Abortion in Jewish Law

This pro-abortion argument is invalid. The legal system does not acknowledge the realities of abortion-- all of which go against Jewish law.

The author does not mention the torture of fetuses that is involved in their demise, the harvesting of baby parts for commercial use, the loss of fatherhood, the eugenics behind the abortion movement, as well as the criminal and profitable motivations behind the abortion movement.

Abortion is allowed in Judaism to save a woman's life, but that is only applicable to less than 1% of all cases.

He also doesn't mention all the cases of women who have died or have been rendered permanently infertile as a result of botched abortions.

There are good and viable alternatives to abortion...and none of them involve the murder of our future generations.

Until every single Jewish human creation of G d falls to their knees and vows to follow their G d and never turn from his ways again, there’ll never be peace between their creator and them. G d has a plan for every creation and for any man or woman to take the authority of destroying that plan by their own hands then G d will reign havoc upon the earth. We as Jews are chosen to stand up front and demand that none of G d’s laws are
crushed, and this is our last chance. G d didn’t create a fetus in a women’s womb to end up as part of a test tube experiment or to create life in a lab.
That’s not science & technology; it’s murder.

The ONLY THING THAT MATTERS is the woman. It is her body, therefore it is HER DECISION. No one else has a right to venture even an opinion about it, not her doctor and not a rabbi. There are no gray areas and no buts about it. Her body, her decision. Everyone else should keep quiet.

“Thou shalll not kill “ seems simple enough, without nuances or exceptional clauses.

It is said to think that any rabbinical position would allow for the abortion of babies with down syndrome and is surely very insulting on the affirmation of the inherent value of these people. Like wise, calling it a ''mitzva'' to abort a child that is the product of adultery and punishing the child for the sins of the parents sounds cruel. I hope neither of these positions are well respected.

There are no such things of deformities as each life is perfect. It is created in the image of G-d. Each life is by definition blessed bc of the divine act we assume when making life. The Torah distinctly tells us in Hashem’s words, “choose life.” It does not say “only the perfect” should choose life. It is all of Israel! When a culture allows for the destruction of the most vulnerable in its midst the society has no right to expect dignity, respect, or honor in return. That society waves its right to law and justice. The womb is the most sacred space. There is absolutely no room for exception. When the Nazis did it is was a crime. Why is it that we teach our young men and women this is now somehow acceptable.

I am not Jewish but I have spent my life in a largely Jewish milieu which I have loved and respected.

Dr. Eisenberg's discussion was truly excellent and germane. He is to be complimented and I would enjoy reading more of his opinions.

There is nothing “nuanced” about what Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton have accomplished. The outcome of these decisions is that we live in a culture that condones death and infanticide. It is legal to kill unborn children up to the moment of birth, by dismembering their bodies limb by limb. We don’t do that to our pets. What is nuanced is that progressive rabbis selectively choose passages in the Torah and other sacred texts and distort their meanings to condone abortion for “choice.” There is nothing in the Jewish religion that promotes, supports or condones abortion for convenience. There is nothing in the Jewish religion or texts that would excuse 63 million lives lost for choice. Not Exodus 21:22-25. Not Mishnah Ohalot 7:6.

The authentic, traditional Jewish position is pro-life. There are numerous passages in the Torah that stress the importance of having children. We just read in Parashat Nitzavim, Deuteronomy 30:19: I have set before you life and death, the blessing and the curse. You shall choose life, so that you and your offspring will live. Very clear.

Women are often left with abortion regret that can last for decades. Tikvat Rachel was developed by Cecily Routman, President of the Jewish Pro-Life Foundation (see her comments below). Tikvat Rachel is the first teshuvah-based post-abortion specifically developed for Jewish women and men who have been psychologically harmed by a previous abortion experience. Abortion-on-demand is not permissible in Judaism. Abortion kills unborn children and hurts women. I only wish more rabbis spoke out in favor of life. https://www.jewishprolifefoundation.org/after-abortion

The writer claims that Judaism is "pro-life" -- as per the GOP / Hard Right / etc. definition.
However, it is IMPOSSIBLE to dismiss the Talmudic statement that states that it is permitted to "cut up" an embryo to save the Mother's life. It is similarly impossible to ignore the GREAT Rishonim who did NOT consider Abortion to be murder.
In attempting to defend this position, Bonnie Chernin takes verses ENTIRELY out of context. The verse cited does NOT refer to abortion -- it refers to the JEWISH PEOPLE choosing to observe the Torah. Yes -- the Torah is "pro life" for the JEWISH PEOPLE. For an embryo, as masterfully discussed in the article, the Torah is MUCH more "nuanced" and -- if anything -- is "pro life" FOR THE MOTHER.
Instead of taking a "hard position", Bonnie should realize that Halacha is NOT what the GOP wants and it is NOT what the Catholic Church wants. There are times when [Bonnie, believe it or not!] the Halacha will permit or even MANDATE that an abortion be performed. And, I suspect that when a woman has an abortion as mandated by Halacha, rather then "regret", there will be a sense of "resolution" -- because, like an Orthodox Jew, this woman followed the guidance of Halacha.

I'm sorry you feel that way. I am not taking Exodus 21:21-25 out of context. The verse refers to either a miscarriage or possibly (as some poskim believe) a live birth. There is no death penalty because it is unknown whether the child would have died of natural causes prior to birth, or been stillborn. In those cases the perpetrator is not responsible for a capital crime. (born-alive rule). You state that it is "permitted to "cut up" an embryo to save the Mother's life." That's true. A mother's LIFE. 99% of abortions are not for that reason. Be that as it may, there are many rabbinic interpretations of why there is a need to cut up the child to kill it. Is the purpose of cutting up the child to kill it to save the mother's life? Or is it to save BOTH mother AND child? If you can maim the unborn child and save both, as horrible as maiming the child is, it is better than outright killing the child. I've heard this interpretation mentioned in audio lectures on Judaism and medical ethics, and I've seen that interpretation written elsewhere. Since I don't know you and am not familiar with your situation, I cannot comment on it. Some women do say they have a sense of resolution, and perhaps they do. Others experience long-standing grief and regret. I welcome you to visit my website, which is JewishLifeLeague.org. As I mentioned in my original post, please also visit The Jewish Pro-Life Foundation as they offer Tikvat Rachel, a teshuvah-based healing program for post-abortive women.

who claim to be Jewish manage to use the words "GOP" and "radical right" when attacking those of us who believe that life is sacred. Can I state that they are radical left and avid hard core leftists? Apparently for some people - and tragically many Jews - there are not enough abortions in the USA! Just sad!

When you have no legal or moral argument to support abortion on demand, attack the writer! For many women, their abortions were the only opportunity to have a child and once that ship sails, it is too late! In my ministry I have met many post abortive women - and even some men - who regret their abortions which were CONVENIENCE ABORTIONS. And now it is too late for them to have children. And yes, some of them have converted out because of the support that prominent Jews have shown for abortion on demand - and their lack of sympathy for women - and men - who have regrets. Repeat after me: the vast majority of abortions are for convenience and life style. The fact that you threw in the GOP shows that you have a radical, political pro abortion agenda - the one the Dem platform has.

Abortion destroys the humanity of the baby and turns women against their own children. There are many women who are wounded by abortion and I know some of them convert to Catholicism where they are welcomed and shown concern. Those Jewish rabbis who are callous about the pain of abortion are the cause of some women's conversion out. They need to look in the mirror. We are the original pro life faith, and pagans hated us because of it! The liberal Jewish movement has taken on the platform of the Democrat party which is anti life.

to accuse ANY knowledgeable Rabbi as being Callous when ruling on a Halachic issue not only shows an incredible arrogance toward both Rabbis and Halacha, it shows a fundamental lack of understanding of Halacha. Judaism is NOT a "feel good" religion. There have been cases when the Halacha mandates something that feels "cruel" or "harsh" or "unfeeling". However, deciding that Judaism is what you "want it to be" reduces everything to "if I do not like it -- it must be wrong".
I would ask the writer of this post -- how many women who had abortions that were halachically sanctioned converted to Catholicism? How many who followed halacha were "wounded"? How many were "turned against their own children?

You are right: Judaism is not a feel good religion and you should not feel good about advocating for abortion on demand and neither should any so-called abortion. Abortion regret - even the Guttmacher institute acknowledges this is high and I know post abortive women who converted out because of people like you. Their abortions were convenience abortions which is what the vast, vast majority of abortions are. Interesting how you pick and choose what to believe from the Torah when it is convenient to you very, very liberal beliefs.

Wow! Just the fact that a woman would consider aborting her own child shows she is against her child. I guess you don't do logic very well. As for the Jewish women who abort, I can assure you that the vast, vast, vast majority were not by Halachic law. Stop trying to hide behind your fake religiosity. They went to Planned Parenthood, an organization founded by the racist Margaret Sanger, and slipped out through the side door.

This legal treatment of the issue omits the realities of abortion, all of which go against Jewish law.

Dr. Eisenberg never mentions the harm done to women by abortion, the torture of babies who are given no pain medication before being starved, poisoned, dismembered or born alive for organ harvesting, the unethical, immoral, dishonest, and criminal elements of the industry, the loss of fatherhood and future generations, or the racist, eugenics, and profit motivates driving the pro-abortion movement.

Judaism clearly prohibits abortion, and the narrow exception to save the life of the mother occurs in less than 1% of pregnancies. This exception has been distorted by decades of Jewish abortion advocates through the use of 'nuance', ignorance and arrogance, arriving at the point where abortion is defined by hundreds of rabbis as a religious right, putting us in accordance with satanic worship, and signaling Jewish approval of 'afterbirth abortion' to save the family inconvenience and to provide fresh organs for NIH funded Mengele type research for the good of humanity.

Any treatment of the abortion issue in Judaism must include these realities in order to provide a complete picture for the reader. For more information, visit JewishProLifeFoundation.org

The poster ignores the significant body of Jewish literature that did NOT consider Abortion to be "murder". The poster did not consider the more "modern" cases where there HAVE been halachically sanctioned abortions. Instead, the poster ARROGANTLY "decides" when abortion is permitted and when not.
When Abortion IS mandated by Halacha -- then it IS a "religious right".
Instead of casting aspersions on those rabbis who have ruled to permit abortions -- the poster should -- instead -- admit that JUST MAYBE the Halacha is NOT what the poster would "like"..

I was told that in Jewish law the embryo is considered "as water" up to 40 days old, and can therefore be aborted. Is this correct? I do not want to spread false information to anyone! (This is re the new law in Texas that does not allow abortion after detection of the fetal heartbeat which is at about 6 weeks - ie conforming almost exactly to the 40 days as water in what I was told is Jewish law.) Please reply urgently!

https://www.sefaria.org/Yevamot.69b.10?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en

The Talmud does say that, but not in the context of abortion.

I heard many years ago from a great Rabbi -- no longer alive -- that he would permit abortion within the first 40 days in cases of Rape -- even if the Mother's life was not in danger. This was NOT some left wing liberal -- but a Rabbi who truly had the Talmud in this "right hand"...

When I taught my course in "Problems and Ethics in the Progress of Science", esp. Medical Science, I made it clear that we need national, regional, and global population controls - but not through "conveyor belt abortions". The old Soviet Union as well as China have seen that - and the consequences of rampant infertility and all. There are better ways - and they are available to most of us in the richer world. And we can ever further them in the poorer parts. The answer is not "a Woman's Right", but "Everybody's Responsibility". As for the so highly praised US "women's right of abortion", the problem is not Roe vs. Wade, but the way perjury was used to create a law aimed at releasing women from any responsibility. Jane Roe, or rather Norma McCorvey, was never raped, but pregnant by her boyfriend, and her pregnancy was not such a burden to her - she carried it out and gave the baby up for adoption. In short: 30 million women based their "right" to kill their unborn on a criminal lie, initiated through some middle-upper-class "women's righters" tricking a poor girl into lies before the Supreme Court. That is not the way to make laws for a decent society.

But, even if she had been raped, the unborn developing life would still be an innocent one and not deserve a quasi death penalty. In this, there had never been any doubt - until the natural quality of persons in their natural definition as Men and Women had been pushed aside by economic and monetary concepts which define a woman (like man) according to wealth - and any child an "artificial and bad burden". I think, millions of women and men love children - and their families - too much to fall for cheap arguments of "property" - be it "my belly belongs to me" to "that fetus is an invader", or "an exploiter", or "a bob of cells". A child, born or unborn, is a human being - one of us - not less. If there has to be a death - if it really MUST be - cry! Don't celebrate! Don't be inhuman! Be a grieving mother!

Do you understand the horror of nonconsensual childbirth? It is comparable to rape.

We know where babies come from; you are free to not engage in activities which create children. You did learn basic biology, right? Did your mother choose to have you? How many people were created because o an "accident" and are happy to be alive?

Um, did you know that rapists do not ask for permission?

Also, yes, unfortunately my mother did choose to have me. Bad decision on her part.

I thought for the first 40 days the embryo is considered to be nothing but water and may be terminated?

The Israel military pays for an abortion(s) for a woman in the . This seems contrary to everything you wrote. Is the military above Torah, the Rabbis and the Almighty?

“Life of the Mother” is the most misused reason for an abortion - a slippery slope, it is used for any indication a pregnancy might harm a woman ... including psychological. My four children were delivered by a medical practice of 3 doctors who had, combined, been delivering babies for over 100 years! They were revered throughout the Los Angela’s area . A plague outside their office doors stated that they would perform no abortions. One of the doctors told me that, in their professional life, they had NOT ONCE had to recommend abortion to save the mother (tubal pregnancy is the exception) that is how genuinely rare it is. G-d’s commandments/laws are often difficult to follow - you can claim to do that and still support abortion, but it would be almost impossible to justify and certainly indicate duplicity.

Ah, the slippery slope fallacy. What about the slippery slope toward seeing a woman as nothing but a container for a baby?

That is not a moral argument to support abortion. A uterus is a warm, nourishing place for a baby. That's where you were within your mother! You are the one diminishing women. Do you believe that men menstruate? You probably do. And that baby has her own DNA! A woman's body is glorious - you seem to be ashamed of it.

You are diminishing women. You are reducing them to nothing but a body. A woman's body's most important fuction is hosting the woman's mind.

You made a typo in your post that perhaps reveals the truth. You wrote a "plague" when you meant to write a "plaque". I think that medical practitioners that would deny a woman control over her own body, who would refuse providing medical care if the care entailed abortion, are a plague! They deny women autonomy, and deny them the right to choose. They might be forcing the women back to the unforunate pre-Roe v. Wade days, when women suffered, even died, because they were not offered the medical care they wanted and needed.

As presented in the article, not only is the question of permitting an abortion nuanced, for a given situation, Poskim can disagree. A woman considering an abortion must follow HER "Posek" regardless of other opinions. Further, this article did not (and -- likely -- could not) get into a discussion of abortion when there are less than 40 days after conception.
It is for this reason that it is so critical that RELIGIOUS Jews should oppose any attempt to overturn Roe v. Wade. A question so sensitive should NOT be left up to the political machinations that kowtow to evangelists or catholics or any other "pro life" group that does NOT follow the criteria of Halacha. Abortion must remain a RELIGIOUS Issue that is decided by the Posek that a woman consults -- and NO OTHER "BODY" should interfere. All of those who idolized Trump for "promising" to appoint Supreme Court Justices who will overturn Roe v. Wade were -- at best short sighted and at worst "politicized" in the worst way.

Roe vs. Wade is not only morally but also legally wrong. Legally - Why?
Simply because no Court of Justice can accept Fake Evidence or Perjury!
Both did apply to the trial of Norma McGovern in which she testified under oath that she had been raped by several persons (3 men and 1 woman), and this was the cause for her being 'with child'. And that she could not bear this situation of shame and suffering and urgently needed it to be ended!
But: All this was a lie - apart from her being pregnant - but that had been her boyfriend! - No rapist anywhere (not to mention 4 of them).
The Fake Evidence was not the baby - but "the rape-produced baby"!
And the Perjury was the Entire Testimony to which she had been coached or coaxed by some "women's righters" (at least, one of whom was a lawyer!)
That is, of course, Serious Crime that should have ended her career in the law.
The lie continued even 'post partum': The pregnancy was perfectly bearable - but Norma (Jane Roe) was only a young woman and student: She gave her daughter up for adoption.

This article is wrong. What a slippery slope to agree to murder of a human life by another human and justify with mental issues or life of the mother at risk. The ever increasing lust for money from the abortion industry has amplified the excuses for abortion to fill their pockets whether it is the selling of baby organs or tissue or allowing them to die after birth when a child survives an abortion. WHAT ABOUT ADOPTION?

If you care so strongly about adoption, focus on FIXING THE ADOPTION SYSTEM! Adoption is extremely complicated and difficult. There's no such thing as "just adopt" or "just put the child up for adoption."

This comment has been deleted.

I believe that 2 of your comments have some merit. Unless you can show stats, your over-generalization that 90% of Jews are okay with committing 'genocide' is abhorrent, and is so far outside rational thought that it serves to diminish whatever comments have merit.

I don't believe that abortion has anything to do with the male- And those who get involved are interested more in their own opinion than the health of the mother.
It's like asking a Rabbi what he thinks of a catholic priest -It is nothing to do with him .
I think that that the article is brilliant -and the explanation to the point -
If only men would realize that women should have the last word !

Chris, there is one more consideration - that should be taken into account. As I alluded to in my posting - after just a few seconds - or minutes - has gone by - once G -D - has allowed the woman's egg - and the male sperm to UNITE - and become a HUMAN SOUL. It is NOW - a CREATION OF G-D - FOREVER. So - with the continuing cycle of life - and that NOW HUMAN SOUL - is born - and begins it's Journey according to G-D's plan for it. That HUMAN SOUL - IS STILL - G-D's CREATION - IT DOES NOT BELONG TO US - TO DO WITH - AS WE PLEASE. WE - and the female - now have the responsibility ourselves - to CARE PROPERLY - for the Soul that G-D CREATED IN US - as - IT'S STILL HIS CREATION. We must now make CORRECT MORAL DECISIONS - on what we do with - and to it - ACCORDING TO - G-D's Torah Laws and Commandments. Once the choice to allow pregnancy is made. When it happens - there is no longer a choice to take the life - G-D may create within.
This still allows for - making certain choices - that G-D - allows us to make. EG: to choose an occupation - to choose where we go to school - to choose where we will live - to KEEP G-D's Torah Commandments and Laws - just to name a few.

You think a man should have no say? A baby Is not property and half the dna is from the father
I guess you think as a man you can have no opinion on what a woman does even your daughter
Just wow
You sound very whipped
Many men regret lost fatherhood

AT THE MOMENT - G-D - allows the male sperm - and the female egg - to meld and ignite - a new live human being - INSIDE A WOMAN - IT IS NOW - an actual LIVE CREATION OF G-D - NOT US! Albeit - not in a form - that we initially recognize. Think - a house is built of many materials - and doesn't look like a house - until complete.
G-D also chooses - to instill in HIS CREATION - all the elements of life - HE DECIDES - will be our path in life. As well as - G-D - CHOOSES - the fate of the birth mother. REMEMBER - Rachel Emanu!? SHE DIED - giving birth to Ben-Oni (Benjamin). Think - could some kind of intervention - saved her?
WE - don't know - why - G-D allowed her to die - PERIOD!
ERGO - if G-D allowed Rachel Emanu - to die - GIVING BIRTH. WHO ARE WE - that we can choose - to OVERRIDE - G-D - and RATIONALIZE - that - depending on circumstances - it's OK - to perform an abortion - because of (X) reason?

Your statements are not in line with Jewish theology or Torah. The fact that Rachel Emanu died in childbirth does NOT negate the halacha that an abortion must be done to save the life of the mother. Hashem decides what will happen and who will have a good outcome in childbirth but we must do our hishtadlut and do everything to save the life of the mother in an emergency.

Rachel Imeinu should have had a C-section in a sterile environment using modern medicine, but sadly, that had not been invented yet.

Rena, Although - it's through PROGRESSIVE THINKING MORALISTS - who speak in G-D's name - on halachic issues - it doesn't change the fact that - THE WRITTEN TORAH - does not come to - the same conclusions - as they - and you have - on the issue of abortion. OR - for that matter - on many halachic decisions. Be they Non-Jews - or Jews.
Both Non-Jews - and Jews - have succumbed to making halachic decisions - on behalf of G-D - without consulting HIM - and getting a TRUE - FACTUAL answer from HIM. And presenting their decisions on issues - as though - they are FACT.
What G-D really wants is - correct - good - sound Torah Teaching. NOT - Torah Teaching - that sounds good.

Through all of this— there are still some very huge holes— caused by the presumption that men — doctors — are somehow infallible in their diagnoses. Medical malpractice is one of the leading causes of death in the 1st world. Just because a doctor says there MAY be an issue with the mother or fetus does not mean they are correct. Abortion based on possible outcomes is still murder— because you have removed the faith in God to cover the situation and given it to men…and the fruit that surround it— death — is not of God. I would always say to err on the side of life when it comes to possibilities — faith and fear are not compatible.

You wrote: "In general, abortion is permitted only if there is direct threat to the mother."
It seems to me as this disregards that fact that we all need to put our faith in The Almighty One. Just as Abraham; David; and so many others who lived their lives expecting our Almighty One to protect and provide, may His will be done!
Trials of faith is what grows our character and like the purification of gold; refines us!

Faith has nothing to do with the action we must take

I am in no way qualified to give medical advice. I will note that I was so diagnosed in my first pregnancy. My beautiful 29 year old daughter is now planning her wedding. She was definitely worth 2 months of bed rest and a medication to prevent preterm labor.

That is not where the tshuva is, 9:52 Shaar 3 and he quotes R' Moshe in 14:27

A man breaking the bris, or masturbation, is considered to be a major sin because the sperm is wasted and the potential human will never be born, and as a result their sould will be very angry and Lilth will haunt the offender.

Logically it would seem to apply also to abortion, where a developing human is killed. Isn't this the same sort of evil?

Jeff Bezos richest man in the world was born to his mother at age 17 she was alienated from her community because of that. if she would only abort him

It is considered a major sin because it is forbidden. The wasted sperm itself is not that different from all the unsuccessful sperm in marital relations or the eggs lost in menstruation.

I'm wondering about what consideration the fallibility of medical diagnosis is given when determining the fate of a fetus. Per this ... "The rabbinic experts also discuss the permissibility of abortion for mothers with German measles and babies with prenatal confirmed Down syndrome." ... because in my case I would most likely been aborted, if it was legal at the time, because my mother had the German Measles in the first trimester. Obviously I was an exception to the normally expected death sentence for fetuses exposed to GM in the first trimester. How does the possibility of statistical anomalies (incorrect diagnoses) fit into abort or don't abort decisions per Jewish law? Related, how does the concept of the, "precautionary principle," fit into Jewish law? Is there somewhere a tendency to fault on the possibility of viability of baby and mother given the chance that analysis of such viability is not perfect? I'm for one am someone who is glad to exist despite, "best medical information." Respectfully

The sentence that you quoted, "The rabbinic experts also discuss the permissibility of abortion for mothers with German measles and babies with prenatal confirmed Down syndrome" does not mean that those rabbinic experts permitted abortion in these cases in any way, it just means that they discussed the issue. The sentence was written in a slightly misleading way and is easily misunderstood. I do not know of any mainstream rabbinic authorities that permit abortion in either of the above cases -- those situations are not a danger to the mother nor do they necessarily guarantee a lack of quality of life for the child. There are many, many Down syndrome children being raised in religious and ultra-orthodox communities so it would seem to prove that no one is being told to abort these children.

In discussing the Noachide law against murder, we see the argument: "On the authority of R. Ismael it was said (he is executed) even for the murder of an embryo. What is R. Ismael's reason? - Because it is written, Whoso sheddeth the blood man within (another) the man, shall his blood be shed. What is a man within another man? - An embryo in his mother's womb."

Every Jew must stand up for the unborn baby. Each child is a child of G-d. How can we not stand for life? We are Jews!! Abortion is the Shoah of our times. Remember the words of the great prophet, Before I formed thee in the bowels of thy mother, I knew thee: and before thou camest forth out of the womb, I sanctified thee, and made thee a prophet unto the nations.

Thank you Kenneth Kaplin for standing for the sanctity of human life! G-d commands Jews to "choose life". How very Jewish of you!

Some years ago I was told by a rabbi that abortion was permitted because the fetus, and then also the newborn, did not have complete status as a full human with all rights, until the 1st birthday. At the 1st birthday the baby would receive a spiritual completion. I have never heard this explanation repeated. Have you heard of this?

Q: Why are Jews in favor of legal abortion?
A: Because they don't believe the fetus is human until it receives its PhD.

While rabbinic rulings apply to Jews, what about non-Jews? I would not have an abortion unless for one of the reasons delineated in this excellent article. But the scary thing about the “pro-life” movement is that they want to ban abortion for every woman. If you oppose abortion— don’t have one!

Murder is also prohibited for non-Jews. To legally allow wanton murder is prohibited for secular society as well.

Please visit my website and group, https://www.JewishLifeLeague.org. We believe that life, both born and unborn, is sacred and worthy of protection. The Jewish Life League provides information and resources on abortion from the traditional Jewish pro-life viewpoint.

which offers hope to Jewish women in crisis. Pregnancy is not a disease. The references to "women's health" is farcical as over 96% of abortions are convenience abortions. Abortion snuffs life and breaks a heart. Sane people are horrified by this casual taking of life.

What are the consequences of having an abortion out of convenience? There was no risk to the Mother's physical or mental health. The Mother is okay with her choice and therefore Teshuvah to absolve this will not take place. Thanks in advance

There is clearly a lot of nuance and room for interpretation in Jewish Law. A very interesting article.

everyone i know who had an abortion has regretted it later saying oh wish i had not done it i was stupidly persuaded but he /she would now be grown and next to me my mother in law developed diabetes with her last 10 th child the doctor said better to abort but she declined even tho she could have died my mother on the other hand had an abortion because my older sister was very difficult and she was afraid the baby would be like her i allways tell her off my wife was told by a female spinster doctor abort sh e being weak willed nearly followed her advice altho i was firmly against it [what do you leave behind on this earth except children] also have you seen how they abort by going into the uterus and cutting the embryo bit by bit hand leg torso head [ why call a baby embryo] except to make it easier to destroy it now on tghe other hand if the baby has genetic problem then i agree as long as the test is done again and again to make sure it is correct as ive heard of a brave jewish couple who went ahead and had a normal baby altho doctors told them opposite my sons rabbi at ohr abraham in bet shemesh adopted two paralyzed children allong with his own and husband and wife held the hands all nite these adopted kids whose parents had abandoned them what a heart they have shallom allen

I know plenty of people whose mothers chose not to abort, and they (child not mother) regret that.

Thank you for this timely article. Although I am against abortion, how can I hold a mirror at another's conscience?

Yes, I am also against abortion and hold life to its utmost existence. I cannot pass judgement against another conscience, but more information on the sacredness of life should be made available on the subject of abortion. A fetus is the living, breathing part of a women's body and feels what the mother feels.

If the mother carrying the embryo is suicidal and wants to abbort because she feels that the pregnancy is making her suicidle when really the embryo is of no harm to her, shouldn't it be considered that she is her own pursuer? Could it be that she has caused these thoughts to arrise in her own mind especially where the pregnancy was unplanned and unexpected or where her partner makes threats to leave if child is not aborted...putting her in a trying situation to choose her partner or child could cause phsycological upset...would her partner then be considered her and the embryos' pursuer?

What if she was raped? I would think that anyone who was raped would have the potential to become suicidal in that case, and in that state of mind, should definitely have their life put first.

Rape is usuallly not a sexual matter but a matter of taking, exerting control and domination. Rarely, does a pregnancy occur as a result of rape. When statistics were kept; around the 70's through 90's; female pregnancy due to rape was around 1/2 of one percent of pregnant women. Today, abortion on demand for any time and reason is crime against humanity.; and is seriously detrimental to the national female emotional, mental and spiritual health. Is a typical leftest, liberal, darwinism ploy to take the least of tradgic situations and blow them up to huge porpotions and would allow for abortion on demand, any time and any reason. The seed of humankind belongs to HaShem, is Holy; that's why we have command to males to not spill their seed; it is not their possesion.

Rape is just as likely to result in pregnancy as consensual relations. The reason that is a small percentage of pregnancies is because consensual relations are a lot more common than rape.

I hope that that statistic about 0.5% of pregnancies resulting from rape is incorrect.
Should it indeed be correct, it would seem to indicate that rape is extraordinarily common.

On another note, it would be good to see the author's reponse to some of the many fascinating comments to his article.

I would just like to add that I had a job at the time and could provide for myself, but barely make it... Time, not a lot, but I figured it out! It seemed impossible at the time but somehow friends came forward and helped and loved me like never before. No one gave me money or watched my child for free on a regular basis, I did it on my own without child support. I am so proud to say that my faith has brought me great rewards. G-d is honoring me for the choices I made to give a living being life inside of me. All of the other challenges that come with the choices I have made are tests of faith and allowing Him to take control of the situation. As a parent of three little boys now I have come to realize that He gives us children and we take care of them and fight for there safety, but ultimately they are His. I can't explain the suffering I am going through, but I have to trust and have faith. I am not so religious, but I do have an amazing relationship. Is there something I am not understanding about the Jewish faith that constitutes for this kind of behavior from a very devout Jewish family? There will never be relationshal forgiveness, but I have forgiven. My son barely knows his biological father, I just continuously get a legal bully game from them.

I like this article coz it helped me out in my end of semester major presentation. THANKS> can you just send me the year in which ths book was published? including the page number from which this article was extracted.

it should be up to the persons must affected by an unwanted baby and be considered that if a person does not have the fianacial means to support an unwanted baby that she would have to rely on society for fianacial support and taxes would have to be paid by others it will cause a problem for soicety thereby draging down on soiciety it considered to be benifincial to the preagnant woman to have an abortion for others behalf

best comment on here^^^

God loves every child, no matter the circumstances of their conception. To say that the baby is unwanted means that we are negating the love of God. Also, your comment presumes incorrectly that there are only 2 choices for the mother - either have the child killed or raise it on her own. That's false and misleading. If the mother is not capable for whatever reason of bringing the child up and supporting him or her, or even just doesn't want to, then there are many, many loving couples who can't have children of their own, who would love to be parents tho this child and to care for him or her. In any case, He loves that child and has loving plans for him or her, plans that none of us can presume to know ahead of time. Maybe that child will grow up to be a loving mother, father, brother or sister, a teacher, scientist, president, etc. Maybe the reason God allows a child to come after a rape is because through that child, God can bless this world in unexpected ways to combat the evil that people like the rapist do. To assume you need to kill an innocent baby to achieve good is the complete opposite of Faith, and totally un-Jewish.

Excellent comments but I do not agree with these other two ideas.

I am not certain that 'no child is unwanted by God'. And I am unsure about the similar idea that 'Gd loves every child no matter the circumstances of their conception.' I believe that virtually all children conceived in normal, loving relationships are indeed 'wanted by Gd'. But I don't think anyone can answer why Gd allowed an evil soul to be bound up in Hitler's body, may his name be expunged.

Secondly, your point about rape seems to contravene our belief in free will. Most rational people will not agree with the fact that the child of a rapist has been brought here by Gd to grow up to be a scientist or president any more than the child conceived during marital 'shalom habayit'.

Free choice means Hitler wasn't an inherently evil soul. He made evil choices.

What part of the post by Kris don't you understand? She said, "I got pregnant from rape." How dare you then tell her 'you failed to use contraception properly'. People who have been sexually assaulted cannot be judged for the perpetrators not having used contraception. You are the one who needs to 'hold back on the indignant, proud tone'.

I got pregnant from rape when I was 22 and had an abortion. I think it is terrible that anyone would give themselves permission to call me a murderer. I really wanted children, and have them now with my husband. But at that time, I made the decision to not allow the continued growth of the embryo inside me, because *if* I were to continue any pregnancy, the child born must be mine to keep and love. At that time, I had no money, no partner and no time to care for (because of work) and no support system of friends, religion or family. It is not ok for any person or government to force me or anyone else to carry a pregnancy to term and then be forced (by circumstance) to give up a child. That is wrong, and that is permitted and condoned in the US today. It is not ok to judge me, or slander me, by calling me a murderer, either.

Kris - Im sorry you were raped and became pregnant. Im sorry you had no support system from family, friends and religion. But most of all, Im sorry you felt you had to kill that innocent fetus. If its growing inside you, its alive. Did you ever hear of adoption? There are thousands of couples who would have loved to raise that now dead baby. Shame on you.

Kris-You did the right thing. Only you knew the entire potential threat to your life from the rape and giving life to the baby of that rapist. It is wrong for anyone to insinuate that your thinking was flawed. Rabbinic opinion of psychological threat cannot be simply dismissed by anyone with an agenda. I've always leaned toward conservative views and yet now that I see people putting agenda ahead of actual humanity and real life situations I'm thinking I'm pro-choice despite the fact that some might abuse the freedom. There is no shame on you and the family and husband you have now are testimony in favor of my opinion. G-d bless you.

For every one adult looking to adopt a child, there are 4 stuck in the endless loop of the adoption system. Also, adoption is an alternative to parenthood, not pregnancy. Your reply is typical, hateful, misogynistic, and complete devoid of any compassion for the children that are ALREADY BORN that desperately need to be adopted out to loving homes before worrying about a clump of cells. Shame on you.

That clump of cells is the beginning of life - it is how you began. Imagine if your mother had been so dismissing of you! we must make it easier and more palatable to adopt. We can change the law and hearts. You sound very bitter. I hope you recover from that.

ladydi, your lack of compassion is scary. but out of curiosity - did you read the article? did you see that things are not black and white? did you read Kris' story? just a quick point - name "ladydi" is an interesting choice. Lady Di was pregnant at the time of accident from extramarital relationships, carrying a heir to a family of terrorist supporters. very interesting choice of name. Kris - i am very sorry to read your story. pain you went through should have being enough. i am not you, but i have some incite to the pain you have gone though. hope you have recovered from that horrible experience. please make sure that you have confronted any issues that might have arose from being raped. take care.

If there are thousands of couples out there that are willing to adopt these unwanted, rape victim children then why are there orphanages? Why aren't all of the children adopted? It's so easy to say what someone else should do. It's not so easy to set up to the plate and put your money where your mouth is. How many children have you adopted? Kris, I'm fully behind you. It was your decision not the decision of these hypocrites.

I would not adopt the child of a rapist. The father is a violent criminal and I would not want the child of that union in my home.

As unfair as it is to force a victim to carry the rapist's child, it is also unfair to judge a child by his or her biological father. Once such a child is born, he or she should be treated like any other.

The foster care system is the problem as it is a cash cow
There are people who want to adopt but a relative might keep
Child in foster care for the pay check
Those of us who are pro life are pro child
We want the system changed

What make syou an authority on rape and carrying the product of that rape until it finally becomes a person. How dare you!!??!! Kris's decision had to be terribly difficult and you would dare to add another layer of pain??!!?? The chutzpah in your judgement of her is a true shanda.

Ladydi, You have no right to criticize Kris. The poor woman was raped! It's not just a matter of giving up the baby for adoption; there's the whole 9 month ordeal of pregnancy! Then the ordeal of childbirth! These can do tremendous physical harm to a woman's physical health, and her mental health for sure.

Murder doesn’t correct rape. Now the mother has to live with the fact that she committed an even more terrible crime than what occurred to her. How can THAT be “healing”? At least if she carries the child to term and gives it up for adoption, she can know that she did the honorable and merciful choice of not committing murder as retribution against a child innocent of its father’s crimes.

Abortion is not murder. In Jewish law, a person who commits an act of nonconsensual abortion on a woman is considered a terrible sort of criminal but not a murderer.

How dare you judge Kris the way your did! How rude. How selfish. You have failed to imagine her situation, failed to empathize with her suffering. No one should control her body! She should not have been raped -- that is an attempt to take control of her body. And she should not be denied an abortion -- that is an attempt to control her body.

I understand the logic of this decision. You shouldn't be proud though. You failed to use contraception properly. Something that's easy. So hold back on the indignant, proud, tone.

She failed to use proper contraception?? Can you read? She was raped!

You missed an important fact. Re-read the comment and consider what you wrote...

She choose to not use contraception? Oh my, disgusting comment by a very small person. If you're raped, you don't get to choose anything and to justify the rape is almost as horrible as doing it in the first place.

Oh my Ben, it seems that you don't understand birth control very well. Some people are actually UNABLE to use birth control because of medical reasons. For example, I myself can't use the patch because the medicine levels cause uncontrollable vomiting, I can't use "the shot" because my bones break easily (broke my pelvis twice in one year at 19 years old, just from running) and bone fractures are a common long-term side effect of "the shot," and because of my history of cervical and breast tumors, birth control that affects my hormones (like the pill) isn't a safe option. I don't fail to use contraception properly....I CAN'T use contraception! Don't jump to conclusions with people.

Even people who are able to use birth control don't usually get advance notice that someone is going to rape them.

I live in the United States of America and am therefore guaranteed by the Constitution a freedom both to practice my religion and from a government imposed religious doctrine. This is a fundamental tenant of the United States. While an individual may believe that abortion is wrong or acceptable based on their individual religious doctrines, it seems that legislating those religious doctrines in a country that fundamentally guarantees via the constitution that religion alone will not dictate law would be wrong. In Israel, it is a different situation as Israel is a country who's government is fundamentally built upon shared religious and cultural doctrines. So, while Jewish theology may inform the individual's decision to have an abortion, I would argue that in the United States, based on the Bill of Rights, it is appropriate to leave those decisions between the individual and their G-d. That's my two-cents.

I don't know if anyone is thinking of what Hashem would want to happen. Life to him is important any life even small ones. I myself believe abortion is murder. I am currently pregnant with my second child who already has a name, who by G-d was given a soul and is alive. I also have a medical condition of which doctors warned me not to have children because I could die in giving birth, but knowing we were all made for something, that my babies were given to me for a reason theres no way I could kill them because I fear for my safety. I'm afraid now , the babys almost due and I am afraid of what will happen-but I know for sure that if I have an abortion I'm killing someone if I don't I might live as I did with my last child. So its clear to me what I'm going to do although my life is threatened I'm going to have this baby.

you can't be forced into aborting, but as to what Hashem would want - according to Halacha it is QUITE CLEAR that you may, and possibly even SHOULD, have an abortion because your unborn child is a rodef.

@ Ahava, isn't a c-section the best way for you to deliver your baby safe ???and keep you safe ?? I had my two children by c-section , otherwise the first one would have been still born and my second child and I would have died.I did decide after my second child it would not be wise to have more children, as much as I wanted too, but I knew that I was responsible for those 2 children .

I agree that abortion is murder......if the fetus is growing, then it is alive and aborting it, in my opinion, is murder.

I am a Reform Jew, most comfortable with Reform for a variety of reasons, but I am an island alone when it comes to the issue of abortion. Although I used to think (prior to my own pregnancies) that elective abortion was "fine," I grew into a deeper understanding a number of years ago. I am a writer and have often thought of writing to those holding a "pro-choice" point of view in hopes of expanding understanding. Anti-abortion, pro-life views are completely compatible with liberal Judaism, when truly understood. I did have a small response article on abortion published in Tikkun magazine a few years ago. (Jan. '97). Any Judaic sources you could guide me toward would be useful in my writing. Thank you for your time and all your good work.

Does the child become human when it is able to live on its own or is it human when conceived? Science now tells us that a new unique DNA is created at the moment of conception. This new DNA only has the capacity to become a human being, doesn't it? How can it then be permitted ever to destroy it? Are we not placing women in the position of potential executioners when we say that they may "terminate " it? Is this not a kind of final solution writ on an individual level? Does that make it right, because an individual woman makes a decision rather that a govenment official?

this article is right on, but i am in the midst of a discussion with an old friend who is seriously pro-choice and i might have swayed him a little. when does a woman's personal decision to have an abortion severely threaten her people's existence? there are over 50,000 Jewish abortions in Israel every year and countless more Jewish abortions throughout the world. if not for the selfless decision to have large families by the hasidic and hariedi women, Jews would be headed toward extinction within one or two generations. this whole Jewish abortion thing (and liberal Jews are the biggest advocates for abortion) is nothing short of self-extermination. why are we completing what Hitler (amach sh'mo) started to do? how can we kill our own Jewish babies? i am not opposed to abortion, especially for well stocked populations. but when a tiny minority of people choose to nearly wipe themselves off the face of the earth with these barbaric procedures, you wonder who are our real worst enemies... Tragically, 'amoch sh'mo' would be proud.....

Would the "save-the-mother's-life" reasoning apply nowadays in light of medical advances regarding premature births? Instead of killing it, the baby could be placed in incubator after being removed from the mother's body.

I thought this was a great overview of the Jewish view on abortion. I plan to use it in an 8th grade Hebrew School class I teach.

1) If a policy says a thing can be done only in rare instances, that does not make it in favor of doing it; nor is it entirely against doing it. All you can really say is it is far more against it than it is for it. Therefore, on balance, Halachah must be more pro-life than it is pro-choice, and puts strong inhibitions against making that kind of choice if at all possible. If we make an estimate of 1-in-5,000 cases in which the health of the mother or baby are unquestionably or substantially at risk, then Halachah will be 99.98% pro-life. I don't know the actual statistics for this, of course, but even if it were 1-in-100, the point would be the same.

I realize you are saying if Halachah is not totally against, then it permits and that would make it pro-life. But, the error in that rationale is that it also promotes abortion as an expression of a woman's will alone. This article clearly does not support that. All it does support is an exception to the general rule.

b) Inconvenient 'is' a reason, it's just not a very good one. Neither are poverty, unpreparedness, stress, and fear. The question then is whether the reason for having an abortion is substantial enough to override our normal judgment and revulsion against aborting a human (or near-human) life.

c) Bringing in the 'If abortion was made illegal ...' argument is disigenuous because, for most life-supporters, it is not a question of all or nothing. Most of us do accept and respect the exception to the rule, and are not about to go along with trading one mistake for another. We just believe it wrong to take a life for anything less than saving another. Most of us would also allow for the case of rape, but would like to see more effort put into saving the child (to be adopted or give help).

d) I would also point out abortion was already on the books in several states and under consideration in several more at the time of Roe v. Wade. Roe and subsequent legislation changed three things. It made abortion the law of the nation, it made abortion discretionary, and it created an abortion industry subsidized at taxpayer expense. That created yet another issue entirely separate from abortion itself ... why taxpayers, who have nothing to do with the circumstances, inconveniences, hardships, choices, or mistakes of others, should be forced bail them out. Therefore, the constant refrain that reversing Roe would have the effect of 'killing women' is patently false and only used to stifle the legitimate criticism this is really about protecting the abortion industry's funding. There would be far less objection to a woman's 'choice', were not this deliberate fleecing involved, and you'd have far less to fear of it being outlawed.

I have found that the information presented to be very informative and leaned. Even though I am not of the Jewish faith, virtually all of what was written on this subject by Dr. Eisenberg to be in full agreement with my values and beliefs. Abortion does have its place but on a very limited scale, just as the Doctor mentioned.

"abortion is only permitted to protect the life of the mother or in other extraordinary situations. Jewish law does not sanction abortion on demand without a pressing reason."

Having myself had an abortion, and knowing many other women who have, I have never met or even heard of anyone who had an abortion without what seemed to her a "pressing reason". It seems that the only reasonable judges of what can be considered a pressing reason, or what can be considered a serious psychological risk to the pregnant woman, must be the woman, her doctor, and her G-d (with rabbinic advice). Clearly, "pressing reasons" and "serious harm" are things which must be evaluated on a case by case basis.

My comment is in response to another comment made by someone on this issue. That person's comment stated that the halachic position is pro-life. After reading the article, I was completely convinced of just the opposite. If abortion was made illegal, eventually no exceptions would be made to save the mother's life. Also, one cannot say that a fetus is not a child only when the mother's life is in danger. It either is or it isn't. I seriously disagree with the person who said that abortion is murder. A fetus is not a child until birth.

This person also said that "over 97% of abortions [are] being performed for no other reason than the pregnancy is inconvenient". I would like to know where that statistic comes from. How ridiculous! People don't just have abortions for no reason. How could someone say such a terrible thing! Chas v'chalilah someone in that person's family should have to have an abortion!

at least 97 percent of abortions are done for convenience and the number may actually be higher. Yes, people have abortions for " no reason" - the words YOU YOURSELF HAVE USED because life is cheap and people like you cheer lead for abortion and give your blessing to this barbarism. I guess you go to "fetus" showers - not BABY SHOWERS.

interesting article, it makes one see thing not black and white, but in full range of colour. thank you very much for it, and thank you for not treating Judaism like blind law.

In my opinion, only an individual women may determine whether carrying a baby to term is detrimental to her mental and emotional health.

As religious people, I would hope that all our actions would support the right to choose life for all women, Jewish or not. I believe that most women, given good support systems will simply choose to carry babies to term. Without adequate supports - economic and emotional - it is irrational to comment on an individual women's choice regarding her mental, emotional and physical well-being and health.

It also seems anti-Jewish to extend Jewish specific religious interpretations to other ethnic groups via supporting US Constitutional Amendment to ban abortion as a individual women deems right. We have never claimed the only "right way"; we have claimed a right way for us (a varied way that encircles us all in G-dness). Let us join together with all people and support economic conditions that allow Jewish people and all people to live free of horrific economic and emotional conditions with social justice that enables rational decisions in choosing life.

The position of the pro-life movement is that abortion should be restricted to cases of rape, incest and threats to the mother's life. Since Halacha restricts abortion only to threats to the mother's life (generally) and the proposed human life amendment would not interfere in that, the proper vote is a pro-life vote.

As Jews, we are called upon to encourage the societies we live in to uphold the Noahide Laws, that includes the injunction against murder. Murder is defined as the unjustified taking of a human life. An abortion is the taking of a life. Judaism is clear, physical life begins at conception. This is a medical as well as spiritual truth. The Sages find a justification for an abortion (or more accurately, a homicide) in the case of a threat to the mother's life in the laws of pursuit. Essentially, that is a case of self-defense. All well and good. I have yet to meet a pro-lifer who would oppose a medically necessary abortion.

However, with over 97% of abortions being performed for no other reason than the pregnancy is inconvenient there can be no halachic justification for the current status quo.

Exceptions for threats to the mother's life are de riguer in any pro-life proposal as are exceotions for rape or incest. That position is more in line with halacha than the pro-abortion position espoused by so many misguided souls on the Left.

If one wishes to espouse liberal politics, that's fine. America is a free country and everyone is entitled to an opinion. However, western liberalism is in most cases completely incompatible with Halacha.

But you are incorrect. The position of most pro-life advocates is that there should be no abortion allowed. Period. I don't know the particular amendment that you are talking about, I just know the opinions of the people that I come into contact with--on the internet, and on the street, and right here in this discussion forum. People who tell even women who have been raped that they should be carrying those pregnancies to term because what happened isn't the fetus' fault, etc.--such voices represent a large segment of the pro-life movement.

Well Miriam, if you continue to vote for paganism then that's what we'll get. If you want to see the effects of no religious intonations in law then check out several european countries, some of which have banned shechita and pretty much all of them have hostile regard for israel. Thank God we have a president who can say Thank God. God is the basis for religious freedon-not secularism

Any civilized society's laws are informed by underlying ethical and moral (read religious) principles. Most of us would agree that it is entirely appropriate to ban the burning of widows, but in many cultures this is considered acceptable. Furthermore, many politicians who maintain that, when it comes to abortion, religious belief should not dictate public policy, have no qualms about invoking religion when it comes to opposing capital punishment, the war in Iraq, etc.

The halachic position on abortion, while some ambiguities remain, is in my opinion a reasonable compromise between the two extremes in American society.

In a sidebar, it is curious to me that the pro-life position is considered an imposition of religious beief on public policy. On the other hand, the pro-choice position (I will avoid saying extremist because many mainstream politicians hold this view), which advocates among other things public funding of the procedure at all stages of pregnancy and advocates usurpation of parental authority in allowing minors to get abortions, is never referred to in the mainstream media as an imposition of belief on public policy.

Wow! This treatice on abortion should be compulsory reading for every major candidate. Dr. Eisenberg's views on this subject are awesome and overwhelming. What a geat person he is.

I believe Mr. Reuven's comment is valid but slightly misguided. Halacha dictates Hashem's will for what we, as Jews, should do, not how American law should be structured. As a frum Jewish voter, I have and will continue to vote "pro-choice" for the political reason that as a Jew who enjoys religious freedom in America and freedom from religious persecution, my personal Halachic obligation does not extend to American society as a whole. Rather than extend my Halachic daled amos to the public sphere, I would prefer to have an America devoid of religious intonation in law. It might work well for us now that the predominatly Judeo-Christian-valuing American Right shares many of our ideas, but we cannot set such a dangerous precedent of allowing religious jurisprudence to influence secular law; what if paganism became the prevailing social more? And Bris Mila came to be construed as the ultimate violation against the paganistic perfection of the human body, like in Ancient Rome and Greece? In this sphere, ruling that religion should have no role in the determination of secular law makes good sense for us as Torah Jews.

....I feel exactly the same way!

In debating the halachic ramifications of abortion, Down Syndrome (DS) should not be lumped in with lethal defects such as Tay Sachs. In 90% of cases, DS produces only a mild to moderate developmental disability. People with DS are much loved and valued by their families and communities. Most people with Down Syndrome can read, write, have friends and hold jobs. Bar and bat mitzvah for young Jews with Down Syndrome is now commonplace, with the young person reading the parsha in Hebrew and delivering their own speech. Halachically, in all but the most profound cases, a Jewish person with DS is obligated in mitzva observance. Even if a family decides that they would not want to raise their child with DS, there are many, many Jewish families ready and eager to adopt kids with DS. Considering all of this, I can't understand why aborting a child with DS could be halachically permissible.

Abortion is a very difficult subject. I believe that all life is given by Hashem. I was a labor and delivery nurse and a neo-natal intensive care nurse. I cared for mothers who were having abortions because their child would be born without kidneys or other defects that were usually incompatible with life. I could not condem them; they were greiving already. I also worked along side of doctors doing emergency C-sections to save the lives of mothers who were having problems
because of the pregnancies. Many times these babies were born quite premature, and stilled survived.

The big problem that I have with abortion is the fact that it is often used as retroactive birth control. Too often I've known of people personally who chose to have an abortion to cover up an "inconvient" pregnancy. I am not talking about rape or incest. I am talking about people who chose to have a sexual relationship with someone out of marriage and now don't want to deal with the consequences of their choices.

I cannot tell you how many women I have talked to who have so many regrets after they have chosen abortion. Many have problems with post traumatic stress after their choices.

Yes, we need to consider the life of the mother, but we also need to consider the life of the fetus when it is not life threatening to the mother.

I would have to take exception with one important point. Many in the "pro-life" camp, including President Bush who is a devout Christian, support allowing abortion in the cases of threat to the mother's life, rape and incest. Agudath Israel of America, an esteemed organization guided by the positions of the Moetzes Godolei HaTorah (Council of Torah Sages in America) have supported the "pro-life" view (as long as there are exceptions allowed for genuine religious reasons) (see articles by Rabbi Avi Shafran, the organization's Director of Public Relations). If it would allowed just for therapeutic reasons, the whole abortion industry in this country and other parts of the world, including Israel, would be devastated. The "pro-choice" movement is unequivocally for unrestricted abortion as a fundamental woman's right...as encapsulated by the phrase that "it's her body." This position is clearly against the Torah, which does not believe in putting the whims of women or men above the will of G-d. It is also highly problematic for society in general. Medical science has advanced so that babies much earlier in pregnancy can be saved. Perhaps, these "humanistic" femininsts should spend a little bit of time in a neo-natal intensive care unit and see what is going on these days. Also, the idea that your body belongs only to you is problematic to society with other issues such as allowing euthanasia, suicide, drug use, etc.

Whether a person is pro-Choice or pro-Life, isn't it sad that only 50 years after 1.5 million Jewish children where killed by the Nazi's that over 1 million Jewish children have been aborted since the beginning of the State of Israel?

Thank you for providing such a profound and informative and essential details about the life-promoting values that are found in halacha on the issue of abortion. Most instructive for all serious, mature critical thinkers on the subject.

The medico-legal issue of when human life begins is primary and fundamental in the American debate on abortion. The "pro life" movement invests the zygote (fertilized egg) with full human equivalency and wants legislation to support that essentially religious belief. Arguably, such legislation would be unconstitutional because it would constitute an establishment of religion under the 1st Amendment.

On the other hand, allowing late-term abortions that don't threaten the physical and/or mental health of the potential mother shows a societal disregard for the miracle of human creation.

I don't want a U.S. Department of Intra-Uterine Surveillance, but neither do I want partial-birth abortions so that the expectant mother can start graduate school on schedule.

M., 5/31/04

To anonymous #3: There is no such thing as a partial birth abortion. The correct clinical term is late term abortion. Also, please understand that the decision to have a late term abortion is not one made in haste. You must be a man, or you never would have written such an insensitive response.

The baby could survive with massive amounts of help or mayevening little there are under 2lb babies born and grew into normal healthy children. The baby is alive and moving and hearing and capable of feeling pain. The baby has little cute baby feet you can hold up to a chart to measure the age. Especially any woman who has felt a baby kick inside her should know that IS a BABY. A person who has not yet seen the light of day. That's great the decision is "not one made in haste"...or isn't worse?

It is called infanticide - which is what partial birth abortion! you sound very callous - many of the women who agree to these gruesome procedures do not know how far along they are. A New York woman - Jennifer Morabelli - died during a very late term abortion done in Maryland as did her baby daughter. What a terrible decision she made to abort - and tragic for her family - because she did not like the diagnose for baby Madison. I guess you would not go to a male doctor to be treated for breast cancer. You sound kind of sexist.

Dear Dr. Eisenberg:

The traditional Jewish view on abortion fits far more comfortably into the framework of the pro-choice movement than it does into the misnamed, so-called "right-to-life" movement.

It is the pro-choice movement that implicitly recognizes the right of Jewish women to consider the halachic position on abortion, to deliberate, and to make decisions based
on the dictates of their individual consciences.

By contrast, the so-called "anti-llife" movement wishes to allow government to supplant the role of a woman's individual conscience in decision making about abortion. Ultimately, the right to life movement poses a severe danger to democratic life and is insulting to all women.

Moreover, some sectors of the anti-choice, so-called "right to life" movement posit the offensive and anti-Semitic argument that therapeutic abortion is equivalent to the horrors of the Holocaust. Jews have an ethical imperative to refute this argument, which trivializes the horrors of the Holocaust.

Sincerely,

Marion I. Lipshutz
proud Jewish mother and proud, pro-choice Jewish feminist


Dr. Eisenberg responds:

Dear Marion,
I can only agree with part of what you wrote. Give a choice between total ban on abortion and abortion on demand, I would have to support abortion on demand since there must be openings for halachically sanctioned abortions. Nevertheless, I would prefer a middle ground that provided for abortion in the limited cases that halacha allows. Regardless of what I would like the law to be, as a public policy issue, abortion on demand is very problematic. I am a radiologist and I see that abortion is used as "retroactive birth control." Halacha clearly views the fetus as a significant being and not as mere "fetal tissue."

You write that "It is the pro-choice movement that implicitly recognizes the right of Jewish women to consider the halachic position on abortion, to deliberate, and to make decisions based on the dictates of their individual consciences." Halacha does not really rely on the dictates of women's (or men's) individual consciences. There are fairly objective criteria for allowing abortion, most of which are medical (including psychiatric). The indications for abortion that are halachically sanctioned cover a very small minority of abortions in America. Do not misinterpret the fact that there is disagreement about some cases to infer that there is disagreement about the fundamental issue: abortion is only allowed for a threat to the life of the mother and according to some for abnormalities in the fetus. I plan to deal with multifetal pregnancy reduction in a future article in the near future. Nevertheless, abortion for economic, social, or other personal preference reasons is not halachically sanctioned. Abortion is almost never an issue of "choice."

Your obvious negative feelings about the political right in the United States really has little to do with the under what circumstances abortion is legitimate.

Best wishes,
Daniel Eisenberg, MD

WHO in the USA uses abortion as "retroactive birth control?" That's crazy! I had one abortion and it HURT, emotionally and PHYSICALLY! I thought my insides were being sucked out! I was about to tell the doctor to stop, even if she wasn't finished. No woman outside the former USSR would choose this. The former USSR is a different story, I admit. I was shocked when a 50 Russian woman told me had had 10 abortions! But then I found out that birth control was hard to get at the time. Over the years I have become less confident of my 100% pro choice position; I'm more sensitive to life issues now. But rest assured, this is not one argument to use against legal abortion.

Ms. Lipshutz is for controlling other people’s bodily autonomy - meaning, a mother has 1 heart, not 2, 2 arms, not 4, etc. What Ms. Lipshutz is stating is not bodily autonomy, but the rights of deciding life or death for another human being — real estate location of this person put aside. I wonder if Ms. Lipshutz, and others of her liberal mindset, agree in total bodily autonomy in all instances — such as “my body, my choice” — when it comes to science experiments like the “covid vaccine” mRNA therapies?

Miss Marion Lipschutz should think of all the Jewish babies that have been aborted. We are our own worst enemies. I am Jewish and pro life and believe that abortion should be unthinkable in a better society. The vast, vast majority of abortions are done for convenience and so called Jewish feminists rarely practice Judaism and are in cahoots with the Pro Death Democrat party and its abortion for anyone for any reason at any time platform. That is sick!

A wonderful summary of the Jewish teacings on abortion. But the question remains (at least for me), at what point in development is the fetus to be treated thus? In other words, at conception, or implantation, or at another point? I would love to hear what the Rabbis say about this.