February 23, 2020 3:52 pm at 3:52 pm #1834633
Evidence that what?
THAT YOU HAVE NO clue what the discussion is aboutFebruary 23, 2020 4:14 pm at 4:14 pm #1834634
and you wont tell me where we argue
we argue on what r eliezer meantFebruary 23, 2020 4:14 pm at 4:14 pm #1834635
you exaggerated and didn’t mean what you said?
im to lazy to scroll back through my comments
care to pinpoint what you mean?February 23, 2020 4:15 pm at 4:15 pm #1834636
By the way you know what the Torah does approve of? Death penalty.”
does it though?YES
do you cal the government that kills more than once in 70 years a חובלנית ?YESFebruary 23, 2020 4:15 pm at 4:15 pm #1834637
משנה תורה, הלכות מלכים ומלחמות ט׳:ד׳
(ד) בן נח שהרג נפש אפילו עובר במעי אמו נהרג עליו וכן אם הרג טריפה או שכפתו ונתנו לפי ארי או שהניחו ברעב עד שמת הואיל והמית מכל מקום נהרג וכן אם הרג רודף שיכול להצילו באחד מאיבריו נהרג עליו מה שאין כן בישראל.February 23, 2020 4:18 pm at 4:18 pm #1834680
“that the question was how they can support the **** democrat position ***** on abortion”
Because it is more in line with halacha than the Republican one.
t he republicans would limit all cases unless the woman’s life was at risk (Of course it depend which republican some would not even allow that, which is a reasonable approach if you beleive, unlike halacha that life begins at conception., we never kill one to save another, why woul fetal life be different. Of course Hlacha has no such problem because we don’t believe life begins at conception) .
Democrats allow all abortions .
Halacha demands each case be judged individually .
Thus in practice this is closer to the Democrat position.
“start with this one Death penalty – well it doesnt deter crime, One of my all time favorite arguments.
Does prison time deter crime? Do fines deter crime?”
Sure I’m sorry I skipped it, Death penalty isnt the topic of this thread, and I’m not sure how I feel about it (I brought it up in passing to make a point that (I thought) was an obvious exaggeration . Of course Republicans don’t actually choose their positions based on what results in more dead bodies (though it does feel that way sometimes)
But since you asked: There are many studies showing the death penalty doesnt deter crime , I am not sure about prison or fines (it seems fines do deter crime I would speed more if not for fear of fine). Keep in mind when we say deter crime it means as opposed to prison not as opposed to no consequence so listing them in succession doesn’t make a whole lot of sense , when you say “Do fines deter crime” as opposed to what? as opposed to nothing? I’m not sure that needs a study. when we say Does the deat hpenalty deter crime, it isnt as opposed to nothing it is as opposed to life in prison. . That said I’m not convinced detering crime is the sole reason to punish criminals.
“Ubiq: That’s absolutely false and a gross misrepresentation.”
I’m sorry which part did I get wrong?
In the past you said
“If halacha allows but doesn’t require abortion (which I agree with Avram is a very rare case), then if the secular law prohibits abortion in that case (which is also very unlikely as any new abortion restrictions will likely be far less restrictive than halacha) she shouldn’t get an abortion. There’s no conflict in such a case between halacha and secular law as not getting an abortion violates neither.”February 23, 2020 5:38 pm at 5:38 pm #1834686
“so you were not following the conversation because you didnt even know what it was about”
I made an isolated comment to Joseph, beleive it or not, I didnt think it would explode into this confused back and forth. (sure I expected some back and forth, but my position is quite clear (even if it wasnt at first) and you sTILL dont seem to get it. as evidenced by:
“Reb Eliezer, I’m really shocked that you support ALL abortion being legal.”” WHEN TAKEN IN CONTEXT”
how are you still this confused. That isnt some mystery you uncovered. Yes thats what RE said,
and I stand by that. I support all abortions being legal . (note legal does not equal moral)
My reason for this is : Because the Torah allows abortions (in extenuating circumstances) incuding cases that the lehavdi Catholic church l, and most Republicans wouldn’t
Thus I support all abortions being legal.
Ive been quite clear on this several times.
I even outlined it step by step
you seem to think you “got me” by exposing some hidden context that I missed. Yes RE supports all Abortions being legal. THAT was what I commented on.
“THAT YOU HAVE NO clue what the discussion is about”
“we argue on what r eliezer meant”
That isnt relevent to my point (as Ive said ) and I’m not arguing on that at all (unless he meant he supports their getting the abortions not their abortions being legal, but I dont think thats what he meant)
“you exaggerated and didn’t mean what you said? im to lazy to scroll back through my comments
care to pinpoint what you mean?”
Yes. In the other thread. you said Democrats support “infanticide” when I called you out on this. you ddint say you exaggerated you doubled down, Then after several back and forths said it wasnt actually true .February 23, 2020 5:39 pm at 5:39 pm #1834692JosephParticipant
Ubiq: I take exception to your description that my definition of life at risk differs from Halacha. Furthermore, as I’ve said in our previous conversations, if there was a ban on abortion with a libral exception for life being at risk that more than covered any halachic exception permitting abortion, you still would oppose the ban abortion despite it allowing it in all cases where Halacha allows it. That demonstrates that your support for abortion-on-demand being legal is not based on any worry about Halacha.February 23, 2020 5:41 pm at 5:41 pm #1834695
Death penalty isnt the topic of this thread,
Right neither was halachic abortions. But your the proponent of zeroing in on single lines and talking about them so I’m not sure what your issue is here
(I brought it up in passing to make a point that (I thought) was an obvious exaggeration .
Now your saying exaggeration is OK?
Your changing your position?
Do you believe in do as I say not as I do?
Cause all the issues you had with what I wrote you seem to have no issue admitting you didFebruary 23, 2020 6:17 pm at 6:17 pm #1834707
“I take exception to your description that my definition of life at risk differs from Halacha”
Got it. Oh obviously. But the gist of my characterization of your view was correct.
in the second half of my post I worded it more parave.
“So the question becomes should a woman who wants an abortion (with her Rav’s allowance) be able to get one.
I say yes – The Torah allows it (I consider the Tzitz eleiezer Torah, and a woman who follows her Rav’s pesak is acting properly. Eve though obviously others will get unsanctioned (halachicly) abortions. I say thats not our problem.
he says those cases never happen, it isnt clear that we hold like those poskim (R’ Moshe argues), and even if do are sufficiently rare that the number of unjustly aborted fetuses far outweigh that concern. (Again Joseph apologies if I’m misrepresenting your view) .”
Is that a fairer representation?
“if there was a ban on abortion with a libral exception for life being at risk that more than covered any halachic exception permitting abortion, you still would oppose the ban abortion despite it allowing it in all cases where Halacha”
Of course not. I’d fully support such a ban. I just don’t see how it can be formulated.
“Now your saying exaggeration is OK?”
Exaggeration is absolutly ok.
but if we went back and forth for several posts with me arguing that Republicans only support the death penalty becasue it doesn’t deter crime, and then saying ok I was just exaggerating.
It would still be ok, but its more frustrating and confusing.
do you see the difference?February 23, 2020 7:28 pm at 7:28 pm #1834741
No. Not really
But either way, I didn’t back off my contention that they support infanticide, and someone helpfully supplied the source.
All I clarified, is that it was necessary for my point.
Your point, while at least now I know perhaps what you are trying to say, is a difficult one to understand.
We have the Torah which allows abortion in limited cases. (irrelevant what they are)
The democrat party which allows abortion on demand, certainly including cases where the Torah does not allow, and see the Rambam I brought before, a גוי חייב מיתה for preforming an abortion not allowed by the Torah
The republican party which according to you (I won’t quibble on that, I’ll grant it blindly) only allows abortion in cases of danger to the mothers life. Something which obviously the Torah allows, but outlawing many cases that the Torah allows.
Which position is more in line with the Torah?
I think it’s a no brainer
The republican position is totally in line. For גוים are required to create דינים. I’m not Aware that they are required to create laws that mimic the Torah.
However they clearly are not allowed to create laws that violate the Torah meaning the 7 מצוות one of which is murder. Which according to the Rambam I brought, unlawful abortion is.
So no. A Torah abiding Jew cannot support the democrat position on abortionFebruary 23, 2020 7:46 pm at 7:46 pm #1834753
“and someone helpfully supplied the source.”
no nobody did. The source supplied id not at all refer to infaticide
“”Which position is more in line with the Torah?
I think it’s a no brainer The republican position is totally in line. For גוים are required to create דינים. I’m not Aware that they are required to create laws that mimic the Torah.”
Totally if goyim knew what was good for them they would ban abortion. If I recall correctly, (at least according to some) for goyim even to save mother’s life it isnt allowed ,
But my primary concern isnt for goyim. what they do is only my concern as far as how it affects us. And since frum people, (by definition) only get an abortion with their Rav’s approval. It is to OUR (not their) advantage to have a more permissive stance on abortion in place than one the Republicans would adoptFebruary 23, 2020 9:15 pm at 9:15 pm #1834773
and someone helpfully supplied the source.”
no nobody did. The source supplied id not at all refer to infaticide
Yes actually it did. You misread it at the time, based on you comment after but I dido bother to correct you.
It said, they would resuscitate the child, and then allow the parents time to decide whether to kill it or not.
In other words, give the parents the option to kill a live baby who was born a short while ago.
As per the article, time frame not established.
That’s murder. Pure and simple. Of an infant.
Or in a single word, infanticide.
It’s what I was referring to, it’s documented, and it’s on the wish list of the more radical fringe of the democrat party, which if history is any guide, means In a few years it will be mainstream democrat party platform.
Democrats the party of murder and infanticide. It’s what I said, it’s what I meant ,and I still stand by it. All I said no the other thread is that if your getting sidetracked from my main point there, then remove infanticide from the discussion, as it’s unnecessary for my point.
I never backed off, I never changed my mind,February 23, 2020 9:15 pm at 9:15 pm #1834774
And since frum people, (by definition) only get an abortion with their Rav’s approval. It is to OUR (not their) advantage to have a more permissive stance on abortion in place than one the Republicans would adopt
No. It’s not to our benefit to have a government that condones and even glorifies murder.
It’s bad for us and for the society we live in.
Even in cases such as severe fetal complications, where it would be allowed in halacha it’s not mandated. So if our host country outlawed it, we would deal with it. If they disallowed it even in cases of danger to the mothers life, we would have an issue, but ultimately we would ignore it. However I don’t believe that is the case anyway.
In the democrat utopia, however they condone murder.
That is never good for us. And it’s unnecessary.
I completely disagree with youFebruary 24, 2020 12:09 am at 12:09 am #1834798
“It said, they would resuscitate the child, and then allow the parents time to decide whether to kill it or not.”
No it didn’t.
He said what currently happens in every hospital. The situation he described is routine and not controversial.
“I never backed off, I never changed my mind,”
Apologies for giving you credit where it wasn’t due.
“That is never good for us. And it’s unnecessary.
I completely disagree with you”
That’s fine. You’re not the first, and I don’t hope to change your mind
Hopefully though now you see where my comment fit in. I’m sorry if it wasn’t clear at first.February 24, 2020 6:55 am at 6:55 am #1834850
The following is a clarification from that governers office
Northam’s office said in a statement on Wednesday that his comments were taken out of context and that Republicans “are trying to play politics with women’s health.”
“No woman seeks a third trimester abortion except in the case of tragic or difficult circumstances, such as a nonviable pregnancy or in the event of severe fetal abnormalities, *************/and the governor’s comments were limited to the actions physicians would take in the event that a woman in those circumstances went into labor,************×********” Ofirah Yheskel, Northam’s spokesperson, wrote in the statement.
So he is talking about a woman who wanted a third trimester abortion, ולא הספיק השעה
So they would birth the baby
(now it’s no longer a fetus)
(now it’s a live baby)
And let the absents decide if they should keep it or kill it
And you (I never claimed this) claim this takes place daily in hospitals.
So you are actually claiming that the democrat party does infanticide.!
I only claimed they support the idea
But hey, I’ll take help from all quarters.
And of course this is good for Jews because it’s more in line with the Torah.
Uh huhFebruary 24, 2020 6:56 am at 6:56 am #1834845
Yes and you could have made it clear right from the start had you just responded to what I wroteFebruary 24, 2020 11:31 am at 11:31 am #1834916
“The following is a clarification from that governers office”
I didn’t need clarification I understood what he meant I work in hospitals and as I said what he describes occurs regularly and isnt controversial neither legally nor le\havdil halachicly. Though its not something lay people think about
first a few quick facts.
A. When a baby with “severe fetal abnormalities” for example anencephaly is born it cannot live very long. NO posek requires the baby to be resuscitated. Of course it cant be killed actively but not a single posek requires the baby to be resuscitated.
with me so far?
B. Now does that mean it can be aborted slightly before birth?
Halchicly not neccesarily (and in fact I dont believe ANY posek would allow such an abortion to take place. Even the Tzitz Eleizer who allows abortions for non-viable fetuses doesnt allow it all the way through pregnancy.
C. Again this does not mean once born they need to be (or even should be) resuscitated. Rather they can be kept comfortable until their inevitable passing rch”l .
Still with me?
The above 3 points are not controversial and shouldnt cause too much trouble
This part is a bit controversial, and is where it gets confusing. So halt kup.
D. to a secular ethicist , IF the fetus can be delivered and be allowed to die on its own. Why put the woman through the agony of delivery just abort it. The vast majority of late term abortions are of this nature.
Now Halacha would make a distinction as one is beyadayim and the other isn’t This is what he was clumsily trying to say
BUT regardless, before it is born it is a fetus and thus not “infanticide” So even these late term abortions, are by definition not infanticide. (infant = after birth)
But obviously they do serve to create “excitement” an abortion at 9 months sounds terrible (and it is) how can we (society not halacha) allow that? your aborting a full term Fetus! how can third trimester abortions ever be justified
now to the governor’s quote:
““[Third trimester abortions are] done in cases where there may be severe deformities. There may be a fetus that’s nonviable. So in this particular example, if a mother is in labor, I can tell you exactly what would happen,” Northam, a pediatric neurosurgeon, told Washington radio station WTOP. “The infant would be delivered. The infant would be kept comfortable. The infant would be resuscitated if that’s what the mother and the family desired. And then a discussion would ensue between the physicians and the mother.”
On to your post:
“So he is talking about a woman who wanted a third trimester abortion, ולא הספיק השעה So they would birth the baby (now it’s no longer a fetus)”
” Resuscitate it (now it’s a live baby)”
And let the absents decide if they should keep it or kill it (murder, infanticide)”
no not kill it, these are babies who die on their own . They are ” nonviable ” so we resuciitate it once or twisce and let the parent say goodbye and then “a discussion would ensue between the physicians and the mother”
As to how much longer to keep resuscitating
“And you claim this takes place daily in hospitals.”
Yes for babies not so often (though in the country im sure its daily lo aleinu). For adults its dozens of times daily in every hospital. A patient is resuscitated then “a discussion would ensue between the physicians and the family ” at what point to stop resuscitation.
No posek requires endless rounds of resuscitation in any case not for adults nor for children,
.February 24, 2020 1:05 pm at 1:05 pm #1834968
Ubiq I’ll grant you this.
If your rendition is correct, I agree with your contention that this is no big dealFebruary 26, 2020 1:01 pm at 1:01 pm #1835679Avram in MDParticipant
Ubiquitin and I had our own lengthy back and forth in this parallel thread a while back: https://www.theyeshivaworld.com/coffeeroom/topic/halachically-okay-to-be-liberal. אֵין כָּל-חָדָשׁ, תַּחַת הַשָּׁמֶשׁ so I’ll try not to rehash what’s already been discussed ad nauseam in both threads. Reading through this one provoked a few thoughts.
I really don’t like the “unlimited abortion on demand should be kept because otherwise poor people will do it unsafely” argument. Although I disagree with ubiquitin, he attempts to justify his position from a Torah standpoint. This argument, however, does not come from the Torah, but the horrible state of affairs in American culture. People are pushed towards abortion due to a combination of economic and cultural factors. If someone has an unplanned pregnancy, their local Planned Parenthood or college health center will help them… if they choose abortion. But prenatal care? Ha! Good one. Tell me, is that truly “choice”? Is that pro-woman and pro-family? And I blame both Republicans and Democrats.
For Republicans, who cares how much it costs, or whether someone undeserving benefits, if programs that help make having a baby no longer a “burden” can eliminate economics as an abortion pressure? A big part of what the conservative -funded crisis pregnancy centers do for women is help them to navigate the red tape to get benefits such as Medicaid and WIC. Why cut those programs? In my perfect world, prenatal and maternal care would be free, paid parental leave would be a given, and if Republicans and Democrats want to fight over child care benefits vs tax credits for stay-at-home parenting, fine. Having a baby should be a blessing, not an “oh no, how are we going to do this?”
As for Democrats? Where to even begin? Before 2016, the Democratic Party Platform stated that abortion should be “legal, safe, and rare.” In 2016? They dropped the “rare.” Buttigieg and Sanders have essentially stated that pro-life Democrats are unwelcome in the tent, even though Democratic supported programs could be touted as pro-life to win back the heartland. There is a cultural push from the left to put abortion on a pedestal. Women who have abortions with no regrets are praised and featured in media stories. Women who feel regret or sadness are somehow broken, wrong, victims of right wing propaganda. The secular culture surrounding us is shifting to a place where it could very soon be considered morally wrong, CV”S, to prolong the life of sick elders or to allow the birth of children with potential disabilities or to parents without means.
These things – cutting or deriding programs that make it economically feasible for people to have children in an urban/suburban society that make children expensive, while removing morality from the culture and making abortion, assisted suicide, etc. into virtues, work in tandem. A pox on both houses, I say.February 26, 2020 4:16 pm at 4:16 pm #1835737
“I really don’t like the “unlimited abortion on demand should be kept because otherwise poor people will do it unsafely” argument.”
I don’t love it either (as I indicated in reply #1834444 “Even if illegal sInce most people feel pressured to do it, they have a pressing reason (not prom dress) they will get it done anyway (I’m not sure how convincing I find this argument), but it has some merit)”
I do like, and agree with your excellent comment, thanks for weighing in.
thanks for comment tooFebruary 27, 2020 10:59 am at 10:59 am #1835969
For your own sake you really should do some introspection about your views of abortion and what the Torah says about it. Instead of becoming a pretzel in trying to say how the Torah is in an agreement with abortion maybe it would behoove you to actually ask a Frum Rov about abortion and live your life with the Torah actually coming before your political beliefs not afterwards.February 27, 2020 1:13 pm at 1:13 pm #1836026
“For your own sake you really should do some introspection about your views of abortion and what the Torah says about it.”
Oh of course, all the time. I do outrospection too, hence my time here
“maybe it would behoove you to actually ask a Frum Rov about abortion”
Sure have and sadly I know of several woman who have asked as well, halacha lemaisahFebruary 27, 2020 1:41 pm at 1:41 pm #1836050February 27, 2020 5:04 pm at 5:04 pm #1836107
“I call your bluff. Name the Rov and what he said.”
I’m not sure by “what he said” he, excuse me THEY allowed (in some cases encouraged) abortion to proceed) Who doesnt matter, at thsi time If it rch”l comes up speak to a frum OB and he or she will guide you.
Until then tell yourself that it never comes up in our community, that everybody is pure nobody makes mistakes with life destroying consequences, no marriages are strained by bad news during pregnancy and I’m making it all up just so I can continue abortions on demand (as If my discussion here is of any practical consequence)February 27, 2020 7:34 pm at 7:34 pm #1836162
I do not believe you that you personally know a Rov that actually said to ever get an abortion (even for the life of the mother which everyone agrees which would be allowed but its so rare in today times).
I’f you can’t NAME a Rov that agrees with the Mudnah pretzel Torah you are saying then it means nothing. We as frum people take a queues from this Dor Rabbanim say and not from personal asinine interpretations of what achroninum or rishonim say.February 27, 2020 7:54 pm at 7:54 pm #1836183
נו נו ברכה והצלחהFebruary 27, 2020 9:44 pm at 9:44 pm #1836195JosephParticipant
Ubiq: What were the underlying reason the Rov(s) permitted the abortion(s)? Why did the parents want the abortions?February 28, 2020 12:52 am at 12:52 am #1836206
You חברה are barking up the wrong tree here.
I personally know a specific case where a prominent rav told a pregnant teenager to abort. Granted it was around the empty day mark. But In dealing with that one specific instance I learned that unfortunately this is way more common than we would like it to be.
And I don’t usually deal with these issues.
So your not going to make any points by questioning the generality of abortion taking place in our communities with heterim.
It’s the idea that abortion wherever, whenever, for whatever reason, is more in line with Torah View, than , strict only in life threatened cases ,allowed, that doesn’t sit well with me.
Neither match. One allows murder. The other outlaws what should be permitted.
I believe דינים allows them to be more מחמיר than the Torah. Not more lenient.
Ubiq seems to disagreeFebruary 28, 2020 7:35 am at 7:35 am #1836227
“But In dealing with that one specific instance I learned that unfortunately this is way more common than we would like it to be.”
Well said, and obviously this is not something that would ever be advertised. We B”h have a large community and are growing. Unfortunately that means very rare problems become more common in the aggregate.
These problems include rape, and teenagers crossing the line.
“What were the underlying reason the Rov(s) permitted the abortion(s)? Why did the parents want the abortions?”
The reason the these heterim were given was combination of it being less than 40 days (“maya bealma”) with the fact that their lives would be destroyed potential resulting in physical harm to them . I don’t know of any case past 25 weeks. Most of the cases between 40 days and 25 weeks involved families with a lot odf children at home carrying a child that could not live too long , would put a big psychological strain on the mother.
If you say they are rare enough that allowing the millions of abortions to take place is not a price worth paying, I hear but I disagree.
If you say that the law can be crafted in a way to allow these exceptions, I don’t really hear that but I see why someone might think so.
but to argue that these things don’t exist in our community, doesnt make sense and won’t make them go away.
“I believe דינים allows them to be more מחמיר than the Torah. Not more lenient.
Ubiq seems to disagree”
Thats not my disagreement. I never said they are allowed to abort, I say thats not our (primary) concern.
And I’m not saying it “sits well with me” either.March 1, 2020 8:23 am at 8:23 am #1836444interjectionParticipant
Ben Shapiro recently featured a girl on tiktok who is, presumably, going to get her 2nd abortion and she is dancing and thinks it’s a party. Seeing her reaction to getting the abortion is creepy at best.
Many pregnancies before 40 weeks can be ended with a pill and dont need an actual procedure.
You would think that when creating the laws prohibiting abortions, the lawmakers would put in exceptions that would make it legal in extenuating circumstances.
The reason “no-questions-asked abortion” was made legal is not because its racist to make it illegal given that rich people will do it anyway (yes, the claim was made that it is a racist law.) The reason it was made legal is because ‘women are emancipated and empowered and dont need to be tied down anymore’. Its because the feminist movement is actually anti femininity and anti humanity. They’re not thinking about the few cases where a life may be in danger (whether because of a physical issue or mental one). They want abortion available, no questions asked because since men can be pigs by st as rting a pregnancy and then walking away, they think women should be offered the same freedom. If our elected officials had any guts, they would stand up to the lobbyists and make a law that protects life and morality while it makes exceptions for those that need it.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.