O.T laws

[farmermike]

Several years ago I was listening to an outspoken ex pastor talking about some laws in the O.T. one of which was in the event of a deformed child being born ,the child was to be killed along with I believe the father.I have never run across this law.a) I'm not looking hard enough.b) the fellow didn't know what he was talking about.Any help?

 

[crimresearch]

That sounds like the Roman law known as the 12 tables:

http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/ancient/12tables.html

 

[farmermike]

Thanks for the link crimresearch.I guess b) would be the answer to my question.Killing a severely deformed baby,though inhumane by our standards,would take out a burden on their society.Killing one of the parents OTOH would seem counterproductive,but given their superstitious nature who knows what conclusions would have been drawn from gods curse on the poor parents.

 

[I'll_buy_that]

"A beam that is built into a house or a vineyard trellis one may not take from its place."

Don't move that or the ceiling will cave in... That's a law?

 

[Beerina]

Thanks for the link crimresearch.I guess b) would be the answer to my question.Killing a severely deformed baby,though inhumane by our standards,would take out a burden on their society.Killing one of the parents OTOH would seem counterproductive

Actually, it makes sense from a genetic defect point of view. However, modern science tells us we should barbarically kill the mother as well as just the father and child. Other siblings should be wiped out, just in case the defects are recessive or only occasionally manifest. Furthermore, any paternal ancestors also living should be killed, as should, in rare cases there are any, any maternal ancestors still capable of reproduction.

Of course, a theological quandry pops up at this point. Given God has caused women in their 70's to bear children on several occasions, should infertile, post-menepausal women (gramma, great-gramma, etc.) be killed too, just in case? Or may we assume that any such pregnancies are the gift of God, and are thus something to be desired, even if the child should turn out defective?

 

[teddygrahams]

Actually, it makes sense from a genetic defect point of view. However, modern science tells us we should barbarically kill the mother as well as just the father and child. Other siblings should be wiped out, just in case the defects are recessive or only occasionally manifest. Furthermore, any paternal ancestors also living should be killed, as should, in rare cases there are any, any maternal ancestors still capable of reproduction.

Of course, a theological quandry pops up at this point. Given God has caused women in their 70's to bear children on several occasions, should infertile, post-menepausal women (gramma, great-gramma, etc.) be killed too, just in case? Or may we assume that any such pregnancies are the gift of God, and are thus something to be desired, even if the child should turn out defective?

What are you, crazy ? Just sterilize them...http://www.eugenicsarchive.org/html/eugenics/essay8text.html

 

[farmermike]

What are you, crazy ? Just sterilize them...http://www.eugenicsarchive.org/html/eugenics/essay8text.html

Took the words right out of my mouth.It would certainly cause a little less stress in a society.

 

[Darat]

Thanks for the link crimresearch.I guess b) would be the answer to my question.Killing a severely deformed baby,though inhumane by our standards,would take out a burden on their society.Killing one of the parents OTOH would seem counterproductive,but given their superstitious nature who knows what conclusions would have been drawn from gods curse on the poor parents.

Perhaps it was just a practically motivated law? After all a handicapped person 2000 years ago would have been an immense strain on a family if they couldn’t ever support themselves or contribute to the family’s survival. Infanticide was an accepted practice for many historic societies e.g. the Romans and Greeks.