4 March 2006 - 9:28am
Forced pregnancy laws are anti-semitic
One thing that self-proclaimed "Christian" politicians like to talk about when advocating forced pregnancy laws is that they are guided by their faith. In other words, for women to be good Christians, they must submit to being wombs of the state. From their faith-based claims that "life begins at conception" to less-public declarations that women exist for making babies and that's pretty much it, these "pro-life" leaders play up their authoritarian laws as being matters of religious expression and faith.
Okay....
Mike the Mad Biologist asks a question:
Why Does the South Dakota Legislature Hate Jews?
...The South Dakota forced childbirth law that means a Jewish woman (even one just passing through who needed medical care) would have to violate Jewish religious law.
Regarding abortion, there is no debate in Jewish law whatsoever on one point: if carrying a pregnancy to term would harm the physical welfare–not the life, the welfare–of the mother, or her ability to bear future children, the fetus is termed a "pursuer" (rodef). In other words, if a pregnancy were carried to term and would cause long-term damage to the woman, the fetus is the moral equivalent of a criminal chasing after her with the intent to do harm. It is not a blessed little 'snowflake.' Under these circumstances, the moral option is to terminate the pregnancy....
Of course, talk to a Christianist off the record and he'll tell you that Christianity is the only path and atheists are damned to hell and Jews are Satan's spawn. The vision of the Founders of a secular nation with a clear separation between Church and State is anathema to the Christianist world view.
Thus we get many claims by Christianists that Christians are being oppressed by being prohibited from ruling everybody's lives, while they pass their particular religious doctrines into laws to force people to obey their particular interpretations of scriptures.
In other words, religious freedom means everyone is entitled to be ruled by Evangelical Christianist doctrine. And they will fight to the death your right to be controlled by them.
The state of South Dakota has made a decision that makes living a Jewish life incompatible with following the law of the land. So much for the vaunted 'Judeo-Christian' tradition that conservatives keep blathering about. It's clear that the 'Judeo' part was nothing more than a fig leaf to mask the 'religious' right's bigotry–although how this wasn't obvious from the get-go escapes me. For any conservative Christians reading this, you are not the 'oppressed', you are the oppressors. Stop with your 'Daniel in the lion's den' complex
And to Jewish Republicans: you were warned this madness would happen. If the South Dakota forced child birth law is not found unconstitutional, it will be passed in other states. Did your parents and grandparents come to this country so their children and grandchildren would be forced to live according to the dictates of Christian zealots? Did you learn nothing from 1,500 years of history? Shame on you.
Psst! Are you Mormons, Methodists and Episcopalians paying attention? You might be next! (Muslims, we know you already know.) Wiccans and worshippers of the Goddess might want to start shopping for asbestos clothing. Catholics, renounce the Pope and you'll probably be okay.
Welcome to Archie Bunker's America!
media girl also blogs at other places.
Similar entries
store
Buy stuff here.
Comments
Reproductive technology is growing more sophisticated by the day. The United States has always led the way in new technologies. However, given the strength of conservative Christians, this may be one time that other nations will develop these technologies whether the United States participates, or not.
It is even more ironic since half the health care dollars spent in the world are spent in the United States.
Looking back through history, when religion puts its hand into science, the tendency is to put on the brakes. Galileo Galilei was put under house arrest by the church.
Since, like money, does not know international boundaries. Professor Debora Spar of the Harvard Business School recently pointed out in a videotaped seminar on reproductive technology that what seems to happen is this: If a science develops in one nation, that nation's ethical/world view will influence the implementation of the technology.
For example, if China takes the lead in reproductive science, over the long haul reproductive science would reflect Chinese values as Chinese science would win out.
If the United States treats an embryo as a "person," and other nations do not, the nations that do not - over the long haul - will be the ones who dominate the technology and in the end will have the final say in the ethics.
Imposing Christian values on folks in South Dakota, or even in the United States, can probably fly short-term, but in the long run if other nations pursue reproductive technology, unfettered by religious interpretations and influences, these centers will thrive.
Christianity does not have a particularly strong record in science.
There is a statistic I am still mulling. Richard Rhodes wrote a Pulitzer Prize winning non-fiction book, "The Making of the Atomic Bomb." Of the scientists who perfected the bomb, 48% were Jewish, 49% were Protestants, 3% were Roman Catholic. In fact, many of the Jews were from Eastern Hungary - who had fled under Hitler - so that some of those at Los Alamos joked that Hungarians were actual Martians who had landed.
Ideological purity at the expense of facts is a losing proposition.
Slate's William Saletan offers some interesting thoughts in this direction.
--|PW|--
Those who believe an embryo has "rights" are trying to allow states to restrict choice. But Slate does not really touch on the international implications.
When quasi-religious views are turned into laws, what I think we'll find is that people will vote with their feet.
I do agree that the Christian victory might galvanize moderates and progressives. To your point, pennywit, the Progressives may get away from using the Courts and go for legislation.
On the other hand, the train has pulled out of the station and reproductive technology will be framed largely outside the United States, as will be the ethics.