection is that the Rabbis identified female masturbation as a display of "impure thoughts" and would therefore be discouraged.

It is important, however, after framing this traditional approach, for me to offer a counterpoint that I believe is shared by a majority of Conservative and Reform Rabbis and Jews, and which may even be supported by some modern Orthodox sources -- namely, that masturbation is not a sin at all. First of all, the traditional reading of the passage about Onan has it all wrong: the main transgression of Onan was not that he spilled seed, but rather that he sexually exploited his new bride by refusing to fulfill his marital obligation. Furthermore, we know that a man can't "run out" of sperm and therefore it is not really accurate to describe masturbation as "wasting" or "destroying" viable seed -- the fact is, the body will make more. Finally, many of us modern rabbis believe that masturbation can be a healthy and viable alternative to sexual intercourse among people whose bodies and hormones are signaling a readiness for sex but who are not mature enough for a sexual relationship or who are simply not in a relationship at the time -- and may not be, for a long time. In antiquity, people were married off in early adolescence; nowadays, people tend not to marry until well into their 20s, 30s, or even later; so restricting all sexual impulses to the confines of marriage creates a number of other problems for healthy sexual development. Masturbation may be one way that people can develop a healthy approach to sexuality without all the challenges and potential consequences of sexual intercourse before emotional readiness for that commitment.

Shalom! - goodbye!
or, L'hitra'ot! - see you later!

But those are both Hebrew. When in doubt, say Shalom!

This is not a moment for black-and-white thinking so I value your commitment to developing a nuanced position that allows your Zionism to co-exist with your awareness of the "complex issues in the current conflict." Here are, I think, the key considerations from a fellow Zionist (me):

1) Zionism begins with the premise of Israel's right to exist and in fact argues for Israel's necessity in the face of centuries of anti-Semitism, particularly as expressed in Europe in the 19th and 20th centuries.

2) Israel's right to self-defense is included in its right to exist, as would be the case for any other sovereign nation.

3) Any nation should be permitted to respond to rocket fire threatening civilians on its sovereign land -- and military force should be an option among possible responses.

4) Therefore, the answer to the question, "Is the current military offensive justified" -- the answer is resolutely, "yes." By every measure, both political and through classical Jewish sources, Israel's present military actions constitute our definition of a "just war," because it is being fought out of self-defense.

5) The only thing that remains, then, is to determine how to conduct this just war in a just way. Morality on the battlefield is a subject of paramount importance: we cannot be savages. We must remember to fear not only the enemy's weapons but also our own ability to inflict harm on other human beings. The article I just posted (see previous response) by Rabbi Donniel Hartman is incisive and appropriate. I hope you will read it and share it!

May peace come speedily--with a true cessation of hostilities.

I think you just say, "Politics aside, my heart goes out to any of your family members living in Gaza right now." There is no need to get political or take sides when expressing a common human bond. The humanitarian implications of this latest offensive are consequential.

I am also happy to digest with you some of what I see to be the political implications of the current situation. The most cogent argument I have encountered from the perspective of Israel is written by a brilliant rabbi, Donniel Hartman, who runs the Shalom Hartman Center in Jerusalem -- check out http://www.hartman.org.il/ for more information.

In 2009, during the "Cast Lead" incursion into Gaza which entailed a costly (both in material and human terms) ground invasion, he wrote a brilliant article which underscores both the necessity of Israel's self-defense in the face of incessant rocket fire into sovereign territory and the ultimate failure of "proportionality" to define the morality of this conflict. Here is an excerpt:

Rabbi Donniel Hartman, “Fighting A Just War Against Hamas Justly” (excerpt) (January 13, 2009)

"The measure of moral ambiguity that may exist in the eyes of some is grounded on the disparity of military capability between Israel and Hamas, a disparity which may question the legitimacy of the premise of self-defense. Hamas as a terrorist organization aims to terrorize, and as such has a limited ability to endanger Israel’s basic existence. While it may harm individual citizens, Hamas does not endanger the state as a whole.

It is under the cloud of this moral ambiguity that much of the criticism against Israel finds shelter. The justification of self defense dissipates when one compares Kassam rockets and mortar shells and their casualty toll with the might of the Israeli army and the consequences of its actions. Furthermore, it is also this reality which fuels the calls for proportionality in which the use of force on Israel’s side, it is claimed, must match that of the enemy it attacks. A “disproportionate” response is classified as unjust, for it is no longer contained or justified under the rubric of self-defense.

The moral difficulty, if not corruption, entailed within the above argument lies in the fact that it essentially allows terrorist organizations to terrorize with impunity, and morally handcuffs a society’s legitimate right to defend itself not merely when its existence is threatened, but when the lives of some of its citizens are in danger and many more are subjected to the effects of terror.

The “weak” are allowed to engage in terror, for it is argued that it is the only means available to them, while the more powerful, and in this case Israel, are always morally reprehensible, for our power and strength voids any military response the legitimacy of the claim of self-defense. This “moral” argument, which grants immunity to terror perpetrated by the weaker, is a significant moral failing in much of the public discourse on morality of war.

Jews and supporters of Israel attempt to counter with claims of Israel’s weakness and victim-hood, creating a competition between Israel and the Palestinians over who is suffering more, and thus worthy of the mantle of morality. This, however, is a competition which Israel cannot, nor I hope, ever win. I welcome Israel’s power, and pray that, we will always lose in the competition over relative victim-hood when it comes to wars that are forced upon us. We cannot, nor should we concern ourselves with the calculation of proportionality. Our task is not to act proportionately but morally and appropriately within the context of the danger we face. That is not only morally permissible but obligatory. As members of the Jewish people, the state of Israel, and the community of nations committed exclusively to fighting just wars and refraining from wars of aggression, we need not apologize for the war in Gaza, but rather be morally proud of our actions. Our return to statehood does not entail a desire to relive the tragedies of the mass suicide at Masada, but to embrace life, and our right to live as a free people, free from terror, free from aggression, and free to pursue the larger values and aspirations of our society."

Of course I would not share this with your son's Palestinian teacher but I think it is important to understand this perspective.

Willful Ignorance, Religious Fundamentalism, and Applebees.

WRT took a family trip to Israel in December 2011. There is no trip planned for 2012, but look for an Israel trip in 2013. Stay tuned!

The URJ is the synagogue arm of Reform Judaism and therefore its primary agenda is not to influence public policy; and while it does from time to time weigh in officially on matters of national interest, the primary Reform Jewish agency for taking positions on issues of national interest is the Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism, or RAC for short.

The RAC does indeed take a position on gun control.

Read more about it here: http://rac.org/advocacy/issues/issuegc/

And especially: http://rac.org/Articles/index.cfm?id=21944&pge_prg_id=14355&pge_id=2412

Sure, it's totally possible. Gypsy is an ethno-national designation more properly known as Romani. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romani_people

Jewish is a religious/ethnic designation attained either by birth or, significantly for your question, by reason of conversion. While most Romani do not affiliate or identify as Jewish, it's certainly possible that, at some point in the past, through birth, marriage into a Jewish family, or conversion to Judaism, a Romani individual would also be Jewish. I'm sure there are many such people.

Synagogue affiliation is really not a measure of basic Jewish status. Many Jews do not attend synagogue but this does not mean that they are not Jewish. (Similarly: many Christians may not attend church, but that doesn't mean they aren't Christian.)

Hey Jess! And a very sweet new year to you and your entire family. :)

Every 5-7 weeks.

That is, like, too many oxymorons for me to count.

No, I already have them.

I'd say a few factors are important and location is the biggest. If your college offers a modern Hebrew program, by all means, take it. I studied Hebrew in Religious School growing up but my first immersive experience was as an undergraduate in the classroom, where I took two years of university-level Hebrew. If you are not enrolled in a college, or your college doesn't offer a Hebrew program, it's a bit harder; check local colleges, synagogues and JCCs, to see if anyone nearby has a program. Also, there are apparently a number of options for one-on-one Hebrew language studies via Skype. I learned of one just yesterday -- The cost broke down to about 30$ a lesson which is pretty good if you have the shekels.

Biblical Hebrew is considerably different from modern Hebrew, but a good grounding in the living language of spoken Hebrew will give you an excellent springboard toward mastering the vocabulary of Biblical Hebrew. (Verb forms and syntax are fundamentally different in Biblical Hebrew but the roots and basic words are shared.)

Trying to find a minimum acceptable age for having sex is not how I approach the question. It is a question of maturity, not chronological age.

And let's not forget: both partners need to be ready, mature, and able to understand and locate those values.

(Is it possible for a high schooler to demonstrate the appropriate maturity and the commitment to the values I outlined? Yes, it's possible. But in my experience the incidence of two high schoolers who are equally mature and ready for a healthy sexual relationship with each other is exceedingly rare.)

I don't think anyone has ever called Birthright or Jewish summer camps "magic pills for our people's future," but I am curious about the antagonistic tone I hear in your question. The fact is, intensive, immersive experiences (camp especially; Birthright Israel to an extent) are some of the best ways of kindling a Jewish spark in a young person. There is plenty of evidence to support the claim that "Jewish camping and immersive Israel experiences play a vital role in the formation of a strong and proud Jewish identity. Children who attend a Jewish camp or participate in youth group have more Jewish friends, are more inclined to raise a Jewish family when they become adults, and are more likely to stay actively engaged members of a Jewish community" (Union for Reform Judaism, as cited on http://www.urjcamps.org/about/mission/).

Oh, the ocean, of course.