The 19th Amendment gave women the right to vote in the United States 1920. You can thank Susan B. Anthony (over there in the left) for that one. That was 90 years ago. That right to vote is essential because it gives women a voice in communal matters which directly affect them. It is fundamentally unfair to subject women to laws that are created by agencies that have no responsibility to women by virtue of the fact that women have no say whether they get voted or not.
It is really obvious that women must have the right to vote in a democracy.
An interesting issue has been raised in Crown Heights, the headquarters of Lubavitch and in particular regarding the Crown Heights Jewish Community Council. The CHJCC receives millions of dollars in Federal money and provides a huge amount of social services to local families.
It’s leadership, like the leadership of many orthodox Jewish organizations, is entirely male. The reason the CHJCC is led my males is actually written into its bylaws. In order to vote, one must be religiously observant, married, previously married or at least 30 years old and male.
It’s unclear to me if the bylaws prevent a woman from being voted into a leadership position, but that is unlikely given that women cannot vote.
There is a halachic precedent for women not taking religious leadership positions. This has been slightly marginalized in the last century with women taking positions of leadership in religious schools. Certainly, many Jewish organizations that are not religious in nature are permitted halachically to have women and do have women in positions of leadership.
Now, a young man from Chabad is challenging the validity of the male requirement.
Unable to use halacha to justify the rule, CHJCC has used a variety of “excuses” to explain the rule. modesty (as per usual), “tradition” and maintaining a peaceful marriage are among the reasons given during the discussion over this issue.
The current director conceded that the issue of women voting is being reconsidered by the council. A lawyer for the council has promised that women will be able to vote in the next elections.
Feeling that progress was not being made in private, closed door, conversations, the man challenging the council is considering taking the issue to the courts. Legally speaking, this would not a 19th Amendment issue, rather a 14th Amendment issue, under the equal protection clause. It could apply because the council is accepting Federal funds. It’s not a very strong case and would likely become a very difficult precedent if it required all organizations accepting a penny of Federal funds to adhere to the strict standards of the constitution regarding separation of church and state as well as the slightly discriminatory policies that many religious organizations may have.
Honestly, the policy really bothers me but I don’t think they would win a constitutional challenge. Especially not these days…
Link: NY Times
Related posts:
