Ancient civilizations largely looked upon abortion as a
woman's individual affair, in which no person, organization or government had
any right to intrude. As C. Gasquoine Hartley put it, "Each woman must be free
to make her own choice; no man may safely decide for her; she must give life
gladly to be able to give it well."1 But with the escalation of
patriarchal dogmas and religions - particularly amongst the Greeks - came a
conviction that a father's semen channeled the soul into the fetus. Men feared
for the freedom from harm any of their body effluvia2 for fear that
black magic might be used to traumatize the living man by harming what was once
a component of him. The horror was especially accentuated in the instance of
sperm as an annexation of the father's soul. If the fetus he fathered were
irreparably damaged, then without a doubt or question he himself would endure
ethereal affliction concurring with the axioms (of the time) of magick. St.
Thomas Aquinas3 held to this same sentiment, since he maintained that
semen was the author of souls.4 It was a logical progression of this
vagary that abortion should (and must) be disallowed, not because it was fraught
with danger to women, but rather because it was rationalized (magickally) to be
dangerous to men.
Nevertheless, In the east abortion was altogether legal
at any time before the fifth month, when "quickening" was felt. After that,
according to Brahman5 scriptures, a woman who destroyed her fetus was held
guilty of murder, but before that time the fetus was soulless and could be
destroyed with exemption from punishment.6 This opinion was
epitomized in the Catholic church's Doctrine of Passive Conception, which
repudiated Aquinas in order to prove that the soul comes only from God. Up to
the late 19th century, the doctrine of Passive Conception professed that the
soul reached its destination in the fifth month of pregnancy, to animate the
fetus, which was, until then, soulless.7
In 1869 the church adjusted and amended its opinion,
quietly coming to terms either that God had provided incorrect information to
his church about his manner of implanting the soul into the body, or else that
he had elected to overhaul it. Pope Pius IX (Pope from 1846-78) proclaimed that
the soul was embraced at conception after all.8
For all intent and purposes, the church was only coming
around, a few decades late, to adapt to some new edicts made by man, not by God.
Abortion was not categorized as a criminal offense in Europe until the 19th
century.9 The United States first identified abortion as a crime in
the year 1830.10
The church now inaccurately masquerades its official position as having "always" disallowed and opposed abortion. The medieval church was galvanized not by abortion per sebut by the
midwives who carried out the abortions themselves. The handbook of the
Inquisition stated: "No one does more harm to the Catholic faith than
midwives."11 The church was not diametrically opposed to cause to die
the not yet born, since it burned many expectant mothers as witches. Even the
pregnant wife of a city councillor was tortured and burned at Bamberg, Germany,
in 1630.12
Modern resistance to legalization of abortion ostensibly
arose from ignorance of how only a short time ago it was forbidden; and also
from male belief that women must be subverted by thrusting childbirth on them.
Betty and Theodore Roszak, in their book Masculine/Feminine,
state: "Male legislators have laughed at the idea of the legalization of
abortion, hinting at unprecedented promiscuity (on the part of women, not men)
if such a thing were allowed. Meanwhile, thousands of desperate women die each
year as the direct result of male laws making abortion illegal. Women are
learning the meaning of this male laughter and indifference in the face of the
most hazardous and serious biological enterprise women can undertake, willingly
or not."13
The Catholic church still claims authority over women's
propagative functions. Catholic hospitals will still not allow abortions even if
the fetus were conceived by rape.14
Abortion as such is not even mentioned in the Bible.
Archeological evidence indicates that in ancient Isreal the infant mortality
rate was as hish as fifty percent. It is also possible that, given the diet and
living conditions at the time of ancient Isreal, female fertility was low.
Therefore, male control of reproduction and a belief that numerous descendants
are a sign of divine blessing are also found in the Bible.
It can also be argued that abortion
waspracticed without censure. Many women died in
childbirth, a strong incentive to avoid carrying a pregnancy to term. Biblical
legislation, as in Leviticus 27:3-7, indicates that the lives of children were
not valued as highly as those of adult men, while no value whatsoever was given
to a child under the age of one month. There is absolutely no indication or
evidence that a fetus had any staus in ancient Isreali society.
A key text for examining Israelite attitudes in Exodus 21:22-25: "If men fight and hurt a woman with child, so that she gives birth prematurely, yet nolasting harm follows, he shall surely be punished accordingly
as the woman's husband imposes on him; and he shall pay as the judges determine.
But if any lasting harm follows. then you shall give life for life, eye for eye,
tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound,
stripe for stripe." Several observations can be made about this particular
passage: The Hebrew text at v. 22 literally reads "and there is no harm," suggesting that contrary to current thought, the miscarriage itself
was not considered serious injury. The monetary judgement given to the woman's
husband indicates that the woman's experience of the miscarriage is not of
significance, and that the damage is considered one to property rather than a
human life. This latter observation is further supported by the contrast with
the penalties for harm to the woman herself.
Several texts have been influential in recent discussions
about abortion. Both Jewish and Christian traditions have regarded the divine
command "Be fruitful and multiply" (Genesis 1:28) as demanding a high
rate of procreation incompatible with abortion in a non-life-threatening
situation. Like Leviticus 27, later rabbinical teachings differentiated between
life under and over the age of one month, while relying on biblical injunctions
to respect and choose life in determining that abortions could be performed to
preserve the life of the mother. Christians opposed to abortion have referred to
Luke 1:41-44 as evidence that a child is cognizant in the uterus, but this in no
way validates the supposition that God opposes abortion.
References and Notes: