Call Me Pelotit (The Real Sins of Sodom and Gemorrah)

I know this editorial will be very unpopular here.

I disagree with many of this Rabbi's conclusions - particularly ones that imply that anti-illegal immigration laws are inherently racist, and those that support the wisely rejected "shamnesty" proposal.

However, I do think that from the standpoint of Jewish Law, Oklahoma House Bill 1804 is wrong, or at least over-reaching, and amounts to enforced cruelty.

I don't read this guy's blog, so don't bother trying to show me what a Bush-hating leftist he is.

I found this sermon when I did a Google search for any parallels drawn between the Midrash for the "Vayera" Torah portion and the debate on illegal immigration.

Ezekiel 16:49
“ ‘Now this was the sin of your sister Sodom: She and her daughters were arrogant, overfed and unconcerned; they did not help the poor and needy.

I guess charity ends when we lose our homes, our families, and other means of survival...

I don't agree with his characterization of those who want to keep our country secure and see to it our laws are obeyed. Even guests in one's house must obey the owner's rules. I fail to see exactly how the lesson of Sodom and Gomorrah is applicable here. The Cities Of The Plain were renowned not just for sexual depravity but also for their inhospitality and their oppression of their fellow citizens. The Midrash doesn't speak to their treatment of outsiders but it does point out an ethical society is of necessity a lawful one. And when there's lawlessness, anything goes under the sun and Americans have seen the high cost of illegal immigration.

"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus

Let’s change the Jimmy Carter coined word “Undocumented” to “ILLEGAL”, and see if that sinks in folks.

“Illegal” means the person is ILLEGALLY in this country, which means the person shouldn’t be here. That said I think Oklahoma is on the right track.

I think you're wrong -- the rebbe has a point and I think reasonable people here can see it.

The Oklahoma law seems to go after the wrong end of the problem.

When you see a person, any person, who is in real need, Christian or Jew has a religious obligation to try to relieve their suffering. Giving a hungry little kid a sandwich is not what the lawmakers should be going after, but rather unscrupulous employers' exploitation of illegals by paying them slave wages in the knowledge that they can't complain to law enforcement. That is the sort of behavior by employers that the lawmakers should go after.

This law -- if the excerpt quoted is acccurate, and no exceptions are included -- will draw the merely merciful into its net, because it's too broadly drawn.

With that said, I'll note that the argument that the true sin of Sodom was inhospitality is the SAME argument used by the heterodox in the Episcopal church to justify the ordination, consecration and marriage of homosexuals. So if I were the rebbe, I wouldn't go there. I might use "we were all strangers in Egypt" instead . . . .

I don't read this guy's blog, so don't bother trying to show me what a Bush-hating leftist he is.

So does that mean you have no clue what this guy usually thinks and want to remain blissfully ignorant?

It does sound pretty over-reaching to me, at least as outlined in the editorial. I haven't read the text of the actual bill, but if I see someone in actual need, telling me it's illegal to help them in anyway is essentially telling me to go against my conscience and my religious beliefs. And if I have to decide whether to obey the law here or obey the Law of God, God is going to win every time.

I'm not going to hide people from immigration authorities, but I'm not going fail to render aid to someone because they might be an illegal immigrant.

How about if we just give them a free ride back across the border? Would THAT count? Lock them up and give them 3 squares a day untill the ride back.....

“On November 1, Oklahoma House Bill 1804 goes into effect. This bill makes it a crime employ, transport, offer housing to or otherwise help undocumented workers or their families. This law has the stench of sulfur to me. It is mean-spirited, racist, prejudiced and short-sighted. It is immoral. That our legislature passed this bill makes Oklahoma more like Sodom and Gemorrah than we would like to believe.”

The analogy is incorrect. The illegal immigrant is a thief who has stolen their way into your house and is demanding that he has a right to be there. Even in old testament times his thievery would be recognized.

The legal immigrant is a different story, but guess what, no one has problem being charitable to a legal immigrant, they are our welcomed guests.

If we decide that non-citizens can break our laws should we do likewise for citizens that break our laws. Of what value is citizenship if citizens are forced to comply with our laws while non-citizens are not?

On FR, it is all about the gays.

You're correct, this editorial will be unpopular here for two reasons.

#1 - It's NOT racist to want to control the borders of this country.
It's NOT racist to want ALL the people of this country to abide by it's laws.
It's NOT racist to want people who DON'T abide by it's laws when entering this country to exit this country.

#2 - is this statement.
I actually think that President Bush’s proposal in the national debate on immigration made sense (Yes, I actually praised our president for something and lightning didn’t strike). His proposal was that undocumented workers who had been here longer than a certain period be given a path toward naturalization

Shamnesty was not and is not popular here.
If you want to give some type of legal standing to illegal immigrants that have been here a certain amount of years, can document their work record during that time, along with documenting that they have not been involved in any other type of criminal mischief, and want to pay all the back taxes on the wages they earned during that time (I'll even be generous and only make them pay a percentage of the taxes they should have with no fines), fine.
They do NOT need a path to naturalization, they do NOT need a path to citizenship.

Worth repeating:

If we decide that non-citizens can break our laws should we do likewise for citizens that break our laws. Of what value is citizenship if citizens are forced to comply with our laws while non-citizens are not?

Its spelled Gomorrah

The rebbe’s position would seem to be that if someone broke into your home, then one has a responsibility to prepare a room for them to sleep in, and to fix supper for them.

And “Racism” is misplaced, as the law is applicable across racial lines, one’s race doesn’t exclude or include from falling under the law’s reach, an Irish Immigres is just as culpable as a Salvadorean one.

I will say however, that if one wishes to house and clothe and to support “illegals” as a dictate of your conscience then by all means do so, I know I ask myself what I would do in such a situation, and it would seem to me that there is a huge difference between what the law would have us to do, and what our consciences would have us to do.

The Classic, Do you serve Man or do you serve God?

Good job - that’s what I would have said, if I hadn’t had a sudden crisis involving two small boys and a cat.

Is it 5 o’clock somewhere yet?

This bill makes it a crime employ, transport, offer housing to or otherwise help undocumented workers or their families. This law has the stench of sulfur to me. It is mean-spirited, racist, prejudiced and short-sighted. It is immoral. That our legislature passed this bill makes Oklahoma more like Sodom and Gemorrah than we would like to believe.

I believe the good rabbi overreaches on this point. The city states of old, and the Jewish communities in particular, were very xenophobic. They had to be to survive. Charity to the poor has always been a pillar of the tribal religions of the Mideast; it is one of the 5 pillars of Islam.

However, embracing the acculturate stranger, the invader, was never a shibboleth of Jewish religion; never a creed to take the non Jew into the community and to feed, employ, and marry the daughters of Abraham.

To extend the virtue of charity to illegal aliens, to the extent extolled by the good rabbi, would make more sense if Rabbi Fox would preach the same charity to the Hamas and Hezbollah terrorists who grace the Israeli landscape.

What fraction of OK’s State budget is for Health and Welfare? Far from making it a crime to help the poor, it is a crime NOT to do so.

This person actually invites emails.

If anyone does respond please be polite as you correct their many errors.

How about this for a law:

It is a crime to knowingly abet, transport, offer sanctuary to or otherwise help bank robbers or their accomplices.

It seems to me that this law is saying that you can not help people commit the crime of sneaking into the country and living hear illegally. Nor can you transport them for the purpose of that crime. When did that become a sin? I'm pretty sure that the poor man Pelotit helped did not violate any laws to enter Sodom.

If we decide that non-citizens can break our laws should we do likewise for citizens that break our laws. Of what value is citizenship if citizens are forced to comply with our laws while non-citizens are not?”

BINGO!

Ezekiel 16:50 “Thus they were haughty and committed abominations before me. Therefore I removed them when I saw it.”

You should have read a little further. It’s never a good idea to take one verse out of context.

Jude 7

It's always 5 o'clock somewhere..............

This “Rabbi” is using the Word of God, Torah, to twist it to mean that we should be nice to illegals? Is that what I just read?
Th story is about how that city condoned and accepted homosexuality. Made special rights for homosexuality to flourish.

“Thus they were haughty and committed abominations before me. Therefore I removed them when I saw it.”

It implies that were they, Sodom and it's environs, kind and loving toward the poor and needy, strangers and the travelers, the abominations they committed might have been overlooked and possibly forgiven. Remember, the Law of Moses had yet to be given, by perhaps a millenia, or so. Jesus referred to Sodom and said that any town that refused to listen to the gospel of his message through his disciples would suffer a worse fate than Sodom on Judgement Day.......

True, but we have to have *some* standards.

If the cat would only bite the boys a few times, they’d stop annoying her so much.

> So does that mean you have no clue what this guy usually thinks and want to remain blissfully ignorant?

Judging from a side remark he made, I assume he is a leftist Bush-hater. However, I did read THIS sermon, and I found it to be reasonably correct, from the standpoint of Jewish Law, with the exceptions I previously noted about the “clear racism” he sees where none is present.

Regardless of the politics of the author, I felt he made his point well.

Boys + cats = trouble............usually for the cat...........

Rabbi Fox has given a great deal of thought to the issue of illegal aliens. But his conclusions are wrong because his premise is wrong. The premise is that all illegal aliens are Mexicans who will starve when Oklahoma’s HB 1804 goes into effect. Further, the Rabbi treats Mexicans as a race and equates it with Jews.

First; All illegal aliens are not Mexicans. Though Mexicans are probably the majority.

Second; Mexican is not a race, it is a nationality.

Third; No illegal alien is starving or will starve as a result of Oklahoma’s HB 1804. At its most precise, the law would force illegal aliens to give themselves up to the authorities. Whereupon, the state is routinely required to feed, clothe, house, and provide medical treatment to them as prisoners until deportation to their country of citizenship.

Therefore, Rabbi Fox is wrong on all major points. The law is not against Mexicans. It applies to all illegal aliens. The law is not racist. Mexicans are not a race nor does the law single out a race. It applies to all illegal aliens. And, no Mexican starves as a result of the law. Indeed, no illegal alien starves as a result of the law. The law merely denies illegal aliens the fruits of their illegal activities.

For Rabbi Fox to declare Oklahoma HB 1804 as Sodom and Gomorrah type behavior is just plain wrong. It is nothing more than a state engaging in legitimate protection of its citizens by denying privileges to lawbreakers.

Further, Rabbi Fox’s characterization of this law as racist and equating it, however thinly veiled, with both pogroms against Jews and the Holocaust is beyond the pale.

Though I admire Rabbi Fox’s attempt to address the invasion of illegal aliens logically, his evaluation of Oklahoma’s HB 1804 is incorrect. His essay only serves to perpetuate the problem.

One should be very careful when applying lessons of the ages to current events. Though the method is valid, its application is too often mangled. And all should keep in mind, intelligence is not the same as wisdom.

Boys + anything = trouble.

Boys + anything = trouble.

Boys + anything + a strict Mom = Little Angels..........

Not when they have older brothers ...

In reality, our Rabbis of old taught that the real sins of Sodom and Gomorrah were not sexual depravity, but lack of charity toward the strangers and less fortunate.

That's not what my Torah says. I'd like him to NAME those "Rabbis of old." It wouldn't surprise me if they were Reformed, which has had a penchant for taking liberties with the word since its founding, which was funded by apostate Frankists of the Bund, Gesellschaft der Brüder.

Have you seen that Sears(?) commercial with the two boys looking in the attic for Christmas presents when Mom comes home?......

Dear Rabbi Dip Stick,
Let me explain this too you using small words so you can understand. Beggars ask in their dispair, Theives sneek about and take when no one is looking. Get the difference.
Get thee hence Pharasee!

> This “Rabbi” is using the Word of God, Torah, to twist it to mean that we should be nice to illegals?

Not exactly. The Rabbi here says that making it a crime to show mercy to the needy is the sin for which Sodom was destroyed, at least according to that particular Midrash.

Personally, feel that it is wrong for the government to forcibly redistribute wealth, particularly to illegal immigrants. And I even feel that charitable donations to organizations that specifically assist illegal immigrants should not be tax deductible. And I believe that companies who knowingly break the law to employ illegal workers should be fined painfully. But I feel that criminal prosecution of people who try to help the less fortunate is wrong.

Thus, as in “therefore”. Their other sins led to their haughtiness and their abominations, and God destroyed them for their abominations.

Jude 7

The absolutely maddening stupidity of citizens that don’t get it is beyond my diminutive comprehension to fathom.

No, we don’t see commercial TV. However, it’s probably similar to scenes in my house!

I once had a crisis involving ONE small boy, a Lab puppy, and a large Siamese cat, so . . .

. . . yeah, it's always 5 o'clock somewhere. < g >

Or so we’d like to think. In reality, our Rabbis of old taught that the real sins of Sodom and Gomorrah were not sexual depravity, but lack of charity toward the strangers and less fortunate.

That's why not helping the poor is known as 'sodomy'....

Boys + cats = trouble............usually for the cat...........

Not in the case of my 14 pound Attack Siamese, Finn MacCoul.

It was my son who had the green streaks running up his arm before I noticed them in the bathtub and he finally fessed up that he had tried to break up a Lab/Siamese spat and got 4 big Siamese canine teeth right through the middle of his hand.

The Lab puppy was so respectful of Finn after that that she did square detours around any room he was sitting in.

I do miss that cat, he was a riot.

On FR, it is all about the gays.

That's funny, you're the first one to bring that topic into the thread.

Yoicks!

Wednesday can beat up the boys; they don’t even go near her. Shannon just says “Peep!” miserably.

I'd like him to NAME those "Rabbis of old." It wouldn't surprise me if they were Reformed

From the article:

One Midrash from Pirkei D’Rabi Eliezer says it well:

R. Yehudah said: They announced in Sodom that anyone who gave bread to the poor, the sojourner or the destitute would be burned. Now, Pelotit was Lot’s daughter and she was married to one of the leaders of Sodom. She saw a poor man afflicted in the public square and she was grieved on his account. What did she do? Every day, when she went to draw water, she would take some food from her house and hide it in her pitcher, and so would feed the poor man. The people of Sodom wondered: how could this man stay alive? When they found out, they took Pelotit out to be burned.

The Midrash is not generally considered to be "Reform only". I read similar commentary in the Artscroll Stone Edition Chumash.

Yeah, little Nifi is a wuss and allowed my son to manhandle her when she was tiny without saying a word (not even a miserable peep).

But she's an atypical cat, she even consorts with DOGS.

"Jude 1:7 In a similar way, Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding towns gave themselves up to sexual immorality and perversion. They serve as an example of those who suffer the punishment of eternal fire.

But here's an interesting thing: Sodom and Gomorrah are characterized explicitly as being BOTH sexually immoral AND lacking in charity toward the needy. I suppose there's a connection there.

Centuries ago, preachers used to make a connection between what used to be grouped as a rhetorical triad of sins, sodomy, usury, and luxury. If you google those three words, you can find some examples. I think the common thread between the three concepts would be that they can be characterized as self-serving behavior.

much a distance between a law and it’s enforcement, as we well know - especially in the case of immigration law. So, big deal, just more words on paper to make somebody feel good.

The rabbi, as usual, is deeply confused. As a matter of religious duty, one is compelled to show compassion for the suffering people. As a matter of secular duty, they are law breakers and need to be treated as such. Having failed to do so has led us to this situation with 1/4 of the nation’s prison population being illegals, with innumerable murders, rapes, robberies, DWIs, etc. being at the hand of illegals.

Rabbi - the law has two pillars: Mercy and Justice. To bemoan what you see as the lack of Mercy while ignoring the need for Justice, is to forget your training - to forget that you are a rabbi.