Same is true of pro-life liberals, pro-life feminists, pro-life gays and so forth. They're there, but if they don't have their own banner you don't "see" them.
Posted on 04/12/2017 10:58:23 AM PDT by nickcarraway
Reecently at March For Life, an annual rally held in Washington, D.C., I hoped to meet and write about other pro-life Jewish marchers.
The record-setting crowd was thick and palpably upbeat after the election of Donald Trump and his nomination of Neil Gorsuch to the Supreme Court. With Donald Trump’s latest threats to defund the largest abortion provider, Planned Parenthood, unless it ceases performing the procedure, and Gorsuch’s confirmation, those who were present at the March are undoubtedly more energized now.
But ultimately I could not find any other Jewish participants. In fact, after the March I joked to my husband that our two Jewish children probably had the rosary memorized after hearing it recited dozens of times over the course of several hours.
Jews and pro-life Christians don’t necessarily see eye-to-eye on the issue of abortion. The pro-life movement in the United States generally believes life begins at conception, and does not allow for exceptions when the life of the mother is in jeopardy. The Jewish view, taken from many Jewish texts, holds more nuances. The most cited passage on the halacha regarding abortion comes from Tractate Ohalot in the Mishnah:
If a woman is in hard travail, one cuts up the child in her womb and brings it forth member by member, because her life comes before that of [the child]. But if the greater part has proceeded forth, one may not touch it, for one may not set aside one person’s life for that of another.
The Orthodox Jewish view is therefore not pro-life, but not at all pro-choice either, as current federal law governs abortion. The Guttmacher Institute, a nonprofit that conducts reproductive health research, asked women, “Why did you choose to abort?” The most common response: women did not desire to have a child. Far fewer respondents faced health issues. Given that polling, most abortions breaches Jewish law within an Orthodox framework.
A common misconception among those outside the pro-life community is a misunderstanding about what it means to be pro-life. As a pro-life Jewish woman, my goal isn’t changing U.S. law regarding Roe v. Wade, largely because, despite the possible defunding of Planned Parenthood and the nomination of Gorsuch, do I expect it will be altered in my lifetime, even under the current administration.
Any illusions pro-life voters might have been under should have been reevaluated given the news that Ivanka Trump met in secret with the President of Planned Parenthood Cecile Richards. My primary concern, and that of many others involved in pro-life activism, is supporting women so that they bring the babies within them to term to be raised in loving homes, either with their birth mothers or with adoptive parents.
Two pro-life Jewish nonprofit organizations, one in the United States and one in Israel, carry out that noble mission — supporting mothers. In Israel, The Committee For The Rescue of Israel’s Babies (C.R.I.B.-Efrat) calls itself the “real pro-life” organization, because “we allow the woman to make a real choice, based on what she really wants, without social or financial pressure.” C.R.I.B.-Efrat provides new baby kits with linens, clothing, bottles and other necessities to relieve the financial pressure involved with bringing an infant home from the hospital. They also provide medical counseling for those who may have been told to abort because of a medical condition faced by the mother or baby.
A similar U.S. organization, In Shifra’s Arms, connects pregnant women with resources such as counselors and referrals to agencies to assist women with the financial and logistical burden of bringing an unplanned pregnancy to term. These agencies can help provide support for childcare, employment services, and health insurance. In Shifra’s Arms also sends clients free care packages throughout a woman’s pregnancy stocked with maternity clothes and baby supplies to alleviate the financial strain as well.
In a conversation with the Forward Erica Pelman of In Shifra’s Arms explained that the most effective way to support women, and therefore bring more Jewish babies into the world, is to provide emotional, physical and financial support, knowing that the reason most women abort is due to such constraints, not medical ones. Pelman takes great care to fill the organization’s board with both pro-life and pro-choice members for the mission of primarily with supporting pregnant women in need.
At the March for Life this past year, my three-year-old daughter didn’t end up picking up how to say the rosary (thankfully), but she did love the chant recited throughout the March and repeats it still: “We love babies, how about you?” My daughter had no idea why we were there; she was merely along for the ride, under the impression the “parade” (as we called it) was a celebration for her new baby sibling coming at the end of April. She learned that our family loves babies; and by supporting C.R.I.B.-Efrat and In Shifra’s Arms, both financially and ideologically, as a pro-life Jewish family we try to bring as many of them to term by supporting their mothers as well.
Read more: http://forward.com/opinion/368694/what-does-it-mean-to-be-jewish-and-pro-life/
It means you’ve got your head screwed on straight and you’ve got at least half a brain inside that head.
Isnt abortion legal in Israel??
What Does It Mean To Be Jewish And Worship Moloch?
Israel has a secular government, very divided, much like the USA.
I am not quite sure the article got the nuance of the Jewish law on abortion, as I understand it.
Basically, abortion is only permitted if continuing the pregnancy will almost certainly end in the death of the mother and child, e.g., an ectopic pregnancy.
I’m a pro-life Catholic, and I am not sure there is any disagreement with the Church’s position.
yeah, 40 years in 2016.
Judaism is pro- life (allowing abortions only if medically necessary to save the mother’s life, a fortunately quite rare situation nowadays **). The title is redundant. “I call heaven and earth to witness against you this day, that I have set before thee life and death, the blessing and the curse; therefore choose life, that thou mayest live, thou and thy seed;” Deuteronomy 30:19. “Jews” who favor abortions on demand are no more Jewish than Nancy Pelosi is Catholic. ** ps: since the soul is understood to enter the body at day 40, some Jews will allow for abortions before then for other reasons. So, Judaism can be seen as almost as completely pro- life as the Church, and traditional rabbis work with priests trying to fight against abortion “clinics”. Believing Jews look upon pro- abortion JINOs with great regret or grief and even disdain, just as good believing Catholics look upon the Pelosi types
“If a woman is in hard travail” you can have a C-section so murdering a pre-born should be illegal.
You apparently don't know the Church's teaching on ectopic pregnancy. Look up the concept of double effect. In an ectopic pregnancy, both the mother and child would die. The Church teaches it's acceptable to unwrap the umbilical cord, to rectify that, even though it would probably result in the death of the baby. But that's still different than going in with the express purpose of killing the baby. One is intentionally trying to kill the baby, one is trying to correct a problem, which may have an unfortunate consequence.
However, in situations where both mother and baby are in lethal risk, and the baby's life literally cannot be saved (e.g. uterine cancer detected during early pregnancy) the doctor is justified in focusing on the mother's life, since that which is impossible cannot be morally obligatory (saving the baby, in this case).
You still cannot directly and deliberately kill the baby. But if, in the course of the legitimate therapeutic treatment of the mother (e.g. hysterectomy of cancerous uterus) the baby dies as a "double" (not intended) effect, that can be sadly accepted as the unavoidable reality of the situation.
On the other hand, if it was LATE in the pregnancy and both the mother and the baby COULD be saved, that's different: in that case, you are obliged to actively try to save both.
It is a treatment of a diseased fallopian tube.
If in the course of this treatment the baby dies, that's a baby-death but it's not an abortion. It's a (predictable) side-effect of removing a diseased fallopian tube, in a situation where in any case the baby cannot be saved.
Same is true of pro-life liberals, pro-life feminists, pro-life gays and so forth. They're there, but if they don't have their own banner you don't "see" them.
The Catholic Church does NOT teach that the “life of the mother takes precedence,” in part because that is meaningless.
What the Catholic Church teaches is that no innocent person may ever be directly attacked. I.e., it is never permissible to kill an innocent person AS A MEANS of saving another person.
A pregnant woman MAY undergo some life-saving treatment even if the death of her baby is a foreseeable side-effect.
Given the Jewish teaching at issue being written in the early Iron Age, I don’t think those fine of lines were being drawn.
I am a bit confused about your comment about “unwrap[ing] the umbilical cord.” An ectopic pregnancy does not involve the umbilical cord being wrapped around anything.
The baby has implanted in (generally) the fallopian tube. The cord is thus attached in the wrong place. It’s not necessarily wrapped around anything.
It’s a serious thing and almost always results in the death of the baby. I think with modern technology, there about been about 3-4 live births in the world from women who have elected to continue with an ectopic pregnancy, and many deaths of mothers.
Modern archaeology suggests that the canaanite practice of child sacrifice served the double purpose of serving their damned gods while also being a primitive form of birth control. Why birth control? Climate change. Sometimes the rains failed to come for a long time. People died of starvation. Witness the way Jacob was driven out of the land by drought. Or Elijah contended with the baal priests to bring rain after a long drought.
The "Orthodox Jewish view" is the topic as correctly interpreted via Divine Law, rather than the humanistic reasoning of either the liberal or Catholic (assuming there's still a difference now) positions.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.