Posted on 05/12/2022 2:29:52 AM PDT by Kaslin
With a subject like abortion, where people are easily controlled by their passions, it becomes easy to base our opinions on what we “feel” as opposed to logical thinking about the issue. Thousands of years ago, Jewish Sages were dealing with the same issue of when/if/how abortion should be permitted or forbidden. With the national chaos regarding a potential reversal of Roe v. Wade, this ancient wisdom and unique understanding is more valuable than ever.
The ancient Sages were supported by their communities, and so were able to devote great thought about many important issues, including abortion. To understand their conclusions, the entire argument must be followed.
In Judaism, there is a huge importance placed on pro-creation, based on the blessing found in Genesis 1:28 that we “should be fruitful and multiply” that is repeated to Jacob (Gen 35:11). But we also believe that sexuality is not only for pro-creation, but for pleasure based upon the words of Exodus 21:10, “a man must not diminish his wife’s duty of marriage”. It is accepted as far back as 2000 years ago that the obligation to pro-create is upon the man (the commandment is given to men), and not to women.
“The man is required to be fruitful and multiple, but not the woman.” (Mishna Yevamot 6:6). This is a recognition of a woman’s rights, and a man’s responsibility. It is her body, and she should not be forced to make a decision between having children or being celibate. In Judaism, while there is a commandment for pro-creation, there is also a commandment for pleasure, and so no argument can be devised against or for abortion based on human sexuality being used only for the purpose of creation (this is different than many other faiths).
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
Precisely. I should have included the intent part. Thank you for adding it.
Precisely. I should have included the intent part. Thank you for adding it.
“From the time of ancient Sages through the Middle Ages until today, it is a Jewish law that a person has no right to inflict damage upon the human body, even upon himself. We are responsible for every part of our body as a Divine gift. Based on this understanding, since the fetus is considered a “limb” of the mother; abortion by choice is forbidden because it is equivalent to hurting one’s self.”
Likely. And if done by a medical practioner, he would be prosecuted. There is a recognized psychiatric disorder, Body integrity dysphoria, relating to people who wish to remove a limb. I'm not aware of any state, or country, one can go to and have a limb removed as treatment. The fact that Judaism considers a fetus the equivalent of a limb in no way diminishes the prohibition of it's destruction, unless to save the life of the mother.
At the time of the Talmud, aborting a baby was unthinkable and unheard of. So was sex change surgery. It’s like trying to figure out what the Talmud says about cybercrimes. It says plenty about crime, but very little about the Internet.
Nazis arrogated on themselves the question of who and who is not human. The Dredd Scott Court did the same. Roe was something similar.
Communists also claim their enemies are not human, are not people. That makes it easier on their conscience to kill them. Actual science says something else, however. Members of the same species are able to share DNA and to breed. Fetuses share the same DNA as the rest of us and are able to develop into full adult human beings. Science never seems to be on the side of socialists and communists, when you use it correctly.
Stalin once said, “if one man dies, it’s a tragedy. If a million men die, it’s a statistic.” Perhaps he saw the people he killed as human, but he didn’t care.
Wild men, such as Cossacks or Arab Mujahideen, kill in a passion, on a retail level, and when their passion subsides, they stop, perhaps feel remorse. Communists, whether National Socialists or International Socialists, kill wholesale and systematically, and feel no remorse whatever. Whether or not they consider their victims human, they put that aspect out of their mind and deliberately disregard it.
He also said “You can’t make an omelette without breaking eggs”. To Stalin, the death of a few million humans was a necessary evil to accomplish some greater good that never materialized. The very reason communists seem so at peace with themselves while committing mass murder is that they think they are creating some sort of utopian world over the mountains of dead bodies. A utopia where people don’t have free will, where the state rules absolutely, and individual lives don’t matter. This is the preferred style of government which liberals want here.
Even if they don’t outright kill people, like Pol Pot or Hitler, they mis-rule so badly that there is mass starvation, sickness, and suicidal behavior. They’re breaking eggs, but without a frying pan that might make a tolerable omelet. Instead they end up with a slippery, gooey mess.
I don’t know if you can call mass-starvation simply a misruling or unintentional. Stalin’s collectivist policies took all the grain from Russian farmers, even the seed for the next season’s crop, and left them to starve. And when they tried to relocate into cities to beg for food, the military came and moved them back to their farms so they could starve to death. There are so many examples of forced starvation under communism. The grain that they confiscated, by the way, was sold on the international market for the most part. It wasn’t redistributed like is supposed to happen. The great famine in the 1930’s that occurred under Stalin was directly a result of government.
But then of course there were all the other examples of mass murder by communists. I don’t know which method was worse.
My family came from the Volga region of Russia, by the way. They weren’t treated very well.
At least he starved Russians, Georgians and Ukrainians equally. He wasn’t a racist./s
On the other hand, Venezuela is starving its citizens by sheer incompetence.
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.