Halachically okay to be liberal?

“Although for a Torah Jew -they are the same – life is life.”
This is not true. Abortion and euthanasia do not fall under the same issur. I’m not justifying either, but there are important differences when it comes to the application of pikuach nefesh between a fetus and a partially or fully born baby.

Curiosity:
I’m a Trumpist Conservative. I doubt CTL thinks particularly highly of me or my opinions; the only reason it seems like he and I are on the same team on this particular thread is because I’m bothered by the way you guys are going about this. I don’t expect to ever convince you otherwise, but I’ll make my point anyway: the way “liberal” is defined in your conservative bubble is not how it is defined in the liberal bubble or anywhere else. Certain religious-right conservatives basically define their entire political affiliation on the issue of abortion and they assume liberals are just the inverse. Statistically that’s not true, and clearly it’s not true. If it makes life easier to define all American politics on the subject of abortion, that’s fine for you, but we don’t all have to accept that definition, and the assertion that it’s the “colloquial” definition is just baseless. Case and point, would you consider the current Catholic pope a conservative by your definition even though he’s basically an unabashed communist?

@NevilleChaimBerlin
I do think highly of you and your opinions. I may not agree with you/them but they are always well thought out, well presented and not full of the current right wing vitriol that infects our country

The Catholic pope is viewed as a liberal.

Today’s pope is “liberal” only in the context of Catholicism. Compared to other recent popes he’s a liberal. In context to the wider world outside Catholicism, even today’s pope isn’t considered liberal by a long-shot.

In fact, even the the two previous popes before the current one, who are considered to be very conservative by all accounts, were economically liberal, opposed the death penalty, supported open borders/free immigration and supported generous welfare. So could you really even consider Pope Benedict or Pope John Paul II to be conservative, given those positions?

In any event, in today’s America those affiliated with the left and who call or consider themselves to be liberal or “progressive”, take social positions that are completely anathema to Torah and Judaism, even in the context of what is permitted/prohibiited for Bnei Noach based on the Sheva Mitzvos. And as such, in the context of the American political scene, it is certainly prohibited to be or be affiliated with the liberals, left, progressives and Democrats given their support for toeiva, abortion, right to suicide, right to pull the plug on the terminally ill, and generally supporting public immorality.

ubiquitin,

“So I’m not talking about where they would “require” per se, but rather where they would ALLOW

” That specific scenario, which is the linchpin of your pro-choice is consistent with Torah argument, seems incredibly unlikely to me.”

It might seem that way but I know of several, and colleagues who deal with this say it is “routine” (of course routine is relative a colleague estimates 1 in 2-3 weeks (that he encounters) .”

Well, not exactly. Because you just said that you were talking about ALLOW, which is a tangent that is probably not a good idea for us to get into, whereas I was talking about REQUIRE. What would these colleagues of yours say about the number of times halacha would require an abortion, but the medical establishment deems it unnecessary?

” I don’t think any significant portion of the goyish world views that issue the same way we do.”
That’s because we have been sleepwalking
4 + 1/2 years ago there was had a hearing in Trenton regarding end-of-life .
presumably based on the polls and what not

they played up the claim of that the public was on the other side
According to reports
among those who showed up it was 9 to 1 non-jews ! against pulling the plug
Have things changed since then? Probably .and whose fault is it ?

” that liberal Jews would say that after Rowe V Wade, there is no point in arguing about abortion in the political sense”

Well if there’s no absolutes and It always just relative well then you might be correct
some of the plaints against Republicans in the 1950s were They were the original ” me too”
In other words they held the same just as moderate Democrats, just perhaps little less hasty

ubiquitin,

What is the point of learning Novi, if one will be an ahm haoretz gamor like you. Giving tzedoka is a PRIVATE thing and NOT a govt thing.

Liberalism, and all the other isms associated with the left, are vl’chora ASSUR GAMUR.

NC

” I don’t think any significant portion of the goyish world views that issue the same way we do.”

100% correct and this gets lost on many in our circles making these conversations strange.
for example IITFT’s response.

We and secular culture are coming from two opposite starting positions.
One the hallmarks of modern society, and medical ethics in particular is autonomy, specifically to allow patients to make decisions about themselves, or people to make decisions about themselves.

“Pulling the plug” isn’t controversial in secular society, as long as that is what the patient (or their family if the patient’s wishes aren’t known) wants. The only time those situations get controversial is if their are conflicting opinions as what patients would want, as in Terri Sciavo’s case.

Abortion is a bit dicier because there the Patient (ie the woman’s) decision affects another (ie the fetus). So in that case it depends on when life begins if it begins at birth, the mother is free to due with her limb (in Talmudic parlance “yerech imo” ) as she pleases . If life begins at conception then her autonomy is challenged by the fetus’s and abortion would not be ok ( proponets of this position are often “stuck” with what to do in extraordinary cases where most of society would support abortion, why in those cases taking a life is ok, very few are consistent and say ALL abortions are forbidden )

Halacha lehavdil takes a very different starting point.
People are NOT autonomous. We do not have baylus over our bodies. A person cannot just “pull the plug” because he has had enough. A person can’t tatoo their body, A person can’t wound themselves, they cant cut of their limb nor abort their fetus. This is why our exceptions are broader than societies . cutting yourself (ie surgery) is allowed in certain cases, is Plastic surgery allowed, thats between you an your Rav. abortion too is allowed in certain (obviously fewer) cases, what are those cases? that is between a woman and her Rav.
Relying on Secular ethists or medical practitioners wont work, becasue the whole starting point is different and incompatible.

(note: for bnei noach the last paragraph isn’t completly right, (ie for them a fetus might be a life ) but our number one concern should be klal yisorel)

Jersey
“Giving tzedoka is a PRIVATE thing and NOT a govt thing.”

I’m not sure if you are new to Judaism, or if our galus has been so long that you have adopted foreing ideas.
In Judiam there is no such distiction. When moshiach comes and Jeish leadership iis reestablished the government will force you to pay maaser, with force if neccesary (kofin al mitzvas asei) they will force you to leave your field fallow every 7th year .

See if you learn Navi you would know this, (for example Yosheyahu sent soldiers to ensure that avoda Zara was eradicated)

ujm
“If halacha allows but doesn’t require abortion (which I agree with Avram is a very rare case), ”

SO that isnt what Avram said was a very rare case . (though he may agree, he said ” extremely unlikely scenario where expert medical opinion would hold that an abortion is unnecessary whereas halacha holds that it is necessary”)

He is right about that, as I acknowledged, but sadly you are wrong.
Unless you define “very rare” differently
how often would you say is “very rare”

Avram
“If the law had a medical exemption, then it would still be the rabbi (for frum Jews) and doctor involved in the decision, no?”

so it depends on how that exemtion was written. If it was black and white ie Mothers life is at risk then halacha is Faaaaaar more “lenient” than halacha. I face this often when patients ask if they should fast yom kippur, I tell them if you want a heter you are better off talking to a Rav. Especially pregnant patients (though I’m not an OB ) for a healthy woman with a normal pregnancy there is (generally) no medical reason not to fast , worst case she goes into pre-term labor. no big deal. Yet halacha views that differently. It would be bad if there was a law passed all pregnant woman have to fast unless her life is at risk. Although h technically that is the halachic stance. , halacha and medicine define that differently. And since constitutionally the law cant reflect the Rabbi’s interpretation it would be a big probelm if it was striclty defined based on “medical risk”
This is even more true for abortion, where halacha considers psychological factors that arguably aren’t medical

“In Judiam there is no such distiction. When moshiach comes and Jeish leadership iis reestablished the government will force you to pay maaser, with force if neccesary (kofin al mitzvas asei) they will force you to leave your field fallow every 7th year .”

Ubiq: I’m sure you’re not a hypocrite and you similarly believe that since under a Torah government we would execute toeiva practitioners you, too, want that activity prohibited in America.

“If halacha allows but doesn’t require abortion (which I agree with Avram is a very rare case)”
It still doesn’t seem like you understand Avram’s “rare case.” He was talking about where the halachah would require it, but the medical professionals would NOT allow it if there were laws limiting abortion. I think this would be not only rare, but non-existent. If the doctor says it’s not necessary, the halachah isn’t going to require it.

The case of the halachah “allowing” abortion is something you’ve invented. This is pikuach nefesh, the proper lashon is “require.” We aren’t talking about a birth control heter.

As much as I’ve been playing devil’s advocate and defending the liberal posters here on this thread, I have to dissociate a bit now. I was defending the belief that political ideology shouldn’t be based solely on this issue. Those who are b’shittah in favor of abortion do not represent the Torah’s view and have likely been adversely influenced by secular, socially liberal colleagues.

Nc
“It still doesn’t seem like you understand Avram’s “rare case.” He was talking about ”

I do. I already said those are rare.

“The case of the halachah “allowing” abortion is something you’ve invented. This is pikuach nefesh, the proper lashon is “require.” ”

So this is where you are 100% absolutly completly no room to agree to disagree wrong. Obviously t6his isnt publicly duscussed. Ask your local ob.

“Torah’s view and have likely been adversely influenced by secular, socially liberal colleagues.”

Nope, i shared with one the halacha that a condemned woman is put to death even if pregnant, even in the 9th month.
They we’re horrified, but i havent changed my view (not that i understand it). I dont have to understand it thats what halacha says then so be it.
I would never allow abortion onve the fetus is viable, but if a rav allows it so be it

“nobody “REQUIRES” it”

To the contrary, there are situations where women can die from not having an abortion and they are not as rare as you think. The most common situation is an ectopic pregnancy, which happens in one to two percent of pregnancies. Fertility treatments — very common in the frum community — can substantially increase that risk. There are two countries in Central America — El Salvador and Nicaragua — where ALL abortions are illegal and indeed some women are dying. Interestingly, both those countries have far left Presidents from Marxist political parties. This destroys the entire premise of most of the discussion here.

There are more rare situations that typically occur late in pregnancy that also are life threatening to the mother and I posted a comment about them earlier. My wife is a primary care physician who takes care of pregnant patients. Once in her career she had to refer a patient for an abortion. The fetus’s brain was developing outside the skull. This is a condition not compatible with life.

In addition to El Salvador and Nicaragua, which ban all abortions for any reason yet have Marxist political parties in power, Malta has a total ban on all abortions, along with a socialist government (which is rare in Europe today). Vatican City also has a total ban on abortion but it really isn’t much of an issue there. 😉

CTL, in all of those countries the Catholic Church is very strong. This does not contradict socialist and even Marxist governments. While in the US and Europe the Church has been conservative in Latin America it has a strong leftist strain. After all, Yushki kicked the money-changers out of the Temple and condemned the rich.

Ubiquitin, you also have foreign ideas. “Tzedaka” is not equivalent to “charity”. A person who starts a business and boosts employment is giving tzedaka but not charity. Rabbi Prof. (Emeritus) Israel Kirzner discusses the role of the entrepreneur in expanding the pie. You can find his ideas summarized on Google.

I did not find who says that government should not legislate morality but in fact almost all laws involve legislating morality. Laws that punish theft, fraud, etc. all legislate morality.

It is A OK Halachically to be liberal for this one & laudable also

“Sanders: U.S. Must Ban Assault Weapons Like New Zealand
March 22, 2019

To get out of the weeds for a moment, I’d like to candidly share an over-arching view of why I am compelled to support a certain amount of “liberalism” (as I understand the term), while I am concerned of the slippery slope problems that may ensue. I think the following sentiment may very well speak for others too:

We understandably have concern of governmental and societal persecution, being that’s been the norm for thousands of years. A ‘live and let live’ society seems logically the best way to prevent future persecution. Using avodah zorah as an example (abortion is obviously a complex issue and most of us aren’t about to poskin as to whom and when it is OK, etc.), would you support an amendment to the constitution outlawing mamash avodah zorah? Assume for the moment it could be done and would be upheld. Of course as a frum Jew I don’t want avodah zorah spreading throughout. But history tells us that there could just as easily be a law forbidding Yiddishkeit, chas v’shalom. Should the risk matter? A big part of my understanding of what America is, is that we recognize that since we could be the next target, it’s better to have a sort of truce whereupon we allow people to live as they want – within reason. Of course where to draw the line will always be a headache. Of course if the halacha states unequivocally that we’d have to support laws against avodah zorah, then that’s our answer. Short of that, just as we don’t want emboldened Muslims lobbying for mandatory sharia law, why would we feel the need to impose halachic standards on goyim? We’re a complex nation with lots of religions and ethnicities. Every country that favors one over the other results in strife. civil wars, or pogroms. Boruch Hashem so many of you have had it so good in this country that you feel so strong about your political views and feel you can take part of our political system so freely. Let’s not take our newfound liberties for granted. What’s wrong with being thankful for the safety and security we’ve experienced in America til now and be good guests until Moshiach comes? And while I do believe that laws may sway values over time, given how polarizing politics have become I increasingly think we’ll need to look for non-political means to influence morality which is probably more effective anyway if done right. Think about it: crusading against toeva marriages only results in an equal opposite reaction. If for example we encouraged the value of modesty, for example, there would less of a need to legislate/adjudicate toiva marriages and abortions.
I see the hallmark of “liberalism” as people who vote and advocate for others interests and well-being, not just their own, exactly of the theory that we all benefit in the longer run.
Given the above, can you personally say the halacha unequivocally requires us to try and outlaw avodah zorah?

Avi

“Ubiquitin, you also have foreign ideas. “Tzedaka” is not equivalent to “charity”. ”
I’m sorry I’m not sure what you are referring to
charity is not strictly defined as giving money and even if it is I’m not sure if you are arguing with something I said OR just sharing a interesting factoid.

could you please elaborate?

“I did not find who says that government should not legislate morality ”
I said it a few times, thats my view. I should clarify though, what I mean by “morality” is really religious based morality.

“but in fact almost all laws involve legislating morality. Laws that punish theft, fraud, etc. all legislate morality”
Those should be laws because as a society we are better off if we all don’t steal and kill. .that is why stealing should be illegal and punished not because Judaism or lehavdil any religion says so.

I believe adultery is immoral, I dont think many here (besides Joseph) believes the US government should legislate adultery (even though that certainly is one of the Sheva mitzvos, while abortion is debatable) while a terrible act and which Ibeleive they will be punished forI dont think the government should be in charge of that

“as a society we are better off if we all don’t steal and kill.”
Propaganda
Who said so
Who defines what the terms should mean anyway
Guaranteed You steal possibly even kill According some esoteric definition

‘Tis Literally What the powerbrokers under the guise of democracy Find convenient And can easily brainwash at a given moment

The reason is they want to raise the age for personal responsibility, while also lowering the age of communal responsibility.

I can and do say
Those should be laws because as a society we are better off if we all don’t practice homosexuality and adultery. .that is why homosexuality should be illegal and punished not because Judaism or lehavdil any religion says so.

homosexuality and adultery are not chukim and have been forbidden by many societies for years, not just on religious grounds!

@Divrihayamin
NY is but one state out of 50.
The bunch of state assembly members you name are not major Liberals on the National scene.

You need to take off your NYcentric glasses. The post I questioned did not say minor NY politicians, it referred to major liberals,

PS Richard Gottfried YMS is more important to turning his agenda in to national policy, than any politician on the national stage.

Divri:
1. You had said, The biggest threat to Jewish religious liberty is the left.” I would agree that there are some on the left who have a problem with bris milah and shchitah and would also agree, as others have suggested that those views may surface more loudly one day, after they have their way on some other more “pressing” fronts. But the numbers and percentages of those on the left who have these views are far outnumbered by wackos on the extreme right who are avowed anti-semites and wish they could ship us out of here. Moreover, unlike these right-fanatics, very few of the left activists have an issue with the religion called “Judaism;” they are against these practices along the same lines as PETA protesting against eating steak.
2. You said” “Homosexuality and adultery . . . have been forbidden by many societies for years, not just on religious grounds.” I beg to differ. All such countries have at least a tradition of Christianity or Islam, whether or not they are still overtly religious. Greece was pre-Christianity and apparently didn’t have a problem with homosexuality.
3. In light of my argument for ‘live and let live’ rationale, you would in fact support legislation against avodah as I described it?
4. Seems we’ve lost the legislative fight on same sex marriages and other social issues. Even conservative judges have had to uphold this as a right based on the state constitutions. The best hope is that there is now a conservative supreme court. In the meantime, it’s clear to me that fighting harder legally or argumentatively only produces an equal and opposite response. Maybe the only hope is to convert their politics by abandoning the angry rhetoric. The plaintiff in Roe v. Wade ended up becoming a pro-lifer because she said the Chrisitian right was “nicer” than the left. L’havdil, when it comes to esrog, people aren’t concerned with just being yotzei, and go beyound mikar hadin. Maybe we have to see these social/morality laws as defining the absolute bottom of the barrel, and meanwhile build conservative values through programs and other means instead of politics, laws, and fighting, which isn’t working anyway. Not to mention, once the political tides turn, the political parties the frum world loves to bash will look at us as their enemy and good luck getting them to help us.