I just read a letter to the editor of my local paper, the Grants Pass Daily Courier (April 12, 00). The letter states the following, among other things:

Exodus 21; 22-23: "If two men are fighting, and in the process hurt a pregnant woman so that she has a miscarriage, but she lives, then the man who injured her shall be fined whatever amount the woman's husband shall demand, and the judges approve. But if any harm comes to the woman, and she dies, he shall be executed."

]he writer continues, this "proves that God does not considera a fetus which is unable to live outside the womb a 'life', requireing a 'life for a life' punishment. The mother, however, is such a life, as are the docdtors and others murdered by fanatical anti-abortionists.

I won't get into the sexism which is so obvous here, but rather the issue of whether a fetus is a "life" or not. I personally think this attitude is vast oversimplification, but I think it very ironic that this would be stated in the bible, which is the very book so many quote all the time to justify their attacks against abortion clinic personnel.

Unfortunately, I can't find our duty bible (Yes, folks, I DO have a bible in the house. It's my wife's) so I can't verify the language here, though it sounds a bit more direct and easier to read than I have come to expect from said book.

-- jumpoff joe (jumpoff@echoweb.neet), April 14, 2000

Answers

Oh gee I sure hope somebody can come up with the answer on this one.

Did you really think before you posted this? This is pertaining to a fight. What does that have to do with a willing abortion?

And while at it, can somebody answer why many states consider if vehicular homocide if you are the cause of an accident and the fetus dies. I mean after all, it isnt a life, right.?

Now think on that, and let the discussion begin.

-- shady (never@xxx.c), April 14, 2000.

Seems that you want to use the bible when it suits you, too Joe. Since NO ONE can say when life begins, shouldn't we "first do no harm?" What can be more disgusting than to reach up inside of a woman and carve up and vacuum a "potential" baby? Or worse, pull the baby out, and drill a hole in their head, and vacuum their brain out? And then dissect whats left and do experiments on them. It doesn't take the bible or God to tell us that there's something wrong here.

-- KoFE (your@town.USA), April 14, 2000.

If I squash a caterpillar, have I killed a butterfly?

-- Lars (lars@indy.net), April 14, 2000.

Lars:

Genius, baby. pure genius.

-- FutureShock (gray@matter.think), April 14, 2000.

Ass kissing FS, pure ass kissing............It's already too late for you, Lars.

-- KoFE (your@town.USA), April 14, 2000.

Such genius. Whether you kill a butterfly in its cocoon or in its last breath of life--you have killed. What part of "thou shalt not kill don't you understand? you may think it is no big deal to kill a child because you can't see it yet but as "that book says"...many times and in many ways...God knows us, he loves us, he values us no matter at what stage in our development we are and he wants us to treat one another that way as well.

Psalm 139 For the director of music. Of David. A psalm.

".....For you created my inmost being; you knit me together in my mother's womb. I praise you because I am fearfully and wonderfully made; your works are wonderful, I know that full well. My frame was not hidden from you when I was made in the secret place. When I was woven together in the depths of the earth, your eyes saw my unformed body. All the days ordained for me were written in your book before one of them came to be. How precious to me are your thoughts, O God! How vast is the sum of them! Were I to count them, they would outnumber the grains of sand."

http://www.independent.ie/1999/302/d20a.shtml http://www.prolifeinfo.org/news3.html

-- tt (cuddluppy@aol.com), April 14, 2000.

Then I guess I can squash a bald eagle's egg because it's not a bald eagle, right?

-- haha (haha@haha.com), April 14, 2000.

Please no more Bible Bullshit,thats what Your Churches and Idols and Temples are for.

-- Not Bamboozled (not@all.convinced), April 14, 2000.

NAS Genesis 25:21-24 21 And Isaac prayed to the Lord on behalf of his wife, because she was barren; and the Lord answered him and Rebekah his wife conceived. 22 But the children struggled together within her; and she said, "If it is so, why then am I this way?" So she went to inquire of the Lord. 23 And the Lord said to her, "Two nations are in your womb; 24 When her days to be delivered were fulfilled, behold, there were twins in her womb.

Question: Did God not see life here?

NAS Psalms 139:13-14 13 For Thou didst form my inward parts; Thou didst weave me in my mother's womb. 14 I will give thanks to Thee, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made; Wonderful are Thy works, And my soul knows it very well.

I am also thankful that my soul also knows it very well.

Tommy R.....

-- Tommy Rogers (Been there@Just a Thought.com), April 14, 2000.

I'm not using the bible when it suits me; I'm just amused at its contradictions, is all.

I personally am not pro abortion, but I'm not pro government intervention in women's lives. I guess I'm in a state of indecision.

I personally don't worry if a bunch of my sperms don't ever get together with some cute ovum, and I'm not concerned about a single celled "human" zygote, either. On the other hand, I'm disgusted that someone would abort a fetus which is fully developed (as mentioned above, a la electrolux)

But somewwhere in between a sperm, an egg, or a zygote, it is clear that a baby human exists. The question is where we draw the line.

How about when the heart starts pumping? Or we can record, through brain waves, when there is conciousness?

Or MAYBE, people can just start being a little bit careful about causing an unwanted pregnancy in the first place.

Yeah, right.

-- jumpoff joe (jumpoff@echoweb.neet), April 14, 2000.

Jumpoff,

Online you should be able to access a bible for free even if you can't find your own. You should read Exodus 21: 20-21. There it says that if a man should strike his slave so hard that the slave should die, he should be punished (NOT put to death), but if the slave should live a day or two before dying he should NOT be punished as the slave is his property.

So looked at it from this perspective, a *fetus* is worth MORE than a fully-grown male or female slave.

The book of Exodus and the covenant at Mt. Sinai is the first example of law in many situations (to my knowledge) recorded. Before these rules, one could say there may have been NO penalty for killing either a slave or accidentally killing a fetus.

By codifying the payment for a fetus' death, they were stating without question that it had value. I'd say the implication of the passage is exactly the opposite of your letter-writer's. I imagine that someone more eloquent than me will reply to your paper and point this out to your editors, and it would be nice if you'd post their reply on this forum!

If you want a religion that *approves* of abortion, try "scientific pantheism". ;-) As there are no rules you must obey, there really is nothing prohibited either.

Frank

-- Someone (ChimingIn@twocents.cam), April 14, 2000.

A society that kills its offspring is a society in trouble.

-- FactFinder (FactFinder@bzn.com), April 14, 2000.

Factfinder,

Can I jump to the conclusion that you are impregnable?!

-- flora (***@__._), April 14, 2000.

Well, either JumpoffJoe or the paper has screwed up what the Bible really says.

New King James Version:

If men fight, and hurt a woman with child, so that she . . .

gives birth prematurely . . .

YET NO HARM FOLLOWS . . .

he shall be punished accordingly as the woman's husband imposes on him; and he shall pay as the judges determine.

BUT IF ANY HARM FOLLOWS, THEN YOU SHALL GIVE LIFE FOR LIFE, EYE FOR EYE, etc . . .

Exodus 21:22-24

-- Robert Bright (roosterbos@go.com), April 15, 2000.

Anyone care to hazard a guess on how many different versions of the bible there are? Think you know where the absolute truth lies? When a child dies inside it's mother, that is called the will of God. But we, who are made in his image, are not allowed to judge for what purpose our bodies are used? Does it not seem right that the divine should care more about the physical and emotional welfare of those who actually breathe and walk upon this earth? Duh.

-- Gia (laureltree7@hotmail.com), April 15, 2000.

Let's apply a little New Testament logic here and follow the example of Jesus when he repeatedly drew his parables from the agrarian lifestyle of the times:

At what point is an apple recognized as an apple? Does it become an apple before or after it is plucked from the tree and removed from its stem?

-- (BustrCollins@aol.com), April 15, 2000.

always interesting that folks that have no belief in or no interest in the bible, love to use it to brow beat others by taking verses out of context. why doesn't anyone pick on the koran or some buddhist work? strange isn't it. bible is the real target. hmmmmm...

if you don't read/study the bible and understand it in its full context, you don't really get it. honestly. that is not a slam but it is not a book you can just casually pick up and read and understand. the more i read it and learn of it, the more amazed i am as to how beautiful and rich it is. and full of life.

novices can check out the Life Application Study Bible New Living Translation--full of explanations, contextual information, charts, etc that can bring fuller understanding plus written in very reasonable language. i am giving it to my whole family for easter. maybe you should get one for your wife, joe. then when you pick up her "duty bible" it won't send you off ranting like this. :-)

-- tt (cuddluppy@aol.com), April 15, 2000.

always interesting that folks that have no belief in or no interest in the bible, love to use it to brow beat others by taking verses out of context. why doesn't anyone pick on the koran or some buddhist work? strange isn't it. bible is the real target. hmmmmm...

Well, since it is the Bible that Christians use to brow beat non- Christians, quoting back at them with the Koran would not make very much sense now would it?

why doesn't anyone pick on the koran or some buddhist work? strange isn't it.

I suspect that if the Muslims and Buddists were as noisy and in-your- face about their religion as Christians are, the Koran would be "picked on". It would not seem strange at all to you, if you were able to step out of your dogma and see it in a fresh light.

-- Uncle Deedah (unkeed@yahoo.com), April 15, 2000.

Killing is killing....period!

-- cin (cinloo@aol.corn), April 15, 2000.

Well there's old tt,cuddlepuppy laying on the guilt just like a good Christian. Anybody gives me a Bible for Easter they'll get a rotten egg in return. Of course I've read the Bible much more than I wanted to and I'm amazed at how beautiful and rich the contradicitons are.

I was raised on the King James version, but since King James had his own agenda, I now only refer to the Oxford Bible, from the original translations.

Funny Joe, you didn't sound like you were ranting to me???

Gawd, please protect me from your followers.

-- gilda (jess@listbot.com), April 15, 2000.

Gilda,

Honesty in scholarship is probably more important than anything else. Comparing Jumpoff's letter writer and my interpretation of Exodus, whose would YOU say comes closer to the truth?

What do you want to be protected FROM?

Uncle,

You said, "I suspect that if the Muslims and Buddists were as noisy and in-your- face about their religion as Christians are, the Koran would be "picked on". It would not seem strange at all to you, if you were able to step out of your dogma and see it in a fresh light. "

Noisy and in-your-face? Who started the thread and why? If someone implied YOU were something you abhor, wouldn't you feel you had the right to respond?

Frank

-- Someone (ChimingIn@twocents.cam), April 15, 2000.

Listen, You Kooks,a Society that breeds like Rats,will live like Rats,and ARE Rats.

-- One big Rat (Been@dumb.too), April 15, 2000.

Big Rat, you are right on target. Do you remember the study about overcrowding of rats?

First the rats were given plenty of room to raise their offspring in uncrowded living conditions. As their numbers increased with more in more rats in the same space, they started exhibiting bizarre and agressive behavior, which they had never done in the past. For instance, mother rats started killing their offspring, male (teenage) rats ran in gangs and attacked other rats. Male rats began mounting other male rates. Fights broke out and some rats ran other rats out of their nests and took them over. Also, many exhibited eating disorders and depression. Doesn't that remind anyone of anything?

There are too many of us.

For you Bible Thumpers, there's a verse from Isaiah, "Woe unto them that join house to house, that lay field to field, till there be no place, that they may be placed alone in the midst of the earth."

-- gilda (jess@listbot.com), April 15, 2000.

Frank,

In discussions of Christianity, the egg came first.

-- Uncle Deedah (unkeed@yahoo.com), April 15, 2000.

Uncle Deedah-

Acutally, it was the ROOSTER who came first!

-- Tarzan the Ape Man (tarzan@swingingthroughthejunglewithouta.net), April 15, 2000.

Uncle Deedah- This one's for you!:) My Karma ran over your Dogma. :)

-- Gia (laureltree7@hotmail.com), April 15, 2000.

Well, I went to look for my (wife's) bible, and it was right where it was SUPPOSED to be! Praise Jesus--it's a miracle; it wasn't their when I looked before, I promise.

Anyway, this one is called "The Oxford Self-Pronouncing Bible THE HOLY BIBLE"

whatever that means.

Exodus 21:22 begins, "If men strive, and hurt a woman with child, so that her fruit depart FROM HER" MY Caps represesnt THEIR italics.

So I guess there are so many translations that it can be interpreted any way a person wants?

tt, I'm sorry you interpret my eloquent philosophizing as "ranting". Hmf.

As far as your position that it's "always interesting that folks that have no belief in or no interest in the bible, love to use it to brow beat others by taking verses out of context. why doesn't anyone pick on the koran or some buddhist work? strange isn't it. bible is the real target. hmmmmm... "

I suspect that the reason we of the open mind don't "pick on the koran, or some buddhist work" (don't forget the deists, the scientific pantheists, muslims, Jews, and oh so many other religions). Maybe it's because the christians are wearing a figurative "kick me" sign, and we can't resist, because so MANY of them are so DAMNED ARROGANT, holier than though, dogmatic, and self righteous. I don't know very many, if any, of the other religious types who fit this description.

By the way, my wife got this bible for graduation from Taft High School, Jue17, 1966, from her grandmother. I think she's had enough time in the saddle by now to decide whether she needs a "better" version or not on her own. I'm sure as hell not going to buy her any religious paraphernalia!

A chicken and an egg lay next to each other in bed. The chicken, with a self satisfied smile on it's face, was smoking a cigarette.

The egg said, "well, I guess that answers THAT old question"

Gilda, as usual, we return to the fact that too many of us, too often, produce too many offspring. Too bad, too sad. We're bad. I'm mad.

JOJ

Frank, you're right, I was noisy, and in your face (not you personally-christians in general. Sorry). I guess I couldn't resist. I did start it. But I did find it educational. Just how many different versions of the book (written by man, but guided by the hand of god) ARE there, do you suppose? Why so many? Are they all saying the same thing? Why not? Which one/ones are right? Which one/ones are wrong? Why did the omnipotent one allow this confusiong to happen? Wouldn't it have been simpler if he had taken the time to write it himself, sign the original copy before a notary public, and copywrite it? Duh!

-- jumpoff joe (jumpoff@echoweb.neet), April 16, 2000.

Well, I went to look for my (wife's) bible, and it was right where it was SUPPOSED to be! Praise Jesus--it's a miracle; it wasn't their when I looked before, I promise.

Anyway, this one is called "The Oxford Self-Pronouncing Bible THE HOLY BIBLE"

whatever that means.

Exodus 21:22 begins, "If men strive, and hurt a woman with child, so that her fruit depart FROM HER" MY Caps represesnt THEIR italics.

So I guess there are so many translations that it can be interpreted any way a person wants?

tt, I'm sorry you interpret my eloquent philosophizing as "ranting". Hmf.

As far as your position that it's "always interesting that folks that have no belief in or no interest in the bible, love to use it to brow beat others by taking verses out of context. why doesn't anyone pick on the koran or some buddhist work? strange isn't it. bible is the real target. hmmmmm... "

I suspect that the reason we of the open mind don't "pick on the koran, or some buddhist work" (don't forget the deists, the scientific pantheists, muslims, Jews, and oh so many other religions). Maybe it's because the christians are wearing a figurative "kick me" sign, and we can't resist, because so MANY of them are so DAMNED ARROGANT, holier than though, dogmatic, and self righteous. I don't know very many, if any, of the other religious types who fit this description.

By the way, my wife got this bible for graduation from Taft High School, Jue17, 1966, from her grandmother. I think she's had enough time in the saddle by now to decide whether she needs a "better" version or not on her own. I'm sure as hell not going to buy her any religious paraphernalia!

A chicken and an egg lay next to each other in bed. The chicken, with a self satisfied smile on it's face, was smoking a cigarette.

The egg said, "well, I guess that answers THAT old question"

Gilda, as usual, we return to the fact that too many of us, too often, produce too many offspring. Too bad, too sad. We're bad. I'm mad.

Frank, you're right, I was noisy, and in your face (not you personally-christians in general. Sorry). I guess I couldn't resist. I did start it. But I did find it educational. Just how many different versions of the book (written by man, but guided by the hand of god) ARE there, do you suppose? Why so many? Are they all saying the same thing? Why not? Which one/ones are right? Which one/ones are wrong? Why did the omnipotent one allow this confusiong to happen? Wouldn't it have been simpler if he had taken the time to write it himself, sign the original copy before a notary public, and copywrite it? Duh!

Pax vobiscum,

JOJ

-- jumpoff joe (jumpoff@echoweb.neet), April 16, 2000.

Jumpoff,

ARRGGH, if you only were going to read one of my posts, I'd prefer it was the first one. The more important thing to my mind is that you'd come away with an understanding that your letter-writer is probably seriously misinterpretting the passage he's quoting. The less important thing is how hurt my feelings are. And believe me they are TERRIBLY hurt. :-)

Anyway, the reason I think the interpretation is important, is that as the Bible is supposed to be a divinely inspired work, there (for believers) really is a right and a wrong interpretation (although I suppose I'm liberal enough to assume that this interpretation can change a bit depending on God's allowances for His people and their times. (Figure that out!)

In any event, Good Night.

Frank

P.S. If you DO reread my first post, you'll note I wasn't above taking a cheap dig at Sci-Pan, so overall, don't expect me to be overly critical of you...

-- Someone (ChimingIn@twocents.cam), April 16, 2000.

Sorry, Frank, that your feelings are hurt. What, exactly, did I do to hurt them? I'm merely expressing myself, which is, to my way of thinking, what this forum is about.

I DID read your first post; I just didn't see any need to reply. I'll revisit it, if it will make your feelings start to feel better.

" So looked at it from this perspective, a *fetus* is worth MORE than a fully-grown male or female slave. "

I'd like to say, "Whoopie", but I won't, in deference to your sensitive feelings. But I don't understand why it matters if the fetus's value is greater than that of a slave? It still doesn't appear to have as much value as that of a "person" (or a "woman", to be specific.)

"The book of Exodus and the covenant at Mt. Sinai is the first example of law in many situations (to my knowledge) recorded. Before these rules, one could say there may have been NO penalty for killing either a slave or accidentally killing a fetus."

So are you saying that, after the Covenant at Mr. Sinai, it was ordered that fetuses and slaves have a value, but not necessarily as great a value as that of a person?

" By codifying the payment for a fetus' death, they were stating without question that it had value. I'd say the implication of the passage is exactly the opposite of your letter-writer's. "

Actually, I think that to place a monetary value on a slave or a fetus implies that their worth is considerably LESS than that of a person, whose death requires another death, according to the Exodus verses. Am I missing something here?

JOJ

-- jumpoff joe (jumpoff@echoweb.neet), April 17, 2000.

Jumpoff,

The ":-)" after the "feelings are hurt" part was supposed to let you know I was joking. Sorry if that didn't come through in the post.

Also, you said, "Actually, I think that to place a monetary value on a slave or a fetus implies that their worth is considerably LESS than that of a person, whose death requires another death, according to the Exodus verses. Am I missing something here? "

No, you're not missing anything, but the point is this wasn't written yesterday, when a basic amount of decency is expected from people, but back when there may have been NO punishment for these acts. I think what is happening here is the documentation of the beginning of law and a codified value system. I guess it's a "glass is half-full" vs. "glass is half-empty" sort of thing. What do you see as more important, that fetuses and slaves weren't accorded full rights under the law, or the fact that for the first time they DID have SOME rights?

Frank

Seriously though, if I would have thought you'd interpret my "feelings are hurt" stuff seriously, I never would have posted it. I was kidding already. -F

-- Someone (ChimingIn@twocents.cam), April 17, 2000.

Hi everybody, to those who ask how many times the bible's been re- written, who knows? If you do your research you will find that the King James version is virtually the same as the dead sea scrolls that were found(I forget the exact date) in 1937 or maybe 1947. Either way, do your research.

-- tom holmquist (tholmquist@3web.net), December 10, 2002.