NJ-05: Rothenberg's Wrongheaded Remarks

by: DavidNYC

Thu Aug 28, 2008 at 12:33 AM EDT

Finally, at times, the rabbi seems very un-rabbi-like. He is quoted as using the "s" word very matter-of-factly in Toobin's piece and using the "b.s." word in Time. I expect a lot of folks in the district may wonder about that.

And Shulman's rhetoric seems more like a Democratic insider than a man of the cloth, such as his comment that Garrett is "in the pocket of Big Oil" and that the runup in energy prices "is the direct result of Big Oil and their cronies like Scott Garrett blocking sound energy policy for years."

This is as ugly as it is wrong. In his column, Rothenberg criticizes a New Yorker profile of Shulman by Jeff Toobin, saying that the author's "forte is simply not politics." Yet when did Rothenberg appoint himself an expert on religion?

Indeed, reform Judaism - the sort practiced by Shulman - embraces a diverse body of beliefs, styles and personal choices. It is Shulman's congregants - not Beltway blowhards - who determine what standards their clergymen ought to meet, and whether they meet them. As a practicing Jew myself, the thought of a smug DC pundit who isn't even a member of my synagogue proclaiming my rabbi spiritually unfit offends me to no end - especially when the "sin" in question is a violation of some ossified standard of bipartisan gentility that never actually existed in the first place.

In fact, in pluralistic America, I'd expect all those who respect the rights of others to observe their religion as they see fit to be displeased about remarks like this. They have no place in our politics or our houses of worship. And as I say, this kind of statement isn't just offensive, it doesn't even pass muster as good political analysis. Case in point: While I'm sure some Catholics didn't think Fr. Robert Drinan - who beat a 28-year incumbent on an anti-Vietnam War platform and supported abortion rights throughout his career - "acted like a priest," that didn't stop him from winning five terms as a Congressman in Massachusetts. He only stepped down because the Pope - not his constituents - forced him to.

If Rothenberg wants to critique Shulman on the merits, fine. But leave religion out of it. Period.