This is a wonderful post! I too took a topic from the pro-life forum and brought it here; I also took one and brought it to the pro-choice topic. This is what we should be doing if we want to discuss these things, not going onto each other's boards!!

Thumbs up, I agree with everything. And the bible excerpt is excellent.

I'm interested in what people will have to say about this. I have noticed one christian is about on the boards, i'm wondering about the bible exerpt...


Hopefully this (the whoe post) will be addressed soon!

I did consider putting the last bit in a separate post because I thought it might mean the rest of the post is ignored.

Anyone?? You can ignore the last bit if you want!

Maybe i'm reading the verse a different way than you, but i'll quote my bible here, again..

"if men struggle with each other and strike a woman with child so that she gives birth prematurely, yet there is no injury, he shall surely be fined as the woman's husband may demand of him, and he shall pay as the judges decide. But if there is any further unjury, then you shall appoint as a penalty life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot".

I'm taking that as saying that if the baby is born alive, though premature, and the mother is fine, then the guy pays a fine and all is gravy. But if the child or mother suffer any injury, then he has to die. I don't really understand how it supports your stance.

As for the rest of you post, I totally agree!!!

The interpretation i've always found (especially when relating to jewish culture) is that by her 'fruit' departing it's assumed to have died and, thus, only a fine is the punishment - the 'harm' following being the death of the woman

Moo, that is a great post, I posted one about morality and it was gone, in response to theirs. The main thing is is that I have a difficult time with is that they are more for the fetus, I do not know if this makes since or not but their are times that the fetus must go or be aborted for the mother to live on, I do not think that I could handle living later on if I knew that my mother had to die so that I could be given life and I realize that the man above died to give us life and blah, blah, blah but a mother and a fetus is a different picture in my book. Moo, we are glad to have you here. You are truly appreciated! Of course along with the others, you are appreciated too!

Ex 21:22-23

and if men strive together, and hurt a woman with child, so that her fruit depart, and yet no harm follow, he shall be surely fined, according as the woman's husband shall lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine.

This is clearly condemning the death of her foetus.

The only reason it plays the issue down is because the phase is assuming the loss was due to an accident.

there is nothing to assume, it is quite clear.

The death of the foetus is condemned.

elucidate

the reason it's 'played down' is because the fetus is not the equal of the woman. It's a lesser 'crime' than killing a person.

the only reason it plays the issue down is because the phase is assuming the loss was due to an accident.

well, as it's the only text in the bible concerning the death of a fetus that's your own interpretation - there's no qualification of your claims that it's only treated lesser because it's an "accident".

Did you read the rest of the post? I'm just curious as no pro-lifer/anti-abortion people have addressed it

Http://search.Americanbible.Org/bible/sear ch.Cfm?Book=exod&chapter=21&verse= &version=cev

just thought i'd point out the american bible societies version of the text concerning the death of the fetus. Irt indictaes that the interpretation is that the death of the fetus is secondary and by no means equal to the death of the woman (it doesn't fall within the ambit of "life for a life" and, again, no reference that this is because of an 'accident'). The reference to the 'harm' that follows means the death of the woman. The death of the fetus is assumed in 21:22 where a fine is imposseable