Are we going too far?

[yungermanchik]

Yes I read it carefully, and I appreciate that you posted it, thank you. As far as I can tell, RMF is a minority opinion both in believing abortion is always assur and in believing the source of the issur is murder as opposed to בל תשחית. Do you know anybody else who holds like him?

So why do you keep pretending that all the rishonim hold it's not.
The Chavos Yair and the other tshovas maharit as well as most of the other mareh mekomos quoted in the Igros.

[PlatinumGuy]

So why do you keep pretending that all the rishonim hold it's not.

On the contrary, I acknowledged there is an exception:

So, I'm at 2 Achronim, you're at 1. I have most achronim.

Referring to RMF. Do you not think he is a minority opinion?

[chinagel]

Of course after you cancelled Rashi and the Ramban because they don't fit your personal feelings.

I didn't cancel them, they're not discussing abortion.

So, I'm at 2 Achronim, you're at 1. I have most achronim.

What about the CH"Y? That's 2 against a Maharit. And the Yaavetz that leaves with tzarich iyun.
In addition you not bringing other Acharonim is hardly proof they don't exist. I asked you for a source for the claim that MOST acharonim hold it's mutar. Bringing 1 acharon is hardly proof of anything.

By rape I meant in case where the baby would be a mazer. If that wasn't clear, I apologize. Nevertheless, rape would normally qualify as צורך גדול.

Lol, really? Is that what the Tennessee law you were discussing was about? Rape would definitely be tzorech gadol but that doesn't mean it's mutar. Don't switch the discussion to mamzer unless you're conceding you were wrong by rape.

But it's not more comparable. That can be proven (tying somebody up to starve is חייב בדיני שמים, abortion according to some is not), but you refuse to believe in the Torah because you think you know better.

Not going to continue this point as I don't see the relevance, but I disagree.

The conversation was about the Tennessee legislature, not the moral values. I'm asking again, why should someone thinking something is murder give them authority to prevent a raped woman from aborting, and how would that be different than people who think slaughtering a cow is abhorrent preventing you from eating steak?

You keep on evading by attacking me and changing the question into why it should be allowed, but the natural state is that everything is allowed, you need justification to interfere in somebody's life and actions.

So why only by rape do you have this question. You original question was does anybody think that in a case of rape it should be illegal. That means you were conceding for the sake of argument that abortion can be illegal, just that in a case of rape it can't be. I assume the concession was because of murder, and if so, why should rape be any different?

A rape victim is monumentally different because it is much more reasonable to compel a woman to maintain a pregnancy that she entered willingly and has obligations towards than one she was violently forced into and was vehemently uninterested in to begin with. You're basically saying you don't understand the difference between forcing parents to feed their kids, and forcing a family to accept a foster care child and feed them.

Do you not agree?

I agree very much on the difference, I just don't see it's relevance if it's murder.

Yes I read it carefully, and I appreciate that you posted it, thank you. As far as I can tell, RMF is a minority opinion both in believing abortion is always assur and in believing the source of the issur is murder as opposed to בל תשחית. Do you know anybody else who holds like him?

Maharam shik Y"D 155.

[PlatinumGuy]

I didn't cancel them, they're not discussing abortion.

Except they are

What about the CH"Y?

He says it's muttar meikar hadin, go read it again.

In addition you not bringing other Acharonim is hardly proof they don't exist.

I brought multiple opinions that aboriton is muttar in cases of Tzorech Gadol, some limited it to Mamzer, some don't. That is a majority until you prove otherwise.

Lol, really? Is that what the Tennessee law you were discussing was about? Rape would definitely be tzorech gadol but that doesn't mean it's mutar. Don't switch the discussion to mamzer unless you're conceding you were wrong by rape.

Yes, the Tennessee law would ban abortions even in cases of mamzerim. If I misrepresented my position by stating 'rape' when I was referring primarliy to a narrower subset, consider me conceding it now. Let's see if you can do the same.

Not going to continue this point as I don't see the relevance, but I disagree.

That's the point. As @Baruch points you, your moral compass is being shaped by Christianity, and you're refusing to accept the Torah's view because you think you know better. It is very much the point and you should think long and hard about it.

So why only by rape do you have this question. You original question was does anybody think that in a case of rape it should be illegal. That means you were conceding for the sake of argument that abortion can be illegal, just that in a case of rape it can't be. I assume the concession was because of murder, and if so, why should rape be any different? I agree very much on the difference, I just don't see it's relevance if it's murder.

I explained myself very clearly, do you not have an answer? Why should somebody calling something 'murder' make any difference as to what they can force other people to do or not? That assumption was unfounded.

.Maharam shik Y"D 155.

He doesn't conclude one way or the other. Is that the best you have? Here's a link to that Teshuva.

P.s. I'm not trying to denigrate you, I genuinely think you're falling into the trap of trying to make the Torah fit into your preconceived feelings, which I suspect are coming from Right wing politics/Christianity, when you should be calibrating your opinion according to the Torah. The Torah is the compass.

[chinagel]

Except they are

But they don't say that it's muttar.

He says it's muttar meikar hadin, go read it again.

Link?

I brought multiple opinions that aboriton is muttar in cases of Tzorech Gadol, some limited it to Mamzer, some don't. That is a majority until you prove otherwise.
Yes, the Tennessee law would ban abortions even in cases of mamzerim. If I misrepresented my position by stating 'rape' when I was referring primarliy to a narrower subset, consider me conceding it now. Let's see if you can do the same.

If you're discussing mamzer, then you have a Yaavetz to add to the mutar side. But you said rape. We can start a different discussion limited to mamzer. But I don't have an opinion one way or the other, I just wanted to see your source that most poskim hold it's mutar.
In addition, the TN law is primarily for goyim, which according to all opinions is shefichas damim. No reason why that should be different in a case of rape. (P. S. I have zero clue about the TN law, I'm just basing off your posts.)

That's the point. As @Baruch points you, your moral compass is being shaped by Christianity, and you're refusing to accept the Torah's view because you think you know better. It is very much the point and you should think long and hard about it.


P.s. I'm not trying to denigrate you, I genuinely think you're falling into the trap of trying to make the Torah fit into your preconceived feelings, which I suspect are coming from Right wing politics/Christianity, when you should be calibrating your opinion according to the Torah. The Torah is the compass.

Maybe for others. I don't follow politics or listen to talk shows.
In addition, the Torah clearly says a Goy aborting is shfichas dam and a chiyuv misah.

I explained myself very clearly, do you not have an answer? Why should somebody calling something 'murder' make any difference as to what they can force other people to do or not? That assumption was unfounded.

It makes a difference when it's a logical position. Calling it murder doesn't mean it's the same as shooting a person point blank, but it's bad enough. We can all agree tying a person up till he starves should be illegal. What you call it, is mainly semantics.

He doesn't conclude one way or the other. Is that the best you have? Here's a link to that Teshuva.

I wasn't saying his opinion that it's assur, just that he's concurring with R' Moshe that the source of issur is shfichas damim, not hashchosas zera.

[Luvisrael]

https://apnews.com/article/dr-seuss-books-racist-images-d8ed18335c03319d72f443594c174513

[Kobe Bryant]

https://www.cnn.com/2021/02/25/business/mr-potato-head-hasbro-gender-neutral/index.html

https://www.cnn.com/2021/02/28/media/fox-news-potato-head/index.html

[skyguy918]

https://www.cnn.com/2021/02/25/business/mr-potato-head-hasbro-gender-neutral/index.html

https://www.cnn.com/2021/02/28/media/fox-news-potato-head/index.html

Ugh... the 'rebranding' is dumb, and the controversy is even dumber.

[aygart]

Ugh... the 'rebranding' is dumb, and the controversy is even dumber.

The controversy is downright silly and the rebranding is simply marketing. At one point they had separate products of Mr. Potato Head and Mrs. Potato Head which basically had different gender oriented attachments. Eventually they combined them into one product of Mr. and Mrs. Potato Head with both sets of attachments included. This probably went back and forth a bunch of times over time. Now they simply made this neutral and are vying for attention as part of the rebrand. Nothing to see here.

[aygart]

Meanwhile,

https://twitter.com/Hasbro/status/1365038178814590995

[jj1000]

Meanwhile,

https://twitter.com/Hasbro/status/1365038178814590995

At the same time

https://twitter.com/AP/status/1366739083742105605

[Dan]

https://nypost.com/2021/03/02/biden-removes-mention-of-dr-seuss-from-read-across-america-day/

[aygart]

At the same time

https://twitter.com/AP/status/1366739083742105605

I have mixed feelings about the Dr Suess books. How would we feel if it had the "stereotypical Jew" depicted with the hook nose and all? I don't see anything wrong with discontinuing to publish books that contain images that are currently viewed as insensitive but don't see these as a reason to avoid other books of his. At the time, they were not considered insensitive. I do think that describing the images a racist is somewhat overboard. His intent was to depict an exotic ethnicity in their ethnic dress, which I don't see a real issue with. Removing mention of his other books is simply silly and would be the same for known anti-semitic authors such as Mark Twain and Roald Dahl.

[grodnoking]

I have mixed feelings about the Dr Suess books. How would we feel if it had the "stereotypical Jew" depicted with the hook nose and all? I don't see anything wrong with discontinuing to publish books that contain images that are currently viewed as insensitive but don't see these as a reason to avoid other books of his. At the time, they were not considered insensitive. I do think that describing the images a racist is somewhat overboard. His intent was to depict an exotic ethnicity in their ethnic dress, which I don't see a real issue with. Removing mention of his other books is simply silly and would be the same for known anti-semitic authors such as Mark Twain and Roald Dahl.

Ever watched family guy? It has stereotypical jews. I don't mind.

Quite surprised it wasn't canceled.

[Dawie]

Tintin comics and Noddy cartoons come  to mind as very cringy in this woke world

[aygart]

Ever watched family guy? It has stereotypical jews. I don't mind.

Quite surprised it wasn't canceled.

I have no idea what that is or what you are referring to, but such a drawing by Dr. Seuss would more likely look more like the anti-semitic caricatures.

[aygart]

Tintin comics and Noddy cartoons come  to mind as very cringy in this woke world

There are some TinTin books that are out of print due to the depiction of Africans.

[skyguy918]

... for known anti-semitic authors such as Mark Twain and Roald Dahl.

Huh? Mark Twain was a known antisemite?

[aygart]

Huh? Mark Twain was a known antisemite?

http://www.twainweb.net/filelist/jews.html

But it does seem more complicated and that it changed as he grew older.

[YitzyS]

Huh? Mark Twain was a known antisemite?

http://www.twainweb.net/filelist/jews.html

But it does seem more complicated and that it changed as he grew older.

I cannot give insight into Twain's thinking when he was young, but this essay, written in his later years, is fascinating, and I think every Jew should read it. I attached it to the following post, so you can click on it to go back there and download the document with the essay.

Attached is the essay "Concerning the Jews," written by Mark Twain and published in Harper's Magazine in 1899. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concerning_the_Jews

It is always a fascinating read, but it is especially poignant with the rise of Antisemitism recently. The closing paragraphs are often quoted, but the entire essay is fascinating.

I created a word document that is easily printable as a booklet, with 2 pages per sheet.