Non-Kosher Beef Part II...What if the lobster is circumcised?

Of course I speak in hyperbole, I do not think that Moses, or Hitler, made those decisions based on morals, divinely inspired or not.

Moving on, I would like to correct the good rabbi on his misconception of evolution and racism. No, the theory of evolution does not support racism. It is widely known, and scholarly accepted, that human variants (races) are recent occurrence. Genetically speaking the differences between races are superficial and minor; there are no biologically "favored races." Cultural interpretations are the basis for perceived natural biological distinctions of races, not on biology. True, when looking at the whole of a species, there are characteristics that separate certain groups into races. Statistical averages of members of different races may have (statistically averaged) better capability at certain traits like high endurance, strength, higher capacity of learning, or better ability to handle climate changes ect… However, to say all members of said race are better at given ability over all members of another race is ridiculous and ignorant, thus no “superior race.” The only way you could have a “superior race” would be if some group evolved into and became the next more highly evolved species above Homo-Sapiens (X-Men!!!!!), in which case it would become a superior species, separated significantly from our own through genetic mutations.

My turn! Since you are a rabbi, I will stick to the Old Testament/ Torah. Let’s go with the story of Noah, post-flood. One night, after partying hard and “winning,” Noah got real drunk and passed out, with a bottle in one hand and his clothes nowhere to be seen. Yes, he was inebriated and naked the next morning when his son Ham found him in his tent. (GEN 9:20-27) After “seeing his father’s nakedness” and then, rather than cloth his father with a sheet he went and told his brothers, probably out of jest as in “hey, dad drank way too much look!!” The brothers, without looking on their dad (and I suppose the moral is to be more respectful of a drunk naked old guy) they covered him. He woke up, and discovered what Ham had done, and instead of punishing Ham, he went for Canaan (Hams 4^th and youngest son) and cursed him to be a servant.

Now, I do not see anything really racist in this picture. In fact I think it is one of the funnies stories in the whole bible! I mean, your dad is drunk off his ass naked in a tent…gotta crack a smirk! But, the implications of this story, and others told in other Jewish text like The Talmud, have implied racial undertones. Granted, many have been disputed citing other biblical references, but this only shows the discord amongst believers and how basically no group of said believe can get one story and stick to it….a topic for another blog post. However, it is not important what the bible says exactly as much as what the readers tend to think it says. We can see what people thought things meant by looking at other historical records. People believe that Ham is the Father of the Africans (via Cush), and this Curse of Ham was the justification for African Slavery, making his descendants slaves seems to be a pretty good curse right? Again, nowhere does it explicitly say anything racial, in fact it was Canaan (Hams 4^th and youngest son) who was directly cursed by Noah to be a servant, not Cush. Yet, there may be some cultural reasons to take some liberties with the story. Thus supporting my earlier remarks that, it is not biology that supports racial prejudice, it is cultural ignorance. Again, it’s not what the book actually says, like your reading of Darwin; we are just read it how we think we want to… And so, racial prejudice and general ignorance was born.

my non kosher beef with a rabbi...

Rabbi Adam Jacobs, WTF!

Ok, so the argument that is being refered to in his article (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rabbi-adam-jacobs/atheisms-odd-relationship_b_839352.html) is the classic is morality granted from divinity or not, and if not where does the human sense of morality come from?
First of all, he mentions a talk on TED by Sam Harris, author (among other works) of the Moral landscape, in February 2010. I found this talk entertaining and very eloquent in his ability to put into simple language such a complex idea.

In the First half of the talk a point was brought up from Proverbs regarding beating a child to teach obedience. I wonder if the rabbi agrees with such a statement that you should beat your children into obedience (Proverbs 23:13). I can tell you from my experience, I loved it when my mother tried to beat me, as I got older and older it hurt her more and more to try and hurt me. Once she swung kitchen spoon at me hitting my blocking arm (less the spoon would hit my face) and it vibrated so much just from my block it ended up hurting her. Yet she still as I grew tried as she might to try and hurt me. The last time, as my memory serves I was about 14 and she balled up her fist and hit me in the chest and instantly, grabbed her hand and ran away. I had nothing more than a tender spot for about an hour. So years went by, trying to hit me, and she never learned her lesson…stop trying to hurt the boy you will only hurt yourself. So at about 12 I realized, obviously hurting someone does not teach them a damn thing, much less obedience. Had she learned anything she would have learned, get my dad mad at me as that is the only way I would come close to “behaving” myself until I turned about 15 anyways. There have been many philosophical and psychological debates over the years and you know what? Beating a child does not teach obedience, it only teaches the kid to grow up and hit children as adults!
Obviously I think it is immoral to beat a child, I also admit (because of my own raising) that I may one day hit my own child out of anger. Even typing the words I am ashamed of myself for conceptually being capable of such an act. Those how take proverbs at their words, bible literalists and the like, would not be so morally troubled by beating their child. Now how can my morality and their morality on this one issue both are divinely inspired? If my morality truly came from the a god(s), Bible, Koran or Bhagavad Gita ect… then I would not feel so bad for thinking I may one day be capable of an act that I consider completely heinous.
Morality is subjective in more ways than one. If the 1950’s on television, you would never see a man and woman in the same bed as one another. In fact, I clearly remember most of the time there was some sort of night stand with a small lamp on it separating two twin beds! Today however, it is not morally questionable (to the general population) to show to the public a man and woman (sometimes more than one or the other or both!) in the same bed. This is a clear paradigm shift in the American concept of morality on television.
Morality is so diverse depending on where you grow up, what era you are a part of, what side of the tracks you are on ect… With morality varying so much, amongst people of the same line of thinking (i.e. One Christians morality is not like the other) whether it be religious or not, how can it possibly come from a single source!
Now we can all say something like “it is morally wrong to kill.” And I think that, with just that statement, most people of any line of thinking would agree in principle. However, among those who would say it is wrong to kill, many would agree with the death penalty. Possibly they would exclaim that there are times when war is needed to settle a resolution and thus people will be killed/ murdered. I am sure I can make more scenarios where murder would be something that evens those who would valiantly fight to say killing is morally wrong would agree in that one circumstance, killing was the “ONLY” way to resolve the situation. Not only that but every day, if you are a believer of the god of Abraham, god kills! You never hear “Thank god that man down the street died, he was such a nice man.” But if you are a believer, how can you deny that it was god who killed that man? Is then your god moral? What about Moses, I mean he freed the Jews, gave us the Ten Commandments which were passed down from god to him directly! Surely he has got to be a moral man. But let me paint a scenario for you that some of you may or may not recognize. A man with +/- 500 followers is walking in the desert. They just fought for their own lives, freedom and rights to worship their god and not a pharaoh who acts as if he were a god. They stumble across a small nation, full of people with different beliefs who worship gods of a different color. They kill all of them! Is that moral? If so Hitler really may have been divinely inspired to make the holocaust! As we all know he went for the Jews, and god has shit on the Jews himself quite a few times for breaking the Abrahamic Covenant, maybe this time god use Hitler to do some of his dirty work! Is Hitler now moral?

to be continued...