|
fiat_lux -> RE: Abortion-Pro life or Pro-Choice? (6/15/2008 6:44:29 PM)
|
quote:
Even the Old Testament speaks to harming a fetus and causing a miscarriage (abortion);
(Exo 21:22) If men strive, and hurt a woman with child, so that her fruit depart from her, and yet no mischief follow: he shall be surely punished, according as the woman's husband will lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine.
(Exo 21:23) And if any mischief follow, then thou shalt give life for life,
(Exo 21:24) Eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot,
Since no age is listed for the fetus that is harmed; I presume that it is from consception or very close to it.
That verse doesn't actually seem to speak to abortion, despite the interpretation you've placed on it. I'm not sure what the KJV means by "mischief" and verse 25 continues your list with "burn for burn, wound for wound, stripe for stripe," which seems to imply we're dealing with something other than harm to the fetus here. Later translations are explicit in writing of a "miscarriage," which would seem to imply the death of the fetus (for which there is a fine) plus any harm to others, probably the woman (for which the punishment is eye for eye, etc.).
I admit I'm not entirely sure of the specific Hebrew words involved here but this doesn't seem to apply to what we call abortion today. Indeed, there's other verses in the Old Testament law which would seem, for example, to imply forced miscarriages as part of the test for adultery. Moreover (and I'm a little less certain here), it would almost seem possible to interpret this verse in the other direction, suggesting that fetuses are described as less valuable life than others, since for their loss there is only a fine imposed rather than the larger "eye for eye" law.
To this end, and strikingly given this discussion, this would appear to be the only instance in the law in which the deliberate loss of a fetus calls for any punishment at all - and in this case, it isn't even described explicitly as falling under the penalty of "murder," the way we routinely call abortion today. God doesn't seem to have wanted a crystal-clear set of rules on the unborn child in the Bible, or you'd think this set of verses would cover a variety of other possibilities for deliberate unborn deaths. Indeed, this rule seems to refer only to accidents which occur in the course of a fight.
Later on, in Numbers 5, there's even a prescribed religious test for adultery which would seem to imply a miscarriage, if the adultery has resulted in pregnancy.
quote:
Abortion is a stirring up some monsterous trouble, the upcoming election and such. I have a few very important things I need to to state, to start. Teenagers have every right, even more a right than adults (I'm 23, by the way) because they are usually the ones who get pregnant and want an abortion. They don't have a career, and for some girls, if they got pregnant, they would be kicked out of their home forever. I know their are shelters and stuff, but that woun't get them into college. After they have the baby and it's taken away from them, their kicked out on the streets again.
This is also a great injustice which should not be permitted.
quote:
Men, you can NEVER get pregnant, you will NEVER know what's it's like to be a woman, and you WILL NEVER be able\have to get an abortion, so stop throwing yourselves at the issue. As a matter of fact, I don't think men should have a say.
You're right. There are some problems forming rapid moral judgements on an experience which one cannot ever have firsthand.
Nevertheless, I hope you'll appreciate that from the perspective of many of the people challenging you here, that can't matter. As soon as you draw a line and say "human life begins here," whether that line is at conception or at birth or at some other point, it becomes morally necessary to try to preserve human life from that point forward. The fact that one can't experience a problem firsthand doesn't really alter that fact.
|
|
|
|