LEV256 The Dorff et al. responsum [one of two mutually exclusive December 2006 legal rulings approved by the Jewish Committee on Laws and Standards (Conservative Movement] hinges on the rabbinic principle that a person's dignity is so important that it supersedes biblical prohibitions (see, e.g., B. Shabbat 81b).  The Talmud, however, immediately qualifies that statement to refer only to the biblical commandment in Deuteronomy 17 to obey the judges of each generation. The authors of the Dorff et al. responsum therefore argue that this halachic principle allows them to suspend rabbinic, although not biblical, prohibitions that would prevent homosexuals from enjoying loving, committed relationships. The authors contend that although the biblical prohibition of anal intercourse remains in place [this verse], in the name of preserving the dignity of homosexuals contemporary rabbis should use their authority to suspend the rabbinic restrictions involving other acts of same-sex physical intimacy. (The responsum makes clear that bisexuals who were able to have fulfilling sexual relationships with members of the opposite gender are not permitted to engage in homosexual activity.) The conclusion of the responsum is that homosexuals may engage in acts of physical intimacy, although not typically prohibited anal intercourse, and be eligible for all honors and privileges available in the community. ... Dorff later acknowledged that he is bothered by maintaining the restriction against anal intercourse, since he knows full well that such a condition is likely to be widely ignored. For the Love of God and People: A Philosophy of Jewish Law (Philadelphia: JPS, 2007), p. 235). Indeed, much earlier in Dorff's career he wrote that "we should not engage in overdoses of legal fictions, as we have been wont to do in the past." "Towards a Legal Theory of the Conservative Movement," Conservative Judaism, 27:3 (1973), p. 75). Nevertheless, since Dorff feared (correctly) that he would not have had the necessary votes from the Committee on Jewish Laws and Standards were he and his co-authors to argue for notifying the biblical prohibition, he did "what [could] be done and [took] satisfaction from the progress that a partial step in the right direction [achieved]." (For the Love, p. 235) … Wisely silent rabbis would refrain from asking invasive questions about… gay men's sexual activity, thus conniving in the halakhic charade. (By Shai Cherry, "Ethical Theories in the Conservative Movement"