Return to Homepage.
Michael Kadish
Professor Goldstein
ENC 1102
10/28/99
Abortion is one of the most volatile debates today (Delainey). The debate goes back and forth, each side making a claim, the other one disproving the claim, the other one attacking back, to know end. The issues of how infrequently partial birth abortion is performed (Dudley), a pattern of women having abortions developing breast cancer (Wingerter), or the actual dangers of an abortion (Dudley) are argued back and forth, to the extant that I, personally, almost never see anybody swayed by any of the arguments. People, as I have seen, seem to have their answer, and will generally accept studies that will support their position, and dismiss the other sides. It seems the argument is divided along religious lines. The religious are opposed, the more modern generally seem to be pro-choice.
Near the extreme end of the religious spectrum, you have Fundamentalist Christians who have no tolerance for abortion, as can be seen from some of their sermons.
The basis for our moral and spiritual integrity as a nation is gone. As a result, an avalanche of evil, crime, immorality, abortion, alcohol and drug addiction has devastated our country and broken the heart of our Lord. Homes are divided, corruption has sprung up in many places, and dishonesty and greed have destroyed lives (George).
In America, for example, we are witnessing epidemics of crime, drug addiction and alcoholism, pornography, AIDS and venereal disease, abortion, and broken homes and divorce-just to mention some of the serious problems facing our nation (Henry).
In 1869 the Pope said that abortion at any time was murder and other churches began to follow this policy. (Macolm)
The list can go on. By these statements, associating abortion to rape, alcoholism, child abuse, and it seems it must be a foregone conclusion that the bible considers abortion evil with a capital "d." Interestingly, none of the above sites said why or where the bible said it was wrong; it was taken for granted. I did find the list of where the anti-abortion verses are, after an extensive search.
Genesis 25:21. And Isaac prayed to the Lord for his wife, because she was barren; and the Lord granted his prayer, and Rebekah his wife conceived.
Jeremiah 1:5. "Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, and before you were born I consecrated you."
Isaiah 49:1,5. "The Lord hath called me from the womb; from the body of my mother hath he made mention of my name. [He] formed me from the womb to be his servant."
In Psalm 139:13, "For you created my innermost being, you knit me together in my mother's womb."
Ecclesiastes 11:5. "As you do not know how the spirit comes to the bones in the womb of a woman with child, so you do not know the work of God who makes everything."
In Hebrews 7:10 "Levi...was still in the loins of his ancestor"
Luke 1:15. For he [John the Baptist] will be great before the Lord, and he shall drink no wine nor strong drink, and he will be filled with the Holy Spirit, even from his mother's womb.
Luke 1:30. And the angel said to her, "Do not be afraid, Mary, for you have found favor with God. And behold, you will conceive in your womb and bear a son and you shall call his name Jesus."
Galatians 1:15,16. But when he who had set me apart before I was born, and had called me through his grace, was pleased to reveal his son to me...I did not confer with flesh and blood. (McKibbin)
If you notice, nothing says, "abortion," "killing a fetus," "human before birth." Of course, oracles and the bible have been known to be rather vague (Aniyach 91) . The source of these quotes explains the significance of the verses, and leads to the conclusion that since God creates you in the womb, and since God is the one responsible for the conception, that therefore, "Abortion is not permissible before God."
Now, I, being Jewish, am not swayed in the slightest by the last four quotes. All of the ones from the Old Testament still apply however. Nevertheless, there is a very large pro-choice movement amongs religious Jews. It stems from Exodus, or as the Jews call it, Shmot, 21:22-3, which reads, from the Torah,
חי ינצו אנשים ונגפו אשא הרה, ויצאו ילדיה ולא יהיה אסון, ענוש יענש כאשר ישית עיליו בעל האשה ונתן בפללים: ועים אסון יהיה ונתתה נפש תחת נפש
Translated, it says that if two men are fighting, and a woman is inadvertently struck, causing her to lose her child, the men must pay what the husband demands, but if she is injured, then the price is soul for a soul. (The Oral Law tells us that whenever the term "eye for an eye" is used, it is not literal, but the injured party must be compensated for the lack that the injured can now do.)
Understand, and do not diminish, the significance of this line. The woman, when injured, receives more compensation than the fetus. It is clearly established that the fetus is not at the level of an adult. How can anti-abortionist counter this? It must be remembered that when King James wrote his version of the bible, he used the Hebrew version, the Greek translation, the Latin translation, the Germanic translation, and the French translation (Olli 76). The Hebrew version has remained the same. To copy a Torah, each letter must be copied in the exact same size and shape, which sometimes seem deformed (Chtov 428). English bibles are constantly being "updated," sometimes, they claim to go back to get the original translations of the Hebrew, but clearly the original mindset of the Christian translator remains. One translation I have here, reads, "If men who are fighting hit a pregnant and she gives birth prematurely but there is no serious injury...but if there is serious injury..." (Barker ed. 117). There is nothing in the verse that says "Nolad," or birth. The line says the baby leaves her. The actual word does mean "leave." The baby leaves her; she loses the child. There is no instance where the term "leaves the mother" means pregnancy in the bible. Another version I have, is vague. "If men strive, and hurt a woman with child, so that her fruit depart from her [their italics] and yet no mischief follow...and if any mischief follow..."(Thompson Ed. 89) The word mischief seems out of place. "Ason" means danger or injury. But, at least they remain vague, and allow the chance that it could be interpreted in a pro-choice way. The third bible that I am using, phrases it interestingly. "...hit a woman, and she gives birth prematurelye..." and then the "e" footnote at the bottom reads "Or she has a miscarraige."
This does not mean that Jews have abortions at any time. It is not permissible to abort simply because the fetus is the undesired gender (Mashe 345). There is a machloket (an Jewish dispute as to how to set the practice.) On the one side, the abortion can only be performed if the woman's life is in danger, which generally includes even because of other people's reactions. (Anirotz 357). Towards the center, if the baby will only live a painful life, generally used in the case of Tay-Sachs fetuses, abortion is permitted (Epoha 95), or if the baby will be a symbol for resentment, as the product of a rape or incest (Moratip 541). The farthest to the left allows abortion even if the woman will suffer psychologically (Shileg 343).
However, religious Christians continue to refuse to allow the act under any circumstances. Many, or most, religious Christians will say that they do not advocate the abortion center bombings, or shootings, which, fortunately, have been on the decline lately (Dudley). However, if they do believe that it is an act of murder, and that murder should be punished, then it seems questionable to simply assume that they do in some way favor the punishment of the doctors (Amreh 245). Christians are, at times, fighting for their lives over an open issue in the bible. This just may in fact show that perhaps, Jesse Ventura's statement that "religion is for the feeble minded," later clarified to fundamentalists, has a point.
1. Amreh, Matthew. Fundamentalism. Regional Press, Chicago, 1990.
2. Anirotz, Mordechai. Judaism Around Us. Torah Press. New York, 1991.
3. Aniyach, Shlomo. About The Torah. Talmud Press, New York, 1985.
4. Barker, Kenneth ed. The Niv Study Bible. Zondervan Publishing House, Grand Rapids, Michigan. 1995.
5. Barker, Kenneth ed. The Quest Bible New International version Zondervan Co. Grand Rapids, Michigan 1994.
6. Bright, Bill. "Take the Challenge; Experience the Adventure," http://www.ccci.org/10steps/step7/adventure/index.html
7. Chtov, Shaul. Sifriut. Mesorah Press. New York, 1972.
8. Delainey, Gary Delainey. "Betty."http://www.dilbert.com/comics/betty/archive/betty1999016230924.gif.
9. Dudley, Dr. Susan. "Techniques for Later Abortion" http://www.prochoice.org/facts/whatis.htm.
10. Dudley, Dr. Susan. "Abortion Doctor Shootings and Bombings" http://www.prochoice.org/facts/bomb.html
11. Epoha, Thomas. Jewish Medical Issues. Study Press. Manhatten, 1979.
12. George, Thomas "Fasting" http://www.fastingprayer.com/whatisfasting/movement/94.html
13. Henry, Mike "Relationships" http://www.ccci.org/transferable_concepts/experience_love/relationship.html
14. Leonard Malcolm "Abortion" http://www.healthlink.co.za/rra/abpol.htm
15. Mashe, Mark. The Rabbi Says. Relig Publishing, New York. 1986.
16. McKibbin, Mark "Abortion" http://www.icon.co.za/~mckibbin/abortion.htm
17. Moratip, Chaim. Cases. Judaica Press. Brooklyn. 1993.
18. Olli, Michael. Translating. Harper & Row. New York. 1977.
19. Shelig, Rabbi Yoni . "Jewish Law." Jewish Press, New York, 1995.
20. Thompson, Dr. Frank Charles. The Thompson Chain-Reference Bible. B.B. Kirkbride Bible Co., Inc. Indanapolis, Indiana. 1988
21. Wingerter, Ann. "National Right to Life Convention Report" http://www.peopleforlife.org/erieechojuly98.html.