Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Largest ever study finds abortion increases risk of severe mental health problems by 81%
LifeSiteNews ^ | 9/1/11 | Thaddeus Baklinski

Posted on 09/01/2011 4:08:38 PM PDT by wagglebee

LONDON, UK, September 1, 2011 (LifeSiteNews.com) - A new study published today in the British Journal of Psychiatry found that women who underwent an abortion experienced an 81% increased risk of mental health problems. The study also found that almost 10% of all women’s mental health problems are directly linked to abortion.

Conducted by Priscilla K. Coleman, Professor of Human Development and Family Studies at Bowling Green State University, Ohio, USA, the study was based on an analysis of 22 separate studies and 36 measures of effect, that involved a total of 877,181 participants of whom 163,831 had experienced an abortion. The study took into account pre-existing mental health problems prior to the abortion.

“In order to avoid any allegations of bias,” Dr. Coleman explained, “very stringent inclusion criteria were employed. This means every strong study was included and weaker studies were excluded.

“Specifically, among the rules for inclusion were sample size of 100 or more participants, use of a comparison group, and employment of controls for variables that may confound the effects such as demographics, exposure to violence, prior history of mental health problems, etc.”

This makes Dr. Coleman’s study the most comprehensive of its kind to date.

“Given the methodological limitations of recently published qualitative reviews of abortion and mental health, a quantitative synthesis was deemed necessary to represent more accurately the published literature and to provide clarity to clinicians” Dr. Coleman stated in the report.

She said her research was focused on offering “the largest quantitative estimate of mental health risks associated with abortion available in the world literature.” This, she said, would give health care practitioners “an accurate synopsis of the best available evidence in order to provide women with valid information in order to make informed health care decisions.”

The research revealed that abortion was associated with a 34% increased risk for anxiety disorders; 37% greater risk of depression; 110% greater risk of alcohol abuse and 220% greater risk of marijuana use/abuse.

Abortion was also linked with a 155% greater risk of attempting to commit suicide.

“The strongest subgroup estimates of increased risk occurred when abortion was compared with term pregnancy and when the outcomes pertained to substance use and suicidal behavior,” Dr. Coleman observed.

“Calling into question the conclusions from traditional reviews,” the report concluded, “the results revealed a moderate to highly increased risk of mental health problems after abortion. Consistent with the tenets of evidence-based medicine, this information should inform the delivery of abortion services.”

Commenting on the results of the study, Pro Life Campaign of Ireland spokesperson, Dr. Ruth Cullen said, “These findings are extremely disturbing and completely undermine pro-choice claims that abortion alleviates mental health problems. In fact, the study further proves that the opposite is the case.”

“These findings cannot be ignored,” Dr. Cullen stated. “They raise very serious issues for everyone regardless of which side they are one in the abortion debate. The best interests of women can only be served by an honest and dispassionate appraisal of the facts.”

Dr. Mary L. Davenport, president of the American Association of ProLife Obstetricians and Gynecologists and medical director of Nigeria’s Magnificat Maternal Health Project, said the study, “sheds important light on the mental health of women,” and exposes the “egregious cover-up of abortion complications” that are an aspect of “the abortion distortion.”

“This review, which is larger than any study to date, contradicts the recent and biased and less systematic review by the American Psychological Association, which fails to find a relationship between mental health problems and abortion,” Dr. Davenport wrote today in the American Thinker.

“The new meta-analysis also contradicts the stance of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG), which has been silent on the mental health impact of abortion in its official publications despite overwhelming evidence over the last two decades of abortion’s adverse effects.”

“By so powerfully linking abortion to mental health problems, the Coleman study helps us comprehend the magnitude of the damage done to entire nations by reckless, permissive abortion policies,” Dr. Davenport concluded.

An abstract of the study titled “Abortion and mental health: quantitative synthesis and analysis of research published 1995–2009” with links to the full text is available on the British Journal of Psychiatry website here.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: abortion; moralabsolutes; prolife
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-157 next last
Commenting on the results of the study, Pro Life Campaign of Ireland spokesperson, Dr. Ruth Cullen said, “These findings are extremely disturbing and completely undermine pro-choice claims that abortion alleviates mental health problems. In fact, the study further proves that the opposite is the case.”

Exactly, it is destroying society.

1 posted on 09/01/2011 4:08:41 PM PDT by wagglebee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: cgk; Coleus; cpforlife.org; narses; Salvation; 8mmMauser
Pro-Life Ping
2 posted on 09/01/2011 4:09:49 PM PDT by wagglebee ("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

Killing innocent people does that.


3 posted on 09/01/2011 4:12:01 PM PDT by freedomfiter2 (Brutal acts of commission and yawning acts of omission both strengthen the hand of the devil.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 185JHP; 230FMJ; AKA Elena; Albion Wilde; Aleighanne; Alexander Rubin; Amos the Prophet; ...
Moral Absolutes Ping!

Freepmail wagglebee to subscribe or unsubscribe from the moral absolutes ping list.

FreeRepublic moral absolutes keyword search
[ Add keyword moral absolutes to flag FR articles to this ping list ]


4 posted on 09/01/2011 4:12:29 PM PDT by wagglebee ("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

Fits with and into the liberalism paradigm and agenda of the continued dumbing down of the world’s populace..../s =.=


5 posted on 09/01/2011 4:14:57 PM PDT by cranked
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

How do you run from your thoughts when you know you have taken a human life? No matter where you go there are reminders-—children playing, babies crying, women shopping for back-to-school items; playgrounds and strollers and soccer teams. There is no escape. Even though our laws say “yes,” every mother and father already knows that killing is wrong, whether they admit it or not.


6 posted on 09/01/2011 4:17:57 PM PDT by Faith
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: freedomfiter2

No kidding.


7 posted on 09/01/2011 4:25:32 PM PDT by stanne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

Why are they finally willing to admit this? Is the cost to the government for treatment of a mental disorder higher than the cost of taking care of an extra child?


8 posted on 09/01/2011 4:27:28 PM PDT by toothfairy86
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee
This is why the pro-abortion crowd seem so nut-so to normal people ~ THEY ARE!!!

Can you imagine if you did a study that compared dentists to abortionists ~ well, maybe you don't want to imagine any of that, but the abortionists undoubtedly ENJOY THEIR WORK and probably don't jump off any scales normed to Eric Dahmer.

9 posted on 09/01/2011 4:27:39 PM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee; 10thAmendmentGuy
"These findings are extremely disturbing and completely undermine pro-choice claims that abortion alleviates mental health problems. In fact, the study further proves that the opposite is the case.”

It's the truth. Nothing but the simple truth.

10 posted on 09/01/2011 4:31:25 PM PDT by little jeremiah (Courage is not simply one of the virtues, but the form of every virtue at the testing point. CSLewis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee
Dr. Coleman's earlier work on this topic is available at http://www.prolifetechnology.org/paper/2005-p-coleman.pdf.

The Eighth annual Pro-Life Science & Technology Conference will be held on Saturday, September 10th at the Engineers Club in Dayton, OH. Register at the web site, www.prolifetechnology.org.

11 posted on 09/01/2011 4:33:13 PM PDT by JoeFromSidney (New book: RESISTANCE TO TYRANNY. A primer on armed revolt. Available form Amazon.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: little jeremiah

Thought you weren’t going to ping me anymore? And I’ve never been in favor of a mental health exception for abortion. I’m in favor of a rape exception — although I agree that overlaps with mental health. What I’m not in favor of is women who are “depressed” because their boyfriend dumped them or because it’s rainy outside being able to get abortions because they were too stupid to use birth control. Got it? See the difference? The mental health exception is wide enough to drive a truck through. I won’t hold a woman accountable for having a child put in her against her will. I will hold all the others accountable, however.


12 posted on 09/01/2011 4:35:20 PM PDT by 10thAmendmentGuy ("[Drug] crusaders cannot accept the fact that they are not God." -Thomas Sowell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: toothfairy86

No. The child will likely ...

1) grow up
2) pay taxes
3) raise 2.1 kids

... thus, the empirically and financially sound way, is life.


13 posted on 09/01/2011 4:53:57 PM PDT by ROTB (Sans Christian revival, we are government slaves, or nuked by China/Russia when we revolt.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: 10thAmendmentGuy

> I won’t hold a woman accountable for having a child put in her against her will.

*********

You don’t believe in God, right?


14 posted on 09/01/2011 4:56:47 PM PDT by ROTB (Sans Christian revival, we are government slaves, or nuked by China/Russia when we revolt.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: ROTB
You don’t believe in God, right?

Not your god. My religion (Judaism) teaches that abortion is acceptable in cases of rape. I'm entitled to it. Quoting Rabbi Simmons:

"In Jewish law, a baby attains becomes a full-fledged human being when the head emerges from the womb. Before then, the fetus is considered a partial life.

So is it permitted to destroy this partial life?

Generally, no. This is illustrated by a case in the Talmud whereby a building collapsed on Shabbat. The rescue crew does not know if anyone is trapped under the rubble or not. And even if someone is trapped, they may already be dead. Despite these doubts, we push aside the restrictions of Shabbat in order to dig out the rubble - on the chance that it may result in the prolonging of human life. Why? Because every part of human life - even a doubtful, partial human life - has infinite value.

This applies to a fetus as well.

However, there can be certain factors which may create an exception. For example, when partial life threatens a full life. The Talmud discusses a case where doctors say that if the mother continues with the pregnancy, she will die. In such a case, we kill the fetus in order to save the mother. Why? Because when the partial life of the fetus is weighed against the full life of the mother, we give precedence to saving the full life.

Our question now is where to draw the line? What constitutes a "threat to the mother?"

As a general guideline, if the fetus poses a real danger to the mother - i.e. the pregnancy will aggravate a heart condition or will cause the mother to go blind - then there is room for discussion.

What about danger to emotional health? There are certain circumstances where this, too, may be grounds for abortion. For example, if the mother became pregnant through rape, and the thought of bearing this child will cause her a nervous breakdown or severe emotional trauma."

15 posted on 09/01/2011 5:02:18 PM PDT by 10thAmendmentGuy ("[Drug] crusaders cannot accept the fact that they are not God." -Thomas Sowell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: 10thAmendmentGuy

>I won’t hold a woman accountable for having a child put in her against her will.

***************

Why hold the child accountable?


16 posted on 09/01/2011 5:03:58 PM PDT by ROTB (Sans Christian revival, we are government slaves, or nuked by China/Russia when we revolt.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: ROTB
More from Rabbi Simmons:

"Western society has slipped far from this Torah value. Of the approximately 2 million abortions performed annually in the United States, about 75 percent are attributed to matters of convenience (i.e. having a baby would interfere with the mother's school or work), or to financial considerations (i.e. a baby is not affordable at this time).

In Judaism, these constitute unacceptable reasons for killing the "partial life" fetus. When one's parents become old and require costly medication, should we then kill them also for financial considerations?!

Or how about when a fetus is diagnosed as having birth defects? Some argue that abortion of a handicapped fetus spares the child a "poor quality of life." Yet who said that having one arm constitutes a poor quality of life?! Should the mother of Stephen Hawking (the world's leading astrophysicist who is near-fully paralyzed) have made a decision that his was a life not worth living? Every time someone loses a limb in an accident, should we kill them?!

Or how about mental retardation? If a set of highly intelligent parents are appalled to discover that their fetus has an IQ of "only" 100, is abortion justified?

Judaism says that this type of selection process is evil. It hearkens to the Nazi program called "T-4," which systematically set out to kill all physically and mentally disabled persons."

17 posted on 09/01/2011 5:04:50 PM PDT by 10thAmendmentGuy ("[Drug] crusaders cannot accept the fact that they are not God." -Thomas Sowell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

Ya think?

It wouldn’t have anything to do with the slaughter of their own child, now would it?


18 posted on 09/01/2011 5:14:16 PM PDT by metmom (For freedom Christ has set us free; stand firm therefore, & do not submit again to a yoke of slavery)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 10thAmendmentGuy

I said I won’t read your freepmails. I thought this might interest you since you favor abortion in the case of rape.


19 posted on 09/01/2011 5:19:51 PM PDT by little jeremiah (Courage is not simply one of the virtues, but the form of every virtue at the testing point. CSLewis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

This explains a lot about feminists. Seriously.


20 posted on 09/01/2011 5:24:24 PM PDT by Secret Agent Man (I'd like to tell you, but then I'd have to kill you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 10thAmendmentGuy

The Talmud discusses a case where doctors say that if the mother continues with the pregnancy, she will die. In such a case, we kill the fetus in order to save the mother. Why? Because when the partial life of the fetus is weighed against the full life of the mother, we give precedence to saving the full life.

*****************

What is the justification for such a Talmudic decree in the Tanakh? The Talmud is mideval Rabbis saying this and that, but surely life is for God to give and take according to Torah or God’s will. Where in the Tanakh is this Rabbinic abortion exception justified?

Skipping over God’s obvious displeasure with killing pregnant women in Amos 1:13, let’s proceed directly to Torah:

Show no pity: life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot.
Deuteronomy 19:21

But if there is serious injury, you are to take life for life
Exodus 21:23

God even cares about animals.

Anyone who takes the life of someone’s animal must make restitution—life for life.
Leviticus 24:18

So, I ask again, where in the Tanakh is the justification for the Talmudic principle that an unborn child is a “partial life”?

**My religion (Judaism) teaches that abortion is acceptable
**in cases of rape. I’m entitled to it.

You should be less concerned about Rabbinic Talmudism (bloodless religion invented after the destruction of the 2nd Temple), which masquerades as Torah Apocalyptic Judaism (blood sacrifices, given by God at Sinai with millions of Jews witnessing).

You should be much more concerned about what God said in the Tanakh. In the Tanakh it says, “Thus says the Lord” many times. In the Talmud it’s, “Rabbi so and so says...”. Aren’t you better off getting God’s desires for you from God?

... man does not live by bread alone, but man lives by every word that comes from the mouth of the LORD.
Deuteronomy 8:3


21 posted on 09/01/2011 5:26:40 PM PDT by ROTB (Sans Christian revival, we are government slaves, or nuked by China/Russia when we revolt.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: little jeremiah

And I explained my position by citing relevant quotations from an Orthodox Rabbi in posts #15 and #17. I don’t attend temple, but I do believe in MY god, and the Orthodox Rabbi has it right. The Reformed and more liberal Jews that allow abortion on DEMAND and solemnize homo marriages have it wrong.


22 posted on 09/01/2011 5:28:04 PM PDT by 10thAmendmentGuy ("[Drug] crusaders cannot accept the fact that they are not God." -Thomas Sowell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: ROTB
This is not my original opinion, but the opinion of pretty much EVERY Orthodox Jewish authority out there. Don't you think they've read the Chumash (or the Pentateuch, if you prefer that word? I was citing an Orthodox rabbi. Trust me, he's intimately familiar with it.

I don't know of any rabbi of ANY Jewish denomination who disagrees with the proposition that not only is abortion always acceptable to save the life of the mother, but it is in fact REQUIRED that this be allowed.

23 posted on 09/01/2011 5:33:11 PM PDT by 10thAmendmentGuy ("[Drug] crusaders cannot accept the fact that they are not God." -Thomas Sowell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: ROTB
Exodus 21:22 states the following:

"If men strive, and hurt a woman with child, so that her fruit depart from her, and yet no mischief follow: he shall be surely punished, according as the woman's husband will lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine."

In biblical times, killing an unborn child (basically an involuntary abortion) required that you pay damages. If you killed the mother, however, you were guilty of MURDER. This is why Judaism favors the life of the mother over the life of the unborn child when their competing interests meet. The mother's right to LIFE must always take priority over the life of the unborn child.

24 posted on 09/01/2011 5:37:23 PM PDT by 10thAmendmentGuy ("[Drug] crusaders cannot accept the fact that they are not God." -Thomas Sowell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: 10thAmendmentGuy; ROTB; Dr. Brian Kopp; trisham; DJ MacWoW; little jeremiah; Coleus; narses; ...
So, you are now trying to claim that Orthodox Judaism supports your pro-abortion agenda?

This has to be some sort of new low, even by troll standards.

25 posted on 09/01/2011 5:56:43 PM PDT by wagglebee ("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee
George W. Bush is also a pro-abort then, by your twisted logic. And Orthodox Jewish rabbis generally do support a rape exception. All of them support a life exception. I think I know just a little bit more about the religion than YOU do.

I love how you're painting me as the enemy, when you've got plenty of liberals that refer to unborn children as parasites on the mother and state that mothers should be allowed to abort up to the moment of pregnancy. No, you reserve all your vitriol for me -- that's so intelligent. Yep, turn off people that agree with you on 95% of pro-life issues. Many who support a rape exception would be turned off by your rabid nature. Support for a rape exception is hardly uncommon, and I am still pro-life, regardless of what YOU think. I belonged to my local NLRC chapter in college, I worked on Carl Paladino's gubernatorial campaign last year, I wrote letters to my newspaper RE Terri Schiavo but whatever. According to you I'm not pro-life because I support a rape exception.

And look at you, summoning reinforcements after I was pinged to this thread by another one of your buds. Well, bring it on. I don't care. Do yourself a favor and just wiggle-waggle away.

26 posted on 09/01/2011 6:05:01 PM PDT by 10thAmendmentGuy ("[Drug] crusaders cannot accept the fact that they are not God." -Thomas Sowell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

That should say NRLC (dyslexia).


27 posted on 09/01/2011 6:07:28 PM PDT by 10thAmendmentGuy ("[Drug] crusaders cannot accept the fact that they are not God." -Thomas Sowell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee; 10thAmendmentGuy; ROTB; Dr. Brian Kopp; trisham; DJ MacWoW; little jeremiah; Coleus; ...
So, you are now trying to claim that Orthodox Judaism supports your pro-abortion agenda? This has to be some sort of new low, even by troll standards.

Looks like it......

I wonder when the commandment of *Thou shall not murder* got amended by God? Apparently we missed the memo.

28 posted on 09/01/2011 6:12:54 PM PDT by metmom (Be the kind of woman that when you wake in the morning, Satan says, "Oh crap. She's UP!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee
"WASHINGTON, February 28, 2006 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Scott McClellan, the principal spokesman for U.S. President George W. Bush said in a press conference yesterday that the President supports abortion in three cases - rape, incest, and the life of the mother.

A reporter asked a question regarding the South Dakota legislation which bans abortion except to save the life of the mother which is likely to be signed by the Governor.

"The state legislature of South Dakota has just passed a new law which allows abortion in case of threat to the mother's life, but denies it to all ages in cases of rape and incest, said the reporter. He then asked, "Does the President believe that rape and incest victims should be denied the right to an abortion?" McLellan responded saying, "the President has made very clear that he is pro-life with three exceptions." While McLellan did not state those exceptions they are widely assumed to be rape, incest and the life of the mother."

See, I don't even support an incest exception like he does, just rape and to save the life of the mother. Yet you're only bashing me. My position on this is mainstream Republican.

29 posted on 09/01/2011 6:13:34 PM PDT by 10thAmendmentGuy ("[Drug] crusaders cannot accept the fact that they are not God." -Thomas Sowell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: metmom

Oh, please, please, please, please, please, please, see #29.


30 posted on 09/01/2011 6:14:07 PM PDT by 10thAmendmentGuy ("[Drug] crusaders cannot accept the fact that they are not God." -Thomas Sowell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee; metmom
I am pro-life except in cases of rape and to save the mother's life. The fetus has rights and those rights cannot be overridden by a prospective mother who is upset that she forgot to wear a condom or that she doesn't feel like having another baby. If you feel that way, give it up for adoption. I know that honest people in the pro-life movement can disagree on the rape exception but I find the idea of forcing a rape victim to bear her child to be cruel and unusual punishment. This should not take up a lot of debate time however, because rape victims comprise less than than 1% of those women that ultimately receive abortions. Surely we can all agree that focusing on the 98% of abortions that are elective is the way to go.
31 posted on 09/01/2011 6:15:58 PM PDT by 10thAmendmentGuy ("[Drug] crusaders cannot accept the fact that they are not God." -Thomas Sowell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: little jeremiah

Our youth pastor was doing a fill in for our main Sunday service last month and reveiled to the congregation that she was the child of a forced rape on her mother.

She is a very powerful testimony.


32 posted on 09/01/2011 6:16:46 PM PDT by Delta 21 (Make your choice ! There are NO civilians.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: 10thAmendmentGuy; wagglebee
Yet you're only bashing me. My position on this is mainstream Republican.

By your own admission, then, you're a RINO.

Besides, that is not an answer to wagglebee's question. He asked you "So, you are now trying to claim that Orthodox Judaism supports your pro-abortion agenda? "

Why don't you answer the question asked instead of answering a question you made up that nobody asked?

33 posted on 09/01/2011 6:17:26 PM PDT by metmom (Be the kind of woman that when you wake in the morning, Satan says, "Oh crap. She's UP!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: 10thAmendmentGuy; wagglebee; little jeremiah; metmom
My position on this is mainstream Republican.

2008 Republican Party Platform

Maintaining The Sanctity and Dignity of Human Life

Faithful to the first guarantee of the Declaration of Independence, we assert the inherent dignity and sanctity of all human life and affirm that the unborn child has a fundamental individual right to life which cannot be infringed. We support a human life amendment to the Constitution, and we endorse legislation to make clear that the Fourteenth Amendment’s protections apply to unborn children. We oppose using public revenues to promote or perform abortion and will not fund organizations which advocate it. We support the appointment of judges who respect traditional family values and the sanctity and dignity of innocent human life.

34 posted on 09/01/2011 6:25:07 PM PDT by DJ MacWoW (America! The wolves are here! What will you do?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: 10thAmendmentGuy; DJ MacWoW

This was a response to a deformed rabbi who promulgated the FALSE premise that abortion was allowed within Judaic Law. B EFFING S
NOT under ANY circumstances. NONE.

The horror of secularism’s intentional misstating as to the intent of Judaic Law...
You have essentially taken a case of unintended consequences which is the accidental death of an unborn child, or manslaughter, and compared it to outright murder. HaShem definitely makes a distinction between these things. You would lead your people to SIN???
Your interpretation of the Torah, which I know and understand, left me gasping in stunned silence at the gross and unethical position you have put forth. G-d NEVER condoned the intentional murder of a child in the womb. You should feel intense shame at presenting this unthinkable position to Jewish women because they will NOT be absolved if they CHOOSE death for their children, nor will women of any other religion or no religion at all.
Understanding the original scripture, not updated to suit your times, is paramount to understanding G-d’s Commandments. You have taken the context and spun it into lead so to blind those who haven’t the teaching nor the common sense you have stripped away from the righteous to make the secular feel righteous when they aren’t, and can’t ever be, according to your interpretation.
Exodus 21: Verse 22-25:
22: *And if men strive together, and HURT a woman with child, so that her fruit depart, and yet no harm follow, he shall surely be fined, according as the woman’s shall lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine.
*Note: “...yet no harm follow” means that the child did NOT die. You will see in the next verses that these passages have nothing to do with the mother per se, but rather with the life of the child.
23: *But if any harm follow, then thou shalt give life for life,
24: eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot,
25: burning for burning, wound for wound, stripe for stripe.
*Note. These verses make no mention whatever of the mother or the life of the mother. It is clearly the unborn child that is the main concern of these verses. Hence, if the mother miscarries and the child is born prematurely but alive, no loss of life has occurred, so a fine is the recompense for carelessness, but should the child die, it is the same as murder and is treated as such.
Your updated version makes no sense as written.
SO!
How DARE YOU!!!???!!!

THIS was what the response was to:

Excerpt by Irwin Graulich from an article on *Jewish Thought on Abortion* Arutz Sheva:
“””What pro-choice and pro-life advocates fail to realize is that their positions make them either accessories to murder, or accomplices to a meaningless beauty salon activity or cosmetic surgery procedure. Now that we see the inherent foolishness of both positions, there is a need to examine the Biblical context for an astonishing revelation on this Solomonic issue.
In Exodus, chapter 21, verses 22-23, it states, “If men shall fight, and they collide with a pregnant woman, and she miscarries, but the woman lives, the punishment on the men is financial, as determined by judges. But if the woman dies, there should be capital punishment.” Watch the brilliance and wisdom of these two sentences.
These verses clearly illustrate two important concepts. First, that the fetus is not a full life. If it were, capital punishment would be called for, as mentioned in the second sentence. We are also shown that the fetus is not a worthless piece of tissue, like excess nasal cartilage, since financial remuneration is required by the offenders. In addition, there are later references to the health of the mother taking precedence to the unborn.
So how do we interpret this God-given posture and how does it totally resolve the issue? This astounding centrist Jewish position is equally distant between pro-choice and pro-life. It simply states that abortion is not murder...and is not nothing! The only way to enforce these seemingly contradictory positions is to allow an immoral act, while at the same time to discourage it strongly, which is exactly what is done in Israel in the majority of cases.”””
*****************************

Note that he had to COMPLETELY change the VERSE in order to reach his obscene conclusion.


35 posted on 09/01/2011 6:25:52 PM PDT by MestaMachine (Bovina Sancta!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: metmom; wagglebee; little jeremiah
Metmom, I expect more from you than that. I expect you to be able to honestly analyze posts, and to exercise good reading comprehension.

Now, wagglebee said this:

"So, you are now trying to claim that Orthodox Judaism supports your pro-abortion agenda?"

I never claimed this. I claimed that Orthodox Judaism endorses LIMITED circumstances in which abortion is acceptable. All Orthodox authorities I've read agree that it is acceptable to save the mother's life. Many Orthodox authorities agree that it is acceptable if the fetus is the product of rape, because carrying it to term could cause the mother severe emotional trauma.

If you actually bothered to read my posts where I quoted the Orthodox rabbi then you would understand that. He makes it quite clear that Orthodox Judaism places the fetus in high esteem, and that it may only be aborted in limited circumstances. One of those circumstances is to save the mother's life, and another is if the child is the product of rape.

HERE, again are the relevant quotes. Don't miss them this time, pretty please?

""In Jewish law, a baby attains becomes a full-fledged human being when the head emerges from the womb. Before then, the fetus is considered a partial life.

So is it permitted to destroy this partial life?

Generally, no. This is illustrated by a case in the Talmud whereby a building collapsed on Shabbat. The rescue crew does not know if anyone is trapped under the rubble or not. And even if someone is trapped, they may already be dead. Despite these doubts, we push aside the restrictions of Shabbat in order to dig out the rubble - on the chance that it may result in the prolonging of human life. Why? Because every part of human life - even a doubtful, partial human life - has infinite value.

This applies to a fetus as well.

What about danger to emotional health? There are certain circumstances where this, too, may be grounds for abortion. For example, if the mother became pregnant through rape, and the thought of bearing this child will cause her a nervous breakdown or severe emotional trauma."

If George W. Bush's position on this makes him a RINO, then yes, you can call me a RINO. Do you think he is a RINO? Be honest now. You're spending all your time bashing me, yet he's even more liberal on this issue than I am. I only support two abortion exceptions. He supports three.

Let me also note again, to anyone viewing, that the only reason I am even in this thread is because little jeremiah pinged me to it. You can't accuse me of TROLLING this thread if I only posted in it after being INVITED. YOU FAIL.

36 posted on 09/01/2011 6:26:38 PM PDT by 10thAmendmentGuy ("[Drug] crusaders cannot accept the fact that they are not God." -Thomas Sowell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: 10thAmendmentGuy

NO NO NO NO NO!!!!


37 posted on 09/01/2011 6:27:35 PM PDT by MestaMachine (Bovina Sancta!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: MestaMachine

That’s so, so very interesting. Are you a rabbi? We attended an Orthodox (not Modern Orthodox, REAL Orthodox) temple growing up, and our rabbi stated many times that abortion was acceptable to save the mother’s life, as well as in cases of rape. Those are the only exceptions he listed. The rest of your post is pretty much just drivel.


38 posted on 09/01/2011 6:29:09 PM PDT by 10thAmendmentGuy ("[Drug] crusaders cannot accept the fact that they are not God." -Thomas Sowell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: MestaMachine

I am right about this, but even if I wasn’t, I’d still support the rape exception. Dubya does despite the fact that he isn’t Jewish. It is merely ancillary support for my position. You won’t change my mind on it. It’s like trying to get someone to change their mind on the death penalty (which I support). You waste a lot of energy and NO ONE changes their mind.


39 posted on 09/01/2011 6:30:33 PM PDT by 10thAmendmentGuy ("[Drug] crusaders cannot accept the fact that they are not God." -Thomas Sowell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: DJ MacWoW; wagglebee; Responsibility2nd; little jeremiah
I have the same position as George W. Bush. You going to call him as a pro abort? Can I ask all of you something? What does this accomplish? I didn't come in this thread and start arguing with you. I don't think I've ever MENTIONED my support of a rape exception in any thread in which I wasn't ATTACKED for it first, based upon information in my profile. Do you really think it is constructive to bring it up in unrelated threads or PING me to pro-life threads and then trash me for the fact that I support such an exception? It's really pathetic is what it is. I won't respond to future pings to threads like this, and I won't respond to people that attack me for being pro-abort. I'll simply report the posts to the moderator as being disingenuous lies, like I did one of your colleague's posts. He equated my support for a rape exception to support for stoning rape victims. I thought it was completely out of line and disrespectful. You apparently don't care. Whatever.

I don't go into abortion threads saying OH YEAH BLAH BLAH GOOD ARTICLE BUT I SUPPORT A RAPE EXCEPTION. I think that would be trolling. But dragging me into threads and attempting to berate me is also trolling.

40 posted on 09/01/2011 6:35:20 PM PDT by 10thAmendmentGuy ("[Drug] crusaders cannot accept the fact that they are not God." -Thomas Sowell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: 10thAmendmentGuy

READ THE VERSE FROM THE MASORETIC TEXT. NOT THE UPDATED, MODERNIZED VERSION. DRIVEL IS WHAT YOU HAVE POSTED. DRIVEL TO THE NTH DEGREE. THESE LAWS WERE WRITTEN LONG BEFORE EITHER YOU OR YOUR RABBI STARTED CITING MODERN MYTH...in place of The Laws of Moses.


41 posted on 09/01/2011 6:35:20 PM PDT by MestaMachine (Bovina Sancta!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: 10thAmendmentGuy; wagglebee; little jeremiah; MestaMachine

Your snarky condescending attitude is not needed.

There is nothing wrong with my reading comprehension, although there is apparently with yours.

My point was that you never answered wagglebee’s question. And now here you are addressing yet another argument of your own construct.

Do try to focus and answer what is asked of you. Taking it off topic and shifting the attention to others or other topics smacks of dishonest debate techniques and covering your butt because you got pinned down and exposed.


42 posted on 09/01/2011 6:35:36 PM PDT by metmom (Be the kind of woman that when you wake in the morning, Satan says, "Oh crap. She's UP!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: MestaMachine

ping to #40


43 posted on 09/01/2011 6:36:03 PM PDT by 10thAmendmentGuy ("[Drug] crusaders cannot accept the fact that they are not God." -Thomas Sowell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: metmom

Read #40. I was PINGED to this thread by little jeremiah. I did not come into this thread and start trolling it up. You pinged me to try to get me into another stupid and unproductive debate about something that neither one of us is going to change our mind about. What is the point?


44 posted on 09/01/2011 6:37:27 PM PDT by 10thAmendmentGuy ("[Drug] crusaders cannot accept the fact that they are not God." -Thomas Sowell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: 10thAmendmentGuy
There you go. Haring off topic. You said: My position on this is mainstream Republican.

The party platform states otherwise.

45 posted on 09/01/2011 6:38:06 PM PDT by DJ MacWoW (America! The wolves are here! What will you do?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: 10thAmendmentGuy

Dubya must attend to his own soul. I will attend to mine. Last time I checked, G-d did not start with a d.


46 posted on 09/01/2011 6:38:49 PM PDT by MestaMachine (Bovina Sancta!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

I’m just surprised the abortionists don’t refute
the study by saying that abortion stops mental
illness in 100% of aborted fetus’.

Abortion IS murder.


47 posted on 09/01/2011 6:40:37 PM PDT by tet68 ( " We would not die in that man's company, that fears his fellowship to die with us...." Henry V.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 10thAmendmentGuy; wagglebee; little jeremiah; MestaMachine
For example, if the mother became pregnant through rape, and the thought of bearing this child will cause her a nervous breakdown or severe emotional trauma."

Just how does that justify murder? And now you propose adding to that trauma with the murder of her own child?

Did you ever hear of adoption?

The answer to the emotional trauma or a rape is forgiveness. It's not the baby's fault the rape happened and you way underestimate the ability of a mother to love her child and recognize its innocence in the matter.

The answer for the trauma of rape is justice being done to the rapist, not murdering the innocent baby.

48 posted on 09/01/2011 6:41:37 PM PDT by metmom (Be the kind of woman that when you wake in the morning, Satan says, "Oh crap. She's UP!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: 10thAmendmentGuy

I didn’t all you a troll. I merely stated your position, and what you CLAIM as the position of Orthodox Judaism is wrong. It is SO wrong I cannot believe my eyes.
Do you not SEE that the entire verse was changed to mean something it did not mean?


49 posted on 09/01/2011 6:43:23 PM PDT by MestaMachine (Bovina Sancta!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: DJ MacWoW; little jeremiah; wagglebee; metmom; MestaMachine; Responsibility2nd
It's not off-topic. I did not come in this thread and start spouting off my beliefs unprompted. Anytime I've brought them up, it's because I've been pinged to one of the threads by your little buds or attacked for it in an unrelated thread. Don't you guys have something better to do? This is my last post in this thread, and I am not responding to pings like this anymore. I'm also reporting posts that accuse me of being PRO-ABORT or equating my support of an exception to support for stoning rape victims, because those are dirty and vicious tactics. If you accuse me of it, you're also calling George W. Bush pro-abort. You don't have the guts to say that, however, because you know other Freepers would jump on you if you said in your post "Hey I think George W. Bush is a pro-abort liberal." No spine.

What are you trying to do? Are you trying to get me to lose my temper and cuss you out so I will get banned. It's not going to happen. The moderators know who I am. They know I'm conservative, and that I'm not some liberal troll or person who's had an account before.

What are you trying to accomplish? Do you think that calling me out in threads like this is going to win me over to your side and lead me to oppose the rape exception? Hardly. All it does is make me more steadfast in my support for it. WHAT is the point of repeatedly distorting my positions and calling me a pro-abort when I have a slightly more conservative position on abortion than our most recent pro-life president? Is that what your god is telling you to do?

If you have answer to these, you can freepmail me (or don't). I won't respond in this thread again, and I won't respond in others like it.

50 posted on 09/01/2011 6:47:26 PM PDT by 10thAmendmentGuy ("[Drug] crusaders cannot accept the fact that they are not God." -Thomas Sowell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-157 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson