Are The Democrats Wanton Baby-Killers?

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by Luke

The point of the trial was not to abort but rather determine guilt IF a baby ever died as a result of this trial it was not the purpose or intention this trial centered on the woman and her choice. Abortion centers on a baby who made no choice and is guilty of no sin.

The express intent of the trial was clearly threefold: to determine guilt, terminate illegitimate seed, and to render the wife barren for life as punishment.

God would not allow for a trial to determine guilt that accidently killed the innocent. God makes no mistakes. The very design of the trial implies the termination of any illegitimate seed should it be present.

Please understand, not only does this set a very high standard against illegitimacy. In the social structure of ancient Israel, it would protect inheritance rights from being claimed by illegitimate children. Thereby protecting inheritance and family wealth from being siphoned off by children who were not sired by the father.

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by Luke

According to the text there was no intentional killing of an unborn child.

There need not be any specific reference. The trial essentially "nuked" the womb of an unfaithful woman. The implication is obvious.

[Aquila]

It should also be noted that the phrase: "make your womb swell and your thigh fall away", is also translated: "cause you to be barren and have a miscarrying womb". The very meaning behind the evasive synonym of the Hebrew language stipulates that a "miscarrying womb" was part of the intent, if the woman was indeed unfaithful.

So, it can be argued that in the OT a husband had full right to subject an unfaithful wife to an ordeal that would not only determine guilt... but would also terminate any illegitimate pregnancy and render the unfaithful wife barren for life. In essence, the Law of Moses grants a husband the right to choose with regards to the illegitimate pregnancy of an unfaithful wife.

Yes, this is brutal, bloody, dark, and tragic. But this was part of the wages of sin under the Law.

[Luke]

The specific point of the trial was to deteremin the womans guilt and deal with it if it were found to be true. Anything else was an unfortunate side effect.

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by Luke

The specific point of the trial was to deteremin the womans guilt and deal with it if it were found to be true. Anything else was an unfortunate side effect.

Again...

.... the very wording, "make your womb swell and your thigh fall away", is also translated: "cause you to be barren and have a miscarrying womb". The meaning behind this evasive synonym of the Hebrew language stipulates that a "miscarrying womb" was part of the intent, if the woman was unfaithful. Please note, the Hebrew is present tense. Therefore, it speaks of immediate miscarriage.

So, it can be argued that in the OT a husband had full right to subject an unfaithful wife to an ordeal that would not only determine guilt... but would also terminate any illegitimate pregnancy and render the unfaithful wife barren for life. In essence, the Law of Moses grants a husband the right to choose with regards to the illegitimate pregnancy of an unfaithful wife. A husband could choose to forgive his wife of any suspected unfaithfulness... or choose to subject her to a trial that would establish guilt, terminate any illegitimate pregnancy, and render her barren.

Yes, this is brutal, bloody, dark, and tragic. But this was part of the wages of sin under the Law.

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by Luke

The specific point of the trial was to deteremin the womans guilt and deal with it if it were found to be true. Anything else was an unfortunate side effect.

It was dealt with by punishing the woman with a miscarrying womb and barrenness.

[Aquila]

The "shiny, happy, jolly" ol' God taught by modern Christianity to the benefit of neo-conservative politics is a tamed and impotent idol compared to the fearsome and terrible God of the Bible that bathed the floors with the blood of illegitimate children and demanded that the very skulls of infants belonging to Israel's enemies be crushed upon the rocks.

At some point... we need to see the horrendous reality of what is in the text and stop making excuses. And we need to understand that this horrendous reality is the result of sin. These realities fully demonstrate how terrible sin and rebellion truly is to God.

But I digress.

[Aquila]

With the more intense study of Numbers 5 completed... I'll repeat myself,

The Bible definitely advocates for the value of human life. However, the extent and manner in which the Bible values life doesn't entirely agree with the radical notions of the modern Pro-Life Movement (essentially what has become strictly a Republican view point). In the Bible...

-A miscarriage resulting from negligence was handled as though it were the loss of property.
-Women suspected of adultery were presented with a trial by ordeal. If guilty, they were rendered barren, and illegitimate pregnancy was terminated. If innocent, the water that causes "the curse" (menses) didn't damage the womb.
-Women caught in the very act of adultery (or fornication) were often executed immediately upon discovery or the testimony of two witnesses. There was no legal concern or moral regard for any possible life within the womb.

Frankly, if one wants to be technical... a biblical position would be that a woman's body and the fruit of her womb are strictly under the prerogative of the husband. Keep in mind, the ability to protect the family's inheritance as it relates to birthright was prominent. According to the Law of Moses... those conceived as a result of sin don't appear to have an inherent right to live.

The libertarian position doesn't advocate for the paternal authority of the husband over his wife's body and the fruit of the womb. However, it extends that authority to individual women themselves. Challenging them to choose wisely. There are many circumstances wherein the authority for making life or death decisions are granted to individual persons. The prevailing opinion is that the complexity of pregnancy, as it relates to a woman's personal sovereignty over her person, warrants that a woman be granted this authority. The church should always advocate for choosing life and do all that it can to empower women who do choose life by addressing the issues they face. The church should also teach against using abortion as birth control and demonstrate mercy and understanding towards those faced with the choice of abortion with regards to rape, incest, or to preserve the life and/or health of the mother. Modern Judaism approaches the subject from this point of view also.

[Jermyn Davidson]

Hey guys,
I started this thread with every intent to bash Democrats in general as wanton baby-killers.

I cannot go through with that intent.

n david, anyone else-- I apologize.


As much as I HATE abortion and think it to be murder, I don't think a blanket condemnation of the Democrats is in order and neither do I think it would help cleanse the infection from our country's moral bedsore-- the women's right to an abortion.

The fact of the matter is that in order for Planned Parenthood or any other organization to kill an unborn child, the mother of that unborn child has to be willing or convinced to participate. The individual freedoms practiced by the mother will, in part, determine if her child is to be born with certain birth defects, if her child is to be born addicted to drugs, if her child is to be born prematurely, if her child is to be born healthy, if her child will live or if her child will die. By Intelligent Design, God has made this so! God has given the woman freedom over her body and should she decide to abuse her God-given freedom, well that is between her and God. What interest would a heathen have in honoring God with her body? What legislative body could force a Christian to dishonor God with her body? God has given, both the Christian and the heathen, the same blessing and curse-- freedom.

God is pro-life and pro-choice. He wants us all to have life, but He has given us all a measure of freedom to choose the kind of life we will have, in this life and the life to come.

In a society that values the individual freedom of the saint and the heathen alike, the heathen has rights that the Christian cannot justify and the Christian has rights that the heathen can never enjoy.

[n david]

Originally Posted by Jermyn Davidson

Hey guys,
I started this thread with every intent to bash Democrats in general as wanton baby-killers.

I cannot go through with that intent.

n david, anyone else-- I apologize.

Ha! Not surprised. Can't bite the hand that feeds you!