Fanatical religious terrorist incident Colorado Springs.

[308jake]

What's that mean?

Do you want the Klingon, Sanskrit or Latin translation? Since English is challenging.

 

[mbills2223]

We never left.......

That's true...I've been here the entire time

 

[Roadie]

This is still going?

No, it's just a figmentation of your imagination

 

[Roadie]

Do you want the Klingon, Sanskrit or Latin translation? Since English is challenging.

Translating Klingon to Sanskrit can be addictive

 

[cbhausen]

How about Cyrillic while we're at it?

 

[Dirtebiker]

The movement certainly held sway, particularly over the weak-minded who wanted to be a part of something.

agreed. And I still blame the individuals!

 

[308jake]

Translating Klingon to Sanskrit can be addictive

Then going back to hieroglyphs. Talk about fun for days.

 

[Kutnupe14]

It means from the Judeo/Christian perspective, fetuses are human, because God said He "knew them" before they were born

Incorrect. There is no "they." That passage is specific to a particular person; a prophet, in fact.

The rest of the verse:
"...'and I appointed you a prophet to the nations.'"

 

[HoughMade]

Incorrect. There is no "they." That passage is specific to a particular person; a prophet, in fact.

The rest of the verse:
"...'and I appointed you a prophet to the nations.'"

But the point is that if a person can be known before birth, we shouldn't be eliminating people before birth.

 

[Kutnupe14]

And then from Exodus 21:

When men strive together, and hurt a woman with child, so that there is miscarriage, and yet no harm follows, the one who hurt her shall be fined according as the woman's husband shall lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine. If any harm follows, then you shall give life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, stripe for stripe.

In this passage it would appear, that a person who causes a woman to lose her unborn child, is simply FINED in an amount determined by her husband/judges. BUT, if the woman is harmed in a way OTHER than the loss of her child, the harm upon the woman shall be placed upon the man.... loss of life, man forfeits his own. Loss of eye, man forfeits his own eye.
So based on this passage, it would appear that an unborn child isn't considered "life" at all, at least so far as a person who (what you guys say is a life, and the termination of which is murder) is responsible for the loss of an unborn child, does not forfeit his life due to this "life for life" policy.

 

[Kutnupe14]

But the point is that if a person can be known before birth, we shouldn't be eliminating people before birth.

That's not made explicit at all.

 

[steveh_131]

And then from Exodus 21:

When men strive together, and hurt a woman with child, so that there is miscarriage, and yet no harm follows, the one who hurt her shall be fined according as the woman's husband shall lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine. If any harm follows, then you shall give life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, stripe for stripe.

In this passage it would appear, that a person who causes a woman to lose her unborn child, is simply FINED in an amount determined by her husband/judges. BUT, if the woman is harmed in a way OTHER than the loss of her child, the harm upon the woman shall be placed upon the man.... loss of life, man forfeits his own. Loss of eye, man forfeits his own eye.
So based on this passage, it would appear that an unborn child isn't considered "life" at all, at least so far as a person who (what you guys say is a life, and the termination of which is murder) is responsible for the loss of an unborn child, does not forfeit his life due to this "life for life" policy.

Modern translations derived from the original Hebrew have determined that this was not properly translated. It is now translated as a 'premature birth', not a miscarriage. Judging by the word used, the context, and its usage throughout the rest of scripture I also think that premature birth makes more sense.

The fine levied was meant to compensate for the difficulties and expense of taking care of a premature infant.

 

[Kutnupe14]

Modern translations derived from the original Hebrew have determined that this was not properly translated. It is now translated as a 'premature birth', not a miscarriage. Judging by the word used, the context, and its usage throughout the rest of scripture I also think that premature birth makes more sense.

The fine levied was meant to compensate for the difficulties and expense of taking care of a premature infant.

That doesn't make a lick of sense (at least not to me). So if a guy causes a woman to go into labor early, he's fined? So premature labor is addressed, but a miscarriage isn't? Odd. You got a source for that?

Edit: Nevermind, I found some.

 

[steveh_131]

That doesn't make a lick of sense (at least not to me). So if a guy causes a woman to go into labor early, he's fined? So premature labor is addressed, but a miscarriage isn't? Odd. You got a source for that?

The root word essentially means to 'come out'. Causing the child to exit the womb. So if you cause the child to exit the womb but there is no further harm... it's a fine. If there is further harm, it's eye for an eye.

Does that make more sense?

ETA: Although I was incorrect about modern translations, even the NASB still uses the word miscarriage.

 

[Kutnupe14]

Ok, here's the problem with the idea that it's a "premature birth," rather than a miscarriage. Our legal eagles, here, should be familiar with the source material of: life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, stripe for stripe. It is from the first set of written laws, the Code of Hammurabi.

From the code:

209. If a man strike a man's daughter and bring about a miscarriage, he shall pay ten shekels of silver for her miscarriage.210. If a man strike a man's daughter and bring about a miscarriage, he shall pay ten shekels of silver for her miscarriage.
210. If that woman die, they shall put his daughter to death.
211. If, through a stroke, he bring about a miscarriage to the daughter of a freeman, he shall pay five shekels of silver.
212. If that woman die, he shall pay one-half mana of silver.
213. If he strike the female slave of a man and bring about a miscarriage, he shall pay two shekels of silver.
214. If that female slave die, he shall pay one-third mana of silver

Nothing in the code addresses premature birth. And know it's a pipe dream, but I would think it's obvious that the particular verse I'm referencing borrows heavily from this set of laws.

Then of course, there is the obvious problem with Biblical scholars, "re-interpreting" the Bible to fit their modern day narrative. A belief that has been held for thousands of years, literally, is re-interpreted in what the late 20th Century?

I tell you what, find me a "pre-mature" birth theory prior to Roe V Wade, and ill accept it.

 

[Kutnupe14]

The root word essentially means to 'come out'. Causing the child to exit the womb. So if you cause the child to exit the womb but there is no further harm... it's a fine. If there is further harm, it's eye for an eye.

Does that make more sense?

ETA: Although I was incorrect about modern translations, even the NASB still uses the word miscarriage.

It makes more sense, but a miscarried child eventually comes out as well.

 

[steveh_131]

Nothing in the code addresses premature birth. And know it's a pipe dream, but I would think it's obvious that the particular verse I'm referencing borrows heavily from this set of laws.

You are correct. About the pipe dream, that is.

Then of course, there is the obvious problem with Biblical scholars, "re-interpreting" the Bible to fit their modern day narrative. A belief that has been held for thousands of years, literally, is re-interpreted in what the late 20th Century?

Interesting point. I would not take for granted that your version has been held for thousands of years. I'll have to read up on it before I comment.

It makes more sense, but a miscarried child eventually comes out as well.

Yes, and if that child comes out dead... eye for an eye.

 

[actaeon277]

Solid gold just went platinum! This thread is epic. Not quite as epic as my "Beautiful Women Packing Heat" thread but epic nonetheless.

That was an epic thread.

 

[steveh_131]

I tell you what, find me a "pre-mature" birth theory prior to Roe V Wade, and ill accept it.

Here is one from the 1800's: Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

If men strove and thrust against a woman with child, who had come near or between them for the purpose of making peace, so that her children come out (come into the world), and no injury was done either to the woman or the child that was born,

(Note: The words ילדיה ויצאוּ are rendered by the lxx καὶ ἐξέλθη τὸ παιδίον αὐτῆς μὴ ἐξεικονισμένον and the corresponding clause יהיה אסון ואם by ἐὰν δὲ ἐξεικονισμένον ᾖ ; consequently the translators have understood the words as meaning that the fruit, the premature birth of which was caused by the blow, if not yet developed into a human form, was not to be regarded as in any sense a human being, so that the giver of the blow was only required to pay a pecuniary compensation, - as Philo expresses it, “on account of the injury done to the woman, and because he prevented nature, which forms and shapes a man into the most beautiful being, from bringing him forth alive.” But the arbitrary character of this explanation is apparent at once; for ילד only denotes a child, as a fully developed human being, and not the fruit of the womb before it has assumed a human form. In a manner no less arbitrary אסון has been rendered by Onkelos and the Rabbins מותא, death, and the clause is made to refer to the death of the mother alone, in opposition to the penal sentence in Exodus 21:23, Exodus 21:24, which not only demands life for life, but eye for eye, etc., and therefore presupposes not death alone, but injury done to particular members. The omission of להּ, also, apparently renders it impracticable to refer the words to injury done to the woman alone.)


a pecuniary compensation was to be paid, such as the husband of the woman laid upon him, and he was to give it בּפללים by (by an appeal to) arbitrators. A fine is imposed, because even if no injury had been done to the woman and the fruit of her womb, such a blow might have endangered life. (For יצא roF( to go out of the womb, see Genesis 25:25-26.) The plural ילדיה is employed for the purpose of speaking indefinitely, because there might possibly be more than one child in the womb. “But if injury occur (to the mother or the child), thou shalt give soul for soul, eye for eye, … wound for wound:” thus perfect retribution was to be made.

 

[Joe G]

Abortion always brings out the emotions in people.
It is and always will be a hot button topic.
We all see this through eyes from personal feelings and life's experiences.
I would suggest that all involved in this discussion please take a deep breath and stand back for a minute.

Please take a break. Abortion will end up being Verboten if cooler heads do not prevail.

Thanks,

-CM-

Honestly, I thought there was a thread and/or posts from various Mods, about the "abortion topic" being verboten due to it's volatility? I remember a few threads being closed by it.

I assume I either mis-remembered, or that stance has been reversed?