Will court threaten Jewish view of abortion?

Morning Call ^ | April 25, 2007 | JONATHAN GERARD

[NYer]

Deep into an auspicious night some 2,000 years ago an Israelite woman was near exhaustion and death -- struggling without success to give birth to a baby that would not come. Her husband waited anxiously nearby. The children were with her mother elsewhere in the village. The midwife, herself weary beyond any fatigue she had ever known, tried everything that experts and experience had taught her about enabling a difficult delivery. Nothing succeeded.

The baby's head was too large to pass through the birth canal. It pounded again and again, with each uterine contraction, against the mother's cervix, causing more damage with each blow. Hours went by. More hours still.

As the mother grew more weary and less able to push, depleted of energy and nutrition and sleep, and near death -- the midwife found herself faced with a cruel decision. If she did nothing, or continued to press the fetus' journey forward, the mother would die. The baby might then be extracted alive. Maybe. Or, she could intervene to end the struggle between mother and fetus in a way that would save the mother but tragically kill the fetus.

She was a religious woman and the rabbi lived not too far away. In her moment of desperation she hurried over to his home for counsel. The rabbi listened carefully and considered the options. ''What would God want of us in such a situation?'' he contemplated. Of course he could never be certain of the answer, but he reasoned that if only one could be saved, it should be the life that was more certain of survival. It should be the life that others already depended upon for their own lives. It should be the mother.

[CondorFlight]

“It is interesting that the depths of his knowledge did not turn toward Rebeka (Rivka).”

Do you mean that Jacob and Esau were not just fetuses (feti?)before they were born, but actually PERSONS even while still in the womb? (Thank you for this example.)

But how un-PC!

[mvpel]

Orthodox rabbis also recognize the concept of the “rodesh” - someone pursuing with deadly consequences. It arises from the Talmudic commentary “If someone comes to kill you, arise quickly and kill him first,” on the verse Exodus 22:1.

This is not some newfangled principle of Jewish law dreamed up by a Reform rabbi, it goes back millenia.

[TigersEye]

But the five members of the majority include jurists who have made it clear that they believe the government, and not doctors or clergy, should be the final say in decisions that regulate a woman's body. - Jonathan Gerard is rabbi of Temple Covenant of Peace in Easton.

In the second to last sentence Rabbi Jonathan Gerard tells an outright lie. Nowhere can he find one statement by any of those jurists to support his lie. Nor can he truthfully say that overturning Roe v. Wade (which is what he dishonestly is referring to without the courage to say) would bear out his scurrilous lie.

Abortion was legal in all 50 states prior to Roe v. Wade in cases of danger to the life of the woman.

The government has never superseded the doctor's diagnosis in such a situation and no one has EVER suggested that it would be any different if Roe v. Wade were overturned.

This is no accident of ignorance or naivete. This rabbi intentionally lied for the purpose of defending infanticide.

[VeritatisSplendor]

I am sorry that your post has been misinterpreted and that you have been attacked on this thread.

You are blessed in your assurance of seeing Elizabeth.

Mrs VS

[TigersEye]

Your post #19 is one of the most ignornant, insensitive and arrogant posts I have ever seen on FR.

[Titan Magroyne]

Thank you both for speaking up. #19 left my jaw hanging.

Blessings upon you, PDSE.

[ApplegateRanch]

When two men fight and one inadvertently strikes a pregnant woman standing nearby, causing her to abort her fetus, the guilty person must pay compensation for her loss (Ex 21:22)

Wrong citation; wrong conclussion, once again proving GIGO.

The key word is inadvertently, which applied to any inadvertant (involuntary manslaughter) homicide. This shows that the fetus was afforded 'personhood', and that it was as wrong to kill it, as it was to kill an already born individual.

What the midwife would do was voluntary and premeditated.

[Anti-Bubba182]

There is not a chance that this "Rabbi" is saying anything without the heavy weight of his leftwing ideology.

Rabbi Jonathan Gerard on Google Search

Rabbinic Letter on Torture...

An Open Letter to Prime Minister Sharon of Israel from North American and European Rabbis

Dear Prime Minister Sharon,

We Rabbis, leaders of our communities, longtime Zionists and supporters of Israel, are writing to express our concern and our support for our colleague, Rabbi Arik Ascherman, who is on trial in Jerusalem for trying to prevent the demolition of 2 Palestinian homes....

I did not have to get off the first page of a search. And it is not unusual of Reform Rabbis to be leftwingers.

Reform Judaism is so permissive that it really isn't Judaism. It is a social club where they talk about Judaism and observe as they please AND the Rabbi approves AND Reform Judaism approves.

Under such a situation a Reform Rabbis opinion has no weight because to them the law has no weight. Torah is something to be used to justify doing what you want.

An Orthodox Rabbi would not end with:

"Will the Supreme Court continue to allow Jews to practice our religion with regard to abortion? The 5-4 decision on April 18 keeps this freedom intact. But the five members of the majority include jurists who have made it clear that they believe the government, and not doctors or clergy, should be the final say in decisions that regulate a woman's body. They have a power that I fear they will abuse when given the chance."

This Rabbi was a signatory of a letter from The Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism with a lot of other Reform Rabbis:

Full Text of Letter in Support of the President's Veto of H.R. 1122, with List of Signatories

"..In Support of the President's Veto of H.R. 1122 September 10, 1998

Dear Senator:

We are writing to urge you to vote to sustain President Clinton's veto of H.R. 1122, the so-called "Partial-Birth Abortion" Act of 1997. .."

H.R.1122
Title: To amend title 18, United States Code, to ban partial-birth abortions.

[TigersEye]

Abortion is not about saving women’s lives!

Studies Find Abortions Have Long-Term Effects

45,951,133

Total Abortions since 1973

------------------------------------------------------------

Why the drop after 1960? (in deaths of women from illegal abortions)

The reasons were new and better antibiotics, better surgery and the establishment of intensive care units in hospitals. This was in the face of a rising population. Between 1967 and 1970 sixteen states legalized abortion. In most it was limited, only for rape, incest and severe fetal handicap (life of mother was legal in all states). There were two big exceptions — California in 1967, and New York in 1970 allowed abortion on demand. Now look at the chart carefully.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Abortion Statistics - Decision to Have an Abortion (U.S.)

· 25.5% of women deciding to have an abortion want to postpone childbearing

· 21.3% of women cannot afford a baby

· 14.1% of women have a relationship issue or their partner does not want a child

· 12.2% of women are too young (their parents or others object to the pregnancy)

· 10.8% of women feel a child will disrupt their education or career

· 7.9% of women want no (more) children

· 3.3% of women have an abortion due to a risk to fetal health

2.8% of women have an abortion due to a risk to maternal health

----------------------------------------------------------------------

So how many women’s lives have been saved by abortion?

Only about 3% of abortions since 1972 were reported to be “due to a risk to maternal health.” A reasonable person would recognize that not all of those cases represent a lethal risk. But let’s say they did. That means that nearly 45 million fetuses were butchered to save the lives of about 1.3 million women. Or put another way; 35 babies are killed to save each woman.

Abortion was legal in all 50 states prior to Roe v. Wade in cases of danger to the life of the woman.

Roe v Wade: FULL Text (The Decision that wiped out an entire Generation 33 years ago today)

[ml/nj]

You forget Rachel

There is no indication in the Torah that Rachel had a difficult pregnancy. Obviously she had a difficult second delivery.

ML/NJ

[VeritatisSplendor]

Yes. Although this particular mishnah applies to delivery.

Mrs VS

[Coleus]

.

[Alouette]

The Real View of Judaism

Liberal Jewish organizations brazenly distort Jewish Law to give people the impression that Hashem, our G-d, condones abortion for “choice. Nothing can be further from the truth. G-d created mankind to be fruitful and multiply, and to protect and nurture life, both born and unborn.

Judaism does not believe in the Christian concept of ensoulment, that at the time of conception the soul enters the embryo making that new life equivalent with a born person. In the earliest stages of pregnancy, up to 40 days post-conception, the fetus is considered “mere fluid” (Mishnah Niddah 3:7). However, after 40 days the fetus is considered formed and a woman who miscarries or aborts has to undergo the ritual cleansing process (mikveh) just as she would if a living child were born (Mishnah Kritot 1:3-6). In the Talmud Arakin 7a-b, the passage indicates it is permissible to desecrate the Shabbat to save the life of an unborn child. Further, while a traditional Jew is forbidden from carrying a knife on the Shabbat, a Jewish surgeon may do so, and use it, to save an unborn child’s life.

The passage most often quoted to “prove” Judaism is a pro-choice faith is Exodus 21:21-23. In the verses, should a quarrel ensue between two men during which a pregnant woman is injured and miscarries, a judge shall determine the fine. Should the mother die, however, then the death penalty would be required. This has been interpreted (wrongfully) to mean that the loss of fetal life did not require the death penalty, therefore, the fetus is not considered a human being.

One problem with this interpretation is that fetal death is occurring as the result of an accident, not an abortion. No choice was involved here. Anyone familiar with the Jewish Scriptures knows that the penalty for murder is death, while the penalty for manslaughter is not (See Exodus 21:12-14 - I recommend the Stone edition of the Torah which includes the Rabbinic writings. There are extensive commentaries on these verses).

The Torah is ambiguous when it comes to abortion. There is no direct proscription against it, and there is no commandment “Thou shalt not abort thy children.” That’s because abortion never existed as a choice in Jewish tradition, or in the Jewish community.

There are many passages in the Torah and Haftorah indicating a connection between the unborn child and the adult, a continuum in the life cycle that began prior to birth. Did not He who made me in the womb make them? Did not the same one fashion us in the womb? (Job 31:15). Before I formed you in the womb I knew you; Before you were born I sanctified you: I ordered you a prophet to the nations. (Jeremiah 1:5). There is a preordained destiny that G-d intended for the prophet, crafted even before his birth. Also, the Biblical account of Rebecca’s unusual pregnancy connects fetal life with future events. In Parashas Toldos, the following verses relate the struggle between Jacob and Esau that began in the womb, foreshadowing their future rivalries and the conflicts between two nations:

The children agitated within her, and she said, “If so, why am I thus?” And she went to inquire of Hashem. And Hashem said to her: “Two nations are in your womb; two regimes from your insides shall be separated; the might shall pass from one regime to the other, and the elder shall serve the younger.” (Genesis 25:22-23).

The Stone edition of the Torah provides explanations on the above verses: “Jacob and Esau represented cosmic forces in Creation, forces that transcended the normal course of personality development, and that existed even before birth. Thus, the turmoil within her was due to the irreconcilable conflict between the two nations that was already taking shape.”

From the Soncino Books of the Bible; The Psalms: The entire passage from Psalm 139:13-18 provides intricate details of G-d’s handiwork in human creation. “For thou hast made my reins; (kidneys, internal organs) Thou hast knit me together in my mother’s womb” (v. 13). “My frame (skeleton) was not hidden from Thee, When I was made in secret (in the womb), And curiously wrought (embroidered, referring to the veins and arteries) in the lowest parts of the earth” (v. 15). “Thine eyes did see mine unformed substance (the embryo), And in Thy book they were all written” (v. 16). The Book referred to in Verse 16 is the “doctrine of predestination. G-d has a book in which is recorded against each person, from the embryonic stage, the number of days which would be lived.” (Commentaries and verses from the Soncino Books of the Bible, London: The Soncino Press, 1985, p. 453-454.)

It is clear that Hashem, our G-d, wanted to establish an association between fetal life and the destinies of individuals and events. Why else would so many textual passages continually refer to the unborn child in such detail? G-d could have easily begun the conflict between Jacob and Esau after their birth, yet He chose not to. The Torah portion indicates that the conflict began in Rebecca’s womb. Throughout Scriptural text, there is that same recurring theme of predestination; life before birth ordaining fate.

Our Torah contains 613 written laws. To the layperson simply reading the Scriptures as a book, those commandments can be confusing and make for very frustrating reading. The Torah is silent on many important issues, and is incomprehensible without further study. For example, “Honor thy mother and father.” How does one do that, exactly? The Books of the Oral Laws (the Mishna, Talmud and Midrash) codify the Laws by subject and with rabbinical commentaries, provide a deeper understanding of the Torah’s meaning, and how the Laws should be applied. There is also the Zohar, or Kabbalah (providing mystical interpretations). All these texts studied together provide the student wisdom and guidance into Judaism’s rich religious heritage.

The view of Judaism is that abortion, while not considered murder, should be strongly discouraged. While the fetus is not accorded full human status, it is still considered a developing life with value, that must be protected and saved whenever possible, unless the life of the mother is in danger. In that case, it is permissible to abort the fetus. The Mishnah Oholoth 7:6 along with Rashi’s commentaries in Talmud Sanhedrin 72b make it very clear that the life (and not the ‘choice’ or ‘health’ of the mother) is the only permissible reason for abortion. Had abortion been performed in Rashi’s time for birth control, convenience, or economic reasons there would have been an outcry from rabbis and the religious community and the practice would have been condemned. Under no circumstances should abortion performed for frivolous reasons be given a stamp of approval by rabbis, under the pretext of “health.”

[Alouette]

http://jewsforlife.org/

FReepMail to be added or removed from this pro-Israel/Judaic/Russian Jewry ping list.

Warning! This is a high-volume ping list.

[wideawake]

So both the Mishnah and the Gospel teach that it is unacceptable to injure an unborn child unless the mother's life is in grave danger.

This is not a rabbinical endorsement of late-term abortion on demand.

The Mishnaic dilemma has luckily been made only an historic dilemma for study and no longer a real-life guide to those specific circumstances - the episiotomy was unknown to the Tannaim.

[Lexinom]

Back before the C-Section, maybe this was so. But now there is no reason for an abortion.

Nice to see you back! Hope everything's okay.

[nmh]

Ever hear of a ... forget the term ... I had it done. I had trouble too ... so they gave me an epidural, made an incision and took my daughter out. Both of us did beautifully.

I don’t understand the dilemma here ... my doctor was a devout Jewish woman and she had N|O issue with this.

[nmh]

A C-SECTION!

NO JEW SHOULD HAVE AN ISSUE WITH THIS|!

THIS ARTICLE IS A CROCK OF YOU KNOW WHAT|!

[Cacique]

ping

[Gumdrop]

A totally false conclusion. The court did not decide that they could decide whether a Mom lives or dies or whether Jews could practice their religion. They decided that the Congress of the United States has the power to legislate regarding human lives that are seconds away from being born.