• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Halakha and Abortion

dantech

Well-Known Member
In the Orthodox Movement, it is basically about whether or not the fetus, or the birth process might harm the mother, whether physically or mentally that is the deciding factor in whether abortion is permitted or not.

What is the conservative, and reform view on the subject?
 
Last edited:

Levite

Higher and Higher
In the Orthodox Movement, it is basically about whether or not the fetus, or the birth process might harm the mother, whether physically or mentally that is the deciding factor in whether abortion is permitted or not.

What is the conservative, and reform view on the subject?

I actually wrote a teshuvah on this subject. When I get home, I'll try to post it.
 

metis

aged ecumenical anthropologist
I think in Reform I'm OK to say that we have very mixed feelings about this. Even though we recognize the teachings, there's also the concern for the pregnant woman as well.

No issue has troubled me more than this one, and I wish I had a simple solution, but I don't. Yes, it is a human life that's growing, but should I impose my will will on a woman as we are both living in a secular society according to the Constitution? If abortions are banned, are we going to accept back-alley abortions with teens and the poor, while middle-class and wealthy women can go elsewhere to get their abortions?

I simply have too many conflicting concerns here.
 

Tarheeler

Argumentative Curmudgeon
Premium Member
I think in Reform I'm OK to say that we have very mixed feelings about this. Even though we recognize the teachings, there's also the concern for the pregnant woman as well.

No issue has troubled me more than this one, and I wish I had a simple solution, but I don't. Yes, it is a human life that's growing, but should I impose my will will on a woman as we are both living in a secular society according to the Constitution? If abortions are banned, are we going to accept back-alley abortions with teens and the poor, while middle-class and wealthy women can go elsewhere to get their abortions?

I simply have too many conflicting concerns here.

But I think we can separate the two; after all, we don't expect non-Jews to live by Jewish law or rabbinical rulings. I can fully support legalized abortions in civil law even though I have religious and moral reservations against them.

But that probably isn't the topic Dan wants to discuss. :sorry1:
 

dantech

Well-Known Member
But I think we can separate the two; after all, we don't expect non-Jews to live by Jewish law or rabbinical rulings. I can fully support legalized abortions in civil law even though I have religious and moral reservations against them.

But that probably isn't the topic Dan wants to discuss. :sorry1:

Well yeah, what I want to discuss is abortion, but halakhically speaking. But since you bring up civil law then a question comes to mind.

In China where many abortions are forced, how does that conflict with a Jewish couple living there. Would they be more halakhically correct to "practice" Zera Lebatala, or would it be better not to, and in the event of a pregnancy, go through with the abortion?
 

Tarheeler

Argumentative Curmudgeon
Premium Member
Well yeah, what I want to discuss is abortion, but halakhically speaking. But since you bring up civil law then a question comes to mind.

In China where many abortions are forced, how does that conflict with a Jewish couple living there. Would they be more halakhically correct to "practice" Zera Lebatala, or would it be better not to, and in the event of a pregnancy, go through with the abortion?

I think that is something they would need speak to their rabbi about.

That would be a situation where civil law goes against Jewish law, and would certainly be a difficult case to decide. What does halakhah say about a couple where the wife is infertile or otherwise unable to have children?
 
Last edited:

metis

aged ecumenical anthropologist
But I think we can separate the two; after all, we don't expect non-Jews to live by Jewish law or rabbinical rulings. I can fully support legalized abortions in civil law even though I have religious and moral reservations against them.

Right, but the political reality is that we have to weigh both, which is what makes it tough for me.
 

Akivah

Well-Known Member
In the Orthodox Movement, it is basically about whether or not the fetus, or the birth process might harm the mother, whether physically or mentally that is the deciding factor in whether abortion is permitted or not.

What is the conservative, and reform view on the subject?

In my opinion in Conservative the view is that Abortion can only be done for the health of the mother, not for the convenience of the mother.
 

Levite

Higher and Higher
OK, I did find a draft copy of my teshuvah, though I can't seem to find the final version. I gave this the once-over to see if I noted any mistakes, and it looked clean, but if there are any, that's why. I also did strip my real name out of it, but that's the only change I made. This should relatively accurately reflect my opinion, which I am happy to discuss further if there are questions.
 

CMike

Well-Known Member
OK, I did find a draft copy of my teshuvah, though I can't seem to find the final version. I gave this the once-over to see if I noted any mistakes, and it looked clean, but if there are any, that's why. I also did strip my real name out of it, but that's the only change I made. This should relatively accurately reflect my opinion, which I am happy to discuss further if there are questions.
Let me take a guess. Since you are very liberal on your positions, I would guess that you would say that abortion should be permitted under all circumstances, correct?
 

Levite

Higher and Higher
Let me take a guess. Since you are very liberal on your positions, I would guess that you would say that abortion should be permitted under all circumstances, correct?

If you took the time to read it, you would find that that is not, in fact, what I hold.
 

Avi1001

reform Jew humanist liberal feminist entrepreneur
Let me take a guess. Since you are very liberal on your positions, I would guess that you would say that abortion should be permitted under all circumstances, correct?

Hi CMike, I am very liberal on my positions, so I would say that abortion should be permitted under all circumstances.....where the mother wishes to have the abortion. Also, for practical reasons, it should be before the end of the second trimester.

Since this is a logical position, I assume you agree, correct ?
 

Flankerl

Well-Known Member
Let me take a guess. Since you are very liberal on your positions, I would guess that you would say that abortion should be permitted under all circumstances, correct?

No offense but you really come over as one of those conservative republicans who sit with their gun by their lawn looking for someone to shoot.

You didnt even read his link.

Iam beginning to miss the inactive time of the DIR...
 

CMike

Well-Known Member
Hi CMike, I am very liberal on my positions, so I would say that abortion should be permitted under all circumstances.....where the mother wishes to have the abortion. Also, for practical reasons, it should be before the end of the second trimester.

Since this is a logical position, I assume you agree, correct ?

Your position is against traditional jewish law.

That law is that an unborn child is a human life. You are not allowed to kill an innocent human life. The only time you may do so is if the mother's life is in danger, then the unborn child is considered a rodoph, a pursuer, and can be killed.
 

CMike

Well-Known Member
No offense but you really come over as one of those conservative republicans who sit with their gun by their lawn looking for someone to shoot.

You didnt even read his link.

Iam beginning to miss the inactive time of the DIR...

I don't care to read the 14 pages. Simply stating his position and why is as far as I go.

Actually you aren't far off.

I am a conservative republican. Not only that I have a concealed pistol license.

In fact, quite a few of us in the synagogue are conservative, and some of us carry a pistol in shul. There is little more jewish than self defense.
 
Last edited:

Levite

Higher and Higher
Your position is against traditional jewish law. That law is that an unborn child is a human life. You are not allowed to kill an innocent human life. The only time you may do so is if the mother's life is in danger, then the unborn child is considered a rodoph, a pursuer, and can be killed.

I don't care to read the 14 pages.

So whose teshuvot did you read to decide this? Which sources went into your deciding that "an unborn child is a human life" is "traditional Jewish law?"

Clearly, those sources didn't include Rashi on Sanhedrin 72b, where he states flatly, in reference to the fetus, דכל זמן שלא יצא לאויר העולם, לאו נפש הוא ("The entire time it has not yet emerged into the air of the world, it is not a living soul"). Or Rav Chisda's opinion in Yevamot 69b, עד ארבעים מיא בעלמא היא ("Until the fortieth day [after the first missed menstrual period, confirming pregnancy], it is only fluid in her womb"). Or the opinion in Sanhedrin 84b, discussing Shmot 21:12 versus Bamidbar 35:30: ואיצטריך למיכתב מכה איש ואיצטריך למכתב כל מכה נפש, - דאי כתב רחמנא מכה איש ומת הוה אמינא: איש דבר מצוה - אין, קטן - לא. כתב רחמנא כל מכה נפש. ואי כתב רחמנא כל מכה נפש הוה אמינא, אפילו נפלים, אפילו בן שמונה, צריכי. ("It was necessary to write 'who strikes a man' [Shmot 21:12] and it was necessary to write 'any who strike a living person,' because if the Torah had written only 'who strikes a man,' I might have concluded, [one who kills] 'a man' [that is,] of Bar Mitzvah age or better is culpable, [but one who kills] a minor is not culpable. And if the Torah had written only 'any who strike a living person' [Bamidbar 35:30], I might have concluded, even a lost fetus or a nonviable premature birth [are cases involving] capital culpability"). Or any of the other sources which I cited, that you chose to ignore.

Your position is not "traditional Jewish law," it is one position, one school of thought within traditional Jewish law. It's fine if you want to hold that way, but you can't say it's the only position or school of thought on the subject. There are others that are just as supportable. Just because you don't agree with them doesn't make them illegitimate.

If you don't want to take the time to read teshuvot and study the sources they use, fine. But in that case, you can hardly criticize the conclusions they come to.
 

dantech

Well-Known Member
Hey Levite, I didn't have the opportunity to read your position yet, but I'm looking forward to it.
 
Top