Wither or not the 14th should be interpreted as a complete control of bodily autonomy or not, is a fair question. I believe other than a few exceptions it should be a right. You should have to jump into the pool and use your body to pull out a drowning kid. Pregnancy is far from that though IMO.
Giving birth to a child is more risky to the mother than having an abortion. She could die, she will experience changes to her body if she survives. I don’t see much evidence that the unborn has rights to the mother’s body, that supersede the rights of the mother to bodily autonomy.
I am only arguing on rights here, and the rights I think we should have (not wither or not the 14th was a correct interpretation).
And the mother is not necessarily required to do that. There are ‘safe haven’ laws that allow for the baby to be dropped off at places like the fire station.
If you accept the child as your own responsibility (don’t give it up for adoption or drop it off at the fire station), then different laws apply to you. You are consenting to care for the child, and there are standards that you are held to. If you don’t meet the standards and it is found out, you may have your child taken away.
The Legislature finds and declares all of the following:
…
(g) People also need to end pregnancies by abortion, including self-managed abortion, which means ending one’s own pregnancy outside of the medical system.
…
123467.
(a) Notwithstanding any other law, a person shall not be subject to civil or criminal liability or penalty, or otherwise deprived of their rights,rights under this article, based on their actions or omissions with respect to their pregnancy or actual, potential, or alleged pregnancy outcome, including miscarriage, stillbirth, or abortion, or perinatal death. death due to a pregnancy-related cause.
“According to the World Health Organisation (WHO), perinatal death is the death of a baby between 22 weeks of gestation (or weighing 500 g) and 7 days after birth”
This actually allows for a child to be alive and ‘aborted’. feel free to read it though.
Regrettably I brought this on myself. And almost no one here wants to know what God has to say about abortion. @Californiagrown finds all this very uninteresting, but this is not a simple interpretation.
Though I have not searched the commentaries on Numbers 5:11-31, I am quite certain that there a number of theologians who would interpret this as a God sanctioned abortion.
I’ll assume those reading this post has read the passage. The question becomes is “the LORD doth make thy thigh to rot, and they belly to swell” (Num 5:21, or 5:27) a mention of a pregnant woman who will be aborting her baby?
To start we should know that the Israelite women that this is written to, saw their most important asset was the ability to give her husband children. (It doesn’t matter whether modern women like it or not, that was the way it was.)
The critical verse that adds interpretation is verse 28, “And if the woman be not defiled, but be clean, then she shall be free, and shall conceive seed.” What the clean woman accused of infidelity receives from the LORD is that she SHALL conceive for her husband.
So what is this that “the LORD doth make thy thigh to rot, and thy belly to swell?” IMO, it is saying she shall lose her ability to conceive. (note: 1 Cor 1:22, “For the Jews require a sign…”) “Thigh to rot” is the LORD sterilizing the defiled woman. It will be a sign the woman lives with the rest of her life. “Belly to swell” is an outward sign to all the people that the LORD has cursed her. Follow in verse 21, “The LORD make a thee a curse” is the “thigh to rot.” And “an oath among thy people” is a sign to the nation of Israel.
I read that as nothing the woman does DURING pregnancy can make her responsible for perinatal death. Killing or starving the baby after it was born wouldn’t be protected.
That is how I read that at first too, but once reading the definition of “perinatal” and “perinatal death”, I realized there is grey area which could be grafted into meaning post-birth abortion within the first week.
I normally wouldn’t poke holes this far, but if Roe v. Wade was stretched this far, why wouldn’t this law be stretched similarly?
I think it was mostly meant to do nothing TBH. They had a problem and created a practical solution to it.
I was mostly just busting your chops though. The Bible doesn’t say much definitively about abortion.
It does seem in places to not value unborn as much as born. Things like if someone strikes a pregnant woman and the child dies, I think they pay a fine. If the woman dies it is a harsher punishment.
I should say that I believe there is a time where I agree with abortion. And it is supported by my understanding of the Bible.
If it is found that the life of the mother (wife of the husband) is in significant danger of death carrying the baby, the child should be aborted.
The relationship between the husband and wife is the most important earthly relationship there is. Gen 2:24, “Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.”
Further proof in Eph 5:23, “For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body.” Christ would not allow His espoused wife to die, and neither should a husband allow his wife to die.
Granted that science has only recently been capable of knowing if the life of the mother is in danger.
Bottom line, according to the Bible, if the wife’s life is in severe danger the baby should be aborted.