So which religious group thinks they can censor the bible, and disagree with a thousand + halachic judgment?
Yes I'm talking about the Artscroll translation to "Song of Songs" (שיר השירים). For those of you unfamiliar with it - Artscroll's own website describes it as:
"The first English translation faithful to the allegory that is the Song's authentic meaning. The ArtScroll Series presents the comments of the classic giants of ancient and contemporary times in a logical, comprehensible manner, like a master teacher on an exciting voyage of intellectual discovery. "
A translation faithful to the allegory that is the Song's authentic meaning should be read as a translation where every part which might be understood as referring to a woman's body or expressing romantic love/lust between a man and a body is censored out.
I have no real problem with this method - were it presented as a commentary. However and despite all of their explanations and warnings - it is clear that they are simply too embarrassed to present the original text as is. Their authentic meaning translation is essentially censoring the original text from the English speaking reader.
De facto - Artscroll seems to pasken like those rabbanim who thought that the song of songs should not be included in the bible. Only the most close minded and insecure Judaism would feel the need to protects its readers from the words of Solomon. Such a mindset places zero belief in its readers abilities.
I can think of few things more radical then censoring the bible.