crazylibertarian Loc: Florida by way of New York & Rhode Island

You still didn't address my original point.

Otisimo Loc: Lansing Michigan

Overly ambitious District Attorneys comes to mind immediately! Lawyers are the cause of most of our social issues in this country.

Bad Bob Loc: Virginia

I wasn't invited.

Singularity

I was.

No sane person is ecstatic about the opportunity for an abortion to preclude the further development of a human life in the womb.

If there were no such thing as a "problem pregnancy," there would be no social need to excuse and forgive its termination.

Just as killing an enemy combatant during war is clearly a self-defensive maneuver, precluding the birth of a fetus which poses a risk or problem to the host, is justified as self-defense/homicide (not murder, that is a different legal definition.)

Try this. The woman has the right to stand her ground/uterus and to even use deadly force to protect her bodily inner space from intruders she does not welcome and feel would pose a threat.

I understand that some states extend this right to men in regards to fully born, umbilically detached and completely developed humans whose lives and activities seem to impede their full and free enjoyment of the point in spacetime they have claimed by virtue of their incidental co-existence in that spot at that moment. If the other person is perceived as threatening, they may be legally shot dead on the spot.

So your answer to why there are laws relating to penalties for interference with a WANTED pregnancy, the answer is most likely there is a recognized right for restitution for property of which one has been unlawfully deprived, similar to that described in the Law of Moses. And the laws of several of these United States.

Happishark

I don't know any pro-abortioners. I'm past childbearing age, but, when I was younger, I would never have chosen abortion for myself. I would and did, however, staunchly defend the principle that it's up to each individual woman, and NOT TO THE GOVERNMENT, to decide for herself whether to give birth. Pro-choice is about CHOICE.

I am old enough to remember how grim things were before abortion was legalized. You are naive if you think outlawing abortions will stop them. They will only become more expensive and, for those who can't afford top-of-the-line illegal procedures, much more dangerous. Thousands of women will die, and thousands more will be mutilated. Some babies will be born grievously damaged by abortions that failed. The lives of rape victims, especially pre-teen girls, will be horribly altered. And of course, poor women and women of color--and their families--will suffer the most. That's the way it was, and that's the way it will be once more, if anti-abortion laws are widely adopted.

Again, I respect your conviction that life begins at conception... but if you oppose abortion on moral grounds, please consider ALL the grave consequences that would arise from simply reversing Roe v. Wade, and try to find a more complex and more balanced way to stand up for what you believe while respecting the rights of others to follow their own moral creeds.

Bad Bob Loc: Virginia

Bad Bob Loc: Virginia

Singularity

When a Christian cites moral grounds they are not conceiving the usual moral or ethical thought or weighing of pros and cons. Rather, they accept, endorse and desperately cling to scraps of ancient literature that describes freeze framed stone age moral fundamentals, promises fantastic eternal reward vs obscenely horrific torture to gain their compliance and convince them to never dare trust their own pitiful fallen nature to think of possibly questioning the LORD! Most don't and don't expect to be able to understand morality but see the utility of emotionally driven intellectual capitulation and compliance with the rules..

Bad Bob Loc: Virginia

Boo_Boo Loc: Jellystone

I do not agree.... however, you can believe as you want. I do need to point out that 2 Samuel is not talking about a fetus, but a child that has been born. And that child was the product of adultery.... the King was actually wrong in many ways.... adultery, the cause of the death of Bath-sheba's husband, and he was not repentant. And it seems as if he took the message from Nathan delivered to heart, for he then wrote Psalm 51.... repenting of his "sin." In the end, G*d forgave him and Solomon, the child got well and went on to be a "good king."

Bad Bob Loc: Virginia

Margaret Sanger way ahead of her time.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q4pwJas4En0

Singularity

The Old Testament God does not seem to consider miscarriage to be a fatality, therefore, how could abortion be homicide, an action causing a human fatality? Mosaic Law seems to consistantly view unborn humans as potential but as yet not fully realized humans. Present day Christians seem certain their loving God would be as horrified as they at the thought of dead fetuses and empty wombs.

Do you have insight from your familiarity with Jewish history and culture to add or amplify, or perhaps correct a misapprehension?

Boo_Boo Loc: Jellystone

A miscarriage is natural death of a fetus or embryo and can happen for a variety of reasons. And it still happens even though we have come a long way to protect the lives of both mother and child. It is true, we see an unborn child as a blessing to come. And we do recognize that there are times that an abortion is necessary, if choice is to be made between the life of mother or that of the unborn, the life of the mother is given more weight. The halacha, our law, the fetus is treated like any other "person." One may not deliberately harm a fetus. That is not to say that all rabbinical authorities consider abortion to be murder. The fact that the Torah requires a monetary payment for causing a miscarriage is interpreted by some Rabbis to indicate that abortion is not a capital crime and by others as merely indicating that one is not executed for performing an abortion, even though it is a type of murder. There is even disagreement regarding whether the prohibition of abortion is Biblical or Rabbinic. Nevertheless, it is universally agreed that the fetus will become a full-fledged human being and there must be a very compelling reason to allow for abortion. And the law goes further to say, once any part of the child is delivered "alive" then it is treated as any other person.

It is important to point out that the reason that the life of the fetus, when considering abortion, is subordinate to the mother is because the fetus is the cause of the mother's life-threatening condition, whether directly (e.g. due to toxemia, placenta previa, or breach position) or indirectly (e.g. exacerbation of underlying diabetes, kidney disease, or hypertension). A fetus may not be aborted to save the life of any other person whose life is not directly threatened by the fetus, such as use of fetal organs for transplant.

Anticipating your next question... most Jews do not recognize deformity as an acceptable reason for abortion. And, there is a difference of opinion regarding abortion for adultery or in other cases of impregnation from a relationship with someone Biblically forbidden. In cases of rape and incest, a key issue would be the emotional toll exacted from the mother in carrying the fetus to term. In cases of rape, Rabbi Shlomo Zalman Aurbach allows the woman to use methods which prevent pregnancy after intercourse. The same analysis used in other cases of emotional harm might be applied here. Cases of adultery interject additional considerations into the debate, with rulings ranging from prohibition to it being a mitzvah to abort.

I hope this answers your question on the Jewish view. I can not answer for the Christian insight.... may I suggest that you pose your question to Zemirah, he frequently posts threads in Faith portion of OPP and seems to be an authority on Christian values and understanding of the NT.

Singularity

Your knowledge and insight are appreciated. Thanks for taking your time! And for the suggestion.

Boo_Boo Loc: Jellystone

With much appreciation to Singularity who took the time to send me a message. I stand corrected, I appreciate the correction: "Soloman was a subsequent son conceived and born after Bathsheba had been widowed and remarried to King David. The child conceived by adultery in the opening scenes of the adventure died after about a week of the kings constant prostration and prayers. His ministers marveled that he immediately rose, bathed and requested food upon learning of the sons death, claiming he had done all humanly possible and he trusted his son to his G*d's hands.

The reaction to his disobedient, rebellious son Absolam's death was poignantly different."