the obligation to reproduce?

[cellio]

During Torah study we've been discussing the part of Leviticus that covers permitted and forbidden sexual relationships. Twice in the last three weeks someone has asserted that the purpose of sex is procreation. (I disputed it the first time; I didn't do so again this morning.) Then, this afternoon, I read an article in Reform Judaism, from the chairman of the national board, about how our population numbers are dropping and it's because we aren't giving priority to having kids and that's a critical mitzvah because we'll die out otherwise and blah blah blah. (Part of "blah blah blah" was that people are too concerned with their careers and not concerned enough with marrying early and reproducing.)

Nonsense, I say.

First off, there is at least one other halachic reason for sexual intercourse: pleasure. Men are specifically obligated to provide this pleasure for their wives, in fact. The talmud even specifies frequency requirements! The idea that sex is only for procreation is not a traditional Jewish notion.

If procreation were the only motivating factor, then alongside the familial restrictions (don't lie with your inlaws) and the ever-challenging Lev 18:22, we would see something about not lying with people who are infertile. But we don't, because that is not forbidden. (For that matter, the Torah itself doesn't say anything against masturbation, though I don't know about later sources.)

Some people can't have kids, and for some people it would be a really bad idea to have kids, but we don't chase those people off. [1] We do, however, alienate them every time we say things like "sex is for procreation, and why aren't you doing your part to replenish the Jewish people?". I am especially offended to hear that argument from leaders in the Reform movement -- leaders who are not simultaneously saying things like "Shabbat is central to Judaism and why aren't you observing it?". The sages aren't even in complete agreement on whether "p'ru ur'vu" (be fruitful and multiply) is a commandment; some say it's a blessing instead.

Further, appeals based on achieving replacement levels for population (the number that gets kicked around is 2.1 kids per couple) are misguided on their own. What good does it do to produce more kids, if we aren't also doing something to keep them Jewish? More than half the US marriages involving Jews are intermarriages; those Jews are very unlikely to have Jewish grandkids. And even within Jewish marriages, how many kids continue their education past bar/bat mitzvah? How many kids end up as committed Jewish adults? The problem here isn't production; it's retention. And if we can't solve the retention problem first, then increasing production won't solve a thing. In fact, it'll make things worse, by providing more non-religious nominally-Jewish models for kids who might be waffling on whether to stick with it.

Yes, paying attention to demographic studies is important -- but it is also important not to attribute the wrong reasons to the results. I would much rather have a smaller number of more committed members of the community; nominal body count really doesn't matter much if they're Jews only in DNA.

Growth will come from increasing education and commitment, and from converts. We need not, and should not, pressure people into having more children than they otherwise would have. That is a loss, not a gain, for the community.

I'll probably try to distill this down into a letter to the editor of Reform Judaism, so comments would be very welcome.

[1] Yes, I am aware that the talmud teaches (somewhere; don't have the cite) that a man may divorce his wife if they fail to produce a child after ten years of trying.

Comments

[figmo.livejournal.com]

IMHO part of the problem is too many rabbis refusing to marry Jews to non-Jews. If a Jewish woman bears a child, the child is automatically Jewish. If marrying the woman to a non-Jew would guarantee her offspring not being converted to her husband's religion, wouldn't it be worth it?

Also, some mixed couples with Jewish fathers want to raise their kids Jewish, but the hoops they have to jump through are greater. Those kids have to be "converted," and if the parents don't act quickly, the poor kid has to jump through major hoops to be what they identify themselves as being.

[zzrg.livejournal.com]

Purely formulaic approaches to religion drive me nuts. If God told someone to take an umbrella to someone one day when it was raining, and he did not bother to mention anything about umbrellas the next day when it was sunny, does that mean that all religious men are obligated to carry umbrellas when they go out until God mentions otherwise?

All religions seem in my eyes to be suffering from a lack of purpose in modern times. (And one reaction of many seems to be to adopt foolish causes). I am wondering... (I am someone that believes in organized religion, but is wary of it. I want to belong, but even the relatively moderate Methodist church which I grew up in did not encourage exploring spiritual boundaries. As far as the God thing goes I am pretty open minded.) ...anyway I was wondering if Judaism is suffering from having formed a secular Jewish state and declining persecution. (I've been reading a book about psychology, not religion, and one of the things it mentions is how people and cultures tend to die if their sense of purpose disappears.)

I think the end purpose of most religions is to create a spiritual community, but that is something that has become more and more difficult in societies that are larger, moving faster, and changing more rapidly. Also, fewer people are looking at people in terms of race, skin color, and religion.

respectfully yours
DISCLAIMER: I claim to have no answers, only a lot of questions.

[mamadeb.livejournal.com]

Doing something to keep the kids Jewish is *vital*, and that's where, imho, the day school movement is key. Afterschool Hebrew schools are failures - kids hate them and parents regard them as necessary things to get through until bar/bat mitzvah. It's especially bad when the teachers are from one movement and the kids and their families are from another, so the lessons they hate so much don't even reflect home practices.

There are day schools in all three major movements now, at least until the high school level, and this is positive across the board - even if the Reform day school where a Conservadox friend teaches doesn't like it when he leaves early on Friday afternoons in winter (they don't mind that he takes second day holidays off, however.)

If Judaism is taught as positive instead being perceived as a burden that can be tossed off at age thirteen, that can only be good.

[goljerp]

I'll probably try to distill this down into a letter to the editor of Reform Judaism, so comments would be very welcome.

This is all very well said. You might want to comment about the implicit anti-feminist tenor of these arguments, the unspoken subtext being, "if these darn women would just stop having careers, then they'd have lots of kids, and everything would be fine!"

[1] Yes, I am aware that the talmud teaches (somewhere; don't have the cite) that a man may divorce his wife if they fail to produce a child after ten years of trying.

True. But I seem to remember this being (or becoming) a reason for divorce, not a requirement for divorce. In other words, a man doesn't have to divorce his wife after ten years of trying if he doesn't wish to.

[celebrin.livejournal.com]

Mine got long. Go http://www.livejournal.com/users/celebrin/115009.html#cutid1 (http://www.livejournal.com/users/celebrin/115009.html#cutid1) to read my response.