Richard Dawkins stripped of 1996 Humanist of the Year Award...

[Tassman]

She actually seeks to dismiss them because they come from the Hellenistic period


But she did let my archaic use of "assay" slip through without comment so maybe their is a glimmer of hope after all.

Oh, spare us.

Why does the religious right always come across as a scam regarding abortion – like some sort of religious Ponzi Scheme? The sanctimonious hypocrisy knows no bounds. This ‘anguish’ for the trillions of innocent prenatal “babies” being brutally slaughtered in the womb by wicked leftists is of recent origin.

“According to the Christian’s “Holy Bible,” and the unerring word of the Christian’s almighty god, there is no “living being” until it takes “the breath of life.” That concept is repeated throughout the Christian bible.
“The Southern Baptist Convention’s president at the time of the Roe ruling, Dallas First Baptist Church preacher W. A. Criswell, celebrated the 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling by taking the time to write that he was pleased.

“I have always felt that it was only after a child was born and had a life separate from its mother that it became an individual person, and it has always, therefore, seemed to me that what is best for the mother and for the future should be allowed.””.

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2019/6/8/1863445/-When-the-religious-right-was-pro-choice-evangelicals-applauded-Roe-v-Wade

AND:

“Jewish law does not share the belief common among abortion opponents that life begins at conception, nor does it legally consider the fetus to be a full person deserving of protections equal those accorded to human beings. In Jewish law, a fetus attains the status of a full person only at birth”.

https://www.myjewishlearning.com/article/abortion-in-jewish-thought/

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

You don't have to take my word for it. You can take the word of any or all of the following:

• the author of I Enoch
• Flavius Josephus
• the author of the Sibylline Oracles
• the author of the Sentences of Pseudo-Phocylides
• David Michael Feldman, author of Birth Control in Jewish Law: Marital Relations, Contraception, and Abortion as Set Forth in the Classic Texts of Jewish Law
• Michael Gorman, author of Abortion and the Early Church: Christian, Jewish and Pagan Attitudes in the Greco-Roman World
• Paul Copan, author of Is God a Moral Monster?

I could add Philo of Alexandria as well since Gorman delves into his view concerning abortion as well, but the above more than suffices to demonstrate your absurd claim that "there is nothing in Judaism condemning abortion" is balderdash.

No my comment is not "balderdash". There is nothing to be found in the Hebrew bible that specifically and categorically condemns abortion, unlike, for example adultery or perjury.

What we are discussing is opinion. And in any religion [especially Judaism] a wide variety of opinion is available.

In your own faith the views on [for example female clergy] will differ widely between a conservative Catholic and a liberal Lutheran; likewise on gay clergy where the views of a conservative evangelical will clash with those of a liberal Episcopalian. Which of those individuals holds the “correct” view on either issue? And what about all the other shades of opinion found on both sides of each issue?

I do not think you actually read what I wrote. The verse in Josephus is open to interpretation and nor do I consider a verse from the Jewish Apocrypha a valid justification for demonstrating an anti-abortion stance within the religion anymore than verse IV from the Greek text A of the Infancy Gospel of Thomas should be taken as a valid representation of the Christ as a child. In that verse Jesus kills another child because the child bumped into him. As for Philo of Alexandria he associated abortion with infanticide. And of course this was [again] a Hellenised Jew expressing his opinion.

Even your own cited David M Feldman wrote in a paper for The Committee on Jewish Law and Standards of the Rabbinical Assembly in 1983:

“Implicit in the Mishnah above is the teaching that the rights of the fetus are secondary to the rights of the mother all the way up until the moment of birth. This principle is obscured by the current phrase, "right to life." In the context of abortion questions, the issue is not the right to life, which is very clear in Jewish law, but the right to be born, which is not as clear. The right to be born is relative; the right to life for existing persons is absolute. "Life" may begin before birth, but it is not the life of a human person; animal life, plant life or even pre-human life are not the same as human life. Rabbinic law has determined that human life begins with birth. This is neither a medical nor a court judgment, but a metaphysical one. In the Jewish system, human life in this sense begins with birth. Of course, potential life already partakes of the potential sacredness of actual life, since the latter can have its inception only through the former.”[My emphasis]

Tomas J Silber writing in a 1980 paper entitled “Abortion: A Jewish View” and published in Journal of Religion and Health noted that “The law of homicide in the Torah refers to nefesh adam: any living man. This excludes the fetus in the womb which is law nefesh hu (not a person) until it is born. The basis for denying capital crime status to feticide in Jewish law is scriptural.” [My emphasis]

And this likewise from the National Council of Jewish Women https://www.ncjw.org/wp-content/uplo...tion-FINAL.pdf which includes this:

According to Jewish law, is abortion health care? Yes, Jewish sources explicitly state that abortion is not only permitted but is required should the pregnancy endanger the life or health of the pregnant individual. Furthermore, “health” is commonly interpreted to encompass psychological health as well as physical health.

Likewise in an even earlier paper [1965] “Jewish Views on Abortion” 17 W. Res. L. Rev. 480 (1965) Rabbi Immanuel Jakobvits explains the confusion between the Jewish interpretation and that of the Christians. He notes that "The legislation of the Bible makes only one reference to our subject, and this is by implication: 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. But if any harm follow, then shalt thou give life for life.

(a) The Jewish Interpretation.-This crucial passage, by one of the most curious twists of literary fortunes, marks the parting of the ways between the Jewish and Christian rulings on abortion. According to the Jewish interpretation, if "no harm follow" the "hurt" to the woman resulting in the loss of her fruit refers to the survival of the woman following her miscarriage; in that case there is no capital guilt involved, and the attacker is merely liable to pay compensation for the loss of her fruit. "But if any harm follow," i.e., if the woman is fatally injured, then the man responsible for her death has to "give life for life"; in that event the capital charge of murder exempts him from any monetary liability for the aborted fruit.' This interpretation is also borne out by the rabbinical exegesis of the verse defining the law of murder: "He that smiteth a man, so that he dieth, shall surely be put to death.. ."' which the Rabbis construed to mean "a man, but not a fetus
The Christian Interpretation.-The Christian tradition disputing this view goes back to a mistranslation in the Septuagint. There, the Hebrew for "no harm follow" was replaced by the Greek for "[her child be born] imperfectly formed." This interpretation, distinguishing between an unformed and a formed fetus and branding the killing of the latter as murder, was accepted by Tertullian, who was ignorant of Hebrew, and by later church fathers. The distinction was subsequently embodied in canon law as well as in Justinian Law”

Now of course there will be great disagreement on the issue of abortion among lay Jews and rabbis.

However, the textual evidence from the Jewish scriptures does not specifically forbid or condemn abortion, and is primarily concerned with the mother.

The whole issue is not nearly as simple as you would like to present it.

[rogue06]

But rogue! Your sources are not REAL Judaism! No True Jewish Document™ would abolish abortion!

She actually seeks to dismiss them because they come from the Hellenistic period


But she did let my archaic use of "assay" slip through without comment so maybe their is a glimmer of hope after all.

[Sparko]

Step right up ladies and gentlemen and children of all ages! Be the first to see the notorious Hypatius Alexandrian, otherwise known as the "Flapping Loon."

Watch as her fool-hearty ignorant declaration that "there is nothing in Judaism condemning abortion" gets wholly eviscerated by not one, two, or even three - but FOUR -- that's right folks -- FOUR ancient sources. See how they straight out, undeniable refute her claim as they, under no uncertain terms, condemn abortion.

Then, before your very eyes you'll will witness as The Flapping Loon begins her dance. Each wing begins flapping in an agitated manner as she seeks to wave off the obviously upsetting terminal rebuttal to her earlier nonsensical squalling. Notice as she frantically grasps at pitifully feeble (ir)rationalizations for dismissing the evidence spotlighting her error.

If we're lucky we'll see her spin out of control in a flurry or erratic questioning and attempts at nitpicking in hopes of sowing enough confusion to conceal yet another screw-up or even make some bizarre assertion of "victory" or something equally strange.

It is an act that the Flapping Loon repeats again and again. Every time she is shown to be clearly wrong.




Btw, I wouldn't recommend books that I wasn't 100% certain represented what I said they did. But just to assay your delusions that I simply made them up or am not familiar with them, here is a taste from one I happen to have

From page 37 of Abortion and the Early Church: Christian, Jewish and Pagan Attitudes in the Greco-Roman World by Michael Gorman, speaking to the testimony provided by the Sibylline Oracles:

A similar blanket condemnation of abortion is found in a contemporary work of a different sort, the Sibylline Oracles. The Oracles are an example of first- and second-century B.C. apocalyptic literature. The section of book 2 on the punishment of the wicked includes women who abort or expose their children:

Having burdens in the womb [they]
Produce abortions; and their offspring cast
Unlawfully away...

These women will suffer the wrath of God along with sorcerers (who dispense, among other things, abortifacients). Also included in his wrath are adulterers, thieves, the impure, and oppressors of the poor and of widows. Again, the writer has no interest in legal fine points but is concerned only with the fundamental immorality of abortion.

Face it. Your claim that Judaism and the Jews say nothing condemning abortion is utter hogswallop.

But rogue! Your sources are not REAL Judaism! No True Jewish Document™ would abolish abortion!

[rogue06]

False equivalence. One cannot validly compare an unformed, non-viable first-trimester fetus with a sick or injured person.

Attempt at hand waving. Some of them are less "viable" than the unborn baby having less brain activity and/or a heart that won't beat on its own.

The new survey by Pew Research Center, conducted July 22-August 4 among 4,175 adults, also finds little support for overturning Roe v. Wade, the landmark Supreme Court decision that established a woman’s right to an abortion. Seven-in-ten say they do not want to see the Roe v. Wade decision completely overturned; 28% say they would like to see the Supreme Court completely overturn the 1973 decision.

You hide behind statements like "not want[ing] to see the Roe v. Wade decision completely overturned" so that you can ignore that a majority want to see increased restrictions. Gallup even found that the majority of those who say they support Roe v. Wade want more restrictions placed on abortion.

Meanwhile the left keeps moving toward allowing abortions right up to the moment of birth like they did in New York -- or are you still contending this isn't true? That it is a "fallacy"?

Nevertheless, despite your hysteria, late-term abortions are very rare.

What a freaking hypocrite. The left is constantly demanding action based upon the concept that if it'll even just save one life.

And one of the reasons that late term abortions are rare is because nearly every state, if not all of them, prohibited or greatly restricted them. But thanks to the ghouls on the left, more jurisdictions are joining New York and celebrating changing the laws to allow for butchering babies right up to the moment of birth.

You must be so proud.

In 2015 only 1.3%) happened on or after 21 weeks of pregnancy, according to the CDC.

Even if we go with your cherry-picked year (more current statistics are available) and stick with just 1%, that is something like the death of 6400 lives. The death of 6400 totally innocent lives of people who have literally never harmed anyone.

[Tassman]

When a person is in a coma they are not "viable outside the womb" without being hooked up to numerous machines and devices. And those brainwaves that appear in the first trimester are more active than many of those in deep comas.

I guess, according to you and your ilk that makes people in comas less than fully human and we can simply dispose of them at our leisure.

False equivalence. One cannot validly compare an unformed, non-viable first-trimester fetus with a sick or injured person.

And if Roe is supported by two-thirds of the American public then why do polls find that so many Americans want to see increased restrictions

The new survey by Pew Research Center, conducted July 22-August 4 among 4,175 adults, also finds little support for overturning Roe v. Wade, the landmark Supreme Court decision that established a woman’s right to an abortion. Seven-in-ten say they do not want to see the Roe v. Wade decision completely overturned; 28% say they would like to see the Supreme Court completely overturn the 1973 decision.

https://www.pewresearch.org/politics...ng-roe-v-wade/

Really? Then why are we witnessing with our own eyes what you so desperately want to sweep under the rug? New York was, IIRC, the first state that legalized aborting a baby right up to the moment of birth.

Nevertheless, despite your hysteria, late-term abortions are very rare. In 2015 only 1.3%) happened on or after 21 weeks of pregnancy, according to the CDC. The vast majority (91%) of abortions take place at or before 13 weeks of pregnancy..

I guess this means that if someone is sick or injured and a doctor assumes that they won't survive but in fact does then that doctor shouldn't be burdened with helping to keep them alive but should be free to refuse all treatment and even food and water so that they will finally die. :

See above.

[rogue06]

Provide some citations then.


Ooh did I hit a nerve?

Again as noted this is Hellenised Judaism.

What about the rest?

As to my comments on abortion and Judaism, I'll take Rabbi Neuberger over rogue06 every time.

You don't have to take my word for it. You can take the word of any or all of the following:

• the author of I Enoch
• Flavius Josephus
• the author of the Sibylline Oracles
• the author of the Sentences of Pseudo-Phocylides
• David Michael Feldman, author of Birth Control in Jewish Law: Marital Relations, Contraception, and Abortion as Set Forth in the Classic Texts of Jewish Law
• Michael Gorman, author of Abortion and the Early Church: Christian, Jewish and Pagan Attitudes in the Greco-Roman World
• Paul Copan, author of Is God a Moral Monster?

I could add Philo of Alexandria as well since Gorman delves into his view concerning abortion as well, but the above more than suffices to demonstrate your absurd claim that "there is nothing in Judaism condemning abortion" is balderdash.

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

Btw, I wouldn't recommend books that I wasn't 100% certain represented what I said they did.

Provide some citations then.

But just to assay your delusions that I simply made them up or am not familiar with them, here is a taste from one I happen to have

Ooh did I hit a nerve?

Abortion and the Early Church: Christian, Jewish and Pagan Attitudes in the Greco-Roman World[/I] by Michael Gorman, speaking to the testimony provided by the Sibylline Oracles:

A similar blanket condemnation of abortion is found in a contemporary work of a different sort, the Sibylline Oracles. The Oracles are an example of first- and second-century B.C. apocalyptic literature. The section of book 2 on the punishment of the wicked includes women who abort or expose their children:

Having burdens in the womb [they]
Produce abortions; and their offspring cast
Unlawfully away...

These women will suffer the wrath of God along with sorcerers (who dispense, among other things, abortifacients). Also included in his wrath are adulterers, thieves, the impure, and oppressors of the poor and of widows. Again, the writer has no interest in legal fine points but is concerned only with the fundamental immorality of abortion.

Again as noted this is Hellenised Judaism.

What about the rest?

As to my comments on abortion and Judaism, I'll take Rabbi Neuberger over rogue06 every time.

[rogue06]

The Book of Enoch is Jewish Apocrypha. Are you going to cite The Infancy Gospel of Thomas as an exemplar for the character of Jesus as a child?

The short answer to all this is that in Jewish law there is no belief [common among abortion opponents] that life begins at conception. In Jewish law, a foetus attains the status of a full person only at birth. Nor is the opinion in Judaism cut and dried.

From here: https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/abortion-in-judaism:

“The scholars deduced the prohibition against abortion by an a fortiori argument from the laws concerning abstention from procreation, or onanism, or having sexual relations with one's wife when likely to harm the fetus in her womb – the perpetrator whereof being regarded as "a shedder of blood" (Yev. 62b; Nid. 13a and 31a; Ḥavvat Ya'ir, no. 31; She'elat Yaveẓ, 1:43; Mishpetei Uziel, 3:46).”

This appears to be the underlying meaning of the quotation from Josephus that you cited. From the same site, “during the Talmudic period abortion was not considered a transgression unless the foetus was viable [ben keyama].” In the view of R. Ishmael, only a Gentile, to whom some of the basic transgressions applied with greater stringency, incurred the death penalty for causing the loss of the fetus (Sanh. 57b).”

Both of which works were composed within Hellenised Judaism. I suppose you are aware of the influence of Hellenism [and indeed other cultures] upon Second Temple Judaism?

From Walter T Wilson’s The Sentences of Pseudo-Phocylides:

“Our poem, then, despite its pretensions, is an example of classicizing, not classical, literature, entailing as such the transformative impersonation of a great author from the classical past. In its basic profile, the Sentences is consistent with other Jewish reimaginings of this past, in which Greek poets find their inspiration in Jewish sources. Pseudo-Phocylides “placed these sentences in the mouth of a Greek thinker who lived centuries earlier in order to show that already in ancient times the wisdom of the Greeks was influenced by the spirit of Moses, with the result that Jewish Torah and Greek ethics were thoroughly in agreement”.

[You might also like to look up Philo of Alexandria’s On the Life of Moses]

Hmm... I note there are no quotes from these works. Presumably you could not find any online.

Were you actually in possession of these texts a few paragraphs [or short quotes with page references] could easily have been supplied.

The same with this one.

Step right up ladies and gentlemen and children of all ages! Be the first to see the notorious Hypatius Alexandrian, otherwise known as the "Flapping Loon."

Watch as her fool-hearty ignorant declaration that "there is nothing in Judaism condemning abortion" gets wholly eviscerated by not one, two, or even three - but FOUR -- that's right folks -- FOUR ancient sources. See how they straight out, undeniable refute her claim as they, under no uncertain terms, condemn abortion.

Then, before your very eyes you'll will witness as The Flapping Loon begins her dance. Each wing begins flapping in an agitated manner as she seeks to wave off the obviously upsetting terminal rebuttal to her earlier nonsensical squalling. Notice as she frantically grasps at pitifully feeble (ir)rationalizations for dismissing the evidence spotlighting her error.

If we're lucky we'll see her spin out of control in a flurry or erratic questioning and attempts at nitpicking in hopes of sowing enough confusion to conceal yet another screw-up or even make some bizarre assertion of "victory" or something equally strange.

It is an act that the Flapping Loon repeats again and again. Every time she is shown to be clearly wrong.




Btw, I wouldn't recommend books that I wasn't 100% certain represented what I said they did. But just to assay your delusions that I simply made them up or am not familiar with them, here is a taste from one I happen to have

From page 37 of Abortion and the Early Church: Christian, Jewish and Pagan Attitudes in the Greco-Roman World by Michael Gorman, speaking to the testimony provided by the Sibylline Oracles:

A similar blanket condemnation of abortion is found in a contemporary work of a different sort, the Sibylline Oracles. The Oracles are an example of first- and second-century B.C. apocalyptic literature. The section of book 2 on the punishment of the wicked includes women who abort or expose their children:

Having burdens in the womb [they]
Produce abortions; and their offspring cast
Unlawfully away...

These women will suffer the wrath of God along with sorcerers (who dispense, among other things, abortifacients). Also included in his wrath are adulterers, thieves, the impure, and oppressors of the poor and of widows. Again, the writer has no interest in legal fine points but is concerned only with the fundamental immorality of abortion.

Face it. Your claim that Judaism and the Jews say nothing condemning abortion is utter hogswallop.

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

Meanwhile the book of Enoch describes "the smiting of the embryo in the womb that it may pass away," as being literally demonically inspired (1 Enoch 69:12) declaring that an evil angel taught humans how to "smash the embryo in the womb"

The Book of Enoch is Jewish Apocrypha. Are you going to cite The Infancy Gospel of Thomas as an exemplar for the character of Jesus as a child?

Josephus declared in his Against Apion” Book II:

The short answer to all this is that in Jewish law there is no belief [common among abortion opponents] that life begins at conception. In Jewish law, a foetus attains the status of a full person only at birth. Nor is the opinion in Judaism cut and dried.

From here: https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/abortion-in-judaism:

“The scholars deduced the prohibition against abortion by an a fortiori argument from the laws concerning abstention from procreation, or onanism, or having sexual relations with one's wife when likely to harm the fetus in her womb – the perpetrator whereof being regarded as "a shedder of blood" (Yev. 62b; Nid. 13a and 31a; Ḥavvat Ya'ir, no. 31; She'elat Yaveẓ, 1:43; Mishpetei Uziel, 3:46).”

This appears to be the underlying meaning of the quotation from Josephus that you cited. From the same site, “during the Talmudic period abortion was not considered a transgression unless the foetus was viable [ben keyama].” In the view of R. Ishmael, only a Gentile, to whom some of the basic transgressions applied with greater stringency, incurred the death penalty for causing the loss of the fetus (Sanh. 57b).”

A little later we have the Judeo-Christian Sibylline Oracles (not to be confused with the Roman Sibylline Books), which contains a wealth of information regarding both Jewish and early Christian beliefs, in which we can read the following:

Next we have the Jewish work Sentences of Pseudo-Phocylides, dating somewhere from between 100B.C. and 100A.D.:

Both of which works were composed within Hellenised Judaism. I suppose you are aware of the influence of Hellenism [and indeed other cultures] upon Second Temple Judaism?

From Walter T Wilson’s The Sentences of Pseudo-Phocylides:

“Our poem, then, despite its pretensions, is an example of classicizing, not classical, literature, entailing as such the transformative impersonation of a great author from the classical past. In its basic profile, the Sentences is consistent with other Jewish reimaginings of this past, in which Greek poets find their inspiration in Jewish sources. Pseudo-Phocylides “placed these sentences in the mouth of a Greek thinker who lived centuries earlier in order to show that already in ancient times the wisdom of the Greeks was influenced by the spirit of Moses, with the result that Jewish Torah and Greek ethics were thoroughly in agreement”.

[You might also like to look up Philo of Alexandria’s On the Life of Moses]

You may also want to take a look at Birth Control in Jewish Law: Marital Relations, Contraception, and Abortion as Set Forth in the Classic Texts of Jewish Law by David Michael Feldman Abortion and the Early Church: Christian, Jewish and Pagan Attitudes in the Greco-Roman World by Michael Gorman^[1] but be prepared to have your narrative dismantled

Hmm... I note there are no quotes from these works. Presumably you could not find any online.

Were you actually in possession of these texts a few paragraphs [or short quotes with page references] could easily have been supplied.

1. Another one of use is Is God a Moral Monster by Paul Copan

The same with this one.

[rogue06]

At this point I'm ignoring her posts that don't actually impact the main point I'm making. Looking back that has been all of them.

She's as tenacious as any terrier when it comes to going down rabbit holes.

[Cerebrum123]

Meanwhile the book of Enoch describes "the smiting of the embryo in the womb that it may pass away," as being literally demonically inspired (1 Enoch 69:12) declaring that an evil angel taught humans how to "smash the embryo in the womb"

Josephus declared in his Against Apion” Book II:

The law moreover enjoins us to bring up all our offspring: and forbids women to cause abortion of what is begotten; or to destroy it afterward. And if any woman appears to have so done, she will be a murderer of her child; by destroying a living creature, and diminishing human kind. If any one therefore proceeds to such fornication, or murder, he cannot be clean.

A little later we have the Judeo-Christian Sibylline Oracles (not to be confused with the Roman Sibylline Books), which contains a wealth of information regarding both Jewish and early Christian beliefs, in which we can read the following:

The godless furthermore shall to all ages perish, all who did evils aforetime, and committed murders, And all who are accomplices therein,...All who caused abortions, and all who their offspring cast unlawfully away.

Next we have the Jewish work Sentences of Pseudo-Phocylides, dating somewhere from between 100B.C. and 100A.D.:

Do not let a woman destroy the unborn babe in her belly, nor after its birth throw it before the dogs and the vultures as a prey.

You may also want to take a look at Birth Control in Jewish Law: Marital Relations, Contraception, and Abortion as Set Forth in the Classic Texts of Jewish Law by David Michael Feldman and Abortion and the Early Church: Christian, Jewish and Pagan Attitudes in the Greco-Roman World by Michael Gorman^[1] but be prepared to have your narrative dismantled.

Care to try again?



1. Another one of use is Is God a Moral Monster by Paul Copan

At this point I'm ignoring her posts that don't actually impact the main point I'm making. Looking back that has been all of them.

[rogue06]

There appear to have been some who expressed concerns. .

The Jews were admired [sometimes grudgingly] because they did not expose unwanted infants. Some in the Graeco-Roman world also expressed their concerns over the practise. However, there is nothing in Judaism condemning abortion and certainly abortion was practised in the Graeco-Roman world,

Meanwhile the book of Enoch describes "the smiting of the embryo in the womb that it may pass away," as being literally demonically inspired (1 Enoch 69:12) declaring that an evil angel taught humans how to "smash the embryo in the womb"

Josephus declared in his Against Apion” Book II:

The law moreover enjoins us to bring up all our offspring: and forbids women to cause abortion of what is begotten; or to destroy it afterward. And if any woman appears to have so done, she will be a murderer of her child; by destroying a living creature, and diminishing human kind. If any one therefore proceeds to such fornication, or murder, he cannot be clean.

A little later we have the Judeo-Christian Sibylline Oracles (not to be confused with the Roman Sibylline Books), which contains a wealth of information regarding both Jewish and early Christian beliefs, in which we can read the following:

The godless furthermore shall to all ages perish, all who did evils aforetime, and committed murders, And all who are accomplices therein,...All who caused abortions, and all who their offspring cast unlawfully away.

Next we have the Jewish work Sentences of Pseudo-Phocylides, dating somewhere from between 100B.C. and 100A.D.:

Do not let a woman destroy the unborn babe in her belly, nor after its birth throw it before the dogs and the vultures as a prey.

You may also want to take a look at Birth Control in Jewish Law: Marital Relations, Contraception, and Abortion as Set Forth in the Classic Texts of Jewish Law by David Michael Feldman and Abortion and the Early Church: Christian, Jewish and Pagan Attitudes in the Greco-Roman World by Michael Gorman^[1] but be prepared to have your narrative dismantled.

Care to try again?



1. Another one of use is Is God a Moral Monster by Paul Copan

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

Which again has nothing to do with my main point. You've mastered the non sequitur haven't you? My main point was about the philosophical arguments and beliefs for those who are against abortion existing long before ultrasounds.

There appear to have been some who expressed concerns. .

The Jews were admired [sometimes grudgingly] because they did not expose unwanted infants. Some in the Graeco-Roman world also expressed their concerns over the practise. However, there is nothing in Judaism condemning abortion and certainly abortion was practised in the Graeco-Roman world,

[Cerebrum123]

Pardon? Your original post [if I recall correctly] was to do with the original Hippocratic Oath which existed within societies where unwanted infants were regularly exposed.

Which again has nothing to do with my main point. You've mastered the non sequitur haven't you? My main point was about the philosophical arguments and beliefs for those who are against abortion existing long before ultrasounds.