The Beginning of Life in Judaism
According to Jewish law, human life begins at birth and not before.
ed note–again, ladies and Gentile-men, just like microscoping any pathogen and in the process understanding its nature, i.e. what it is, how it functions, and therefore the manner in which that pathogen threatens an otherwise healthy body, likewise, ‘examinations’ such as this, in which certain pathological thought patterns are studied reveal the existential threat which these thought patterns pose to the continued ‘health’ of humanity, as well as the Apocalyptic end that will certainly materialize if the immune system of the body politic is compromised and unable to function properly in dealing with it.
Therefore, in moving forward with our little examination, the reader will note that the author of this piece is nothing less than a medical doctor whose very essence is understanding the biology of human life from A to Z.
And not just any old generic, ‘over-the-counter’ medical doctor, ladies and Gentile-men, but rather, as his wiki page describes him, very lettered, very respected, and considered an authority of sorts within the field of human medicine, to wit–
‘A professor of medicine at Mount Sinai School of Medicine and the director of the Department of Medicine at Queens Hospital Center. He is also the chairman of the Medical Ethics Committee of the State of New York. He is, moreover, an expert on Jewish medical ethics and on the medical writings of Moses Maimonides…’
‘Rosner has published eight books on Jewish medical ethics, including ‘Modern Medicine and Jewish Ethics’, ‘Medicine and Jewish Law I, II and III’, ‘Pioneers in Jewish Medical Ethics’ and ‘Biomedical Ethics and Jewish Law’. He also translated Avraham Steinberg’s seven-volume Encyclopedia Hilchatit Refuit from Hebrew into English as the ‘Encyclopedia of Jewish Medical Ethics’.
‘His other books include: an English translation of Julius Preuss’s classic reference work ‘Biblical and Talmudic Medicine’, and the ‘Encyclopedia of Medicine in the Bible and in the Talmud’. He is also the translator and editor of ‘Moses Maimonides’ Medical Writings’, ‘A Medical Encyclopedia of Moses Maimonides’, and ‘The Medical Legacy of Moses Maimonides’. Dr. Rosner is recognized as an authority on this giant of Jewish thought and medieval medicine.’
‘He has also published almost 800 articles and thirty-nine chapters in books on all aspects of Jewish medical ethics and Jewish medical history, and on many other topics, including hematology, leukemia, anemia, immunology, and general medicine.’
‘Rosner is an internationally known authority on medical ethics, having lectured widely on Jewish medical ethics throughout the USA, and has served as visiting professor and/or lecturer in Israel, England, France, Germany, Mexico, Canada, the Netherlands, South Africa, New Zealand and Australia…’
Please note, just as his CV clearly states, that it is the field of ‘Jewish medical ethics’ wherein the lion’s share of his ‘expertise’ resides and which formulates his position on ‘when human life begins’ and therefore the ‘religious legality’ surrounding the performance of certain medical procedures such as abortion which he clearly states is the ‘killing’ of a living child.
Having said that, let us then turn to some of the specifics of what it is that our medical doctor has to say about this weighty issue involving the manner in which Judah-ism determines the moral permissibility of killing children, both within the womb and outside of it–
1. A child is not a ‘human being’ until it is born. Not until it is completely separated from his/her mother and breathing on his/her own is it ‘legally’ any different from a wart, a pimple, a boil or a splinter, as well as the fact that the mother carrying this child–according to Jewish religious law–possesses the right–both legal and moral–to have this living child destroyed via the medical procedure known as abortion.
BUT WAIT, IT GETS EVEN BETTER (WORSE) THAN THAT…
Even AFTER the child is born, ‘Jewish medical ethics’ stipulate that there is a 30 day ‘grace period’ where the child can still be killed–AFTER IT HAS BEEN BORN, IS BREATHING ON HIS/HER OWN, EATING, SLEEPING, CRYING, WETTING HIS/HER DIAPERS, ETC–because, as our deranged and diabolically-demented ‘doctor’ explains, based upon the ‘holy’ teachings found within the Jewish Torah (specifically the book of Numbers) a ‘person’ is not considered a ‘person’ until after they have passed that 30 day ‘grace period’ after birth, and therefore, prior to that 30 days, this child that has been born and is CLEARLY A LIVING PERSON is not a ‘person’ in the eyes of what are the highly-elastic/constantly-mutating ‘protocols’ found within Jewish law, to wit–
‘…Although the newborn infant reaches the status of a person or ‘nefesh’, which it did not have prior to birth, it still does not enjoy all the legal rights of an adult until it has survived for thirty days postpartum, and therefore the death penalty is not imposed against one who kills such a child before it has established its viability…’
It is no small coincidence then that several states infected with high concentrations of Judah-ites–most notably New York and California–have in recent years passed laws de-criminalizing the deliberate killing of post-partum children and in fact have even made it a CRIME for prosecutors and/or police to INVESTIGATE the killing of those children.
Now, all of this is not just important, but APOCALYPTICALLY important, and for several reasons.
Firsto, when we have a medical doctor who understands the functions of the human body better than anyone else stating in the most matter-of-fact manner that a yet-to-be-born child is not a human being until it is born and then after that, for 30 days, that it is STILL not a human being with the same rights as everyone else, and bases this position on what his ‘Jewish ethics’ tell him, then this is a BIG CLUE to all Gentiles with a vested interest in their own future survival that there is something ontologically and organically WRONG, ABBERANT, ABNORMAL AND AMMORAL about this ‘faith’ to which he adheres.
And please, no lectures from the ‘expert’ brigade on how this is all a ‘Khazar and Talmud’ thing that does not represent ‘authentic’ Judah-ism. As the reader will plainly see for him/herself, our deranged and diabolically demented doctor cites those Judaic scholars of the past–most notably the ‘great Rambam’ himself, Maimonides, not an Ashkenazic (Khazar) Jew but rather a Sephardic one–who based the permissibility of killing children less than 30 days from their birth upon what it is that the book of Numbers–intrinsic to Judah-ism going all the way back to the beginning of the entire Hebraic affair–has to say on the matter.
Do we understand better then, things such as this–
And a million other examples of what it is that ‘Jewish medical ethics’ has to say on the legal/moral ‘permissibilty’ of murdering children when doing so serves the interests of the followers of Judah-ism?
Now, the other reason that this is important, and again, not just in a tangential way, but rather in an APOCALYPTIC one, is that the GENUINE Holocaust of the 20th century, not taking place in ‘Nazi’ Germany, but rather in the Christian West and known as ‘abortion on demand’ that to date has resulted in the deliberate murder of HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF CHILDREN has been and remains to this day the result of those same ‘Jewish ethics’ which our deranged and diabolically-demented doctor lists in his essay below.
Furthermore, what makes this outrage and this ‘crime of the century’ even worse is that all the signs were there from the very beginning that this Holocaust was an inevitability once the ‘children of Israel’ had chewed their way into the highest echelons of power within the formerly-Christian West…
And yet, deluded Christians who bought into the snake oil that ‘Jesus was a Jew’ and that the war he fought against the organized forces of anti-Gentilism during His own time–that ‘liberation theology’ that later came to be called ‘Christianity’–was just a ‘new and improved’ form of Judah-ism, rather than His professed followers seeing it as its EXACT OPPOSITE, instead share much/most of the blame for this Holocaust that has truly been a testimony and testament to Judah-ism’s fawning worship of the culture of death and of its the inhumanity to Gentiledom.
Dr. Fred Rosner for My Jewish Learning dot com
Let us first establish the time in which a fetus legally acquires the status equal to a human being.
The Talmud states in part that if the ‘greater part is already born, one may not touch it, for one may not set aside one person’s life for that of another.’
Thus the act of birth changes the status of the fetus from a nonperson to a person (nefesh). Killing the newborn after this point therefore is infanticide. Many Talmudic sources and commentators on the Talmud substitute the word ‘head’ for ‘greater part,’ while others maintain the ‘greater part’ verbatim.
Not only is the precise time of the birth of paramount importance in adjudicating whether aborting the fetus is permissible, but the viability of the fetus must also be taken into account. The newborn child is not considered fully viable until it has survived thirty days following birth, as is stated in the Talmud–
‘Any human being who lives 30 days is not a nephel [abortus] because it is stated: ‘And those that are to be redeemed of them from a month old shalt thou redeem (Numbers 18:16),’ since prior to thirty days it is not certain that he will survive.’
Further support for the necessity of a 30‑day postpartum viability period for adjudicating various Jewish legal matters pertaining to the newborn comes from Maimonides, who asserts–
‘If a child is born before the end of nine months, it is regarded as a defacto abortion until it has lived for thirty days, and if one kills it during these thirty days, it is not murder and one is not put to death on its account.’
Thus, although the newborn infant reaches the status of a person or nefesh, which it did not have prior to birth, it still does not enjoy all the legal rights of an adult until it has survived for thirty days postpartum, and therefore the death penalty is not imposed against one who kills such a child before it has established its viability.