The Moral Minefield

Exodus 21: 22 "When there's a fight and in the fight a pregnant woman is hit so that she miscarries but is not otherwise hurt, the one responsible has to pay whatever the husband demands in compensation.” (The Message)

I must confess I’m one of those odd Christians who reads the Old Testament. Actually, I’m one of those really odd Christians who likes to read through the bible. All of it (except maybe for some of those genealogies... that’s a bit of a stretch. I don’t think skimming over those bits should be regarded as cheating).

I have been reminded of this passage over the past couple of days as debate has raged over the U.S. election on Alan Hirsch’s blog, a fascinating glimpse into the passionate and divisive world of American politics. I’ve been reminded of this passage because it is the closest thing to an abortion in the biblical record. (ripping babies out of the wombs of mothers would cause the death of mothers in a world without surgery or antibiotics, so I don’t think those passages count).

Alan noted that most of the world seems to be hoping for a Democrat victory. The invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq (and subsequent political and military complications) seem to have alienated the entire Muslim world, and much of the Western world. Knowledge of and failure to regulate appalling bank lending practices is tipping the entire world into recession (for when the economic giant quakes the whole world trembles). This has alienated the “right” of the Western world (and it’s no mean feat to alienate both left and right so spectacularly in one term of government). Apparent approval of forms of torture from high levels of the administration; military contracts awarded to Cheney’s cronies and subsequent suspicion of nepotism; rhetoric like “axis of evil”, “great satan”, etc. that have fed into the alqaeda propaganda machine... these have not been high points in America’s standing in the international community. (In fact, the only international body I can think of calling for a Republican victory appears to be alqaeda itself... http://au.news.yahoo.com/a/-/world/5096057/alqaedalinked-website-backs-mccain although I can’t claim exhaustive research, or vouch for the veracity of this report!)

But none of this perception matters enough for large numbers of U.S. voters... because McCain is pro-life and Obama is pro-choice. The murder of innocent babies is the most pressing issue of the day... the standing of America in the global community is a secondary issue. I fully understand this view... and if abortion is murder, I endorse this view too.

But is abortion actually murder?

It is certainly the taking of human life. So you may think I’m being cute to question whether the taking of human life is murder. But we are all aware of situations where the context requires the equation taking life = murder breaks down.

A soldier who kills an enemy soldier has not committed murder. A nurse who gives an agonised dying patient a high dose of morphine might kill the patient, but she is not considered a murderer. A driver who runs over and kills a pedestrian has killed someone, but depending on context, this may be an accident, or it may be that negligence was involved... but they are not considered a murderer. A prison guard who kills a condemned prisoner under a court order has not murdered. A constable who shoots and kills in self-defence is not a murderer. And so on. Context matters. We all accept this.

Now I find abortion terrible... but I do not think it is always murder. What if an abortion is performed on a child with a non-viable medical condition detected by ultrasound? This does precipitate an unavoidable death... but I’m not convinced the unborn child was “murdered”. What if an abortion is performed for a mother who is deeply suicidal because of her pregnancy? What if an abortion is performed on a mother whose life is regarded at grave risk for medical reasons? Has not one life been saved, where two lives were at serious risk? The law has recognised for a significant period of time that there are some circumstances where abortion is permissible.

This reflects the vexing problem that abortion is also “more or less bad” depending on context. There are parts of India (and China) where ultrasounds are used to determine gender, and female children are aborted. I regard this as deplorable. Even in the West, abortions are sometimes performed on the basis of gender.

Where a mother regards they are completely unable to cope with having a child... where indeed, they may truly be unable to cope with a child (particularly where the thought of adoption has failed to enter their heads) abortion is more understandable. Tragic, but more understandable.

This is where the Exodus passage is interesting. The causation of a miscarriage is not treated as a murder under Mosaic law. Nor is it treated in the same way as manslaughter, so “intent” cannot be regarded as the sole cause for the difference. I think this is a difficult passage to understand, but the implication is that abortion is a bad thing... but not as bad as murder.

I’m interested in the responses of others to this. Do you think I’m right? Or wrong? My views are not “locked in stone”, so I am genuinely interested in your views and rationale.

I’m of the view that regardless of who becomes the next president of the U.S., the horse has bolted in a legal sense. Abortions will continue happen... thus high quality sex education, and good support of single mothers to minimize the chance of childhood poverty, abuse and neglect seems the most pragmatic response. But the moral issues tick away behind this... and I’m bravely inviting an exploration of these here.

A new pet

This has been an expensive week in the life of Woodlock pets. Our Maltese "Bubbles" developed an infection that has required daily visits to the vet for injections. She's been a rather miserable pup... but I'm pleased to report she is returning to her rather manic self.

Meanwhile my nine-year-old has begged me to adopt a "online" pet... which sounds a considerably cheaper (if less relational) option in the pet stakes.

Well, let's just see if this works....

Japanese Banking Crisis

Following the problems with Lehmann Bros and the sub-prime lending market in the USA, uncertainty has now hit Japan ..

In the last 7 days Origami Bank has folded, Sumo Bank has gone belly up, and Bonsai Bank announced plans to cut some of its branches.

Yesterday, it was announced that Karaoke Bank is up for sale and will likely go for a song, while today shares in Kamikaze Bank were suspended after they nose-dived.

While Samurai Bank is soldiering on following sharp cutbacks, Ninja Bank is reported to have taken a hit, but they remain in the black.

Furthermore, 500 staff at Karate Bank got the chop, and analysts report that there is something fishy going on at Sushi Bank where it is feared that staff may get a raw deal.