From: reid@metis.tti.com (Reid Kneeland)
Subject: Re: God's view of children (and adults)
Organization: Transaction Technology Inc.
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 1992 15:30:45 GMT

In article <92211.125359P85014@BARILVM.BITNET> Anthony Waller <P85014@BARILVM.BITNET> writes:
>In article <1992Jul27.160503.27610@ttinews.tti.com>, reid@metis.tti.com (Reid
>Kneeland) says:

>>Well for starters, there's a very old (ca. 3000 years) religion which
>>holds that infanticide is called for in certain extreme circumstances.
                                       ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Clear enough?

>>This religion is called Judaism.  Don't believe me?  Ask an orthodox
>>rabbi about "kiddush hashem".  It dates back to the defeat of Israel by
>>the Babylonians in the 6th century BC.  The gist of it is that it is
>>better for children to die by the hands of their parents than to fall
>>into the hands of pagans (sorry, ailsa) who might abuse them or
>>sacrifice them to their gods.  Though this set of circumstances is
>>unlikely to occur today, the law is still "on the books".

>One of the most
>horrendous practices was the offering of children to the moon-god,
>Molech.  The Torah is uncompromising in its outlawing of this
>atrocity.

Of course.  Doesn't his support my statement above (see my sentence
ending with the words "...or sacrifice them to their gods")?

>  Secondly, you mention "kiddush hashem" which translates as
>"sanctification of the Divine name."  Part of sanctifying, or
>making Holy the name of G-d is the obligation to be killed rather
>than perform certain forbidden actions, viz: murder, idolatory and
>incestuous sexual relations, i.e. if someone says to you either kill
>Joe or I will kill you, then you must forfeit your own life.

Yes, "kiddush hashem" has a a broader meaning than I implied,
but this is the part of it that was relevant to the discussion.

>I find that your use of part of this law (and I fear your post was
>inaccurate  but I don't want to make this too long) to prove that
>Judaism is one of the "numerous older religions that condoned or even
>demanded infanticide"  highly offensive!

I'm sorry you find logic offensive.  It there's a flaw in my logic,
please point it out to me, I really am willing to listen:

Judaism is an "older religion", yes?  And part of Jewish Law says that
under certain extreme circumstances, the right thing to do is for
parents to kill their children (probably just before they kill
themselves), yes?  This is "condoning or demanding infanticide", yes?

I stated CLEARLY in my posting that this was limited to extreme
circumstances unlikely to occur today.  You're reacting as if I said
that Judaism was the same sort of religion as the child-sacrifice
cults.  I said nothing of the kind, nor did I imply it.  I have never
engaged in the blood-libel.

Followup in email, please.

=====================================================================
Reid Kneeland
reid@ttidca.tti.com  (that's MISTER reid@ttidca.tti.com to you!)
{philabs,psivax,pyramid,quad1,rdlvax,retix,rutgers}!ttidca!reid
Transaction Technology Inc., Santa Monica, CA, USA (310) 450-9111 x2499
The opinions expressed above do not necessarily etc etc...

Never trust a man who can count to 1,023 on his fingers.