OK guys, I've got another busy evening of it, so I'm going to try to give each of you a good response here and then I'll have to (mostly) bail. Sorry. Hope you understand.
@dexter,
That's an interesting point, but there are also issues regarding whether she was known to be pregnant, etc. This was extensively discussed in the earlier thread I mentioned and it took me hours to look up a bunch of sources then, so I fear I am going to bail on that question and refer you to that thread if you want to find more. Lame I know. Sorry.
Now, as regards your earlier post. All very interesting. I do agree that intuitions (obviously) break down in resolution on such questions as this, which is not to say morality itself does, or that it can't be useful to try to prod the intuitions in particular directions with thought experiments, etc. That, of course, may seem more worthwhile to me than to you, given that I see the intuitions, at least at their best, as reflecting a moral reality that you don't believe in. In particular, I do oppose abortion across the board, but I don't necessarily think this position is implied _by our moral intuitions_, which is exactly why this topic so commonly becomes a cross-worldview one.
I will note -- though I'm sure you're already aware -- that your evolution-based account of moral intuition doesn't actually give any force to why we should follow it now, at least without the added hypothesis that we should care about the furtherance of the species. Of course, as you say, your real basis for morality comes down to the idea that (perhaps because of what evolution has done) people will find it more rewarding to live that way. I'm not sure where that leaves one on those rare occasions where one wouldn't find it more rewarding, and has no account of morality that makes it seem particularly normatively compelling, but that may be for another day.
Anyway, all in all a very interesting post. Thank you.
@abge,
I don't doubt your intelligence, and I hope I didn't imply otherwise. Here is the point. Suppose that God came and spoke to you and said, "Abge, two things. First, the Higgs Boson exists. Second, go break Dan Jones's window down the road. I'm really mad at him." And you wrote down these things, and they were treasured into the future.
It's safe to say that people in the future would view the part about the Higgs Boson existing as a timeless truth that didn't change; but they wouldn't be able to come to any sweeping conclusions like they should go break people's windows. That part was a specific command to you.
So it is here. God had a specific relationship with his OT people. Some of His interactions with them involve specific things they were supposed to do then, or specific ways they were supposed to live, which don't translate well. Others were revelations of timeless truths which remain true. I'm suggesting that if a fetus was a person then, a fetus is still a person; but if they were supposed to go take out Babylon, that doesn't mean we're supposed to go bomb Iran. We have a completely new set of _commands_, but not a new set of truths about the structure of the world.
Make sense?
Now, onto Psalm 51. First I'll say that I don't think it's actually necessary to go to the Hebrew (though see below); because again, let's assume your translation is right. Let's see what it says then. This is the ESV:
"1 Have mercy on me,[a] O God,
according to your steadfast love;
according to your abundant mercy
blot out my transgressions.
2 Wash me thoroughly from my iniquity,
and cleanse me from my sin!
3 For I know my transgressions,
and my sin is ever before me.
4 Against you, you only, have I sinned
and done what is evil in your sight,
so that you may be justified in your words
and blameless in your judgment.
5 Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity,
and in sin did my mother conceive me.
6 Behold, you delight in truth in the inward being,
and you teach me wisdom in the secret heart.
7 Purge me with hyssop, and I shall be clean;
wash me, and I shall be whiter than snow.
8 Let me hear joy and gladness;
let the bones that you have broken rejoice.
9 Hide your face from my sins,
and blot out all my iniquities.
10 Create in me a clean heart, O God,
and renew a right[b] spirit within me.
11 Cast me not away from your presence,
and take not your Holy Spirit from me.
12 Restore to me the joy of your salvation,
and uphold me with a willing spirit. "
What is this Psalm about? It is about the Psalmist's own sinfulness -- not that of his mother. So in context, even in the least favorable translation of that particular verse, it is clear that it refers to HIS sinfulness at conception. (Remember, you're the stickler for context!).
That said, I tried to take seriously your request for a Hebrew analysis. I only halfway got you one. That is, I found a book quoted in a paper, but the book is not mostly available online, and it's also 360 pages, so even if it were, you'd be on your own. The book is "Psalm 51 in the Light of Ancient Near Eastern Patternism," here:
http://books.google.com/books/about/Psalm_fifty_one.html?id=4sYUAAAAIAAJ
The quote is,
"In Psalm li. 7 [English v. 5] the psalmist is relating his sinfulness to the very inception of life; he traces his development beyond his birth ... to the genesis of his being in his mother's womb -- even to the very hour of conception."
The quote is taken from here (a couple weak arguments in this paper, most not bad though):
http://www.etsjets.org/files/JETS-PDFs/19/19-1/19-1-pp003-014_JETS.pdf
This article deals slightly with the Hebrew interpretation of the Psalm directly, as well (pp. 12-13).
Sorry I can't give you more detail right now! I hope this is a beginning.
@dexter, while I was finding him that, I found this article on Exodus 21. I only skimmed it, and I'm pretty sure I found better last time, but since you're interested in that passage, I'll present it:
http://faculty.gordon.edu/hu/bi/Ted_Hildebrandt/OTeSources/02-Exodus/Text/Articles/Grisanti-Abortion-TMSJ.pdf
I pass it on mostly without comment, as I haven't read it closely enough to endorse or refute it.
Whew. Well, I'm not sure if I'll have time later for another round, but hopefully! I hope this addressed some of the issues you were interested in.
)
Ranking should take into account etiquette, if possible
)
)
)
)