June 26, 2003

THE BROTHERS JUDD HOME FOR BAD JEWS

Be a good Jew and vote Democratic: Jews shouldn't vote for Jewish candidates because they're Jewish, but they should vote for the Democratic Party because of Jewish values. (Bradford R. Pilcher, June 26, 2003, Jewsweek)
Forgive the partisan tone, but the Democratic Party is simply more in line with Jewish values today. Conservative Jews will protest, of course, and they could certainly cite some examples to bolster their case. Some Democrats have openly vilified the Jewish state to a degree that is simply absurd if not anti-Semitic. But issues like these are exceptions rather than the rule. On the whole, the Republican agenda is largely out of step with Judaism. The Democratic Party, on the other hand, is filled with political Yiddishkeit.

Take abortion and sexual politics. There's a fair share of controversy over how permissive Judaism is of abortion, but nobody can question that Judaism allows for it in some circumstances. Yet Republicans aggressively pursue the repeal of Roe v. Wade and obstinately block exceptions in cases of rape or a danger to the mother's life from their attempts to restrict abortion. It's Democrats who seek to make the procedure "safe, legal, and rare."

Fine. Let's adopt only the abortion restrictions provided by Jewish law, which conveniently appear elsewhere in the magazine, Abortion distortion: Roe v. Wade's 30th anniversary is bringing the abortion debate back into the spotlight. Why Jews should support pro-life. (Rabbi Avi Shafran, June 26, 2003, Jewsweek.com):
The assertion that Jewish law allows a woman to terminate a pregnancy at will in no way reflects accepted -- or even seriously entertained -- rabbinic opinion. And if anything undermines basic tenets of Judaism, it is the notion that the Torah allows unfettered "access to reproductive services" -- i.e. Roe v. Wade-style abortion-on-demand.

To be sure, the Talmudic sources are clear that the life of a pregnancy-endangered Jewish mother takes precedence over that of her unborn child when there is no way to preserve both lives. And, while the matter is not free from controversy, there are respected rabbinic opinions that allow abortion when the pregnancy seriously jeopardizes the mother's health. But those narrow exceptions certainly do not translate into some unlimited mother's "right" to make whatever "choice" she may see fit about the child she carries.

And in the case of "partial birth abortion," the procedure approaches -- in fact, likely crosses -- the border between abortion and infanticide, where Jewish law does not even recognize a "life of the mother" exception.

Whatever Hadassah and its allies might wish were the case, the Torah clearly affords fetal life significant protection. There is absolutely no source in halacha, or Jewish religious law, for the contention that a mother may "choose" to terminate a pregnancy at will.

Who's closer: Republicans or Democrats? Posted by Orrin Judd at June 26, 2003 10:47 PM
Comments for this post are closed.