From: adams@spss.com (Steve Adams)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,talk.religion.misc
Subject: Re: Abortion and Religion II: OT attitudes
Keywords: abortion, infanticide
Date: 23 Dec 92 14:39:51 GMT
Organization: SPSS Inc.

nyikos@math.scarolina.edu (Peter Nyikos) writes:

>Steve Adams and I have had a heated exchange on the subject of just
>what the bible means by "Lo Tirtzach" in Exodus, variously translated
>"Thou shalt not kill," "You shall not kill," "Thou shalt not commit
>murder," and Steve only knows what else. :-)
Whatever the 'else' is, 'murder' appears to be the most accurate term.

Peter now attempts to 'prove' me wrong with annecdotal evidence:

>In my very first post on this subject, in which I was refuting a trumped-up
>charge agains Suzanne Forgach, I suggested an intermediate reading, "Thou
>shalt not commit unjustifiable homicide." [To include, for example,
>negligent manslaughter].  It's been like pulling teeth
>to get anyone else in talk.abortion or talk.religion.misc to address 
>this issue.  Fortunately, Steve (inadvertently?) gave me a promising 
>lead on this, by directing my attention to the 35th chapter of Numbers,
>where I found [I am using the Jerusalem bible]:
>
>	Yahweh spoke to Moses and said:
>	"Say this to the sons of Israel:
>	`...If the killer has maliciously manhandled his victim, or thrown
>     some lethal missile to strike him down, or out of enmity dealt the 
>     deathblow with his fist, then he who struck the blow must die; he
>     is a murderer.'    Numbers 35:9-10, 20-22
>
>Despite the use of "murderer" this seems to be a more broad definition
>of "murder" than is in general use today.  For example, in the movie
>"In the Heat of the Night," Sidney Poitier deduces who committed the
>"murder" which was the centerpiece of the plot, and it turns out that
>the culprit "dealt the deathblow" without actually intending to kill
>the victim, but just to knock him unconscious, the better to rob him.
>[In the taped confession, he closes with the words, "I did not mean
>to kill him."]  I got the distinct impression that he was not about 
>to be charged with murder, but only with manslaughter, yet his deed
>arguably falls within the use of "murderer" above.
>
>[Interesting talk.abortion sidelight: the motive for the robbery was to
>get enough money for an illegal abortion; the killer had gotten a young
>woman pregnant and an old Black woman was all set to do the abortion.]
Hmm.  A movie?  In any event, 'murder' has a specific legal meaning, and
often is specified in degrees.  Typically, '1st degree Murder', or 'Murder
1' as Steve McGarret used to say, is pre-meditated, intentional, etc, etc.
Other degrees or definitions depend on the particulars, such as
pre-meditation, intention, etc.  For example, in some jurisdictions,
killing someone intentionally, but without planning to (ie no 'plot') is
2nd Degree murder.  And so on.

In your example above, you need to know the *exact* legal definition of 
manslaughter.  In any layman's terms, though, it is murder.

>I mentioned this passage of Numbers in my first reply to Steve, with
>the words, "Now we are getting somewhere."  Apparently, I said, the
>Biblical meaning of murder does NOT coincide with the present-day one.
Sure it does.  The basic concept of murder is killing someone, excluding
self-defence or unavoidable situations (involuntary manslaughter).

You're arguing an American *legal* term against the common understanding of
murder as the kiiling of another person.

>Steve deleted all hint of this in his reply, to which I am following
>up below as though to a post still on the boards.  If he does not feel
>up to dealing with this issue, perhaps some other reader can help take
>it further.

Well, I don't particularly remember this exchange and what I did or didn't
delete.  It was >50 days ago, ya know.  Edited, I'll say.  The entire
discussion revolved around the fact that an abortion was described in the
Numbers text, and that God ordained it.  Additionally, the text on
accidental feticide shows that there was to be a fine in the case of men
fighting causing a miscarriage.

I had a hard time trying to follow your post.  I stand by the fact that the
Bible does not support 'Thou shalt not kill' as a translation of the
Hebrew.  I cited examples of situations where there was killing and there
was no 'life for life' penalty in the OT. 

I'm removing all of the text.  If you feel the need, please post something
that defends 'Thou shalt not kill,' and gives an exegetical discussion  of 
the texts that show killing is not only not being punished, but is accepted
or required.  Similarly, with the Numbers 5 text on abortion.

 -Steve
--
  The opinions expressed above are those of the author and not SPSS, Inc.
                         -------------------
   adams@spss.com                                  Phone: (312) 329-3522
   Steve Adams        "Space-age cybernomad"       Fax:   (312) 329-3558