Luke Ford

I just finished reading David Klinghoffer’s new book, Shattered Tablets: Why We Ignore The Ten Commandments At Our Peril.

I don’t have much to say about it because I agree with it.

Rod Dreher writes:

Mr. Klinghoffer cites the work of noted Baylor University sociologist Rodney Stark, who found that across global cultures, the degree to which individuals believe in a personal G-d indicates how likely they are to behave morally. You don’t have to believe in G-d to be good, but it demonstrably helps. Mr. Klinghoffer identifies the loss of the Ten Commandments’ as responsible for America’s cultural crises.

No surprise there: What else would you expect a believing Jew (or Christian) to say? But here’s the thing: This is essentially the same conclusion reached by the late Philip Rieff, an agnostic who was one of the 20th century’s most important social critics.

Mr. Rieff, a sociologist whose most important work dealt with psychology and religion, taught that all cultures develop from prohibitions, that is, the creative tension between the commanding "Thou shalt not" and the assertive "I will." We now dwell in an anti-culture, according to Mr. Rieff, in which we no longer feel the pull of old prohibitions against the expression of individual instinct and will to power.

In biblical terms, we have lost the fear of the Lord — and in Mr. Rieff’s telling, the absence of "holy fear" makes us terrors unto ourselves and one another.

Not a big fan of The Awareness Center, David Klinghoffer quotes approvingly Rabbi Matis Weinberg on page 199.

If fear of God is as important as Klinghoffer claims, then why does he live in the least religious part of America?

When I interviewed David a few months ago, he said: "Seattle is very goyish. That’s one thing that makes it not as interesting a city as New York. In many ways, it’s a very gentle place. Seattle has a lot of problems. I write about the consequences of secularism in the North-West — the most unchurched region in the country — in my new book on the Ten Commandments."

Well, if the consequences of secularism are so heinous, then why does Klinghoffer choose to pitch his tent in the middle of it?

David says he likes trees. Seattle has little Torah but lots of trees. Are trees more important than Torah? If Torah is more important than trees, then why wouldn’t one live in a Torah center (if one has a choice)?

I suspect that in reality David likes secularism a lot more than he lets on or he wouldn’t live where he does. If God, Torah and religion were so important, then Seattle would be a less hospitable place than the Bible Belt. If the Ten Commandments are so important, then why doesn’t David live in Jerusalem or the Bible Belt? Wouldn’t that be putting one’s family where one’s books are?

To me, the sacred texts of the Jewish tradition are clear that the proper place for a Jew to live is in Zion. That I don’t live there is because I am lazy and I’m OK with not living up to all of Judaism’s requirements.

Like David, I believe in God and Torah and the Ten Commandments. Yet I choose to live on the West Coast, which is far less religious than the East Coast.

According to his book, David employs a babysitter sympathetic to witchcraft. If witchcraft is as bad as the Torah says, then why would one employ a babysitter who dabbles in it?

David devotes several pages to denouncing gossip. He only talks about the harm that gossip does and ignores the benefits of gossip (principally that it enforces social norms and it warns people about danger).

(Similarly, throughout the book David only discusses the bad parts of secularism and ignores the good things that come from secularism. He largely ignores the bad things in Judaism and Christianity and only emphasizes their virtues.)

Gossip is often inaccurate and done privately, making it easy to condemn. But there a value more important than accuracy and accountability and that is merit. If the result of gossip is more meritorious than deleterious, then in that instance gossip is good.

What the heck do I mean?

Let me share a painful example.

Moishe posts about me to FailedMessiah:

Steve and Yochanan, I agree but you wouldn’t be so generous when he is feeling up your teenage daughter and whispering suggestive comments into her ear during kiddush. That’s why he has been thrown out.

If you can get a hold of them, read all of his bragging posts on Protocols from 2 years ago. He is relying on people’s short memories to clense himself.

By the way, most of these frum girs are so sheltered that they don’t realize that a butt-grab or an arm stroke along with a "good Shabbos" in shul is a problem, they tend to be confused and shocked and move on to ignore it. Its not abuse, just pushing the limits.

Let us say those allegations (like much of gossip) are completely false (that’s my contention). Are they therefore without merit? No. The underlying message of this post is that I am dangerous, that I violate community norms, and that I seek a predatory sex life.

Well, I certainly don’t act like that in shul today because I’d be thrown out. But I can’t say that those accusations are without merit. They are a warning to the unwary. They enforce social norms. They let people know I’m a male whore (who hasn’t had any customers in a few years).

Even though I did not do any of the things in that post above, I earned it with my gross behavior. I am lascivious and I do lack boundaries.

I deserve that so-called gossip and slander because I’ve been a bad boy.

I don’t like it when people say false and horrible things about me, but most of the time I realize I brought it on myself.

For every condemnation of gossip in the Bible, there are an equal number of admonitions to protect the innocent. Also, the Bible and the Talmud have no compunction about publicizing and condemning behavior that violates social norms.