ZHID Abortionists Like Morgentaler=$MILLIONS Killing Babies!!

ZHID Abortionists Like Morgentaler=$MILLIONS Killing Babies!!	Ernst Zundholz
Re: ZHID Abortionists Like Morgentaler=$MILLIONS Killing Babies!!	Kenny McVaySOBC

From: Ernst Zundholz Subject: ZHID Abortionists Like Morgentaler=$MILLIONS Killing Babies!! Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 14:56:51 -0700 From: Brian Blankski Newsgroups:can.general,soc.culture.canada,soc.culture.canadian,wpg.general,tor.general,ont.general Subject: Re: ZHID Abortionist Kills Babies-for MILLION$$$ References: Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 09:40:31 -0700 Subject: ZHIDS=ABORTIONS=Killing for Dollars!! Kenneth McVay,SOBC, the well-known fag in Canada, Fag McVay of Vancouver, convicted of child molesting and car theft in California and Oregon, and still unemployed gas pump boy, mastermind of the Canadian branch of NAMBLA,now finally dying as a diseased AIDS-spreader, wants all to know about all his fellow criminals and perverts. Here is a photo of Ken McVay, director of WWW.NIZKOR.ORG-- Does he not have the uncouth look as to fit the profile of a person who would say in general regarding child : "I am weary of seeing the issue of "child " blown out of proportion (I've been on and around the Net since 1988, and have yet to come across anything I'd consider "child ." I've seen photos of naked children, ... and fail to see the harm, or any great moral danger to our society)."? http://www.protocol.gov.bc.ca/protocol/prgs/obc/1995/1995_KMcVay.jpg Would any of you want to leave this person, Ken McVay, alone with your children? Here is the latest....... Pepost from January 8, 2002: <<distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only. - FAIR USE INTENDED>>> http://www.plannedparenthood.org/Library/opposition/vol1num5/art3.htm (Link still active March 5, 2003) HLI AND ANTI-SEMITISM, CONTINUED Human Life International, which held its international conference in Montreal April 19-23, 1995, went on the defensive in the face of critical reports in the Canadian press. However, HLI spokespersons underscored the very issues raised by concerned groups. For example, responding to concerns that HLI fingers Jews as the primary promoters of abortion, HLI spokesperson Judith Reisman said, "...everyone knows Jews do [emphasis in the original] lead the abortion industry, and I'll thank B'Nai Brith from the bottom of my heart if they can prove otherwise."(1) Notes 1.Joe Woodward, "Extremism in Defense of the Unborn: Human Life International is Accused by B'Nai Brith of Anti-Semitism," British Columbia Report, January 9, 1995. I also invite one and all to consider this vintage post of mine: http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&selm=35488b33.219890968%40news.tavish-central.net&rnum=8 Subject: Re: WONG is Right! Jews support abortion - the evidence is overwhelming! (Re: More Jewish Support of Butchery Known as Abortion <> Jewish Community Relations Council >) Date: 1998/04/30 Message-ID: <35488b33.219890968@news.tavish-central.net> Classic repost. Not all links may be active today. I make this challenge regarding the information below. I want anyone to show any other "world religion" - i.e. Muslim, Hindu, Shinto, Buddhist, etc. that takes such of an active role in the promotion of infanticide aka abortion. We all know that each major organization may have splinter sects that approve abortion BUT we do not see any "world religion" as a whole defending and promoting abortion such as Judaism! Read all the documented links, verify them and then ask yourselves if Jewry as a whole deserves the "Holocaust" sympathy they currently receive! I hope the following awakes millions up from their slumber concerning these hypocrites who like wallowing in their own misery while actively advocating death for the unborn. I also wish to make this challenge to all Americans- name one Jew in Congress that is pro-life and has a record of voting against any bill that condones abortion. Can you name one? I can't! Did you know that the legislation written by two Jews (one each in the House and Senate) became Law and is now used to harass abortion protestors such as Operation Rescue? Click this link and see who these two Jews were and the bill numbers and their exact text that became law: http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&selm=abts9t01vldb7n7g5vpqeetkt9cd2vp5ts%404ax.com&rnum=14 Subject: Operation Rescue West Seeks $500,000 Reward (REPOST).. Date: Thu, 01 Mar 2001 10:18:58 -0600 Message-ID: Doc Tavish ---------- Forwarded Message Follows ---------- Jewish Empathy for Blood of Innocents? ABORTION <<>> Folks I have a minor proposition for all of you to consider. It is a mathematical problem of sorts and its variables are not absolutes. I only give generally accepted variables (rounded figures) or arbitrary variables as starting points. The problem is- which group of people actually have more blood guilt in spilling the blood of innocents? Here are the variables (as they apply to present day United States): The Nazi Third Reich lasted for 12 years from 1933 to 1945 as compared to Roe Vs Wade (legalization of abortion on demand) ~27 years [1973 to February 3, 2000] for ease of computation-- twice as long in rounded figures. Again in "rounded figures" and I would appreciate documented exact numbers if they are available- there were at least 1,000,000 Nazis and the United States has 1,000 abortion doctors at the beckoning call which means Nazis outnumbered abortionists at least a 1,000 to 1. The generally accepted figure of "Holocaust" victims is 6,000,000 while Operation Rescue with numbers verified by Alan Guttmacher Institute gives abortions a number of over 35,000,000 or about six times the death rate in about twice the time. Now run this premise through your heads and let it soak in. Not all Nazis ever physically took a life BUT all abortionists have! Going by arbitrary ratios of 1,000,000 Nazis killing 6,000,000 Jews we see that each Nazi would have had to kill 6 Jews personally and as we all know- not all Nazis did any actual killings On the other hand if the U.S. has 1,000 abortion doctors (of which each and everyone of them has taken life as a fact) and they collectively performed over 35,000,000 abortions then that would mean each doctor for his part would have had to "kill" at least 35,000 babies or roughly 1522 babies a year or ~127 a month which could be easily done with only 4 "procedures" done daily. Again all the above are arbitrary numbers meant to evoke your thoughts and for conjecture! New challenges I ask now on January 8, 2002: 1) Can anyone name just one Jewish congressperon past or present who has ever been "pro-life"? Just name one! 2) Can anyone name just one (well known) Jewish organization known for its "pro-life" struggles and activism? Just name one! From the material below take notice of what Jewry said in these chosen "snippets": "In the fall of 1992, when Operation Rescue mobilized an anti-abortion campaign in Wichita, Kan, Jewish groups were at the foreground of its opposition." "This is not a pro-choice state," a staffer at the New Orleans Federation told New Voices... Shows of Jewish support like in.. Louisiana are scarce. In fact, according to some Jewish leaders, such actions are not needed, since Jewish women do not abort." "According to Planned Parenthood, Long Island Jewish Hospital is among a dozen hospitals nationwide that teaches abortion procedures to their resident doctors. Another organization, the Jewish Communal Fund, supports Planned Parenthood with financial contributions." In other words these Jews are fighting for the "right" of non-Jewish women to abort! Does it not seem strange that Jews are interested in preserving "rights" for others when they themselves don't elect to use them? Have any of you ever wondered what the ratio of abortion doctors is? How many Jewish versus Gentile abortionists? How many mainline religions support abortion the way that Jewish religious groups do? Think about it! Classic Doc Tavish Repost From the Vintage Archives [Not all links may still be active many of the links quoted are at least two years old. Tavish comment February 1, 2000] http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&selm=3547a05d.159763437%40news.tavish-central.net&rnum=5 "More Jewish Support of Butchery Known as Abortion <> Jewish Community Relations Council >" Message-ID: <3547a05d.159763437@news.tavish-central.net> Jewish Community Relations Council http://www.jcrc.org/main/women.htm [Link active February 1, 2000] "JCRC firmly endorses the right of women to reproductive choice. We are concerned about the new-found strength of abortion opponents in Congress." "Long supportive of a woman's legal right to reproductive choice, JCRC opposes legislation, citizen initiatives and other measures that seek to weaken the guarantees of a woman's right and access to reproductive services." ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ More on Jewry supporting infanticide: The Jewish Communication Network http://www.jcn18.com/jsps/oct1995/page9.htm [Link active February 1, 2000] Abortion: On the Line Also see: http://x2.dejanews.com/getdoc.xp?AN=311967088&fmt=text http://groups.google.com/groups?oi=djq&selm=an_311967088 Message-ID: <34abf874.258761288@news.smart1.net> "B'nai B'rith Women has been one of dozens of Jewish organizations that have made their pro-choice stance publicly known and have rallied around women's right to choose abortion. Here, activists participated in the March for Women's Lives in Washington, D.C. in 1992." [Caption quote from web site picture.] Where Do Jewish Groups Stand? By Udi Ofer, Staff Writer "One Jewish organization which has been vocal in the past and continues to support access to abortion is the Union of American Hebrew Congregations, the Reform movement's umbrella organization. Even before Roe Vs. Wade, the 1973 landmark Supreme Court decision legalizing abortion, the UAHC passed a resolution in favor of a woman's right to choose. "We commend those states which have enacted humane legislation in this area (abortion) and we appeal to other states to do likewise and permit abortions under such circumstances as threatened disease or deformity of the embryo or fetus, threats to the physical and mental health of the mother, rape and incest and the social, economic and psychological factors that might warrant therapeutic termination of pregnancy," the November 1967 UAHC position paper stated. After Roe vs. Wade passed, the UAHC stated in 1975: "We oppose those riders and amendments to other bills aimed at halting Medicaid, legal counselling and family services in abortion-related activities...We are opposed to attempts to restrict the right to abortion through constitutional amendments." However, these were only organizational proclamations. And as the years pass, so did more resolutions. In 1994, various occurrences of clinic violence erupted throughout thecountry. Headlining these events were the murders of Dr. John Britton and James Barrett at a Pensacola, Fl. clinic. Immediately, the Jewish community mobilized by rushing to its fax machines with press releases. "We call on leaders of the anti-abortion movement not only to condemn these outrageous murders and all violence at and about abortion clinics but to abandon the rhetoric of murder and hate which encourages those in this movement to believe such acts of violence are justifiable," stated the AJCongress after the murders. But not all national organizations restrict themselves to decrees. In the fall of 1992, when Operation Rescue mobilized an anti-abortion campaign in Wichita, Kan, Jewish groups were at the foreground of its opposition. For weeks violent anti-abortion protests and clinic violence dominated the Wichita. In the end, however, Operation Rescue was run out of town. "B'nai Brith Women helped women secure safe access to clinics in Wichita, by organizing the community to work with city legislature," said Aileen Cooper, the public affairs coordinator at BBW. According to Maya Townsend, also of BBW, members of the organization became part of an escort service to assist women in securing access to abortion providers. The escort service protected women from harrassment from abortion foes. BBW was also a member of the Kansas Choice Alliance, a local pro-choice movement. Another Jewish leader who has taken action in the issue of abortion is Rabbi Michael Matuson. In 1992, Rabbi Matuson challenged the Louisiana state legislature in its strict new anti-abortion laws. The Reform rabbi volunteered as a plaintiff in a lawsuit seeking an injunction to prevent enforcement of the new law. Immediately following his challenge, Rabbi Matuson and his Baton Rouge congregation received death threats. However this did not stop the rabbi, and eventually the anti-abortion law was overturned. When asked whether he received any support from the Jewish community, Matuson replied "the UAHC and the Central Conference of American Rabbi's supported me. However, I did receive much opposition. Though it was inappropriate for me to get involved, I did anyway." "This is not a pro-choice state," a staffer at the New Orleans Federation told New Voices. Shows of Jewish support like in Wichita and Louisiana are scarce. In fact, according to some Jewish leaders, such actions are not needed, since Jewish women do not abort. Rabbi Israel Vana and Rabbi William Schwartz now live in Pensacola, Fl. Both are Conservative rabbis and both agree that women should have a choice on abortion. However, when asked how the Jewish community reacted to the murders at the Pensacola clinic, neither were able to state a specific action that was taken on the part of the Jewish community. But both remembered that various organizations passed resolutions condemning the act. Neither Vana nor Schwartz lived in Pensacola at that time. When asked if a woman in their congregations had ever sought an abortion, both replied with a terse, " it neverhappened." This is strange to Cooper, who cites a 1985 survey of 485 Jewish women conducted by BBW that concluded that 91 percent of Jewish American women are pro-choice. According to BBW's survey, of 471 non-Jewish women, 56 percent were pro-choice. When asked how is it that the rabbi's insist that the Jewish women in their congregations have not approached their rabbis about abortion, Cooper replied that it is between woman and doctor and does not usually involve a rabbi. The United Synagogue of Conservative Judaism, believe that the only way to decide on whether to decide on whether to abort is through one's rabbi. In its resolution, it stated that abortion should only be allowed "under certain unfortunate circumstances." It is up to rabbi to decide which "circumstances" are "unfortunate." Other organizations decide to neither pass resolutions nor take action on the issue of abortion. "Judaism is neither pro-choice nor pro-life," insisted Amy Bebchick, the Mitchell Fellow at Hillel: The Foundation for Jewish Campus Life. Hillel, an international Jewish student organization, with more than 100 chapters nationwide, lets every chapter create its own policy concerning every issue. If they want to take action, whether pro-choice or pro-life, they may. Other organizations show support in different ways. According to Planned Parenthood, Long Island Jewish Hospital is among a dozen hospitals nationwide that teaches abortion procedures to their resident doctors. Another organization, the Jewish Communal Fund, supports Planned Parenthood with financial contributions." ~~~~~~~~~~~ END ~~~~~~~~~~~ There you have it folks. The world's largest Jewish Organization, the ADL and Union of American Hebrew Congregations are all for abortion! I did NOT delete one word form the texts above and I provided the click links so anyone may verify that I showed exactly what the Jews wrote. Doc Tavish ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ http://www.rcrc.org/religion/es/judaism.html [All links active February 1, 2000] Judaism and Abortion By Rabbi Raymond A. Zwerin and Rabbi Richard J. Shapiro The issue of abortion in Jewish life is both complex and multi-faceted, with roots going back to the Bible. Its complexity is due, in large measure, to the reluctance of Jewish legal authorities to establish a single principle by which to determine the morality of abortion. Within the context of an overriding Jewish concern for the sanctity of human life, legal authorities have relied largely on individual cases and derivative legal concepts in determining when an abortion may take place. Especially during the past century, the increased diversity of traditions and practices within the Jewish community has naturally led to a diversity of approaches to the abortion issue. Nonetheless, out of this complex diversity a clear, general concept can be adduced from the centuries of Jewish tradition; and, it is that concept which this article will address. There are four aspects to the issue of abortion in Jewish tradition: (1) the legal status of the embryo/fetus, http://www.rcrc.org/religion/es/section1.html "The Legal Status of the Embryo/Fetus According to Jewish law, a fetus is not considered a full human being and has no juridical personality of its own. While recognizing the potentiality of becoming human, Rashi, the great 12th century commentator on the Bible and Talmud, states clearly of the fetus "lav nefesh hu--it is not a person." The Talmud contains the expression "ubar yerech imo--the fetus is as the thigh of its mother," i.e., the fetus is deemed to be part and parcel of the pregnant woman's body. [...] Jewish law is quite clear: while the fetus in the womb is to be protected as a potential human being, it has no personhood; it is not a bar kayamah (a viable, living being), thus, it is not accorded any of the rights or privileges of a human being." [excerpt] (2) the time of ensoulment; http://www.rcrc.org/religion/es/section2.html "The Time of Ensoulment While the status of a fetus is of interest with regard to the ultimate question of the morality of abortion, so, too, is the issue of ensoulment. Namely, at what moment does the soul enter the body? In Jewish legal tradition, there are several theories. The most famous text in this regard is from the Talmud and concerns a somewhat strange dialogue between the Roman Emperor Antoninus and Rabbi Judah the Patriarch, the compiler of the Mishna.[*] Antoninus asked Rabbi Judah: 'From when is the neshamah (soul) endowed in man: from the time of birth, or from the moment of intercourse?' Rabbi Judah answered. `From the time of birth.' The Emperor then asked. `Can meat remain three days without salt and not putrify?'" [...] The Rabbis were saying, in effect, that the moment of ensoulment is unclear at best, and subject to a great deal of speculation and disagreement. They state, therefore, that is one of the "secrets of God" that will be revealed only when the Messiah comes. As a result, the issue of ensoulment plays virtually no role in Jewish considerations of the morality of abortion." [excerpt] (3) conditions under which a therapeutic abortion may take place; and http://www.rcrc.org/religion/es/section3.html "Conditions for Therapeutic Abortions The issue of therapeutic abortion itself is first dealt with in a second century Jewish legal text quoted in the Mishna. If a woman is in hard labor (that threatens her life), one dismembers the fetus within her and removes it limb by limb, because her life takes precedence over its life. Once the greater part of it emerges it may not be touched, for we donot set aside one life for another. In commenting on this passage, later authorities further define the phrase "the greater part of it." During a normal delivery, this refers to the emergence of the forehead, while during a breach birth, this means more than half the body. There are two principles employed here to arrive at the conclusion that the abortion is justified. The first and foremost of the two is that the fetus remains only a potential human life until its emergence from the birth canal. One must, therefore, sacrifice the potential life in order to save a fully existent human life, i.e., the pregnant woman in labor. The second principle deals with the concept of self-defense. In Jewish law, one is permitted to defend oneself, even to the extent of taking the attacker's life should one's own life be in jeopardy. This point was brought into the discussion on abortion when some authorities in the Talmud challenged the prohibition stated above, of the taking of the life of the now fully human child in order to save the life of its mother. It was argued that the principle of the aggressor ought to apply here. Since it was pursuing its mother with intent to kill one should be permitted to kill if necessary, even the fetus whose greater portion had already emerged. This argument was rejected, however, in favor of a position that the mother is being pursued "from Heaven;" i.e., that the difficulties she is encountering are an act of God, and that it is impossible to know, in reality, who is pursuing whom. The principle of pursuer and self-defense, therefore, cannot be applied in the case of the child in the process of being born and need not be applied prior to birth since in that case the pursuer is not a person. Nonetheless, in the legal code of Maimonides, the great Jewish sage of the 13th century, the argument of the pursuer was used once again. In commenting on the passage from the Mishna quoted above, and in stating the rules governing abortion in his code, Maimonides utilizes the pursuer justification, using the example of a boat about to sink from its load. In order to lighten the load, a passenger without baggage steps forward and proceeds to throw overboard the baggage and a mule belonging to the others. Maimonides states that that person is not liable for restitution to the owners, for the baggage and the mule are pursuers, "seeking" to kill them all." [excerpt] (4) conditions under which a non-therapeutic abortion may take place. http://www.rcrc.org/religion/es/section4.html "Conditions for Non-Therapeutic Abortions The guidelines for deciding cases of accidental and therapeutic abortion, then, are reasonably clear-cut, even though there is some disagreement concerning the proper justification. Such cannot be said once one turns to the topic of a non-therapeutic abortion. Here the relevant literature is the Responsa-- questions written to and responses written by rabbinic authorities from the 10th century to today. It is also here that a divergence in opinion begins to emerge. Such divergence is due initially to differing understandings of Maimonides' use of the pursuer argument, cited above. Later, in the 19th and 20th centuries, it becomes part and parcel of the diversity within Judaism itself as liberal streams of Jewish tradition and observance emerge. There are many relevant Responsa concerning abortion, several of which follow. In all of them, the principles are those described above. Note, however, how different understandings of these principles lead to different conclusions. The first case concerns a child who is nursing and cannot survive without his mother's milk, being allergic to all other forms of nutrition. The mother, however, having become pregnant once again, sees that her milk has now ceased flowing. Here, where the issue is saving the life of a third party, as opposed to the pregnant woman herself, two different authorities mandate the performance of an abortion to save the life of the existing child. Other cases emerge today as a result of a better understanding of mental health issues. The question is whether or not suicidal tendencies in a pregnant woman (tendencies that might, as a result of the pregnancy itself, impel the woman to take her own life), justify the performance of an abortion. In this case, even the most stringent of authorities permit an abortion to save the life of the pregnant woman. In past centuries, many other circumstances have come before rabbinical authorities, as well. One case involved a woman whose pregnancy would leave her permanently deaf, and while some authorities rejected this as sufficient grounds for an abortion, no less an authority than a Chief Rabbi of Israel granted her permission. In cases involving adultery, there is also a division of opinion. Some invoke the principle of "let the fruit of the act bear witness to the deed lest adultery flourish in the land." Others maintain that we must do everything possible to save the pregnant woman from great mental pain and anguish, shame being the greatest mental pain. And in several cases involving rape, this latter principle seems to dominate, with many authorities granting permission to take the steps necessary to ensure that a pregnancy will not result Yet, in the light of these cases, might one assume that abortion is justifiable under any and all circumstances? The answer, according to Jewish law, is clearly "no." The majority of Jewish legal sources indicate that abortion is permissible at any stage of the pregnancy if the well-being of the pregnant woman is jeopardized, while it is clearly not permissible if the well-being of the future child is the issue. This distinction can best be illustrated by the following example. Due to modem medical technology a pregnant woman can now be certain, long before the birth of her child, whether it will be born defective due to rubella or the taking of Thalidomide during pregnancy, or due to genetic factors such as Tay-Sachs disease, or due to systematically transmitted diseases such as AIDS, etc. In all of these cases, abortion is not permitted out of fear or concern over what the child might have to endure during its life. Its lot in life is not to be determined nor judged by humanity. Its quality of life is one of the "secrets of God," and is not open to human judgment. However, some rabbinical authorities maintain that if the pregnant woman expresses anguish about her own mental, emotional, or psychological well-being resulting from an impending birth, then her pain may warrant an abortion. Other rabbinical authorities would not permit an abortion on such grounds. In cases of non-therapeutic abortion, then, the major consideration is "the pain of the mother." It is out of consideration for the woman involved, and not the fate or condition of the fetus, which becomes the determining factor in prohibiting or permitting an abortion. And it is precisely on this issue that diversity of opinion is now the greatest. Not only is the diversity seen between the various movements in Judaism today, but even within each movement itself. In addition to traditional Jewish mores and standards, each movement has its own criteria for determining the permissibility of abortion under other than therapeutic circumstances." [quoted in full] ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Doesn't the above make you want to vomit? How many hours of media exposure do we get monthly concerning the "Holocaust" against Jews yet these same Jews favour and condone the slaughter of millions of innocents! For pictures of the "handiwork" of what Jews embrace and remember this was brought out above: "According to Planned Parenthood, Long Island Jewish Hospital is among a dozen hospitals nationwide that teaches abortion procedures to their resident doctors. Another organization, the Jewish Communal Fund, supports Planned Parenthood with financial contributions." Challenge: Name any other major world religion who condones and contributes to planned infanticide! Now links to pictures (links active January 31, 2001): http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/3382/index.htm http://www.holylamb.com/abortion1.htm http://www.operationrescue.org/involved/truthtruck.asp http://www.operationrescue.org/abortion/babypics.asp From the above link here are the most horrendous and convincing pictures showing the atrocity which only one world religion (Judaism) supports: http://www.operationrescue.org/images/front/baby2.jpg http://www.operationrescue.org/images/front/baby4.jpg http://www.operationrescue.org/images/front/baby6.jpg http://www.operationrescue.org/images/front/baby10.jpg http://www.operationrescue.org/images/front/baby12.jpg http://www.operationrescue.org/images/front/baby14.jpg Look at those pictures and links and accept the challenge I made at the top of the page which said: "I make this challenge regarding the information below. I want anyone to show any other "world religion" - i.e. Muslim, Hindu, Shinto, Buddhist, etc. that takes such of an active role in the promotion of infanticide aka abortion. We all know that each major organization may have splinter sects that approve abortion BUT we do not see any "world religion" as a whole defending and promoting abortion such as Judaism! Read all the documented links, verify them and then ask yourselves if Jewry as a whole deserves the "Holocaust" sympathy they currently receive! I hope the following awakes millions up from their slumber concerning these hypocrites who like wallowing in their own misery while actively advocating death for the unborn." I use two sig lines in this post. One showing how Jews relate to communism and the other showing how Jews view non-Jews which would explain why abortion is so attractive to them. What better way could be had than for ignorant people to kill their own and thus be one less GOY the Jew has to deal with? Doc Tavish Daily Showing the Hypocrisy of Jewry --- I ask-- why do we never see Jews criticize the communism which existed before Stalin took control? "Because there was very little to criticize." Susan Cohen - January 24, 2001 --- "We are not allowed to drink any wine or grape juice, or any drink containing wine or grape juice, which has been touched by a non-Jew after the seal of the bottle has been opened." Information taken from: Is it Kosher, Rabbi E. Eidlitz and Spice and Spirit, The Lubavitch Women's Cookbook Publications (July 12, 2001) Schulchan Aruch, Johre Deah, 122: "A Jew is forbidden to drink from a glass of wine which a Gentile has touched, because the touch has made the wine unclean." Jewish Talmud ______________________________________________________________________ Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Still Only $9.95 - http://www.uncensored-news.com <><><><><><><> The Worlds Uncensored News Source <><><><><><><><> From: "kenmcvay@nazikor.orgy" Subject: JEW GETS MILLIONS KILLING BABIES!!! Newsgroups: alt.abortion From: Joe Kamenar Newsgroups: alt.religion.christian.romancatholic, soc.culture.usa,soc.culture.canada,alt.abortion Subject: --> Abortion Is Murder Date: Mon, 22 Nov 1999 16:06:41 -0500 If an aborted baby has a heartbeat and functioning organs (like a brain), then to take its life is murder. This is not CHOICE. People who support unlimited abortions and partial birth abortions should be banned from society. How can anyone argue otherwise? From: bmccandlss@aol.com (BMcCandlss) Newsgroups: alt.abortion Subject: Re: MILLIONS FROM KILLING BABIES!!! >Date: Sun, 21 November 1999 02:06 PM EST >On 21 Nov 1999 18:35:34 GMT, bmccandlss@aol.com >(BMcCandlss) wrote: >> apifar@ibm.net (Craig Chilton) wrote: >>> On Sun, 21 Nov 1999 12:17:54 -0500 (EST), >>> "boris@movil.com" wrote: >> Sorry dude, the American Revolution was founded on the >> principle that all are created with the RIGHT to LIFE, >> so your "Benediction" is given with foot in mouth. Keep dreaming. Our founding documents were based on principles of English law, which DID ascribe these rights to the unborn; it's cited right in Roe v. Wade. Likewise, our founding documents state that "all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their creator with the right to life..." Note it says CREATED, not BORN. NO "Men" were EVER born; only little babies are BORN. Clearly this "creation" refers to something other than birth. Likewise, "Men" are not "created," we don't pop into existence fully formed. Simply put, abortion was tolerated only due to primitive ob/gyn practices of the day, nothing more-- your argument, being based on them, dies with them. And yes, the unborn DO have intrinsic value in terms of their promise of a future as adults, just like infants do, which is why they are protected by law, as opposed to being shipped to the pound to be gassed with the cats and dogs which, although equally intelligent now, will NEVER reach adult human intellect. Maybe the unborn had no value BEFORE conception, but by the time they're big enough to be aborted that's no longer the case; the die is cast, so those cast must not die. ***VERY VALID POINTS OPPOSING ***THE MURDERING ABORTIONISTS!!! From: "Mark" Newsgroups: edm.general,can.general Subject: Re: MORGENTALER MAKES $17 MILLIONS KILLING BABIES!!! Date: Sat, 20 Nov 1999 10:36:57 -0700 Melanie Piper wrote in message <3831CB3F.E0753FBC@telusplanet.net>... >boris.spetznatz@lubyanka.net wrote: >> From: bk469@torfree.net (John Lauzon) >> Subject: MORGENTALER: THE $17 MILLION/YEAR ABORTION MAN Man alive just did a show on Morgentaler. I was amazed that he survived both Auschwitz and Dachau and yet still has such a callous view of life. His humanist views developed before WWII by the influence of his humanist father. I've been doing some reading on humanism lately. All of the worst people this century has seen were humanists. Hitler, Stalin, Mao, and Pol Pot were all humanists. So it isn't surprising to me that Morgantaller, who signed the Humanist Manifesto II, would be just as willing to kill as they were. On an aside, he was also very willing to cheat on his wife, and did so constantly. >> abortionist Henry Morgentaler, one can >> ascertain that Morgentaler makes at least $17,083,764 >> per year >Do you want your reader to be jealous of his income? How is >his income relevant to whether or not his beliefs or activities >should/should not be supported? I've heard coimments from reformed abortionists that they did it for the incredible amount of money they make. Morgantaler has personally performed 75,000 abortions, at the going rate of about $600, that amounts to $45,000,000!! >> from his business of killing unborn babies. >Your choice of word for what he does. Sure wouldn't be mine. I have yet to hear a pregnant woman refer to her unborn baby as a featus, or a lump of flesh. "Oh, feel my tummy dear, our lump of flesh is really kicking". >> A province by province breakdown of abortion >> provision is provided by CARAL at >> http://www.caral.ca/situation1.html . >> The site lists the number of abortions performed per >> week at the Morgentaler abortuaries. >"abortuaries"--again a choice of words designed to inflame >and influence; a less-biased choice of words would be what >the facilities are actually termed within the conventional >medical and health-care "establishment": clinics. ROTFL. You call the guy an anti-semite and then you have the nerve to talk about inflamatory language. A mill is exactly what they are, get them in and out as fast as they can. 132,000 abortions were performed in 1996, that's one out of every five pregnancies. >Ah, what the hell. I support your right to your opinions, but >I just couldn't resist. I was taught to "read critically" in >about Grade Nine and sometimes the "button-pushers" just jump >out at me. Reading critically isn't worth much if you only read propaganda. Markw From: bk469@torfree.net (John Lauzon) Subject: MORGENTALER: THE $17 MILLION/YEAR ABORTION MAN MORGENTALER: THE $17 MILLION/YEAR ABORTION MAN OTTAWA, Nov 10 (LSN.ca) - From statistics and figures published on the website of the Canadian Abortion Rights Action League (CARAL) and the website of notorious Canadian Jewish abortionist Henry Morgentaler, one can ascertain that Morgentaler makes at least $17,083,764 per year from his business of killing unborn babies. Health researcher Isabelle Begin who discovered the information informed LifeSite News that Morgentaler owns and operates 8 clinics in 7 provinces in Canada. Adding the numbers of abortions performed in the Morgentaler clinics (save for the Edmonton clinic figures, which are unavailable) and multiplying by the average cost of these abortions (as compiled from information on Morgentaler's website) one can conclude that destroying pre-born humans makes a substantial contribution to Morgentaler's comfortable livelihood. The calculation goes like this: Average yearly revenue: $607.25/abortion x 28,133 + (no info for Edmonton) = $17,083,764 minimum yearly gross revenue. A province by province breakdown of abortion provision is provided by CARAL at http://www.caral.ca/situation1.html Lawyers, politicians, and judges need to be recycled - as fertiliser!! "At a time of universal deceit - telling the truth is a revolutionary act." (George Orwell) David Icke - '...and the truth shall set you free' "All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed, second it is violently opposed, and third, it is accepted as self-evident." (Arthur Schopenhauer) "The reason men are silenced is not because they speak falsely, but because they speak the truth. This is because if men speak falsehoods, their own words can be used against them; while if they speak truly, there is nothing which can be used against them -- except force." -- John Bryant "To attempt to silence a man is to pay him homage, for it is an acknowledgement that his arguments are both impossible to answer and impossible to ignore." --John Bryant If you believe in the TRUTH and the RIGHT, then visit www.freedomsite.org Posted by: Steven Horn (KCOM) 1836 NW 11th St Oklahoma City, OK 73106 (405) 524-0576 together with Boris Dynin = NAMBLA executive & Henry who like late night discussions, even from Stormfront, Christian Identity, Pamyat, Aryan Nations, etc. I am together with McVay, regional managers for NAMBLA. We like young children, so that we can train them our way. CALL late nights to discuss: (408) 773-0984 Email me: boris@movil.com , or even VISIT me at: 55 Chumasero Drive, Daly City, San Francisco 94132 Ken McVay invites callers,and visitors,to his homouals escorts office: VISIT at: #5 - 1601 - Bowen Road, Nanaimo, B.C., Canada, or my home at: Apt. 3108 - 995 Bowen Road, Nanaimo, B.C., Canada or call: 1-250-616-9431 As everyone can see McVay takes it as a compliment when he is called a "confessed child-molester" and the additional material should give an indication as to the why. "I am weary of seeing the issue of "child " blown out of proportion (I've been on and around the Net since 1988, and have yet to come across anything I'd consider "child ." I've seen photos of naked children, but then I've got some of those in my family photo album, and fail to see the harm, or any great moral danger to our society)." - Nizkor Director Ken McVay http://www.spectacle.org/695/mcvay.html [Many paedophiles also have family albums with naked children photos in them.] Look at Ken McVay's photo and ask yourselves; "Does he not look like a disheveled unkempt pervert or someone who would molest your child even if he or she were not naked"? http://www.protocol.gov.bc.ca/protocol/prgs/obc/1995/1995_KMcVay.jpg For detailed and documented evidence of McVay's questionable background and details of convictions, please refer to Dr.David Michael's detailed expose on McVay. McVay is a distraught paranoid molseter, and is known for claiming that anyone who refutes his lies must be a grosvenor!! It is also suspected that McVay fabricates responses using aliases, just to justify his existence to his ZHID masters. Since I am a female, I also like to receive many calls, to discuss NAMBLA,lesbianism, JEW atrocities and similar. Call me, Shiksa Susan Cohen at: 301-681-9193, especially late nights. Also,be sure to include me on maillists: Keith Spencer,5005 Whitemud Road,Edmonton,AB,Canada T6H5L2 I welcome phone calls, late nights:(780)437-1787 or send lots of emails to: krs2@ualberta.ca, or phone to work:(780)492-0473 For the real TRUTH about ZHIDS, visit the world top-rated website for JEW-WATCH: http://www.jewwatch.com Or, other useful websites include: ZUNDELSITE - www.zundelsite.org IHR - www.ihr.org OSTARA - www.ostara.org PAMYAT - http://abbc.com/pamyat/index.html Edgar J.Steele - www.ConspiracyPenPal.com AL JAZEERA - http://english.aljazeera.net/HomePage THE HOFFMAN WIRE - Dedicated to Freedom of the Press, Investigative Reporting and Revisionist History Subscribe: HoffmanWire-subscribe@topica.com Or, visit the website for NATIONAL ALLIANCE : http://www.natvan.com They have lots of information, as well as books and records. They also are involved in exposing Ken McVay for the crook he is, and passing on information to the appropriate criminal prosecutors. As a service to the public, this article is posted worldwide by a victim of the molester pervert Ken McVay, with the assistance of a group interested in detailing the depredations of the ZHIDS. May Ken McVay and his like,rot in gehenna. From: Kenny McVaySOBC Subject: Re: ZHID Abortionists Like Morgentaler=$MILLIONS Killing Babies!! Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 07:57:12 -0700 On Tue, 11 Jan 2005 14:56:51 -0700, Ernst Zundholz wrote: >From: Brian Blankski >Newsgroups:can.general,soc.culture.canada,soc.culture.canadian,wpg.general,tor.general,ont.general >Subject: Re: ZHID Abortionist Kills Babies-for MILLION$$$ >References: >Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 09:40:31 -0700 >Subject: ZHIDS=ABORTIONS=Killing for Dollars!! >Kenneth McVay,SOBC, the well-known fag in Canada, >Fag McVay of Vancouver, convicted of child molesting >and car theft in California and Oregon, and still >unemployed gas pump boy, mastermind of the >Canadian branch of NAMBLA,now finally dying as a >diseased AIDS-spreader, wants all to know >about all his fellow criminals and perverts. >Here is a photo of Ken McVay, director of WWW.NIZKOR.ORG-- >Does he not have the uncouth look as to fit the profile of a >person who would say in general regarding child : >"I am weary of seeing the issue of "child " blown out of >proportion (I've been on and around the Net since 1988, and >have yet to come across anything I'd consider "child ." >I've seen photos of naked children, ... and fail to see the >harm, or any great moral danger to our society)."? >http://www.protocol.gov.bc.ca/protocol/prgs/obc/1995/1995_KMcVay.jpg > Would any of you want to leave this person, Ken McVay, > alone with your children? > >Here is the latest....... > >Pepost from January 8, 2002: > ><<>distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed >a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit >research and educational purposes only. - FAIR USE INTENDED>>> > >http://www.plannedparenthood.org/Library/opposition/vol1num5/art3.htm >(Link still active March 5, 2003) > >HLI AND ANTI-SEMITISM, CONTINUED >Human Life International, which held its international conference in >Montreal April 19-23, 1995, went on the defensive in the face of critical >reports in the Canadian press. However, HLI spokespersons underscored the very >issues raised by concerned groups. For example, responding to concerns that >HLI fingers Jews as the primary promoters of abortion, HLI spokesperson Judith >Reisman said, >"...everyone knows Jews do [emphasis in the original] lead the >abortion industry, and I'll thank B'Nai Brith from the bottom of my heart if >they can prove otherwise."(1) > >Notes >1.Joe Woodward, "Extremism in Defense of the Unborn: Human Life >International is Accused by B'Nai Brith of Anti-Semitism," British Columbia >Report, January 9, 1995. > > > >I also invite one and all to consider this vintage post of mine: > >http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&selm=35488b33.219890968%40news.tavish-central.net&rnum=8 >Subject: Re: WONG is Right! Jews support abortion - the evidence is >overwhelming! (Re: More Jewish Support of Butchery Known as Abortion ><> Jewish Community Relations Council >) >Date: 1998/04/30 >Message-ID: <35488b33.219890968@news.tavish-central.net> > >Classic repost. Not all links may be active today. > >I make this challenge regarding the information below. I want anyone >to show any other "world religion" - i.e. Muslim, Hindu, Shinto, Buddhist, >etc. that takes such of an active role in the promotion of infanticide aka >abortion. >We all know that each major organization may have splinter sects that approve >abortion BUT we do not see any "world religion" as a whole defending and >promoting abortion such as Judaism! Read all the documented links, verify them >and then ask yourselves if Jewry as a whole deserves the "Holocaust" sympathy >they currently >receive! I hope the following awakes millions up from their slumber >concerning these hypocrites who like wallowing in their own misery while >actively advocating death for the unborn. > >I also wish to make this challenge to all Americans- name one Jew in >Congress that is pro-life and has a record of voting against any bill that >condones abortion. Can you name one? I can't! Did you know that the >legislation written by two Jews (one each in the House and Senate) became Law >and is now used to harass abortion protestors such as Operation Rescue? Click >this link and see who these two Jews were and the bill numbers and their exact >text that became law: >http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&selm=abts9t01vldb7n7g5vpqeetkt9cd2vp5ts%404ax.com&rnum=14 >Subject: Operation Rescue West Seeks $500,000 Reward (REPOST).. >Date: Thu, 01 Mar 2001 10:18:58 -0600 >Message-ID: > > >Doc Tavish > >---------- Forwarded Message Follows ---------- > >Jewish Empathy for Blood of Innocents? ABORTION <<>> > >Folks I have a minor proposition for all of you to consider. It is a >mathematical problem of sorts and its variables are not absolutes. I >only give generally accepted variables (rounded figures) or arbitrary >variables as starting points. > >The problem is- which group of people actually have more blood guilt >in spilling the blood of innocents? > >Here are the variables (as they apply to present day United States): > >The Nazi Third Reich lasted for 12 years from 1933 to 1945 as compared >to Roe Vs Wade (legalization of abortion on demand) ~27 years >[1973 to February 3, 2000] >for ease of computation-- twice as long in rounded figures. > >Again in "rounded figures" and I would appreciate documented exact >numbers if they are available- there were at least 1,000,000 Nazis and the >United States has 1,000 abortion doctors at the beckoning call which means >Nazis outnumbered abortionists at least a 1,000 to 1. > >The generally accepted figure of "Holocaust" victims is 6,000,000 >while Operation Rescue with numbers verified by Alan Guttmacher Institute >gives abortions a number of over 35,000,000 or about six times the death rate >in about twice the time. > >Now run this premise through your heads and let it soak in. Not all >Nazis ever physically took a life BUT all abortionists have! >Going by arbitrary ratios of 1,000,000 Nazis killing 6,000,000 Jews we see >that each Nazi would have had to kill 6 Jews personally and as we all know- >not all Nazis did any actual killings >On the other hand if the U.S. has 1,000 abortion doctors (of which >each and everyone of them has taken life as a fact) and they collectively >performed over 35,000,000 abortions then that would mean each doctor for his >part would have had to "kill" at least 35,000 babies or roughly 1522 babies a >year or ~127 a month which could be easily done with only 4 "procedures" done >daily. > >Again all the above are arbitrary numbers meant to evoke your thoughts >and for conjecture! > >New challenges I ask now on January 8, 2002: >1) Can anyone name just one Jewish congressperon past or present who >has ever been "pro-life"? Just name one! >2) Can anyone name just one (well known) Jewish organization known for >its "pro-life" struggles and activism? Just name one! > >From the material below take notice of what Jewry said in these chosen >"snippets": > >"In the fall of 1992, when Operation Rescue mobilized an anti-abortion >campaign in Wichita, Kan, Jewish groups were at the foreground of its >opposition." > >"This is not a pro-choice state," a staffer at the New Orleans >Federation told New Voices... Shows of Jewish support like in.. Louisiana are >scarce. >In fact, according to some Jewish leaders, such actions are not needed, since >Jewish women do not abort." > >"According to Planned Parenthood, Long Island Jewish Hospital is among >a dozen hospitals nationwide that teaches abortion procedures to their >resident doctors. >Another organization, the Jewish Communal Fund, supports Planned >Parenthood with financial contributions." > >In other words these Jews are fighting for the "right" of non-Jewish >women to abort! >Does it not seem strange that Jews are interested in preserving >"rights" for others when they themselves don't elect to use them? Have any of >you ever wondered what the ratio of abortion doctors is? > >How many Jewish versus Gentile abortionists? >How many mainline religions support abortion the way >that Jewish religious groups do? Think about it! > >Classic Doc Tavish Repost From the Vintage Archives >[Not all links may still be active many of the links quoted are at >least two years old. Tavish comment February 1, 2000] > >http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&selm=3547a05d.159763437%40news.tavish-central.net&rnum=5 >"More Jewish Support of Butchery Known as Abortion ><> Jewish Community Relations Council >" >Message-ID: <3547a05d.159763437@news.tavish-central.net> > >Jewish Community Relations Council > >http://www.jcrc.org/main/women.htm >[Link active February 1, 2000] > >"JCRC firmly endorses the right of women to reproductive choice. We >are concerned about the new-found strength of abortion opponents in >Congress." > >"Long supportive of a woman's legal right to reproductive choice, JCRC >opposes legislation, citizen initiatives and other measures that seek to >weaken the guarantees of a woman's right and access to reproductive services." > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > >More on Jewry supporting infanticide: > >The Jewish Communication Network > >http://www.jcn18.com/jsps/oct1995/page9.htm >[Link active February 1, 2000] > >Abortion: On the Line > >Also see: http://x2.dejanews.com/getdoc.xp?AN=311967088&fmt=text >http://groups.google.com/groups?oi=djq&selm=an_311967088 >Message-ID: <34abf874.258761288@news.smart1.net> > >"B'nai B'rith Women has been one of dozens of Jewish organizations >that have made their pro-choice stance publicly known and have rallied around >women's right to choose abortion. Here, activists participated in the March >for Women's Lives in Washington, D.C. in 1992." [Caption quote from web site >picture.] > >Where Do Jewish Groups Stand? >By Udi Ofer, Staff Writer > >"One Jewish organization which has been vocal in the past and >continues to support access to abortion is the Union of American Hebrew >Congregations, the Reform movement's umbrella organization. Even before Roe >Vs. Wade, the 1973 landmark Supreme Court decision legalizing abortion, the >UAHC passed a resolution in favor of a woman's right to choose. "We commend >those states which have enacted humane legislation in this area (abortion) and >we appeal to other >states to do likewise and permit abortions under such circumstances as >threatened disease or deformity of the embryo or fetus, threats to the >physical and mental health of the mother, rape and incest and the social, >economic and psychological factors that might warrant >therapeutic termination of pregnancy," the November 1967 UAHC position >paper stated. > >After Roe vs. Wade passed, the UAHC stated in 1975: "We oppose those >riders and amendments to other bills aimed at halting Medicaid, legal >counselling and family services in abortion-related activities...We are >opposed to attempts to restrict the right to abortion through constitutional >amendments." > >However, these were only organizational proclamations. And as the >years pass, so did more resolutions. > >In 1994, various occurrences of clinic violence erupted throughout >thecountry. >Headlining these events were the murders of Dr. John Britton and James >Barrett at a Pensacola, Fl. clinic. Immediately, the Jewish community >mobilized by rushing to its fax machines with press releases. "We call on >leaders of the anti-abortion movement not only to condemn these outrageous >murders and all violence at and about abortion clinics but to abandon the >rhetoric of murder and hate which encourages those in this movement to believe >such acts of violence are justifiable," stated the AJCongress after the >murders. > >But not all national organizations restrict themselves to decrees. In >the fall of 1992, when Operation Rescue mobilized an anti-abortion campaign in >Wichita, Kan, Jewish groups were at the foreground of its opposition. For >weeks violent anti-abortion protests and clinic violence dominated the >Wichita. In the end, however, Operation Rescue was run out of town. > >"B'nai Brith Women helped women secure safe access to clinics in >Wichita, by organizing the community to work with city legislature," said >Aileen Cooper, the public affairs coordinator at BBW. According to Maya >Townsend, also of BBW, members of the organization became part of an escort >service to assist women in securing access to abortion providers. The escort >service protected women from harrassment from abortion foes. BBW was also a >member of the Kansas Choice Alliance, a local pro-choice movement. > >Another Jewish leader who has taken action in the issue of abortion is >Rabbi Michael Matuson. > >In 1992, Rabbi Matuson challenged the Louisiana state legislature in >its strict new anti-abortion laws. The Reform rabbi volunteered as a plaintiff >in a lawsuit seeking an injunction to prevent enforcement of the new law. >Immediately following his challenge, Rabbi Matuson and his Baton Rouge >congregation received death threats. However this did not stop the rabbi, and >eventually the anti-abortion law was overturned. When asked whether he >received any support >from the Jewish community, Matuson replied "the UAHC and the Central >Conference of American Rabbi's supported me. However, I did receive much >opposition. Though it was inappropriate for me to get involved, I did anyway." >"This is not a pro-choice state," a staffer at the New Orleans Federation told >New Voices. > >Shows of Jewish support like in Wichita and Louisiana are scarce. In >fact, according to some Jewish leaders, such actions are not needed, since >Jewish women do not abort. > >Rabbi Israel Vana and Rabbi William Schwartz now live in Pensacola, >Fl. Both are Conservative rabbis and both agree that women should have a >choice on abortion. >However, when asked how the Jewish community reacted to the murders at >the Pensacola clinic, neither were able to state a specific action that was >taken on the part of the Jewish community. But both remembered that various >organizations passed resolutions condemning the act. Neither Vana nor Schwartz >lived in Pensacola at that time. When asked if a woman in their congregations >had ever >sought an abortion, both replied with a terse, " it neverhappened." >This is strange to Cooper, who cites a 1985 survey of 485 Jewish women >conducted by BBW that concluded that 91 percent of Jewish American women are >pro-choice. >According to BBW's survey, of 471 non-Jewish women, 56 percent were >pro-choice. >When asked how is it that the rabbi's insist that the Jewish women in >their congregations have not approached their rabbis about abortion, Cooper >replied that it is between woman and doctor and does not usually involve a >rabbi. The United Synagogue of Conservative Judaism, believe that the only way >to decide on whether to decide on whether to abort is through one's rabbi. In >its resolution, it stated that abortion should only be allowed "under certain >unfortunate >circumstances." It is up to rabbi to decide which "circumstances" are >"unfortunate." > >Other organizations decide to neither pass resolutions nor take action >on the issue of abortion. > >"Judaism is neither pro-choice nor pro-life," insisted Amy Bebchick, >the Mitchell Fellow at Hillel: The Foundation for Jewish Campus Life. >Hillel, an international Jewish student organization, with more than 100 >chapters nationwide, lets every chapter create its own policy concerning every >issue. If they want to take action, whether >pro-choice or pro-life, they may. > >Other organizations show support in different ways. > >According to Planned Parenthood, Long Island Jewish Hospital is among >a dozen hospitals nationwide that teaches abortion procedures to their >resident doctors. >Another organization, the Jewish Communal Fund, supports Planned >Parenthood with financial contributions." > >~~~~~~~~~~~ END ~~~~~~~~~~~ > >There you have it folks. The world's largest Jewish Organization, the >ADL and Union of American Hebrew Congregations are all for abortion! I did NOT >delete one word form the texts above and I provided the click links so anyone >may verify that I showed exactly what the Jews wrote. > Doc Tavish > >~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > >http://www.rcrc.org/religion/es/judaism.html >[All links active February 1, 2000] > >Judaism and Abortion > >By Rabbi Raymond A. Zwerin and Rabbi Richard J. Shapiro > >The issue of abortion in Jewish life is both complex and >multi-faceted, with roots going back to the Bible. Its complexity is >due, in large measure, to the reluctance of Jewish legal authorities to >establish a single principle by which to determine the morality of abortion. >Within the context of an overriding Jewish concern for the sanctity of human >life, legal authorities have relied largely on individual cases and derivative >legal concepts in determining when an abortion may take place. Especially >during the past century, the increased diversity of traditions and practices >within the >Jewish community has naturally led to a diversity of approaches to the >abortion issue. Nonetheless, out of this complex diversity a clear, general >concept can be adduced from the centuries of Jewish tradition; and, it is that >concept which this article will address. > >There are four aspects to the issue of abortion in Jewish tradition: > >(1) the legal status of the embryo/fetus, >http://www.rcrc.org/religion/es/section1.html > >"The Legal Status of the Embryo/Fetus >According to Jewish law, a fetus is not considered a full human being >and has no juridical personality of its own. While recognizing the >potentiality of becoming human, Rashi, the great 12th century >commentator on the Bible and Talmud, states clearly of the fetus "lav >nefesh hu--it is not a person." The Talmud contains the expression "ubar >yerech imo--the fetus is as the thigh of its mother," i.e., the fetus is >deemed to be part and parcel of the pregnant woman's body. > >[...] > >Jewish law is quite clear: while the fetus in the womb is to be >protected as a potential human being, it has no personhood; it is not a bar >kayamah (a viable, living being), thus, it is not accorded any of the rights >or privileges of a human being." >[excerpt] > >(2) the time of ensoulment; >http://www.rcrc.org/religion/es/section2.html > >"The Time of Ensoulment >While the status of a fetus is of interest with regard to the ultimate >question of the morality of abortion, so, too, is the issue of >ensoulment. Namely, at what moment does the soul enter the body? In >Jewish legal tradition, there are several theories. The most famous text in >this regard is from the Talmud and concerns a somewhat strange dialogue >between the Roman Emperor Antoninus and Rabbi Judah the Patriarch, the >compiler of the Mishna.[*] > >Antoninus asked Rabbi Judah: 'From when is the neshamah (soul) endowed >in man: from the time of birth, or from the moment of intercourse?' Rabbi >Judah answered. `From the time of birth.' The Emperor then asked. `Can meat >remain three days without salt and not putrify?'" > >[...] > >The Rabbis were saying, in effect, that the moment of ensoulment is >unclear at best, and subject to a great deal of speculation and disagreement. >They state, therefore, that is one of the "secrets of God" that will be >revealed only when the Messiah comes. As a result, the issue of ensoulment >plays virtually no role in Jewish considerations of the morality of abortion." >[excerpt] > >(3) conditions under which a therapeutic abortion may take place; and >http://www.rcrc.org/religion/es/section3.html > >"Conditions for Therapeutic Abortions >The issue of therapeutic abortion itself is first dealt with in a >second century Jewish legal text quoted in the Mishna. > >If a woman is in hard labor (that threatens her life), one dismembers >the fetus within her and removes it limb by limb, because her life takes >precedence over its life. Once the greater part of it emerges it may not be >touched, for we donot set aside one life for another. > >In commenting on this passage, later authorities further define the >phrase "the greater part of it." During a normal delivery, this refers to the >emergence of the forehead, while during a breach birth, this means more than >half the body. > >There are two principles employed here to arrive at the conclusion >that the abortion is justified. The first and foremost of the two is that the >fetus remains only a potential human life until its emergence from the birth >canal. >One must, therefore, sacrifice the potential life in order to save a >fully existent human life, i.e., the pregnant woman in labor. > >The second principle deals with the concept of self-defense. In Jewish >law, one is permitted to defend oneself, even to the extent of taking the >attacker's life should one's own life be in jeopardy. This point was brought >into the discussion on abortion when some authorities in the Talmud challenged >the prohibition stated above, of the taking of the life of the now fully human >child in order to save the life of its mother. It was argued that the >principle of the aggressor >ought to apply here. Since it was pursuing its mother with intent to >kill one should be permitted to kill if necessary, even the fetus whose >greater portion had already emerged. > >This argument was rejected, however, in favor of a position that the >mother is being pursued "from Heaven;" i.e., that the difficulties she is >encountering are an act of God, and that it is impossible to know, in reality, >who is pursuing whom. The principle of pursuer and self-defense, therefore, >cannot be applied in the case of the child in the process of being born and >need not be applied prior >to birth since in that case the pursuer is not a person. > >Nonetheless, in the legal code of Maimonides, the great Jewish sage of >the 13th century, the argument of the pursuer was used once again. In >commenting on the passage from the Mishna quoted above, and in stating the >rules governing abortion in his code, Maimonides utilizes the pursuer >justification, using the example of a boat about to sink from its load. In >order to lighten the load, a passenger without baggage steps forward and >proceeds to throw overboard the baggage and >a mule belonging to the others. Maimonides states that that person >is not liable for restitution to the owners, for the baggage and the >mule are pursuers, "seeking" to kill them all." [excerpt] > >(4) conditions under which a non-therapeutic abortion may take place. >http://www.rcrc.org/religion/es/section4.html > >"Conditions for Non-Therapeutic Abortions > >The guidelines for deciding cases of accidental and therapeutic >abortion, then, are reasonably clear-cut, even though there is some >disagreement concerning the proper justification. Such cannot be said once one >turns to the topic of a non-therapeutic abortion. Here the relevant literature >is the Responsa-- >questions written to and responses written by rabbinic authorities >from the 10th century to today. It is also here that a divergence in opinion >begins to emerge. >Such divergence is due initially to differing understandings of >Maimonides' use of the pursuer argument, cited above. Later, in the 19th and >20th centuries, it becomes part and parcel of the diversity within Judaism >itself as liberal streams of Jewish tradition and observance emerge. There are >many relevant >Responsa concerning abortion, several of which follow. In all of them, >the principles are those described above. Note, however, how different >understandings of these principles lead to different conclusions. > >The first case concerns a child who is nursing and cannot survive >without his mother's milk, being allergic to all other forms of nutrition. The >mother, however, having become pregnant once again, sees that her milk has now >ceased flowing. Here, where the issue is saving the life of a third party, as >opposed to the pregnant woman herself, two different authorities mandate the >performance >of an abortion to save the life of the existing child. > >Other cases emerge today as a result of a better understanding of >mental health issues. The question is whether or not suicidal >tendencies in a pregnant woman (tendencies that might, as a result of >the pregnancy itself, impel the woman to take her own life), justify the >performance of an abortion. In this case, even the most stringent of >authorities permit an abortion to save the life of the pregnant woman. > >In past centuries, many other circumstances have come before >rabbinical authorities, as well. One case involved a woman whose >pregnancy would leave her permanently deaf, and while some authorities >rejected this as sufficient grounds for an abortion, no less an authority than >a Chief Rabbi of Israel granted her permission. > >In cases involving adultery, there is also a division of opinion. Some >invoke the principle of "let the fruit of the act bear witness to the deed >lest adultery flourish in the land." Others maintain that we must do >everything possible to save the pregnant woman from great mental pain and >anguish, shame being the greatest mental pain. And in several cases involving >rape, this latter principle seems to dominate, with many authorities granting >permission to take the steps necessary to ensure that a pregnancy will not >result > >Yet, in the light of these cases, might one assume that abortion is >justifiable under any and all circumstances? The answer, according to Jewish >law, is clearly "no." The majority of Jewish legal sources indicate that >abortion is permissible at any stage of the pregnancy if the well-being of the >pregnant woman is jeopardized, while it is clearly not permissible if the >well-being of the future child is the issue. This distinction can best be >illustrated by the following >example. > >Due to modem medical technology a pregnant woman can now be certain, >long before the birth of her child, whether it will be born defective due to >rubella or the taking of Thalidomide during pregnancy, or due to genetic >factors such as Tay-Sachs disease, or due to systematically transmitted >diseases such >as AIDS, etc. >In all of these cases, abortion is not permitted out of fear or concern over >what the child might have to endure during its life. Its lot in life is not to >be determined nor judged by humanity. Its quality of life is one of the >"secrets of God," and is >not open to human judgment. However, some rabbinical authorities maintain that >if the pregnant woman expresses anguish about her own mental, emotional, or >psychological well-being resulting from an impending birth, then her pain may >warrant an abortion. Other rabbinical authorities would not permit an abortion >on such grounds. > >In cases of non-therapeutic abortion, then, the major consideration is >"the pain of the mother." It is out of consideration for the woman involved, >and not the fate or condition of the fetus, which becomes the determining >factor in prohibiting or permitting an abortion. And it is precisely on this >issue that diversity of opinion is now the greatest. Not only is the diversity >seen between the various movements in Judaism today, but even within each >movement itself. In addition to traditional Jewish mores and standards, each >movement has >its own criteria for determining the permissibility of abortion under other >than therapeutic circumstances." >[quoted in full] > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > >Doesn't the above make you want to vomit? How many hours of media >exposure do we get monthly concerning the "Holocaust" against Jews yet these >same Jews favour and condone the slaughter of millions of innocents! > >For pictures of the "handiwork" of what Jews embrace and remember this >was brought out above: "According to Planned Parenthood, Long Island >Jewish Hospital is among a dozen hospitals nationwide that teaches abortion >procedures to their resident doctors. Another organization, the Jewish >Communal Fund, supports Planned Parenthood with financial contributions." > >Challenge: Name any other major world religion who condones and >contributes to planned infanticide! > >Now links to pictures (links active January 31, 2001): >http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/3382/index.htm >http://www.holylamb.com/abortion1.htm >http://www.operationrescue.org/involved/truthtruck.asp >http://www.operationrescue.org/abortion/babypics.asp >From the above link here are the most horrendous and convincing >pictures showing >the atrocity which only one world religion (Judaism) supports: >http://www.operationrescue.org/images/front/baby2.jpg >http://www.operationrescue.org/images/front/baby4.jpg >http://www.operationrescue.org/images/front/baby6.jpg >http://www.operationrescue.org/images/front/baby10.jpg >http://www.operationrescue.org/images/front/baby12.jpg >http://www.operationrescue.org/images/front/baby14.jpg > >Look at those pictures and links and accept the challenge I made at >the top of the page which said: > >"I make this challenge regarding the information below. I want anyone >to show any other "world religion" - i.e. Muslim, Hindu, Shinto, Buddhist, >etc. that takes such of an active role in the promotion of infanticide aka >abortion. We all know that each major organization may have splinter sects >that approve abortion BUT we do not see any "world religion" as a whole >defending and promoting abortion such as Judaism! Read all the documented >links, verify them and then ask yourselves if Jewry as a whole deserves the >"Holocaust" sympathy >they currently receive! I hope the following awakes millions up from >their slumber concerning these hypocrites who like wallowing in their own >misery while actively advocating death for the unborn." > >I use two sig lines in this post. One showing how Jews relate to >communism and the other showing how Jews view non-Jews which would explain why >abortion is so attractive to them. What better way could be had than for >ignorant people to kill their own and thus be one less GOY the Jew has to deal >with? > >Doc Tavish Daily Showing the Hypocrisy of Jewry > >--- >I ask-- why do we never see Jews criticize the communism >which existed before Stalin took control? > >"Because there was very little to criticize." > Susan Cohen - January 24, 2001 > >--- >"We are not allowed to drink any wine or grape juice, or any drink >containing >wine or grape juice, which has been touched by a non-Jew after the >seal of the >bottle has been opened." >Information taken from: Is it Kosher, Rabbi E. Eidlitz and Spice and >Spirit, >The Lubavitch Women's Cookbook Publications (July 12, 2001) >Schulchan Aruch, Johre Deah, 122: "A Jew is forbidden to drink from a >glass of wine which a Gentile has touched, because the touch has made >the >wine unclean." Jewish Talmud > > >______________________________________________________________________ >Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Still Only $9.95 - >http://www.uncensored-news.com > <><><><><><><> The Worlds Uncensored News Source ><><><><><><><><> > >From: "kenmcvay@nazikor.orgy" >Subject: JEW GETS MILLIONS KILLING BABIES!!! >Newsgroups: alt.abortion > >From: Joe Kamenar >Newsgroups: alt.religion.christian.romancatholic, >soc.culture.usa,soc.culture.canada,alt.abortion >Subject: --> Abortion Is Murder >Date: Mon, 22 Nov 1999 16:06:41 -0500 > >If an aborted baby has a heartbeat and functioning >organs (like a brain), then to take its life is murder. >This is not CHOICE. >People who support unlimited abortions and partial >birth abortions should be banned from society. >How can anyone argue otherwise? > > >From: bmccandlss@aol.com (BMcCandlss) >Newsgroups: alt.abortion >Subject: Re: MILLIONS FROM KILLING BABIES!!! >>Date: Sun, 21 November 1999 02:06 PM EST >>On 21 Nov 1999 18:35:34 GMT, bmccandlss@aol.com >>(BMcCandlss) wrote: >>> apifar@ibm.net (Craig Chilton) wrote: >>>> On Sun, 21 Nov 1999 12:17:54 -0500 (EST), >>>> "boris@movil.com" wrote: > >>> Sorry dude, the American Revolution was founded on the >>> principle that all are created with the RIGHT to LIFE, >>> so your "Benediction" is given with foot in mouth. > >Keep dreaming. >Our founding documents were based on principles of >English law, which DID ascribe these rights to the unborn; >it's cited right in Roe v. Wade. > >Likewise, our founding documents state that >"all Men are created equal, that they are >endowed by their creator with the right to life..." > >Note it says CREATED, not BORN. >NO "Men" were EVER born; only little babies are BORN. >Clearly this "creation" refers to something other than birth. > >Likewise, "Men" are not "created," we >don't pop into existence fully formed. > >Simply put, abortion was tolerated only due to primitive >ob/gyn practices of the day, nothing more-- your argument, >being based on them, dies with them. > >And yes, the unborn DO have intrinsic value in terms >of their promise of a future as adults, just like infants >do, which is why they are protected by law, as opposed to >being shipped to the pound to be gassed with the cats >and dogs which, although equally intelligent now, will >NEVER reach adult human intellect. > >Maybe the unborn had no value BEFORE conception, >but by the time they're big enough to be aborted that's >no longer the case; the die is cast, so those cast >must not die. > >***VERY VALID POINTS OPPOSING >***THE MURDERING ABORTIONISTS!!! > >From: "Mark" >Newsgroups: edm.general,can.general >Subject: Re: MORGENTALER MAKES $17 MILLIONS KILLING BABIES!!! >Date: Sat, 20 Nov 1999 10:36:57 -0700 > >Melanie Piper wrote in message <3831CB3F.E0753FBC@telusplanet.net>... >>boris.spetznatz@lubyanka.net wrote: >>> From: bk469@torfree.net (John Lauzon) >>> Subject: MORGENTALER: THE $17 MILLION/YEAR ABORTION MAN > >Man alive just did a show on Morgentaler. I was amazed >that he survived both Auschwitz and Dachau and yet still >has such a callous view of life. His humanist views developed >before WWII by the influence of his humanist father. > >I've been doing some reading on humanism lately. All of the >worst people this century has seen were humanists. Hitler, >Stalin, Mao, and Pol Pot were all humanists. So it isn't >surprising to me that Morgantaller, who signed the Humanist >Manifesto II, would be just as willing to kill as they were. > >On an aside, he was also very willing to cheat on his wife, >and did so constantly. > >>> abortionist Henry Morgentaler, one can >>> ascertain that Morgentaler makes at least $17,083,764 >>> per year > >>Do you want your reader to be jealous of his income? How is >>his income relevant to whether or not his beliefs or activities >>should/should not be supported? > >I've heard coimments from reformed abortionists that they >did it for the incredible amount of money they make. >Morgantaler has personally performed 75,000 abortions, >at the going rate of about $600, that amounts to $45,000,000!! > >>> from his business of killing unborn babies. > >>Your choice of word for what he does. Sure wouldn't be mine. > >I have yet to hear a pregnant woman refer to her unborn baby >as a featus, or a lump of flesh. "Oh, feel my tummy dear, >our lump of flesh is really kicking". > > >>> A province by province breakdown of abortion >>> provision is provided by CARAL at >>> http://www.caral.ca/situation1.html . > >>> The site lists the number of abortions performed per >>> week at the Morgentaler abortuaries. > >>"abortuaries"--again a choice of words designed to inflame >>and influence; a less-biased choice of words would be what >>the facilities are actually termed within the conventional >>medical and health-care "establishment": clinics. > >ROTFL. You call the guy an anti-semite and then you have the >nerve to talk about inflamatory language. A mill is exactly >what they are, get them in and out as fast as they can. >132,000 abortions were performed in 1996, that's one out >of every five pregnancies. > >>Ah, what the hell. I support your right to your opinions, but >>I just couldn't resist. I was taught to "read critically" in >>about Grade Nine and sometimes the "button-pushers" just jump >>out at me. > >Reading critically isn't worth much if you only read propaganda. > >Markw > > >From: bk469@torfree.net (John Lauzon) >Subject: MORGENTALER: THE $17 MILLION/YEAR ABORTION MAN > >MORGENTALER: THE $17 MILLION/YEAR ABORTION MAN > >OTTAWA, Nov 10 (LSN.ca) - From statistics and figures >published on the website of the Canadian Abortion Rights >Action League (CARAL) and the website of notorious >Canadian Jewish abortionist Henry Morgentaler, one can >ascertain that Morgentaler makes at least $17,083,764 >per year from his business of killing unborn babies. > >Health researcher Isabelle Begin who discovered the >information informed LifeSite News that Morgentaler >owns and operates 8 clinics in 7 provinces in Canada. > >Adding the numbers of abortions performed in the >Morgentaler clinics (save for the Edmonton clinic figures, >which are unavailable) and multiplying by the average >cost of these abortions (as compiled from information >on Morgentaler's website) one can conclude that >destroying pre-born humans makes a substantial >contribution to Morgentaler's comfortable livelihood. >The calculation goes like this: >Average yearly revenue: $607.25/abortion x 28,133 >+ (no info for Edmonton) = $17,083,764 >minimum yearly gross revenue. > >A province by province breakdown of abortion >provision is provided by CARAL at http://www.caral.ca/situation1.html > > >Lawyers, politicians, and judges need to be recycled - as fertiliser!! > >"At a time of universal deceit - telling the truth >is a revolutionary act." >(George Orwell) > >David Icke - '...and the truth shall set you free' > >"All truth passes through three stages. >First, it is ridiculed, second it is violently opposed, >and third, it is accepted as self-evident." >(Arthur Schopenhauer) > >"The reason men are silenced is not because they speak falsely, >but because they speak the truth. This is because if men speak >falsehoods, their own words can be used against them; while if >they speak truly, there is nothing which can be used >against them -- except force." -- John Bryant > >"To attempt to silence a man is to pay him homage, for it is an >acknowledgement that his arguments are both impossible to answer >and impossible to ignore." >--John Bryant > > >If you believe in the TRUTH and the RIGHT, >then visit www.freedomsite.org > > >Posted by: >Steven Horn (KCOM) >1836 NW 11th St >Oklahoma City, OK 73106 >(405) 524-0576 > >together with > >Boris Dynin = NAMBLA executive & >Henry who like >late night discussions, even from Stormfront, >Christian Identity, Pamyat, Aryan Nations, etc. >I am together with McVay, regional managers for NAMBLA. >We like young children, so that we can train them our way. > >CALL late nights to discuss: (408) 773-0984 >Email me: boris@movil.com , or even >VISIT me at: >55 Chumasero Drive, Daly City, San Francisco 94132 > > >Ken McVay invites callers,and visitors,to his homouals escorts >office: >VISIT at: >#5 - 1601 - Bowen Road, Nanaimo, B.C., Canada, or my home at: >Apt. 3108 - 995 Bowen Road, Nanaimo, B.C., Canada >or call: 1-250-616-9431 > > >As everyone can see McVay takes it as a compliment when he is >called a "confessed child-molester" and the additional material >should give an indication as to the why. > >"I am weary of seeing the issue of "child " blown out of >proportion (I've been on and around the Net since 1988, and have >yet to come across anything I'd consider "child ." I've >seen photos of naked children, but then I've got some of those in >my family photo album, and fail to see the harm, or any great >moral danger to our society)." - Nizkor Director Ken McVay >http://www.spectacle.org/695/mcvay.html [Many paedophiles >also have family albums with naked children photos in them.] > >Look at Ken McVay's photo and ask yourselves; "Does he not look like >a disheveled unkempt pervert or someone who would molest your child >even if he or she were not naked"? > >http://www.protocol.gov.bc.ca/protocol/prgs/obc/1995/1995_KMcVay.jpg > >For detailed and documented evidence of McVay's questionable >background >and details of convictions, please refer to Dr.David Michael's >detailed >expose on McVay. McVay is a distraught paranoid molseter, and is known >for claiming that anyone who refutes his lies must be a grosvenor!! It >is also suspected that McVay fabricates responses using aliases, just >to justify his existence to his ZHID masters. > >Since I am a female, I also like to receive many calls, to discuss >NAMBLA,lesbianism, JEW atrocities and similar. >Call me, Shiksa Susan Cohen at: 301-681-9193, especially late nights. > >Also,be sure to include me on maillists: >Keith Spencer,5005 Whitemud Road,Edmonton,AB,Canada T6H5L2 >I welcome phone calls, late nights:(780)437-1787 or >send lots of emails to: krs2@ualberta.ca, or phone to >work:(780)492-0473 > > >For the real TRUTH about ZHIDS, visit the world top-rated website for >JEW-WATCH: >http://www.jewwatch.com > >Or, other useful websites include: >ZUNDELSITE - www.zundelsite.org >IHR - www.ihr.org >OSTARA - www.ostara.org >PAMYAT - http://abbc.com/pamyat/index.html >Edgar J.Steele - www.ConspiracyPenPal.com >AL JAZEERA - http://english.aljazeera.net/HomePage >THE HOFFMAN WIRE - Dedicated to Freedom of the Press, > Investigative Reporting and Revisionist History > Subscribe: HoffmanWire-subscribe@topica.com > >Or, visit the website for NATIONAL ALLIANCE : http://www.natvan.com >They have lots of information, as well as books and records. > >They also are involved in exposing Ken McVay for the crook he is, >and passing on information to the appropriate criminal prosecutors. > >As a service to the public, this article is posted worldwide by a >victim of the molester pervert Ken McVay, with the assistance >of a group interested in detailing the depredations of the ZHIDS. >May Ken McVay and his like,rot in gehenna. >