Welcome, Guest! - or
Easy to remember!  »  VinNews.com

New York - Killing Doctors Who Perform Abortions: A Jewish Perspective

Published on: June 1, 2009 03:55 PM
Change text size Text Size  
Bookmark and Share
file photofile photo

New York - Dr. George Tiller was murdered, it seems, because he performed abortions. Those who defend such actions justify them by claiming that it is entirely appropriate to kill a person in order to prevent their killing others. Are they right?

It’s important to ask this question, upsetting as it may be, because the fundamental claim (no pun intended) made in defense of Dr. Tiller’s murderer does follow a certain logic, which if correct, might justify the actions of his actions. They claim that killing Tiller saves many lives and is therefore justifiable.

According to Jewish law, the principle which they argue is, in fact correct. It’s called the law of the rodef, or pursuer. Based on a rule found in Exodus 22 and explained by the Babylonian Talmud on page 73a, this law actually demands that one preempt a murderer by killing them before they commit their crime. So again, one might come to the conclusion that the events in Kansas actually have the biblical and religious grounding that supporters of accused murdered, Scott Roeder, claim. They are wrong, at least from the perspective of Jewish law.

Advertisement:

Under no circumstances is a fetus considered a human life, according to Jewish law. Ironically, Maimonides, calling a fetus a rodef, uses this law to explain why a baby must be aborted if the pregnancy endangers the mother’s life. While Jewish law is no fan of abortion, and does not sanction abortion on demand under all circumstances, it is never murder.

Now, I have no expectation or desire to see Jewish law become the law of the land. Nor do I expect to convince radical Christian murderers to change their ways because of a Jewish reading of scripture. But I think that all of us who want to see Dr. Tiller’s murderer prosecuted to the full extent of the law, and even more importantly, bring about an end to such murders, consider the claims made by the murderers. We must, because actually our views are ultimately not so different. Yes, I really mean that.

If we truly believed that abortions were murder, and had the ability to stop someone from performing them, would we not be justified in using all available means to do so? Would we not want someone to do just that if a person was heading off to kill one of our kids?

So how would you respond to someone who genuinely believes that is the case in this case? What arguments can be used to dissuade the future murderers from following a path to what they imagine to be a justifiable homicide and most of us know to be murder?

Author, radio and TV talk show host, and President of CLAL-The National Jewish Center for Learning and Leadership, Brad Hirschfield is the author of You Don’t Have To Be Wrong For Me To Be Right: Finding Faith Without Fanaticism. Listed as one of the nation’s 50 most influential rabbis in Newsweek, and a regular commentator on Court TV, he is the creator of the popular series, Building Bridges, airing on Bridges TV, and the co-host of the weekly radio show, Hirschfield and Kula.


More of today's headlines

New York - Stocks rallied Monday, sending the Dow near the break even point for the year, as better-than-expected readings on manufacturing activity raised hopes that a... Garden City, NY - Cell phones, instant messages and global positioning satellites are everywhere. But awareness that information sent over these devices is traceable...

 

Total122

Read Comments (122)  —  Post Yours »

1

 Jun 01, 2009 at 03:07 PM power up Says:

After all, according to this, the mother is the murderer, not the doctor, because we pasken 'shlichoy shell adam kemoisoy' so the doctor is merely a tool,another question? Is a jewish person mechiyav to kill a rodef when the nirdaf is not jewish?

2

 Jun 01, 2009 at 03:22 PM Anonymous Says:

shlichoy shell adam kemoisoy does not work for murder

3

 Jun 01, 2009 at 03:39 PM Anonymous Says:

Reply to #1  
power up Says:

After all, according to this, the mother is the murderer, not the doctor, because we pasken 'shlichoy shell adam kemoisoy' so the doctor is merely a tool,another question? Is a jewish person mechiyav to kill a rodef when the nirdaf is not jewish?

You're wrong. 'Ein Shliach L'dvar Aveira'. The laws of sheliach do not apply when you send someone to commit a sin. In any case even if abortion is considered murder I dont think the doctor has a din of rodef unless he was in the act of performing the abortion.

4

 Jun 01, 2009 at 03:37 PM WolfishMusings Says:

Reply to #1  
power up Says:

After all, according to this, the mother is the murderer, not the doctor, because we pasken 'shlichoy shell adam kemoisoy' so the doctor is merely a tool,another question? Is a jewish person mechiyav to kill a rodef when the nirdaf is not jewish?

I don't think you can say "shlucho shel adam k'moso" WRT murder. The murderer is still ultimately responsible ("ain shlicach l'd'var aveirah"). Under your logic, a hit man could never be prosecuted since he's just a hired hand.

The Wolf

5

 Jun 01, 2009 at 03:45 PM Anonymous Says:

I'm sorry, but the mother cannot be the "murderer" since "eyn shlicho le dvar aveyra". It may be wrong, but there's no application of rodef. Honestly, though, I think the murderer would not listen to any kind of logical argument, however commonly religious. He was simply a madman.

6

 Jun 01, 2009 at 03:44 PM Anonymous Says:

In Judaism there is a din of a nefel, that’s a baby who is less then 30 days old, which is a sofek if it will survive. Someone who kills that baby does not under Jewish law get the death penalty. It sure is considered retzicha but not the same as killing a non nefel; and a fetus has even less standing then a nefel.

I’ve always wondered why Christian anti-abortionists think that they are correct under Jewish law. According to them if only one can survive then maybe the baby should survive instead of the mother. While Judaism is very strong against abortion, it does not think alike with Christians on this issue. The only thing that they have in common is that abortion is wrong; from there they go in different directions.

7

 Jun 01, 2009 at 03:42 PM Anonymous Says:

A point that was left out here is that by and large, this doctor was taking care of the really tragic cases, where the mother was in danger or had been R"L raped, or the fetus was dying and endangering the mother, but laws in the mothers' home states wouldn't let their own doctors do anything about it.

8

 Jun 01, 2009 at 03:34 PM Anonymous Says:

i think the halacha is that a ben noah is not allowed to do an abortion. any law a ben noah breaks makes him liable the death penalty . so technically one could kill him. It is too bad the people in Israel don't rise up against the doctors who do abortions here. in usa some people have guts. i am not condoning killing but at least do we have to give these doctors our business....

9

 Jun 01, 2009 at 03:20 PM Anonymous Says:

You are never chayav to kill a rodef unless you have no other option. Read the actual halacha, don't just quote something you heard you heard once and pretend it's torah mi sinai. Ignorant twit.

10

 Jun 01, 2009 at 03:20 PM Yosef Says:

Reply to #1  
power up Says:

After all, according to this, the mother is the murderer, not the doctor, because we pasken 'shlichoy shell adam kemoisoy' so the doctor is merely a tool,another question? Is a jewish person mechiyav to kill a rodef when the nirdaf is not jewish?

So according to your very intelligent statement if i tell some one to kill someone, and he does it for me, its as if i killed him and not you?

11

 Jun 01, 2009 at 03:17 PM Yosef Says:

I do not agree with killing people nor do i agree with killing innocent little babies. These babies were not old enough to talk and say let me live. I am tired of people calling them fetuses, they are not fetuses they are babies. Stop trying to give excuses to kill little babies by calling it a fetus i am sick and tired of it. Do i mourn that a murderer was killed who happened to have a Medical license absolutely not.

12

 Jun 01, 2009 at 03:48 PM Milhouse Says:

Reply to #3  
Anonymous Says:

You're wrong. 'Ein Shliach L'dvar Aveira'. The laws of sheliach do not apply when you send someone to commit a sin. In any case even if abortion is considered murder I dont think the doctor has a din of rodef unless he was in the act of performing the abortion.

Yes, he does. He was a serial killer, and all attempts to stop him by less lethal means had failed. Because he is dead, many innocent babies will not be murdered. That makes his killing justified.

13

 Jun 01, 2009 at 03:49 PM WolfishMusings Says:

Reply to #3  
Anonymous Says:

You're wrong. 'Ein Shliach L'dvar Aveira'. The laws of sheliach do not apply when you send someone to commit a sin. In any case even if abortion is considered murder I dont think the doctor has a din of rodef unless he was in the act of performing the abortion.

Interesting... so to take this out of the realm of abortion for a moment...

If you knew that I was going to murder ten people every day, are you saying that a person wouldn't be within their halachic rights to off me in my car, even though I wasn't "in the act?"

The Wolf

14

 Jun 01, 2009 at 04:06 PM Milhouse Says:

Reply to #6  
Anonymous Says:

In Judaism there is a din of a nefel, that’s a baby who is less then 30 days old, which is a sofek if it will survive. Someone who kills that baby does not under Jewish law get the death penalty. It sure is considered retzicha but not the same as killing a non nefel; and a fetus has even less standing then a nefel.

I’ve always wondered why Christian anti-abortionists think that they are correct under Jewish law. According to them if only one can survive then maybe the baby should survive instead of the mother. While Judaism is very strong against abortion, it does not think alike with Christians on this issue. The only thing that they have in common is that abortion is wrong; from there they go in different directions.

A ben yisroel doesn't get the death penalty for murdering a person who might have died anyway, but as you say "it sure is considered retzicha". And a ben noach who does the same thing *does* get the death penalty. For that matter, a ben yisroel who murders a ben noach does not get the death penalty; but one would hardly say that therefore it was not retzicha!

As for the less-than-30-day baby, his murderer (if a ben yisroel) may not get the death penalty, but where do you see that one may not kill a rodef who threatens him? One may certainly be mechalel shabbos for him. How much more so when the rodef is a ben noach, as this one was.

15

 Jun 01, 2009 at 04:31 PM Shira Says:

I don't understand this article. Abortion is murder. How can you say it isn't? I'm talking about a regular abortion, not one performed to save the mother's life, which we all know is permitted. An abortion at say, 6 months pregnancy, is absolute murder. A 6 month old "fetus" - if born - would survive.
i know because my niece was born 3 months premature.
So again I say, I don't understand this article. Why do you not print the author's name?

16

 Jun 01, 2009 at 04:19 PM Milhouse Says:

Reply to #10  
Yosef Says:

So according to your very intelligent statement if i tell some one to kill someone, and he does it for me, its as if i killed him and not you?

Not only is he wrong and you right, he has it completely backwards. In halacha, not only is the hit man completely responsible for his actions, but (as logically follows) the hirer is NOT responsible. The common law holds both equally responsible, but the Torah says ein shliach lidvar avera; since the hit man is a moral agent who made his own decision to kill, and but for that decision no murder would have taken place, the hirer has committed no crime.

17

 Jun 01, 2009 at 04:15 PM Milhouse Says:

Reply to #7  
Anonymous Says:

A point that was left out here is that by and large, this doctor was taking care of the really tragic cases, where the mother was in danger or had been R"L raped, or the fetus was dying and endangering the mother, but laws in the mothers' home states wouldn't let their own doctors do anything about it.

There is no state in which a mother may not save her life by killing the baby who is endangering it. Self-defense is always a defense against a charge of murder, whether the victim is in or out of the womb. The abortions this monster was performing were ELECTIVE.

18

 Jun 01, 2009 at 04:00 PM Milhouse Says:

Reply to #3  
Anonymous Says:

You're wrong. 'Ein Shliach L'dvar Aveira'. The laws of sheliach do not apply when you send someone to commit a sin. In any case even if abortion is considered murder I dont think the doctor has a din of rodef unless he was in the act of performing the abortion.

Who on earth is this Brad Hirschfield? Oh, he works for the "non-denominational" CLAL, headed by pseudo-orthodox rabbi Irving Greenberg. No wonder he comes up with such burus.

Even most abortionists refuse to do "late term" abortions. This man was one of the few who did so. And these were not babies who were threatening their mothers' lives. They were innocent souls, helpless infants who were harming nobody and did not deserve to have their lives snuffed out by this cruel remorseless killer. He was a serial killer, and not out of passion but for money; in plain English, he was a hit man.

As everybody who has opened a sefer knows, there is no question that a ben noach who kills unborn babies is a murderer, and if convicted by a court he deserves the death penalty. It follows as the night the day that if he is about to perform an abortion he must be stopped, and if the only way to do that is to kill him then he must be killed. No court is needed for this, any more than a court is needed to shoot a gunman who is mowing people down at a school or a mall. Since every possible non-lethal method of stopping him had been tried and failed, and the result was more dead babies, this killing was definitely justified. The babies who will now survive and grow up to have children of their own justify it.

19

 Jun 01, 2009 at 04:34 PM Anonymous Says:

Reply to #11  
Yosef Says:

I do not agree with killing people nor do i agree with killing innocent little babies. These babies were not old enough to talk and say let me live. I am tired of people calling them fetuses, they are not fetuses they are babies. Stop trying to give excuses to kill little babies by calling it a fetus i am sick and tired of it. Do i mourn that a murderer was killed who happened to have a Medical license absolutely not.

They are fetuses and your efforts to endow them with the attributes of a born child or adult or any sort of human life are based on ignorance of torah and halacha. Whether you are "sick or tired" of it really doesn't matter since your views are contrary to torah the new President will protect a women's right to choose and his Supreme court will affirm Roe V. Wade.

20

 Jun 01, 2009 at 04:30 PM Anonymous Says:

Reply to #14  
Milhouse Says:

A ben yisroel doesn't get the death penalty for murdering a person who might have died anyway, but as you say "it sure is considered retzicha". And a ben noach who does the same thing *does* get the death penalty. For that matter, a ben yisroel who murders a ben noach does not get the death penalty; but one would hardly say that therefore it was not retzicha!

As for the less-than-30-day baby, his murderer (if a ben yisroel) may not get the death penalty, but where do you see that one may not kill a rodef who threatens him? One may certainly be mechalel shabbos for him. How much more so when the rodef is a ben noach, as this one was.

Are you saying that a yid who is found guilty of having murdered a goy does not get the death penalty but the converse facts would warrant a death penalty. Are you a racist or just distorting the torah?

21

 Jun 01, 2009 at 04:19 PM Anonymous Says:

The salient question is if killing the rodef stops the killing. If it doesn't, it is not permitted. And it is hard to say that this will stop murders. If anything, it makes the cause more sympathetic and will cause more of them.

22

 Jun 01, 2009 at 04:41 PM Anonymous Says:

Reply to #11  
Yosef Says:

I do not agree with killing people nor do i agree with killing innocent little babies. These babies were not old enough to talk and say let me live. I am tired of people calling them fetuses, they are not fetuses they are babies. Stop trying to give excuses to kill little babies by calling it a fetus i am sick and tired of it. Do i mourn that a murderer was killed who happened to have a Medical license absolutely not.

But in this case you are not saving any lives. They will just go to the next doctor. So here by killing this man you arent saving anybody. And to call this man a murderer shows a complete lack of sechel. Did he do things that might not have been ethical? Perhaps. Does a doctor who aborts a fetus to save the mothers life a murderer? Dont think so. Look, im not saying this guy was a saint. But to give abortions to fetus of victims of rape, insest, servere defects is not a murderer in my book.

23

 Jun 01, 2009 at 04:37 PM Anonymous Says:

Abortion is totally forbidden even before the period of formation, which takes place 40 days from conception. The process of conception and pregnancy corresponds in Kabbalah to the three lower Divine worlds. Conception corresponds to the world of Creation. The 40-day period from conception corresponds to the world of Formation. Birth takes place after the subsequent period, which corresponds to the world of Action.

Early Kabbalah refers to three crucial moments in pregnancy: The moment of conception, the moment of formation and the moment of birth, which is the moment of the full development of the fetus in the womb. In Hebrew this moment is called Asiyah. It also means "completed being." The fetus is complete and now can be born into the world and continue to grow.

Above these three worlds, the union of the father and mother corresponds to the world of Atzilut, which is the level of Divine Consciousness, total and absolute unity. This gives birth to the three lower worlds. The union is expressive of Divine union. If the seed is properly conceived, then the Divine process of progeneration is taking place. It is absolutely forbidden to destroy this Divine process that actually begins from the moment of conception. This is the secret of creation, as it were, ex nihilo.
Rabbi Yitzchak Ginsburg
Inner.org

24

 Jun 01, 2009 at 04:17 PM Yosef Says:

The bottom line is that he is a murderer, the headline should be "Murderer Gets Killed".

25

 Jun 01, 2009 at 04:15 PM Anonymous Says:

Reply to #12  
Milhouse Says:

Yes, he does. He was a serial killer, and all attempts to stop him by less lethal means had failed. Because he is dead, many innocent babies will not be murdered. That makes his killing justified.

There is NEVER a justification for murder. Whatever you may think of the morality of his actions, he was not a "serial killer" except in your warped mind. He was operating legally under U.S. law and performing procedures recognized by the medical profession. You remind of these crazies who bomb abortion clinics because they were "told by God to do so. Hopefully, you and your mishpacha will not ever be the victims of someone who decides that your hateful and disgusting rhetoric warrants violence.

26

 Jun 01, 2009 at 04:11 PM Anonymous Says:

I am sure that the halacha is that outside of a Beis Din, we are not allowed to kill an abortionist, the writer of this article is also wrong that abortion is not a form of murder. There is a Teshuva in Igros Moshe where R' Moshe Feinstein ZT'L says that someone who performs an abortion commits the aveira of "Lo Sirtzach".

27

 Jun 01, 2009 at 04:01 PM Halacha Says:

This so called Rabbi paskened "shelo k'halacha". There is two dinim -abortion by goyim & abortion by Yidden. A goy who performs an abortion is chayav meesah. A yid -it's just hezek. Acc. to the torah this Doctor is indeed a Rodef if he is a goy instead of a yid. I'm surprised at VIN that they expressed his view, without asking a shailah!

28

 Jun 01, 2009 at 05:00 PM Milhouse Says:

Reply to #22  
Anonymous Says:

But in this case you are not saving any lives. They will just go to the next doctor. So here by killing this man you arent saving anybody. And to call this man a murderer shows a complete lack of sechel. Did he do things that might not have been ethical? Perhaps. Does a doctor who aborts a fetus to save the mothers life a murderer? Dont think so. Look, im not saying this guy was a saint. But to give abortions to fetus of victims of rape, insest, servere defects is not a murderer in my book.

What next doctor? How many doctors do you think are available, especially in Kansas, who are willing to do what he did? And those few who are available will now think twice, out of fear for their own skins. Don't talk about saving the mother's life; that has nothing to do with this. The babies this man killed were innocent, not harming anyone, and did not deserve to die; he was a murderer, every bit as much as Ted Bundy.

29

 Jun 01, 2009 at 04:55 PM Milhouse Says:

Reply to #15  
Shira Says:

I don't understand this article. Abortion is murder. How can you say it isn't? I'm talking about a regular abortion, not one performed to save the mother's life, which we all know is permitted. An abortion at say, 6 months pregnancy, is absolute murder. A 6 month old "fetus" - if born - would survive.
i know because my niece was born 3 months premature.
So again I say, I don't understand this article. Why do you not print the author's name?

They did print his name; can't you read? It's Brad Hirschfield of CLAL. He claims to be an "orthodox rabbi", but his "smicha" comes from the "traditional" movement (a breakaway from the conservatives) and his MA and M Phil come from JTS. CLAL is the non-orthodox "pluralist" group founded by pseudo-orthodox rabbi Irving Greenberg.

30

 Jun 01, 2009 at 04:52 PM chochom Says:

brad hirshfield believes that gay marriage may be sanctioned by the torah (pg. 143 in his book). he kneeled with a group of muslims praying in a mosque (ibid. pg. 150). i therefore think that his spokemanship on behalf of Judaism may be questionable.





31

 Jun 01, 2009 at 04:43 PM Anonymous Says:

Reply to #18  
Milhouse Says:

Who on earth is this Brad Hirschfield? Oh, he works for the "non-denominational" CLAL, headed by pseudo-orthodox rabbi Irving Greenberg. No wonder he comes up with such burus.

Even most abortionists refuse to do "late term" abortions. This man was one of the few who did so. And these were not babies who were threatening their mothers' lives. They were innocent souls, helpless infants who were harming nobody and did not deserve to have their lives snuffed out by this cruel remorseless killer. He was a serial killer, and not out of passion but for money; in plain English, he was a hit man.

As everybody who has opened a sefer knows, there is no question that a ben noach who kills unborn babies is a murderer, and if convicted by a court he deserves the death penalty. It follows as the night the day that if he is about to perform an abortion he must be stopped, and if the only way to do that is to kill him then he must be killed. No court is needed for this, any more than a court is needed to shoot a gunman who is mowing people down at a school or a mall. Since every possible non-lethal method of stopping him had been tried and failed, and the result was more dead babies, this killing was definitely justified. The babies who will now survive and grow up to have children of their own justify it.

Brad Hirschfield is one of the foremost and most innovative minds in orthodox jewsish thought today. He has pioneered a philosophy of using daas torah to create coalitions of understanding and hope among yidden and goyim. Don't belittle someone whose writings you are obviously not familiar with and whose brilliance shines with some of the great rabbonim of our generation.

32

 Jun 01, 2009 at 05:27 PM Anonymous Says:

"Those who defend such actions justify them by claiming that it is entirely appropriate to kill a person in order to prevent their killing others."

Who has come out to defend such actions?

33

 Jun 01, 2009 at 05:15 PM mottel Says:

Reply to #15  
Shira Says:

I don't understand this article. Abortion is murder. How can you say it isn't? I'm talking about a regular abortion, not one performed to save the mother's life, which we all know is permitted. An abortion at say, 6 months pregnancy, is absolute murder. A 6 month old "fetus" - if born - would survive.
i know because my niece was born 3 months premature.
So again I say, I don't understand this article. Why do you not print the author's name?

American law is stunningly hypocritical. Someone who attacks a pregnant woman and murders her fetus, is charged with murder. Yet if the MOTHER herself demands her own baby be murdered by a doctor in a white coat; it's called 'choice'!!!
Feminism gave women the right to commit murder, where anyone else would be executed!

34

 Jun 01, 2009 at 05:09 PM Milhouse Says:

Reply to #27  
Halacha Says:

This so called Rabbi paskened "shelo k'halacha". There is two dinim -abortion by goyim & abortion by Yidden. A goy who performs an abortion is chayav meesah. A yid -it's just hezek. Acc. to the torah this Doctor is indeed a Rodef if he is a goy instead of a yid. I'm surprised at VIN that they expressed his view, without asking a shailah!

When a yid does it it's also murder. That there's no chiyuv misah is another matter. There is no halachic difference between killing an ubar and killing a ben noach. For both acts a ben noach gets the death penalty and a ben yisroel does not, but they're both acts of murder.

35

 Jun 01, 2009 at 05:04 PM mottel Says:

Reply to #8  
Anonymous Says:

i think the halacha is that a ben noah is not allowed to do an abortion. any law a ben noah breaks makes him liable the death penalty . so technically one could kill him. It is too bad the people in Israel don't rise up against the doctors who do abortions here. in usa some people have guts. i am not condoning killing but at least do we have to give these doctors our business....

Correct. A Ben-Noach who aborts a fetus is chayev misah

36

 Jun 01, 2009 at 05:37 PM Anonymous Says:

Reply to #28  
Milhouse Says:

What next doctor? How many doctors do you think are available, especially in Kansas, who are willing to do what he did? And those few who are available will now think twice, out of fear for their own skins. Don't talk about saving the mother's life; that has nothing to do with this. The babies this man killed were innocent, not harming anyone, and did not deserve to die; he was a murderer, every bit as much as Ted Bundy.

These doctors have been targeted and threatened for years. Not going to stop them. All Im saying is you have to see the difference between this man and Ted bundy. What about Kavorkian? Was he a murderer? Can you put him on the same level Ted bundy? Hitler? All killed people..but circumstances were different. There are levels in society for crimes; first degree murder, 2nd degree, manslaughter...Now if you are saying halachically he should be killed..fine.

37

 Jun 01, 2009 at 06:02 PM tzoorba Says:

Reply to #23  
Anonymous Says:

Abortion is totally forbidden even before the period of formation, which takes place 40 days from conception. The process of conception and pregnancy corresponds in Kabbalah to the three lower Divine worlds. Conception corresponds to the world of Creation. The 40-day period from conception corresponds to the world of Formation. Birth takes place after the subsequent period, which corresponds to the world of Action.

Early Kabbalah refers to three crucial moments in pregnancy: The moment of conception, the moment of formation and the moment of birth, which is the moment of the full development of the fetus in the womb. In Hebrew this moment is called Asiyah. It also means "completed being." The fetus is complete and now can be born into the world and continue to grow.

Above these three worlds, the union of the father and mother corresponds to the world of Atzilut, which is the level of Divine Consciousness, total and absolute unity. This gives birth to the three lower worlds. The union is expressive of Divine union. If the seed is properly conceived, then the Divine process of progeneration is taking place. It is absolutely forbidden to destroy this Divine process that actually begins from the moment of conception. This is the secret of creation, as it were, ex nihilo.
Rabbi Yitzchak Ginsburg
Inner.org

Many poskim hold that the issur of abortion does not apply before 40 days. This only means that more leniency can be applied to abortion at that time for some crucial need.

38

 Jun 01, 2009 at 05:55 PM tzoorba Says:

Reply to #34  
Milhouse Says:

When a yid does it it's also murder. That there's no chiyuv misah is another matter. There is no halachic difference between killing an ubar and killing a ben noach. For both acts a ben noach gets the death penalty and a ben yisroel does not, but they're both acts of murder.

It's shofech dam haodom baodom which is a very severe sin.

The Meshech Chochma says a person who does it gets the death penalty in the hands of heaven and the Rogachover says that it is included in shfichas domim, murder. However, the Tzitz Eliezer disagrees that it is full fledged murder.

39

 Jun 01, 2009 at 06:15 PM Anonymous Says:

Reply to #22  
Anonymous Says:

But in this case you are not saving any lives. They will just go to the next doctor. So here by killing this man you arent saving anybody. And to call this man a murderer shows a complete lack of sechel. Did he do things that might not have been ethical? Perhaps. Does a doctor who aborts a fetus to save the mothers life a murderer? Dont think so. Look, im not saying this guy was a saint. But to give abortions to fetus of victims of rape, insest, servere defects is not a murderer in my book.

Why is a fetus concieved from a rape allowed to be killed?

40

 Jun 01, 2009 at 06:22 PM Halacha Says:

Reply to #38  
tzoorba Says:

It's shofech dam haodom baodom which is a very severe sin.

The Meshech Chochma says a person who does it gets the death penalty in the hands of heaven and the Rogachover says that it is included in shfichas domim, murder. However, the Tzitz Eliezer disagrees that it is full fledged murder.

Your talking about killing a goy, not a fetus, correct?

41

 Jun 01, 2009 at 06:21 PM Charlie Hall Says:

Reply to #38  
tzoorba Says:

It's shofech dam haodom baodom which is a very severe sin.

The Meshech Chochma says a person who does it gets the death penalty in the hands of heaven and the Rogachover says that it is included in shfichas domim, murder. However, the Tzitz Eliezer disagrees that it is full fledged murder.

The Tzitz Eliezer also permitted abortions of fetuses with genetic defects.

42

 Jun 01, 2009 at 06:20 PM Milhouse Says:

Reply to #38  
tzoorba Says:

It's shofech dam haodom baodom which is a very severe sin.

The Meshech Chochma says a person who does it gets the death penalty in the hands of heaven and the Rogachover says that it is included in shfichas domim, murder. However, the Tzitz Eliezer disagrees that it is full fledged murder.

Does he say the same about killing a treifa or a nochri? Are they also not really murder, just because they don't get the death penalty when a ben yisroel does them?

In any case, this "doctor" was a ben noach, so the issue isn't relevant here. Nor is the pre-40-day issue relevant. There can be no question that he was a rodef, and had to be stopped the only way possible.

43

 Jun 01, 2009 at 06:19 PM Charlie Hall Says:

Reply to #20  
Anonymous Says:

Are you saying that a yid who is found guilty of having murdered a goy does not get the death penalty but the converse facts would warrant a death penalty. Are you a racist or just distorting the torah?

He may be both.

44

 Jun 01, 2009 at 06:18 PM Halacha Says:

Reply to #34  
Milhouse Says:

When a yid does it it's also murder. That there's no chiyuv misah is another matter. There is no halachic difference between killing an ubar and killing a ben noach. For both acts a ben noach gets the death penalty and a ben yisroel does not, but they're both acts of murder.

I don't know what murder means in halacha. That is an american term used as opposed to killed. But, you are right it is Rezecha. But this type of Rezecha is only a Lav similar to Hezek.

45

 Jun 01, 2009 at 06:18 PM Charlie Hall Says:

Reply to #18  
Milhouse Says:

Who on earth is this Brad Hirschfield? Oh, he works for the "non-denominational" CLAL, headed by pseudo-orthodox rabbi Irving Greenberg. No wonder he comes up with such burus.

Even most abortionists refuse to do "late term" abortions. This man was one of the few who did so. And these were not babies who were threatening their mothers' lives. They were innocent souls, helpless infants who were harming nobody and did not deserve to have their lives snuffed out by this cruel remorseless killer. He was a serial killer, and not out of passion but for money; in plain English, he was a hit man.

As everybody who has opened a sefer knows, there is no question that a ben noach who kills unborn babies is a murderer, and if convicted by a court he deserves the death penalty. It follows as the night the day that if he is about to perform an abortion he must be stopped, and if the only way to do that is to kill him then he must be killed. No court is needed for this, any more than a court is needed to shoot a gunman who is mowing people down at a school or a mall. Since every possible non-lethal method of stopping him had been tried and failed, and the result was more dead babies, this killing was definitely justified. The babies who will now survive and grow up to have children of their own justify it.

Not true. Because there are rare occasions when even a late term abortion is mandated by Jewish law, it is necessary that there be doctors able to perform them.

46

 Jun 01, 2009 at 06:16 PM Charlie Hall Says:

Reply to #17  
Milhouse Says:

There is no state in which a mother may not save her life by killing the baby who is endangering it. Self-defense is always a defense against a charge of murder, whether the victim is in or out of the womb. The abortions this monster was performing were ELECTIVE.

There are countries in which such a mother would be forced to give up her life.

47

 Jun 01, 2009 at 06:30 PM Charlie Hall Says:

Reply to #18  
Milhouse Says:

Who on earth is this Brad Hirschfield? Oh, he works for the "non-denominational" CLAL, headed by pseudo-orthodox rabbi Irving Greenberg. No wonder he comes up with such burus.

Even most abortionists refuse to do "late term" abortions. This man was one of the few who did so. And these were not babies who were threatening their mothers' lives. They were innocent souls, helpless infants who were harming nobody and did not deserve to have their lives snuffed out by this cruel remorseless killer. He was a serial killer, and not out of passion but for money; in plain English, he was a hit man.

As everybody who has opened a sefer knows, there is no question that a ben noach who kills unborn babies is a murderer, and if convicted by a court he deserves the death penalty. It follows as the night the day that if he is about to perform an abortion he must be stopped, and if the only way to do that is to kill him then he must be killed. No court is needed for this, any more than a court is needed to shoot a gunman who is mowing people down at a school or a mall. Since every possible non-lethal method of stopping him had been tried and failed, and the result was more dead babies, this killing was definitely justified. The babies who will now survive and grow up to have children of their own justify it.

If you have received a psak halachah that you are obligated -- or even permitted -- to take the law into your own hands and murder a doctor who performs abortions, please cite the posek who gave you such a psak. Or if you are yourself a posek, identify yourself.

48

 Jun 01, 2009 at 06:29 PM Charlie Hall Says:

Has anyone else here actually been privy to a real posek answering a real shilah regarding abortion? I have. And the posek was far more meikel than I would ever have imagined. The halachah is not according to the Christian fundamentalists. (It isn't according to the pro-Choice Protestant churches either.)

And while non Jews, unlike Jews, are potentially subject to a death penalty for an abortion, the gemara in Sanhedrin rules that there is nothing prohibited to a Ben Noach that is permitted to a Jew, so the laws regarding abortion would be the same even though the penalty is different. And note that non Jews are also potentially subject to the death penalty for theft of less than a pruta.

Finally, note that there are some differences of opinion regarding when abortions are permitted even in Judaism. Rav Moshe and the Tzitz Eliezer disagreed on a number of circumstances -- and the Tzitz Eliezer's position was accepted as normative in Israel's medical system. Everyone should follow his/her own posek.

49

 Jun 01, 2009 at 07:49 PM dovy Says:

A few basics for the confused: A Jew who kills a fetus is clearly not chayav missah as per the mishnah in niddah. A goy is chayav missah as per the Gemara in Sanhedrin. The Rambam clearly holds that killing a fetus is retzicha. The Ramban and Tosfos in Niddah appear to hold that it is not murder, although it is permitted to be mechalel shabbas for a fetus. Rav Moshe is mechadesh that even according to Tosfos and the Ramban it is considerd murder, albeit with no death penalty. The Seridei Aish and Tzitz Eliezer, and possibly the Yaabetz, disagree with Rav Moshe's interpertation of the Ramban. All of the aforementioned is in regard to a fetus after it was "formed" meaning 40 days from conception. Prior to that, it is definitely not considered murder according to anyone as per the Gemara in Niddah.

50

 Jun 01, 2009 at 08:31 PM PMO Says:

Reply to #11  
Yosef Says:

I do not agree with killing people nor do i agree with killing innocent little babies. These babies were not old enough to talk and say let me live. I am tired of people calling them fetuses, they are not fetuses they are babies. Stop trying to give excuses to kill little babies by calling it a fetus i am sick and tired of it. Do i mourn that a murderer was killed who happened to have a Medical license absolutely not.

Unfortunately for you, halacha says otherwise. Torah makes a clear distinction not matter what your personal belief may be.

52

 Jun 01, 2009 at 07:44 PM ZR Says:

Reply to #48  
Charlie Hall Says:

Has anyone else here actually been privy to a real posek answering a real shilah regarding abortion? I have. And the posek was far more meikel than I would ever have imagined. The halachah is not according to the Christian fundamentalists. (It isn't according to the pro-Choice Protestant churches either.)

And while non Jews, unlike Jews, are potentially subject to a death penalty for an abortion, the gemara in Sanhedrin rules that there is nothing prohibited to a Ben Noach that is permitted to a Jew, so the laws regarding abortion would be the same even though the penalty is different. And note that non Jews are also potentially subject to the death penalty for theft of less than a pruta.

Finally, note that there are some differences of opinion regarding when abortions are permitted even in Judaism. Rav Moshe and the Tzitz Eliezer disagreed on a number of circumstances -- and the Tzitz Eliezer's position was accepted as normative in Israel's medical system. Everyone should follow his/her own posek.

In a case known to me the Posek ruled in a case where the foetus was with abnormal development witch the doctors said had 0% cahnce of surviving more than a few hours after birth. The Posek ruled, after hesitation, that it’s permitted to abort. That’s probably after taking into consideration of the psychological state of the mother.

Anyone with a shaila should speak to a Rov who is expert in these laws, as soon as possible. Within the 1st three months it’s much more lenient then after. So if CH"V anyone needs a psak the quicker they go to the Rov the better.

53

 Jun 01, 2009 at 07:30 PM Anonymous Says:

Reply to #47  
Charlie Hall Says:

If you have received a psak halachah that you are obligated -- or even permitted -- to take the law into your own hands and murder a doctor who performs abortions, please cite the posek who gave you such a psak. Or if you are yourself a posek, identify yourself.

Be careful with your lunatic suggestion that it is Ok or even required for yidden who get a posek to authorize a murder. Even saying somthing like that in a public forum like this could expose you to civil and criminial liability.

54

 Jun 01, 2009 at 07:16 PM Anonymous Says:

Reply to #48  
Charlie Hall Says:

Has anyone else here actually been privy to a real posek answering a real shilah regarding abortion? I have. And the posek was far more meikel than I would ever have imagined. The halachah is not according to the Christian fundamentalists. (It isn't according to the pro-Choice Protestant churches either.)

And while non Jews, unlike Jews, are potentially subject to a death penalty for an abortion, the gemara in Sanhedrin rules that there is nothing prohibited to a Ben Noach that is permitted to a Jew, so the laws regarding abortion would be the same even though the penalty is different. And note that non Jews are also potentially subject to the death penalty for theft of less than a pruta.

Finally, note that there are some differences of opinion regarding when abortions are permitted even in Judaism. Rav Moshe and the Tzitz Eliezer disagreed on a number of circumstances -- and the Tzitz Eliezer's position was accepted as normative in Israel's medical system. Everyone should follow his/her own posek.

Most poskim follow the opinions of the Tzitz Eliezer who was permissive of abortions in a wide range of circumstances. More importantly, the chief rabbonim of Eretz Yisroel have long allowed abortions and the rate of abortions in Israel is actually higher than in the U.S. If the most senior rabbis in Israel allow abortion, who are you to suggest that it may be wrong.

55

 Jun 01, 2009 at 07:06 PM Yosef Says:

I do not agree with killing people nor do i agree with killing innocent little babies. These babies were not old enough to talk and say let me live. I am tired of people calling them fetuses, they are not fetuses they are babies. Stop trying to give excuses to kill little babies by calling it a fetus i am sick and tired of it. Do i mourn that a murderer was killed who happened to have a Medical license absolutely not. I stand with what i wrote and he was not doing it to save the mothers life, he was doing it for $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$. Murder for money!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

56

 Jun 01, 2009 at 06:43 PM Halacha Says:

Reply to #48  
Charlie Hall Says:

Has anyone else here actually been privy to a real posek answering a real shilah regarding abortion? I have. And the posek was far more meikel than I would ever have imagined. The halachah is not according to the Christian fundamentalists. (It isn't according to the pro-Choice Protestant churches either.)

And while non Jews, unlike Jews, are potentially subject to a death penalty for an abortion, the gemara in Sanhedrin rules that there is nothing prohibited to a Ben Noach that is permitted to a Jew, so the laws regarding abortion would be the same even though the penalty is different. And note that non Jews are also potentially subject to the death penalty for theft of less than a pruta.

Finally, note that there are some differences of opinion regarding when abortions are permitted even in Judaism. Rav Moshe and the Tzitz Eliezer disagreed on a number of circumstances -- and the Tzitz Eliezer's position was accepted as normative in Israel's medical system. Everyone should follow his/her own posek.

Why are you playing devil's advocate -when you know this doctor was a rodef and it was good he was killed? No one would ever Matter the abortions this guy did. Look I'm not advocating going out to kill abortion doctors because chayecha kodem. You don't have to risk your life to save someone elses and here the gov. will prosecute you!

57

 Jun 01, 2009 at 06:34 PM tzoorba Says:

Reply to #42  
Milhouse Says:

Does he say the same about killing a treifa or a nochri? Are they also not really murder, just because they don't get the death penalty when a ben yisroel does them?

In any case, this "doctor" was a ben noach, so the issue isn't relevant here. Nor is the pre-40-day issue relevant. There can be no question that he was a rodef, and had to be stopped the only way possible.

Even though I agree with you that a ben noach is chayav misa for this and probably within the mitva of dinim of the sheva mitzvos, they are mechuav to do something to stop it and there may even be an inyan of something akin to ovid inish dina lenafshay, no Jew should take any action like this.

This would be a sacana for the clal and there is no chiyuv to put the clal in sacana.

58

 Jun 01, 2009 at 06:34 PM Halacha Says:

Reply to #19  
Anonymous Says:

They are fetuses and your efforts to endow them with the attributes of a born child or adult or any sort of human life are based on ignorance of torah and halacha. Whether you are "sick or tired" of it really doesn't matter since your views are contrary to torah the new President will protect a women's right to choose and his Supreme court will affirm Roe V. Wade.

Unfortuanely, you are the one ignorant of halacha. BTW, the liberals who got the US Supreme Court to legalize abortion are liars. I learnt in Biology in College that life starts with conception just they call it an embryo, at three months it's called a fetus. So acc. to science they are destroying life. The Supreme Court said that life begins after 20 weeks, that is not what the scientists say. But no one has the guts to challenge this lie. That's what the final Din in Shomayim will be. Hashem just won't say why didn't you listen to me? He will show what you did was hypocritical in things that you believed in -like science!

59

 Jun 01, 2009 at 08:45 PM Anonymous Says:

Reply to #50  
PMO Says:

Unfortunately for you, halacha says otherwise. Torah makes a clear distinction not matter what your personal belief may be.

mr libertarian. america is not a religious country stop using halacha let me remind you that libertarians believe 100% in separation of church and state. But when it fits your political agenda you use halcha to justify it. your a hypocrite.

60

 Jun 01, 2009 at 08:44 PM Milhouse Says:

Reply to #54  
Anonymous Says:

Most poskim follow the opinions of the Tzitz Eliezer who was permissive of abortions in a wide range of circumstances. More importantly, the chief rabbonim of Eretz Yisroel have long allowed abortions and the rate of abortions in Israel is actually higher than in the U.S. If the most senior rabbis in Israel allow abortion, who are you to suggest that it may be wrong.

The rate of abortions in Israel has nothing to do with any rov's psak. It's all outright murder by those who don't bother asking anyone. And why should I care what the Israeli chief rabbis think? What makes them such great poskim? (Some of them happen to be such, but it's not inherent in the post.) The Rambam clearly calls it murder, who are you to suggest that he was wrong?

61

 Jun 01, 2009 at 08:34 PM Anonymous Says:

Reply to #48  
Charlie Hall Says:

Has anyone else here actually been privy to a real posek answering a real shilah regarding abortion? I have. And the posek was far more meikel than I would ever have imagined. The halachah is not according to the Christian fundamentalists. (It isn't according to the pro-Choice Protestant churches either.)

And while non Jews, unlike Jews, are potentially subject to a death penalty for an abortion, the gemara in Sanhedrin rules that there is nothing prohibited to a Ben Noach that is permitted to a Jew, so the laws regarding abortion would be the same even though the penalty is different. And note that non Jews are also potentially subject to the death penalty for theft of less than a pruta.

Finally, note that there are some differences of opinion regarding when abortions are permitted even in Judaism. Rav Moshe and the Tzitz Eliezer disagreed on a number of circumstances -- and the Tzitz Eliezer's position was accepted as normative in Israel's medical system. Everyone should follow his/her own posek.


this since when is america a jewish country ? we are not basing abortion law in america on religion. Charlie i have never seen you quote halacha in regard to any other political topic, so why do you use it for abortion?
the abortion issue is not halachic, it should be based on logic: This person provided late term abortions. Can you tell me logically why performing an abortion in the 9th month is any different than killing a baby once its born? i surely cant. Therefore in my eyes, this doctor is little different than the SS barbarians who gunned down jews on the eastern front( note; my grandparents survived the holocaust, and many family members were killed by the nazis ym'sh)

62

 Jun 01, 2009 at 06:57 PM Medic Says:

Reply to #42  
Milhouse Says:

Does he say the same about killing a treifa or a nochri? Are they also not really murder, just because they don't get the death penalty when a ben yisroel does them?

In any case, this "doctor" was a ben noach, so the issue isn't relevant here. Nor is the pre-40-day issue relevant. There can be no question that he was a rodef, and had to be stopped the only way possible.

1] You certainly had better not be advocating "extra-judicial" means of stopping abortions. Are you saying that killing somebody without the benefit of being charged with a crime and being found guilty in a court of law is a good thing? There are many ways to protest against abortion. Gunning people down is not it. Period. [Ask a sheila of your Rav: "Am I allowed to shoot down doctors who perform abortions?" I would love to hear how he paskins for you]
2] You are (I'm guessing) too young to remember the days of back alley abortions and women dying of hemorrhage, sepsis, and gangrene. It's very simple to advocate from the comfort of your home. It is also (and you can all get your keyboards ready to fire at me) simple to paskin theoretically: it is much harder when a real, live human being is in front of you and she is really pregnant and really not ready (for any of a host of reasons) to carry the fetus to term. I do remember those days and I know Rabbanim who didn't find it as easy to assur them "across the board." (save your comments: by definition if I hold this opinion then any of the "Rabbanim" I know are treif to you: c"v if anyone disagree with you! By definition, they can't really have a real s'micha).

63

 Jun 01, 2009 at 09:50 PM rivkie Says:

what i understand from what i have learned is that abortion is considered murder for everyone and is not permissible. However, for a yid if an abortion has to be done for medical reasons, it is not considered that problematic if the fetus is less than 40 days old. After that it is much more problematic.
However, for a non Jew, abortion at any stage is considered murder and there is no justification unless there is a danger to the mother's life. Terminating that pregnancy without a proper medical reason is considered murder and is totally forbidden.

64

 Jun 01, 2009 at 09:31 PM Anonymous Says:

Reply to #60  
Milhouse Says:

The rate of abortions in Israel has nothing to do with any rov's psak. It's all outright murder by those who don't bother asking anyone. And why should I care what the Israeli chief rabbis think? What makes them such great poskim? (Some of them happen to be such, but it's not inherent in the post.) The Rambam clearly calls it murder, who are you to suggest that he was wrong?

First, the Rambam in hilchohot Melachim (Perek9.4)paskined that there are many circumstances where abortion is permitted which is also the holding of Rav Yishmael and many others. Further, there is much new knowlege since the time of Rambam so his holding back then has little relevance to contemporary halacha which is endorsed by so many great rabbonim in EY and the U.S. So no, you are WRONG and Maimonides was RIGHT in the exceptions where he said abortions were permnitted.

65

 Jun 01, 2009 at 10:59 PM LYS Says:

Reply to #64  
Anonymous Says:

First, the Rambam in hilchohot Melachim (Perek9.4)paskined that there are many circumstances where abortion is permitted which is also the holding of Rav Yishmael and many others. Further, there is much new knowlege since the time of Rambam so his holding back then has little relevance to contemporary halacha which is endorsed by so many great rabbonim in EY and the U.S. So no, you are WRONG and Maimonides was RIGHT in the exceptions where he said abortions were permnitted.

Although you may be right in regards to a Jewish person (that they may perform abortions) the rambam does not leave too much room if any for a goy to perform an abortion.

66

 Jun 01, 2009 at 10:34 PM czyran Says:

you can only kill a rodef either when he is in the act of killing or exhibiting somehow that he is about to kill like chasing somebody with a weapon

67

 Jun 01, 2009 at 11:07 PM Milhouse Says:

Reply to #66  
czyran Says:

you can only kill a rodef either when he is in the act of killing or exhibiting somehow that he is about to kill like chasing somebody with a weapon

And that is exactly what this Tiller did. A clearer case of rodef could hardly be imagined.

68

 Jun 01, 2009 at 11:03 PM LYS Says:

Reply to #62  
Medic Says:

1] You certainly had better not be advocating "extra-judicial" means of stopping abortions. Are you saying that killing somebody without the benefit of being charged with a crime and being found guilty in a court of law is a good thing? There are many ways to protest against abortion. Gunning people down is not it. Period. [Ask a sheila of your Rav: "Am I allowed to shoot down doctors who perform abortions?" I would love to hear how he paskins for you]
2] You are (I'm guessing) too young to remember the days of back alley abortions and women dying of hemorrhage, sepsis, and gangrene. It's very simple to advocate from the comfort of your home. It is also (and you can all get your keyboards ready to fire at me) simple to paskin theoretically: it is much harder when a real, live human being is in front of you and she is really pregnant and really not ready (for any of a host of reasons) to carry the fetus to term. I do remember those days and I know Rabbanim who didn't find it as easy to assur them "across the board." (save your comments: by definition if I hold this opinion then any of the "Rabbanim" I know are treif to you: c"v if anyone disagree with you! By definition, they can't really have a real s'micha).

I thought Jewish people went according to Torah what is the connection if it's "extra-judicial" or not (dina d'malchusah dina is only in regards to monetary matters). The only question is if he would be considered a rodef. Although he would clearly be chayav missa that doesn't necessarily prove that he has the din of a rodef.

69

 Jun 01, 2009 at 10:24 PM czyran Says:

k illing a rodef is only permitted when he actually in the act of killing or by showing by showing by his actions that he wants to kill like chasing somebody with aweapon but just knowing that maybe he will kill somebody at some other time you could not kill

70

 Jun 01, 2009 at 10:15 PM Milhouse Says:

Reply to #53  
Anonymous Says:

Be careful with your lunatic suggestion that it is Ok or even required for yidden who get a posek to authorize a murder. Even saying somthing like that in a public forum like this could expose you to civil and criminial liability.

No, it cannot. Boruch Hashem we have freedom of speech.

71

 Jun 01, 2009 at 10:14 PM Anonymous Says:

Reply to #62  
Medic Says:

1] You certainly had better not be advocating "extra-judicial" means of stopping abortions. Are you saying that killing somebody without the benefit of being charged with a crime and being found guilty in a court of law is a good thing? There are many ways to protest against abortion. Gunning people down is not it. Period. [Ask a sheila of your Rav: "Am I allowed to shoot down doctors who perform abortions?" I would love to hear how he paskins for you]
2] You are (I'm guessing) too young to remember the days of back alley abortions and women dying of hemorrhage, sepsis, and gangrene. It's very simple to advocate from the comfort of your home. It is also (and you can all get your keyboards ready to fire at me) simple to paskin theoretically: it is much harder when a real, live human being is in front of you and she is really pregnant and really not ready (for any of a host of reasons) to carry the fetus to term. I do remember those days and I know Rabbanim who didn't find it as easy to assur them "across the board." (save your comments: by definition if I hold this opinion then any of the "Rabbanim" I know are treif to you: c"v if anyone disagree with you! By definition, they can't really have a real s'micha).

the "killer" of this so called doctor did a very understandable thing being that the doctor was a most prolific serial killer @ 60,000 murders for money. He probably felt there was no other way to stop the baby killings. Just because what this disgusting doctor did was "legal" means nothing. The Nazi's made a lot of evil doings "Legal"

72

 Jun 01, 2009 at 10:13 PM Milhouse Says:

Reply to #46  
Charlie Hall Says:

There are countries in which such a mother would be forced to give up her life.

1. How is that relevant? There is nowhere in the USA like that, so this murderer in Kansas was not performing any valuable service for such women. A woman whose life is in danger can get the necessary treatment anywhere in the USA.

2. Name a western country in which a mother would be forced to give up her life for her baby. I don't believe such a country actually exists.

3. If such a country does exist, and on a very rare occasion a woman does die from not being able to get an abortion, how is that not outweighed by the hundreds of thousands of babies who are NOT threatening their mothers' lives, and whose lives would be saved by such a strict law? It's not ideal, but it's a better situation than we have here.

73

 Jun 01, 2009 at 10:09 PM Anonymous Says:

There is no court now that rules according to the sheva mitzvos so a ben noach cannot do something such as the person did to this doctor since there is no proper court to judge him.

74

 Jun 01, 2009 at 10:08 PM Milhouse Says:

Reply to #64  
Anonymous Says:

First, the Rambam in hilchohot Melachim (Perek9.4)paskined that there are many circumstances where abortion is permitted which is also the holding of Rav Yishmael and many others. Further, there is much new knowlege since the time of Rambam so his holding back then has little relevance to contemporary halacha which is endorsed by so many great rabbonim in EY and the U.S. So no, you are WRONG and Maimonides was RIGHT in the exceptions where he said abortions were permnitted.

You are flat out lying. And you have the chutzpah (or the stupidity) to give the chapter and verse in which anybody can look to see that it makes NO exceptions whatsoever, it lists NO circumstances in which abortion is permitted. None at all. It doesn't even say anything about saving the mother's life (and indeed some poskim have derived from this that a ben noach is NOT allowed to kill a baby even to save the mother's life!) So why did you make up this stupid lie? Are you just brazen, and figure if you give a cite some people won't look it up, and will just believe you? Or is there some other explanation?

75

 Jun 02, 2009 at 12:30 AM Milhouse Says:

Reply to #69  
czyran Says:

k illing a rodef is only permitted when he actually in the act of killing or by showing by showing by his actions that he wants to kill like chasing somebody with aweapon but just knowing that maybe he will kill somebody at some other time you could not kill

There was no "maybe" about it. There is not the slightest doubt that if this monster were not dead he would kill again and again and again. That's why he needed to be made dead.

76

 Jun 02, 2009 at 12:29 AM Milhouse Says:

Reply to #73  
Anonymous Says:

There is no court now that rules according to the sheva mitzvos so a ben noach cannot do something such as the person did to this doctor since there is no proper court to judge him.

No court is needed to kill a rodef.

77

 Jun 02, 2009 at 06:22 AM Shaul in Monsey Says:

Reply to #67  
Milhouse Says:

And that is exactly what this Tiller did. A clearer case of rodef could hardly be imagined.

A more clear case would be an adult walking up to another and popping a cap in his melon. Your passion for abortion might be commendable but your comments are just silly.

The problem with all of this debate is that each case needs to be measured and deliberated based on the unique circumstances each case brings. All of these blanket statements, in reality, mostly just demonstrate an utter lack of understanding that the abortion debate has been abused in America by politicians on both sides to rally votes and elect people. It is a highly personal issue and if anyone here thinks that many, many yidden do not avail themselves of abortion for a whole host of reasons, the you are just very naïve.

Arguments like Tiller is Bundy are classic anti abortion iconica taken right out of their script. It is like saying all Jews are shylocks. Of course the truth is much different and there is no way to judge this doctor without knowing the details of every one of his cases.

78

 Jun 02, 2009 at 07:36 AM anonymous Says:

Reply to #12  
Milhouse Says:

Yes, he does. He was a serial killer, and all attempts to stop him by less lethal means had failed. Because he is dead, many innocent babies will not be murdered. That makes his killing justified.

you should move to Jiddah , Saudi Arabia

79

 Jun 02, 2009 at 07:31 AM anonymous Says:

Reply to #76  
Milhouse Says:

No court is needed to kill a rodef.

You are living in the United States of America and must obey U.S. civil code and your mentality is a hilul hashem

80

 Jun 02, 2009 at 07:47 AM tzoorba Says:

Reply to #75  
Milhouse Says:

There was no "maybe" about it. There is not the slightest doubt that if this monster were not dead he would kill again and again and again. That's why he needed to be made dead.

This is still not a din of rodef. He would be chayav under shfichas domim for bnei noach and should be chayav under their dinim.

It is certainly a very good thing that this child murderer is dead.

81

 Jun 02, 2009 at 07:53 AM tzoorba Says:

Reply to #77  
Shaul in Monsey Says:

A more clear case would be an adult walking up to another and popping a cap in his melon. Your passion for abortion might be commendable but your comments are just silly.

The problem with all of this debate is that each case needs to be measured and deliberated based on the unique circumstances each case brings. All of these blanket statements, in reality, mostly just demonstrate an utter lack of understanding that the abortion debate has been abused in America by politicians on both sides to rally votes and elect people. It is a highly personal issue and if anyone here thinks that many, many yidden do not avail themselves of abortion for a whole host of reasons, the you are just very naïve.

Arguments like Tiller is Bundy are classic anti abortion iconica taken right out of their script. It is like saying all Jews are shylocks. Of course the truth is much different and there is no way to judge this doctor without knowing the details of every one of his cases.

Are you deliberately being ignorant?

There is no question that this monster killed late term babies for money. This is legalized murder and is an indictment of America that it is not being legally stopped.

It's very interesting to me that the same idiots who complain about torture of terrorists are very complacent when it comes to mass murder of viable pre infants.

What is the difference to them between a baby on the verge of being born and one that actually exited? If they are both viable, just because on is inside, murder for the slightest of reasons is ok?

82

 Jun 02, 2009 at 08:28 AM Avrohom Abba Says:

Killing a doctor is murder, even if abortion is also murder. Which part of, "Thou shalt not kill," is hard to understand?
If an abortion is considered a killing, the doctor is wrong. But when you kill that doctor, you are wrong.
Also, I don't even know why they start counting a person's age from the actual birth.
How can you be killing, if the embryo is not even considered a minute old? I mean the embryo is not counted as alive until it's aging process begins.
In any event, killing a doctor who performs abortions is still murder.

83

 Jun 02, 2009 at 09:01 AM ZR Says:

Reply to #70  
Milhouse Says:

No, it cannot. Boruch Hashem we have freedom of speech.

I'm not too sure advocating and promoting murder are protected by Free Speech. I'd be careful.

84

 Jun 02, 2009 at 09:15 AM Anonymous Says:

Reply to #83  
ZR Says:

I'm not too sure advocating and promoting murder are protected by Free Speech. I'd be careful.

thats what msnbc is accusing Fox news of doing by calling him tiller the killer for so many years. But i believe the ruling is only when its a clear and present danger does enciting not get covered by the first ammendment. Thats from cases involving KKK rallys and the like.

85

 Jun 02, 2009 at 09:12 AM Anonymous Says:

If there are two people going to kill one person...am i aloud to kill only one of them if the other will kill the victim anyways? Im not asking for an opinion. I am asking if anyone knows the sugya and has an actual teyretz. Please leave all baali batisha answers aside.

86

 Jun 02, 2009 at 09:10 AM anonymous Says:

Reply to #53  
Anonymous Says:

Be careful with your lunatic suggestion that it is Ok or even required for yidden who get a posek to authorize a murder. Even saying somthing like that in a public forum like this could expose you to civil and criminial liability.

Wonderful to read a sane comment and the charge would be enticing to violence/murder which I believe without having passed a bar examination is a penal liability under U.S. civil code. It seems that of you live a dual life maybe you start waking up and realizing that everybody that means everybody must obey U.S. civil code

87

 Jun 02, 2009 at 09:34 AM deepthinker Says:

If you kill Dr. Mengele, are you a murderer?

88

 Jun 02, 2009 at 09:56 AM Shulchan Aruch for Bnei Noach Says:

Since there seems to be people here who want to know the actual halacha - and for Bnei Noach, here are the applicable laws. It is also very important to know them, as the Rambam says that it is our duty to influence (nowadays, by persuasion) non-Jews to keep the Sheva Mitzvos.
1)One who pursues a fetus, meaning that he wishes to kill the fetus in any manner, is considered a rodef, and it is permitted to save the fetus like any other pursued person, and if it is only possible to do so by killing the pursuer, this is permitted.
(Rambam, Laws of Murder, ch. 1 based on Niddah 44a and Ran there, and possibly even according to both opinions of Tosfos Sanhedrin 59a and for sure Rabbi Yishmael on 57b)
2)If a woman is dying in childbirth, it is permitted to cut the fetus out of her stomach and kill it, by medicine or hand, in order to save her, because the fetus is a rodef. If it has already stretched out its head, it is forbidden to touch it, for one cannot push one life away for another. If taking no action would result in both dying, or if it is clear that the child will die either way, or it will be stillborn, it is permissible to save her life by taking the fetus, even if the head or most of the body has come out.
(Panim Meiros vol. 3 ch. 8, and Tiferes Yisrael Boaz Ohalos end of ch. 7, )
3) One who is inclined to murder and does so regularly is considered a “pursuer”, and the court or anyone must kill him immediately.
(Shulchan Aruch Choshen Mishpat 388:15, and Shach there.)
4) It is not considered to be a human life until 40 days. Prior to this time it is like mere water. Therefore one who aborts an embryo within 40 days (or one who hit a pregnant woman who miscarried as a result) even though it is forbidden because of murder, and Hashem seeks the justice of this embryo, none the less the court do not execute as a result.
(Igros Moshe Choshen Mishpat Vol. 2 chapter 69 part 3 and others)
5) To take the law into one own's hand, though the person may not be liable, it is still forbidden, as this would erase the process of due judgment (the mitzvah of dinim) and would corrupt society; see Minchas Chinuch Mitzvah 410 and Sefer Hachinuch Mitzvah 49.
(These halachos are from the yet-unpublished second volume of Sheva Mitzvos Hashem / The Divine Code by Rabbi Moshe Weiner (with comments by Rabbi Zalman Nechemia Goldberg)

89

 Jun 02, 2009 at 09:49 AM anonymous Says:

Reply to #87  
deepthinker Says:

If you kill Dr. Mengele, are you a murderer?

The comparison is stupid . Mengele selected at random who should be killed and it was adults and children. In the case of abortion the mother makes a decision and fetuses and children and adults are different.

90

 Jun 02, 2009 at 09:47 AM deeperthinker Says:

Reply to #87  
deepthinker Says:

If you kill Dr. Mengele, are you a murderer?

No...because he is already dead and you cant kill a dead person!

91

 Jun 02, 2009 at 10:32 AM Halacha Says:

Reply to #82  
Avrohom Abba Says:

Killing a doctor is murder, even if abortion is also murder. Which part of, "Thou shalt not kill," is hard to understand?
If an abortion is considered a killing, the doctor is wrong. But when you kill that doctor, you are wrong.
Also, I don't even know why they start counting a person's age from the actual birth.
How can you be killing, if the embryo is not even considered a minute old? I mean the embryo is not counted as alive until it's aging process begins.
In any event, killing a doctor who performs abortions is still murder.

No one advocated killing him as a judgment -but he was allowed to be killed because of the din Rodef! Have you never heard of this din?
This guy was going to abort fetuses again- no one claims otherwise!

92

 Jun 02, 2009 at 10:35 AM tzoorba Says:

Reply to #89  
anonymous Says:

The comparison is stupid . Mengele selected at random who should be killed and it was adults and children. In the case of abortion the mother makes a decision and fetuses and children and adults are different.

So, if the mother decides to kill her unborn baby that is not random so it is ok?

According to you, since fetuses are not children they can be killed at random. Who made the mother judge and executioner in this case?

93

 Jun 02, 2009 at 10:40 AM Anonymous Says:

Reply to #11  
Yosef Says:

I do not agree with killing people nor do i agree with killing innocent little babies. These babies were not old enough to talk and say let me live. I am tired of people calling them fetuses, they are not fetuses they are babies. Stop trying to give excuses to kill little babies by calling it a fetus i am sick and tired of it. Do i mourn that a murderer was killed who happened to have a Medical license absolutely not.

they are not babies, no matter how hard you wish it and they do not have the halachic status of babies

94

 Jun 02, 2009 at 01:37 PM Ahavah Says:

There is absolutely no medical need for anyone, ever, to have a late term abortion. Any person who needs labor induced due to medical need can go to ANY ob-gyn in the country and have an induced pre-term delivery. The difference is that the ob-gyn will not purposefully kill the child during the process, though the child may die anyway if it is too premature or too sick to survive. It's simply a LIE to say a late term abortion is ever "necessary." An abortion is only necessary if you INTEND to end up with a dead baby.

95

 Jun 02, 2009 at 02:22 PM Milhouse Says:

Reply to #82  
Avrohom Abba Says:

Killing a doctor is murder, even if abortion is also murder. Which part of, "Thou shalt not kill," is hard to understand?
If an abortion is considered a killing, the doctor is wrong. But when you kill that doctor, you are wrong.
Also, I don't even know why they start counting a person's age from the actual birth.
How can you be killing, if the embryo is not even considered a minute old? I mean the embryo is not counted as alive until it's aging process begins.
In any event, killing a doctor who performs abortions is still murder.

Killing a murderer before he strikes is not murder, it's saving lives and a public service. Where did you get the idea that it is murder?

96

 Jun 02, 2009 at 02:21 PM Milhouse Says:

Reply to #80  
tzoorba Says:

This is still not a din of rodef. He would be chayav under shfichas domim for bnei noach and should be chayav under their dinim.

It is certainly a very good thing that this child murderer is dead.

If you admit that killing those babies was murder, and that he intended to go on killing them, then how can you still say he wasn't a rodef? That's the very definition of a rodef: someone who will undoubtedly kill unless he is stopped, and who can't be stopped by non-lethal means.

97

 Jun 02, 2009 at 02:19 PM Milhouse Says:

Reply to #79  
anonymous Says:

You are living in the United States of America and must obey U.S. civil code and your mentality is a hilul hashem

You are living in God's world, and must obey His law. Divrei harav vedivrei hatalmid, divrei mi shom'in?

98

 Jun 02, 2009 at 02:18 PM Milhouse Says:

Reply to #77  
Shaul in Monsey Says:

A more clear case would be an adult walking up to another and popping a cap in his melon. Your passion for abortion might be commendable but your comments are just silly.

The problem with all of this debate is that each case needs to be measured and deliberated based on the unique circumstances each case brings. All of these blanket statements, in reality, mostly just demonstrate an utter lack of understanding that the abortion debate has been abused in America by politicians on both sides to rally votes and elect people. It is a highly personal issue and if anyone here thinks that many, many yidden do not avail themselves of abortion for a whole host of reasons, the you are just very naïve.

Arguments like Tiller is Bundy are classic anti abortion iconica taken right out of their script. It is like saying all Jews are shylocks. Of course the truth is much different and there is no way to judge this doctor without knowing the details of every one of his cases.

How would that case be any clearer than this? We don't need to know the details of every one of his cases; all we need to know is that he regularly performed late-term elective abortions, and that he aborted even viable babies without even claiming that the mother's life was at stake.

99

 Jun 02, 2009 at 02:23 PM Milhouse Says:

Reply to #83  
ZR Says:

I'm not too sure advocating and promoting murder are protected by Free Speech. I'd be careful.

Then look it up and you will be sure. They absolutely are protected.

100

 Jun 02, 2009 at 02:29 PM Milhouse Says:

Reply to #94  
Ahavah Says:

There is absolutely no medical need for anyone, ever, to have a late term abortion. Any person who needs labor induced due to medical need can go to ANY ob-gyn in the country and have an induced pre-term delivery. The difference is that the ob-gyn will not purposefully kill the child during the process, though the child may die anyway if it is too premature or too sick to survive. It's simply a LIE to say a late term abortion is ever "necessary." An abortion is only necessary if you INTEND to end up with a dead baby.

That goes too far. There are cases where abortion is necessary in order to save the mother's life. In those cases the baby is directly endangering the mother, and so he is a rodef, in exactly the same way that this "doctor" was endangering babies' lives. And therefore killing the baby is justified, for the exact same reason that killing this "doctor" was justified.

101

 Jun 02, 2009 at 02:25 PM Milhouse Says:

Reply to #86  
anonymous Says:

Wonderful to read a sane comment and the charge would be enticing to violence/murder which I believe without having passed a bar examination is a penal liability under U.S. civil code. It seems that of you live a dual life maybe you start waking up and realizing that everybody that means everybody must obey U.S. civil code

You are either utterly ignorant of the law, or deliberately lying about it. There are no other choices. The First Amendment protects our right to advocate any position we like, no matter how unpopular. And the position I'm advocating is not at all unpopular.

102

 Jun 02, 2009 at 01:22 PM anonymous Says:

Reply to #92  
tzoorba Says:

So, if the mother decides to kill her unborn baby that is not random so it is ok?

According to you, since fetuses are not children they can be killed at random. Who made the mother judge and executioner in this case?

The abortion decision is a free choice by a woman . Mengele killed children and adults who were forcibly taken to AUSCHWITZ ONLY BECAUSE THEY WERE JEWS.Abortion is not a selective killing because of religion or race. You know very little what happened in Birkenau by making such silly comparison. Judge or executioner is based on the laws of the civil code and you are against abortion which I understand lobby your legislator but shooting of the doctor still is murder and has nothing to do with the medical procedure he performed.

103

 Jun 02, 2009 at 02:45 PM anonymous Says:

Reply to #101  
Milhouse Says:

You are either utterly ignorant of the law, or deliberately lying about it. There are no other choices. The First Amendment protects our right to advocate any position we like, no matter how unpopular. And the position I'm advocating is not at all unpopular.

I believe you should join the Taliban, Hamas or Al Queida your mind fits perfectly in their distorted mind

104

 Jun 02, 2009 at 02:50 PM vusizgatkes Says:

Before any assumptions are made about rodef shmodef, I think that it is necessary to look into the nature of these abortions. I'm still trying to do some research about this story, and I have not yet come up with information that points to "murder," as a couple of you still like to call it despite the fact that the VIN article itself says that according to Jewish law, abortions are never considered murder. But anyway, Tiller performed late-term abortions in cases where the patients' fetuses had severe fatal birth defects. And while it is true as well that he aborted healthy fetuses, he performed those abortions to protect the mother from "substantial and irreversible impairment of a major bodily function" (quote from Wall Street Journal)

105

 Jun 02, 2009 at 04:32 PM Milhouse Says:

Reply to #102  
anonymous Says:

The abortion decision is a free choice by a woman . Mengele killed children and adults who were forcibly taken to AUSCHWITZ ONLY BECAUSE THEY WERE JEWS.Abortion is not a selective killing because of religion or race. You know very little what happened in Birkenau by making such silly comparison. Judge or executioner is based on the laws of the civil code and you are against abortion which I understand lobby your legislator but shooting of the doctor still is murder and has nothing to do with the medical procedure he performed.

What difference does it make how the victims were selected, or why? Abortion is not selective by religion or race, but by age; how is that any better? And even if it were not selective at all, how would that be better?

What has the civil code got to do with anything? What Mengele did was perfectly legal; did that make it any less wrong?

106

 Jun 02, 2009 at 04:21 PM Milhouse Says:

Reply to #104  
vusizgatkes Says:

Before any assumptions are made about rodef shmodef, I think that it is necessary to look into the nature of these abortions. I'm still trying to do some research about this story, and I have not yet come up with information that points to "murder," as a couple of you still like to call it despite the fact that the VIN article itself says that according to Jewish law, abortions are never considered murder. But anyway, Tiller performed late-term abortions in cases where the patients' fetuses had severe fatal birth defects. And while it is true as well that he aborted healthy fetuses, he performed those abortions to protect the mother from "substantial and irreversible impairment of a major bodily function" (quote from Wall Street Journal)

Who told you that "according to Jewish law, abortions are never considered murder"? The sheigetz "rabbi" who wrote this opinion piece? Is that what you call "the VIN article itself", as if it were some sort of authoritative statement?

He performed late-term elective abortions. That is by definition murder. He even killed VIABLE babies, where there was NO threat to the mother's life. "Substantial and irreversible impairment of a major bodily function" means NOTHING. Depression counts as an "impairment of a major bodily function", and all this monster had to do was write down that in his opinion having the baby would make the mother depressed, and go ahead and abort the baby. For that matter, he could write down whatever he liked, because there was no check on him.

He even killed babies because their mothers would be depressed if they had to miss a concert, or a prom! Altogether he boasted of having killed over 60,000 babies who were after 24 weeks! And you think it possible that they were all necessary to save their mothers' lives?

107

 Jun 02, 2009 at 06:10 PM moish Says:

Reply to #16  
Milhouse Says:

Not only is he wrong and you right, he has it completely backwards. In halacha, not only is the hit man completely responsible for his actions, but (as logically follows) the hirer is NOT responsible. The common law holds both equally responsible, but the Torah says ein shliach lidvar avera; since the hit man is a moral agent who made his own decision to kill, and but for that decision no murder would have taken place, the hirer has committed no crime.

wrong, see kidushin 43a "dina raba idina zuta ika beynaihu".

108

 Jun 02, 2009 at 05:52 PM Anonymous Says:

Reply to #18  
Milhouse Says:

Who on earth is this Brad Hirschfield? Oh, he works for the "non-denominational" CLAL, headed by pseudo-orthodox rabbi Irving Greenberg. No wonder he comes up with such burus.

Even most abortionists refuse to do "late term" abortions. This man was one of the few who did so. And these were not babies who were threatening their mothers' lives. They were innocent souls, helpless infants who were harming nobody and did not deserve to have their lives snuffed out by this cruel remorseless killer. He was a serial killer, and not out of passion but for money; in plain English, he was a hit man.

As everybody who has opened a sefer knows, there is no question that a ben noach who kills unborn babies is a murderer, and if convicted by a court he deserves the death penalty. It follows as the night the day that if he is about to perform an abortion he must be stopped, and if the only way to do that is to kill him then he must be killed. No court is needed for this, any more than a court is needed to shoot a gunman who is mowing people down at a school or a mall. Since every possible non-lethal method of stopping him had been tried and failed, and the result was more dead babies, this killing was definitely justified. The babies who will now survive and grow up to have children of their own justify it.

Just for the record, night does not actually follow the day. Rather, it is the day that follows the night.

109

 Jun 02, 2009 at 05:51 PM Shaul in Monsey Says:

Reply to #98  
Milhouse Says:

How would that case be any clearer than this? We don't need to know the details of every one of his cases; all we need to know is that he regularly performed late-term elective abortions, and that he aborted even viable babies without even claiming that the mother's life was at stake.

So in your world the only answer to violence is...more violence. How Islamic of you. Your arguments are that weak on the merits that you need to condone murder? Even espouse it. Hardly the Torah perspective. Your comments really do reflect how ingrained this kind of rhetoric has become, and how obtuse its proponents have become.

110

 Jun 02, 2009 at 05:42 PM Raphael Kaufman Says:

Reply to #101  
Milhouse Says:

You are either utterly ignorant of the law, or deliberately lying about it. There are no other choices. The First Amendment protects our right to advocate any position we like, no matter how unpopular. And the position I'm advocating is not at all unpopular.

The First Ammendment is not absolute. Debating whether or not killing an abortionist is morally permissable is fine no matter how unpopular or objectionable one's position may be to another. Advocating killing abortionists comes pretty close to incitement which is not "Protected Speech"

111

 Jun 02, 2009 at 06:44 PM moish Says:

Reply to #81  
tzoorba Says:

Are you deliberately being ignorant?

There is no question that this monster killed late term babies for money. This is legalized murder and is an indictment of America that it is not being legally stopped.

It's very interesting to me that the same idiots who complain about torture of terrorists are very complacent when it comes to mass murder of viable pre infants.

What is the difference to them between a baby on the verge of being born and one that actually exited? If they are both viable, just because on is inside, murder for the slightest of reasons is ok?

chazal already said kol hamerachem al ho'achzorim etc.

112

 Jun 02, 2009 at 06:36 PM moish Says:

Reply to #53  
Anonymous Says:

Be careful with your lunatic suggestion that it is Ok or even required for yidden who get a posek to authorize a murder. Even saying somthing like that in a public forum like this could expose you to civil and criminial liability.

if he is chayav miso it is not murder, although obviously we are in golus and yad hagoyim takifa

113

 Jun 02, 2009 at 07:03 PM PMO Says:

Reply to #59  
Anonymous Says:

mr libertarian. america is not a religious country stop using halacha let me remind you that libertarians believe 100% in separation of church and state. But when it fits your political agenda you use halcha to justify it. your a hypocrite.

Wow... aren't you insane. I do believe 100% in the separation of church and state. However, this *IS* still a JEWISH news board, isn't it? How is giving the Torah view a problem... unless you are a goy, in which case that message was not for you. I was responding to a specific person.

Secondly, my political view is that abortion is LEGAL... I don't agree that it should be legal in most cases, but it is. Therefore, killing a man for doing a 100% legal activity is just plain MURDER. I am DEEPLY saddened that this poor man was killed for doing his 100% legal job. The pain his wife and children must be experiencing is enormous and my heart goes out to them. As for the piece of human filth who killed him.... a needle full of lethal drugs is exactly what the doctor ordered.

114

 Jun 02, 2009 at 07:12 PM PMO Says:

Reply to #59  
Anonymous Says:

mr libertarian. america is not a religious country stop using halacha let me remind you that libertarians believe 100% in separation of church and state. But when it fits your political agenda you use halcha to justify it. your a hypocrite.

Wow... aren't you insane. I do believe 100% in the separation of church and state. However, this *IS* still a JEWISH news board, isn't it? How is giving the Torah view a problem... unless you are a goy, in which case that message was not for you. I was responding to a specific person.

Secondly, my political view is that abortion is LEGAL... I don't agree that it should be legal in most cases, but it is. Therefore, killing a man for doing a 100% legal activity is just plain MURDER. I am DEEPLY saddened that this poor man was killed for doing his 100% legal job. The pain his wife and children must be experiencing is enormous and my heart goes out to them. As for the piece of human filth who killed him.... a needle full of lethal drugs is exactly what the doctor ordered.

115

 Jun 02, 2009 at 07:40 PM Milhouse Says:

Reply to #110  
Raphael Kaufman Says:

The First Ammendment is not absolute. Debating whether or not killing an abortionist is morally permissable is fine no matter how unpopular or objectionable one's position may be to another. Advocating killing abortionists comes pretty close to incitement which is not "Protected Speech"

Oh, and if you're even thinking of mentioning "falsely shouting fire in a theatre and causing a panic", you should know that Schenck has not been valid law for 40 years.

116

 Jun 02, 2009 at 07:38 PM Milhouse Says:

Reply to #110  
Raphael Kaufman Says:

The First Ammendment is not absolute. Debating whether or not killing an abortionist is morally permissable is fine no matter how unpopular or objectionable one's position may be to another. Advocating killing abortionists comes pretty close to incitement which is not "Protected Speech"

You are wrong. There are no two opinions about this. The law is crystal clear; advocating anything one likes, including murder, is protected speech. In America a person can advocate wiping out the Jews, ch"v, or re-enslaving the blacks, and any policeman who lays a hand on him will lose his house in a Bivens suit.

117

 Jun 02, 2009 at 07:35 PM Milhouse Says:

Reply to #109  
Shaul in Monsey Says:

So in your world the only answer to violence is...more violence. How Islamic of you. Your arguments are that weak on the merits that you need to condone murder? Even espouse it. Hardly the Torah perspective. Your comments really do reflect how ingrained this kind of rhetoric has become, and how obtuse its proponents have become.

Violence is the ONLY answer to violence. What do you think stopped Hitler? What are you, some kind of pacifist? The Torah perspective is EXACTLY as I have given it. Killing a rodef is not murder, it's a public service.

118

 Jun 02, 2009 at 07:43 PM Milhouse Says:

Reply to #113  
PMO Says:

Wow... aren't you insane. I do believe 100% in the separation of church and state. However, this *IS* still a JEWISH news board, isn't it? How is giving the Torah view a problem... unless you are a goy, in which case that message was not for you. I was responding to a specific person.

Secondly, my political view is that abortion is LEGAL... I don't agree that it should be legal in most cases, but it is. Therefore, killing a man for doing a 100% legal activity is just plain MURDER. I am DEEPLY saddened that this poor man was killed for doing his 100% legal job. The pain his wife and children must be experiencing is enormous and my heart goes out to them. As for the piece of human filth who killed him.... a needle full of lethal drugs is exactly what the doctor ordered.

The Holocaust was just as legal. Does that mean that killing Nazis was "just plain MURDER", and those who did so were "pieces of human filth" who deserved execution? There's a piece of human filth in this story, all right, but he's thankfully dead. And anyone who calls that murder is pretty filthy too.

Just remember, John Brown was hanged for murder, but ten years later armies were marching in his name.

119

 Jun 02, 2009 at 08:22 PM Anonymous Says:

Reply to #113  
PMO Says:

Wow... aren't you insane. I do believe 100% in the separation of church and state. However, this *IS* still a JEWISH news board, isn't it? How is giving the Torah view a problem... unless you are a goy, in which case that message was not for you. I was responding to a specific person.

Secondly, my political view is that abortion is LEGAL... I don't agree that it should be legal in most cases, but it is. Therefore, killing a man for doing a 100% legal activity is just plain MURDER. I am DEEPLY saddened that this poor man was killed for doing his 100% legal job. The pain his wife and children must be experiencing is enormous and my heart goes out to them. As for the piece of human filth who killed him.... a needle full of lethal drugs is exactly what the doctor ordered.

the person you responded to did not mention religion you brought it in. You were using religion to justify abortion- it has no place in the abortion debate.

Second you make a really dumb argument: many awful things were legal in nazi germany, you feel bad for the gas chamber operators though?

120

 Jun 02, 2009 at 09:49 PM tzoorba Says:

Reply to #102  
anonymous Says:

The abortion decision is a free choice by a woman . Mengele killed children and adults who were forcibly taken to AUSCHWITZ ONLY BECAUSE THEY WERE JEWS.Abortion is not a selective killing because of religion or race. You know very little what happened in Birkenau by making such silly comparison. Judge or executioner is based on the laws of the civil code and you are against abortion which I understand lobby your legislator but shooting of the doctor still is murder and has nothing to do with the medical procedure he performed.

You have a number of issues confused here.

We are discussing the Torah's point of view of abortion and not the law of the land. This does not imply that we will take the law into our own hands. We won't do this, even though it would be justified due to the gravity of the crime, since by Torah guidelines we are not supposed to. (aiva, sacana leclal etc.)

The Torah point of view is that abortion after 40 days (to all opinions) is tantamount to murder. There are extreme circumstances where murder is permitted. Murder is permitted in self defense. It is considered self defense of a mother who would die if her baby were carried to term and since the fetus doesn't have the same life status as the mother, the mother's life takes priority.

Even within the simple morality framework of the Judeo-xtian heritage of this country, killing an unborn child that is late term should rightfully be considered murder. It is only as a concession to the women's liberation movement that widespread abortion has been legalized. Roe of Roe vs. Wade has reversed her position and is against abortion.

The law of the land doesn't always mean that it is right. It was the Nazi law of the land to kill Jews and by that token he was as innocent as the mother child murderers.

What makes a mother's whim sacred so that her fancy can cause the murder cum abortion of her child? This confusion is caused by your advocacy of abortion choice which means a mother's lifestyle comes ahead of a human (fetus) life.

The monster called Tiller killed thousands of babies for money and with no good reason. He deserved to die an untimely death by any rational standard. The death penalty is fully justified in this case (although not by the current immoral civil law). The only question is how it should be administered and by whom. A death penalty for an evil person is not murder in the moral sense.

121

 Jun 03, 2009 at 06:19 PM Ahavah Says:

Reply to #100  
Milhouse Says:

That goes too far. There are cases where abortion is necessary in order to save the mother's life. In those cases the baby is directly endangering the mother, and so he is a rodef, in exactly the same way that this "doctor" was endangering babies' lives. And therefore killing the baby is justified, for the exact same reason that killing this "doctor" was justified.

No, there are cases where the baby needs to be delivered early to save the mother's life, and this can be done by induced labour or by c-section. There is NO medical condition that REQUIRES you to kill the baby. I defy you to name even one. Doctors have testified before congress that there is no reason to purposefully kill the baby in these circumstances - one of the largest late-term abortionists of the 80s and 90s even admitted this before congress. The testimony is public record and was widely reported. There is no medical reason in these cases to kill the child, and plenty of emergency pre-term c-sections and deliveries are made every day to babies as young as 24 weeks, who often survive with few or no lingering medical problems. The only difference is that those mothers, even though in danger, wanted their babies saved. The ones who go to abortionists instead of ob-gyns want their babies dead. That is the only difference. These are facts. A late term abortion has no other purpose than to kill the child - it's murder, plain and simple.

122

 Jun 04, 2009 at 12:41 AM Milhouse Says:

Reply to #121  
Ahavah Says:

No, there are cases where the baby needs to be delivered early to save the mother's life, and this can be done by induced labour or by c-section. There is NO medical condition that REQUIRES you to kill the baby. I defy you to name even one. Doctors have testified before congress that there is no reason to purposefully kill the baby in these circumstances - one of the largest late-term abortionists of the 80s and 90s even admitted this before congress. The testimony is public record and was widely reported. There is no medical reason in these cases to kill the child, and plenty of emergency pre-term c-sections and deliveries are made every day to babies as young as 24 weeks, who often survive with few or no lingering medical problems. The only difference is that those mothers, even though in danger, wanted their babies saved. The ones who go to abortionists instead of ob-gyns want their babies dead. That is the only difference. These are facts. A late term abortion has no other purpose than to kill the child - it's murder, plain and simple.

I am not a doctor, so I don't know. But from what I've read, it seems that few people claim that NO such cases exist; the most I've seen is that they are very few and rare. Maybe Charlie Hall can enlighten us on whether such cases actually exist.

Is it possible for an ectopic pregnancy to last long enough to be called "late term"? If so, that would be an example. But I don't suppose it is possible.

In any case, it's irrelevant to the case of Tiller, because women whose life was in danger didn't need to go to him; they could get treated anywhere. The women who went to him were the ones whom almost nobody else will agree to abort, either because they're afraid of pro-life violence, or because although they're abortionists even they have a line they won't cross.

123

 Jun 04, 2009 at 03:02 PM Ahavah Says:

Reply to #122  
Milhouse Says:

I am not a doctor, so I don't know. But from what I've read, it seems that few people claim that NO such cases exist; the most I've seen is that they are very few and rare. Maybe Charlie Hall can enlighten us on whether such cases actually exist.

Is it possible for an ectopic pregnancy to last long enough to be called "late term"? If so, that would be an example. But I don't suppose it is possible.

In any case, it's irrelevant to the case of Tiller, because women whose life was in danger didn't need to go to him; they could get treated anywhere. The women who went to him were the ones whom almost nobody else will agree to abort, either because they're afraid of pro-life violence, or because although they're abortionists even they have a line they won't cross.

An ectopic pregnancy will burst the fallopian tubes and cause dangerous bleeding in as little as four weeks of pregnancy - it is not possible for a fetus to grow much more than that in a tube that is maybe 1/4" wide at best, so you're correct, there's no such thing as a "late term" ectopic pregnancy. In rare instances, a baby can grow outside the womb altogether, but there are documented cases where these have gone full term and been delivered healthy. But if they do become a problem, an abortion won't help, since the child isn't in the womb to be aborted. The woman has to actually have surgery on her abdomen to remove the fetus attached somewhere in her abdominal cavity outside the womb. In that case, there would be little way to save the child's life, since there's no way to transplant a placenta into the womb. Once you detach it from whatever it's attached to, the child suffocates in a few minutes. But again, an abortionist wouldn't be doing this - a certified internal surgeon assisted by an ob-gyn would have to do it. The reason most abortionists won't kill viable babies is because it is morally disgusting and medically reprehensible and violates their Hippocratic oath to "do no harm" to a living being. As I said, a mother with a dangerous pregnancy can go to ANY hospital or ob-gyn and have a pre-term c-section or delivery, and they will save her life and try their best to save the baby's life, too. The ONLY reason to go to an abortionist is if you INTEND to have your baby murdered.

124

Sign-in to post a comment

Scroll Up
Advertisements:

Sell your scrap gold and broken jewelry and earn hard cash sell gold today!