tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11850330.post114199905013086380..comments2023-08-03T04:54:54.068-04:00Comments on Abacaxi Mamão: Fox News' Low-Cut Dress Proclivities and Republican "Family Values"Abacaxi Mamaohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06604184268628243496noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11850330.post-1142508196700173462006-03-16T06:23:00.000-05:002006-03-16T06:23:00.000-05:00I agree - there's a huge qualitative difference be...I agree - there's a huge qualitative difference between passing a law which requires (say) parental consent before obtaining a non-emergency abortion, and one which criminalizes all abortion other than that which immedately threatens the mother's life. <BR/><BR/>It does say in Makkot that "if a woman is in [hard labour] and the baby has not yet crowned, you cut it up and take it out of her. If the baby's head has crowned, you don't touch her, because you may not exchange one life for another." Definitely not what South Dakota has in mind!<BR/><BR/>Your observation is dead-on, and I think it should go farther: I wish that the Jews of all religious denominations would recognize that the parameters of the debate are not congruent with Jewish belief - I've seen a lot of people who believe that the principles of the Democratic party and NARAL were clearly given at Sinai, and the most egregious example is when Jews support organizations like "Americans United for Separation of Church and State." (that's the group that would be against the building of eruvin, as they would use public land for religous benefit).Davidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16491386537225283381noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11850330.post-1142444685956948442006-03-15T12:44:00.000-05:002006-03-15T12:44:00.000-05:00How could I not have commented on this?"So halakha...How could I not have commented on this?<BR/><BR/>"So halakhah doesn't quite fit into the whole pro-choice/pro-life framework, but on balance will tend to prohibit most of the elective abortions in the country."<BR/><BR/>I agree, but find it <B>very</B> problematic that so many frum Jews don't have a problem with states trying to pass laws that forbid abortion when the woman's health is in danger. That is, many frum Jews seem to be okay with states passing laws that make halachic practice <I>assur</I> [forbidden]. Who knows where South Dakota thinks the line is between "a woman's life" (which is protected under the law they just passed) and "a woman's health" (which is not protected), but I'm not sure I want legislators to make that decision for me in place of a unit that includes me, a halachic authority, and a doctor. And I'm not sure that if I was in that position, I would want to have to cross state lines to follow halacha.Abacaxi Mamaohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06604184268628243496noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11850330.post-1142444324774850422006-03-15T12:38:00.000-05:002006-03-15T12:38:00.000-05:00Hi David,Thanks for your comments.You're right abo...Hi David,<BR/><BR/>Thanks for your comments.<BR/><BR/>You're right about divorce and adultery not being morally equivalent, and I'm sorry if mentioning them together made it seem otherwise. I may go back and change the wording on that, or maybe this comment here is enough.<BR/><BR/>Republicans who adulterate and also want to forbid gay marriage on the grounds of "protecting the santity of marriage" are really what I find most problematic. Republicans who are themselves divorced but want to forbid gay marriage on the grounds of "protecting the sanctity of marriage" are not the equivalent, although I think that someone who has married and divorded <I>multiple</I> times might want to think twice about being a spokesperson for the sanctity of marriage. I'm not sure why I think that one divorce isn't a qualitatively bad thing, but four divorces are.<BR/><BR/>I agree that those stastics <I>may</I> be worthless, which is why I included the caveat. I don't know that they're any more worthless than other statistics that people quote in support of their political views.Abacaxi Mamaohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06604184268628243496noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11850330.post-1142360457589313672006-03-14T13:20:00.000-05:002006-03-14T13:20:00.000-05:00In my understanding, most Halakhic sources would t...In my understanding, most Halakhic sources would tend to say that abortion is either forbidden or mandatory, depending on the particulars - very few examples of the idea of "choice" are present. So halakhah doesn't quite fit into the whole pro-choice/pro-life framework, but on balance will tend to prohibit most of the elective abortions in the country.<BR/><BR/>Certainly, halakhah disagrees with the pro-choice "personal autonomy" approach: one isn't free to tattoo one's own skin, so the idea that one might not be free to terminate one's pregnancy isn't so foreign. Then again, there are cases I'm aware of where Rabbis had to tell a woman that she was required to get an abortion. The Rabbi I spoke to said that that was the hardest "decision" of his career (and he's not young). I put decision in quotes, because it wasn't really a decision, as much as an explanation of what the laws were, but the laws were heartbreaking and wrenching.<BR/><BR/>Alg, One thing which should be noted about what you were saying about adultery and divorce is that those are qualitatively different things - divorce is not evil, and is not forbidden (unless you're Catholic), but adultery is both. That doesn't change the fact that there's lots of unbeliveable hypocrites in power, but I think those two shouldn't be grouped in quite the same way.<BR/><BR/>Another thing which should be noted is a difference between New England and the rest of the US regarding divorce, and why the stats are misleading: <BR/><BR/>Maryland has far stricter divorce laws than Utah - for a "no-fault" divorce in Md, you need to be separated for 2 years. In Utah, it's 90 days. In Maryland, a partner being convicted of a felony, and going to prison is <I>not considered grounds for an 'at-fault' divorce</I>, unless the prison term is more than 1 year. Yeah, soak that up. The result? It's easier to go elsewhere and divorce there than pursue it in Maryland. Other NE states (I know Md isn't NE, but it has a similar legal history) have blue laws which are similar, left over from their puritan upbringing. The laws don't annoy enough people to get changed, and most people just work around them.<BR/><BR/>Also, I'd be curious to see the percentages of marriages, in addition to the percentages of divorce: if Delaware has twice the divorce rate of Massachusetts, but three times the marriage rate, then comparatively fewer of those marriages are actually ending. Long-term domestic partnership is far more socially acceptable in the Northeast and California than in the South, so that might be related as well.Davidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16491386537225283381noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11850330.post-1142187912544612632006-03-12T13:25:00.000-05:002006-03-12T13:25:00.000-05:00Well, they were referring to situations where the ...Well, they were referring to situations where the woman simply didn't want the child. Yeah, you could make the argument that the woman's mental health is in danger, but I think that's just a way to try to bend the rules. I think it's pretty clear that according to the Torah, a woman can only have an abortion if she's in real danger, not just because her life will be difficult if she has a kid. I of course don't agree with it, but I think if you're really following the Torah, there's no way around it.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11850330.post-1142147600160436812006-03-12T02:13:00.000-05:002006-03-12T02:13:00.000-05:00Thanks for the compliment. By the way, though, it'...Thanks for the compliment. By the way, though, it's not true that "according to the Torah, you're not supposed to do it." It's way more complicated than that. At the very least, if the pregnant women's life is in jeopardy, abortion is probably <B>required</B>.Abacaxi Mamaohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06604184268628243496noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11850330.post-1142026342585042022006-03-10T16:32:00.000-05:002006-03-10T16:32:00.000-05:00Well put. It boggles my mind how Republicans can s...Well put. It boggles my mind how Republicans can somehow debate these points in a way that makes sense to them. It often just comes down to religion, I guess. I was arguing with a nice Jewish family in Tennessee about abortion, and the bottom line was that they felt that it should be outlawed because according to the Torah, you're not supposed to do it. There was no point in arguing any further because if someone feels that the laws in our wonderfully secular society (as secular as one could hope for, anyway) should mirror the laws in the "good book," there's no getting through to them. All I can do is pray for them.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com