Adultery Testing

May this water that brings a curse enter your body so that your abdomen swells or your womb miscarries.”

As with other sexual related matters, it should not surprise that many think you can be a good Christian without supporting a ban on abortion.  This was seen by the Baptist response to Roe v. Wade.  Apropos of the book I'm reading (see below), Sarah Weddington went to work for President Carter.

Note: I'm reading Jimmy Carter's latest (an autobiography of sorts) and he notes he opposes abortion except in cases of health (strictly applied) and rape, but unlike the usual stereotype (matching reality in various ways) supported various means to reduce the prevalence of abortion and means (including government provided) to care for children once born.  Anyway, I'm about half-way through and it's a pretty good read in a down to earth tone.

Some will appeal to the Bible to find a means to argue that abortion is against God's will.  This requires some doing, since the document does not have much to say directly about such things. A few poetic verses about God knowing us in our womb won't really do the trick unless you are assuming things ahead of time. An early Christian work (Didache) actually does oppose abortion, but the brief reference doesn't answer all the questions either, plus also bans various other things that aren't illegal. Ultimately, ways can be provided to justify both sides, especially if the choice is left to the person and the test is if it is moral or not. Like lying.

One gotcha on the pro-choice side is Numbers 5, which provides a test for (female) adultery that in some cases would result in a "miscarriage." Why would God punish the "baby" in such a case if abortion is wrong?  Another excerpt provides a smaller fine for a blow that causes a miscarriage as compared to unlawful killing a born person.  Relying on "Old" Testament verses is of limited value for Christians at any rate though some of them do selectively cite those books for various rules themselves. Fair is fair.

One translation of the test uses an euphemism -- "thigh to waste away and your abdomen to swell," but what is happening seems apparent.  At least when the pregnancy is a result of adultery (see also, justification in the gospels for divorce), abortion seems to be allowable even beyond rape and the health/life of the woman.  Present day abortion opponents who aren't strict about every verse of the Bible being correct need not be stuck by it, but it is something of a unpleasant provision for strict anti-lifers.

The ordeal however is fairly interesting on its own terms. It is a means to peacefully, in an orderly fashion, address the problem of men who suspect their wives committed adultery but have no way of proving it.  Likewise, it provides a means to show the innocence of the women.  In practice, there probably also is the chance for the dispute to be handled "out of court" so to speak.  The culture clearly favored men here but even there they weren't given carte blanche.  False witness was not allowed. And, adultery by men -- even if not lethal -- could still be a wrong against the husband or family of the woman involved. No free pass. Finally, the painful (I'd think) process plus being barren is a horrible punishment, but it isn't death. 

Not saying it was an ideal solution, especially since do not actually believe the special potion was foolproof, nor that adultery warrants such a physical penalty. I do understand the mindset of the times, including the threat adultery has to the orderly progress of a small tribal community in particular.  This includes concern for the legitimacy of children. It does take two to tango here and the man is likely to if anything have the upper hand. Making him sterile or something seems fair too.