When Did Jews lose their Freedom Of Religion?

A Jewish reaction to the end of Roe v. Wade

I am not a lawyer, nor do I pay one on tv, though I am married to one which means if I need legal work I pay full retail at some other firm, however, she is a real good source for explaining legal matters to me.

I am a Jew and an American by choice and one of the alluring parts of becoming a citizen was that I would be protected by the Constitution and its amendments. The one that spoke personally to me was the first amendment that contained the Establishment clause and the Free Exercise clause, that formed the constitutional right of freedom of religion.

One section familiar to all states that, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…” I always believed that this would protect me as a Jew and my synagogue and its congregants to practice our religion without governmental restrictions of favoritism to other religions. Over my career this protection was tested in mostly symbolic ways that had more to do with messaging or ignorance than a fundamental challenge to practicing my religion. I had to deal with the Coral Springs youth sports leagues scheduling their games Saturday morning but omitting any games on Sunday until after noon so as not to conflict with church attendance. This ultimately changed when the demand for fields was so great the leagues needed to schedule Sunday morning as well.

For years I had to negotiate with various municipalities about what kind of “holiday” displays they could erect on public lands. We eventually agreed that holiday displays that were secular in nature and not overtly religious would qualify. Out went creches and menorahs and in came Santa, trees and 7-foot dreidels. It was about pride and inclusiveness but was never about life altering issues, until now.

The Supreme court is probably going to overturn Roe v Wade and with it the legal right for a woman to choose to have an abortion for any reason during the first trimester of pregnancy and with some governmental restrictions during the second trimester. If this happens at least half of the States will outlaw abortion entirely under all circumstances; and only some with an exception for rape or incest. For some but not all there will be an exception for the mother’s health. In short in some states if a mother’s life is threatened by an unwanted pregnancy, it will be a felony to have an abortion. The mother and possibly the doctor could go to jail for saving the mother’s life. It is not farfetched to see that a prescribing doctor or a pharmacist who fills out a prescription for medication that will induce an abortion will also end up in jail.

As horrific as all this sounds you would not be amiss in asking what this has to do with religion?

The simple answer is everything.

The opposition to abortion comes from one key opinion. When does life begin? If you believe that life begins at conception, then you are entirely correct in prohibiting abortion as you are murdering a life. This is not a game of semantics it is crucial to this whole debate. If life begins when the egg and the sperm meet and form a zygote that new cell and the multi cells that will soon form by mitosis, have the legal status of a human being, equal to the mother’s life. In this definition of life if the mother was having a hard labor and the delivery of the baby could cause the death of the mother, it would be murder to actively engage in removing the fetus if that removal would cause the death of the fetus.

On today’s Meet the Press, Governor Tate Reeves of Mississippi, who’s law the Supreme court is ruling makes this point very clearly. He said,

“I believe that clearly life begins at conception.” He then added, “What makes abortion different is if you believe as I believe that it is an unborn child in the mother’s womb….”

This makes perfect sense if you accept the definition of when life begins, and it is that precise definition that brings us into the violation of church and state.

The definition of the beginning of life is not scientific or universal it is Christian theology. As Governor Reeves said, “I believe”. Well you can believe what you want but don’t make laws that restrict my life because of what you believe.

Religions believe in the existence of the soul and the moment the fetus is ensouled it has the status as a full-fledged human being, a full life. If this were universally accepted by all people, there would be no problem with whatever anti-abortion laws we were to put in place. After all there are medical ethics that are universal and enforced, but they are all non-religious in nature.

If all religions agreed on one definition of ensoulment there would still be an argument over why religions are allowed to define human life but at least there would be no favoring of one religion over the other. But many religions do differ on ensoulment and even groups within one religion disagree. An April 4, 2017, article on Slate showed that while many Christian denominations believe that life begins at conception, the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America and many American Baptists don’t believe abortion is akin to murder. Presbyterians concede they may not know exactly when human life begins.

Islam is unsure when ensoulment occurs, but it ranges from 40 days to 120 days.

Judaism believes that the fetus is treated like an organ of the mother in that if it threatens the mother’s physical or mental health it can be removed like an appendix that is about to rupture. Judaism posits that ensoulment and therefore full standing as a human being does not occur until the majority of the fetus has emerged from the birth canal.

The first Jewish law code was the Mishna and it was edited in the 2nd century C.E., but reflects discussions that are older by as much as a few hundred years. A mishna describes a fetus that is threatening the mother’s life. The Mishna says you go in and cut up the fetus piece by piece to remove it because the fetus is a threat to the mother’s life.

There is no question of equal standing, the fetus will always be secondary. It should also be pointed out that while it is not yet a full life it is potential life so that its removal should not be a casual act but only undertaken when the mother’s health is in danger.

This Mishna brings us to the issue at hand about the freedom to practice my religion. My religion demands me to save the mother’s life. It is as much or more of a religious obligation as the obligation to pray or keep dietary laws. If the government of my state restricts my religious obligation to abort and save the mother’s life, the state is interfering in my ability to practice my religion.

If Roe falls and the states restrict our rights to abortion the Jewish community should sue the state for violating the constitution. It would no longer be a privacy act issue that is being challenged but a first amendment challenge. Jews have a constitutional right to practice their religion and not have a Christian definition that is parochial and far from universal be the underlying argument for restricting our religious rights.

This is America or at least it used to be. It is time to fight back before we find ourselves returning to a 1950s white dominated, racist, antisemitic, Protestant, heterosexual, United States. Is that where you want to live?

Please share with many others. It is our lives they are messing with. If you would like to join this blog send an email to ravpp1@gmail.com with your full name and email.