Drug use during pregnancy: Abuse of Drugs During Pregnancy

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
If you have not already done so, it’s a good idea to read the introduction to this discussion first.

The anonymous student who started this thread asked to not have her words reprinted here. She was the only person who chose to support her arguments using quotes from the Bible, specifically 1 Corinthians 10:23 and Exodus 21:22-25.

I replied on May 8, 2008 2:07 AM:

Hi. It was interesting to find someone using Biblical passages to justify a position. This is not unusual, of course, since people have done that throughout history. It is a little surprising to see it in a class discussion, though.

I am a Christian, and I absolutely do not mean any disrespect to you or your own religious views by entering into a discussion with you on this topic. I both agree with and disagree with some of the conclusions you drew from the particular passages you quoted.

Exodus 21 does not fit in very nicely with our modern sensibilities concerning matters of law and justice. For example, Exodus 21:5-6 states that if a servant was given a wife by his master, and children, when his seven-year period of servitude was over, he could either leave his wife and family and go free himself, or, if he loved them so much that he’d rather stay in lifelong servitude with them, that could be arranged, too. Of course, he would need to have his ear bored through to the doorpost as a sign of his decision to remain and serve his master until the fellow eventually dies. (BBE) (Henry)

Ignoring the fact that lifelong compulsory servitude (i.e., slavery) was acceptable at the time, I still don’t see how this is applicable in today’s society. Most Americans would agree that slavery is wrong (excuse me, compulsory lifelong servitude indicated by driving a spike through the ear). Throughout the Old Testament, slavery and servitude are accepted norms for that highly misogynistic society. Obviously those attitudes persisted well into the history of our own country. We had a civil war over that very matter. Both the North and the South quoted the Bible to support extremely different views on the topic. In the end, our nation decided that certain parts of the Bible were wrong, and it was time for slavery to end.

Now let’s look at the whole of the passage you quoted in context:

Exo. 21:22: If men, while fighting, do damage to a woman with child, causing the loss of the child, but no other evil comes to her, the man will have to make payment up to the amount fixed by her husband, in agreement with the decision of the judges.

Exo. 21:23: But if damage comes to her, let life be given in payment for life,

Exo. 21:24: Eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot,

Exo. 21:25: Burning for burning, wound for wound, blow for blow.

Bible in Basic English

It probably surprises many that the old “eye for an eye” saying relates to a man harming a pregnant woman during a fight. (It did me.) That line has been used for ages as the solution to any number of wrongs in this world. I’m sorry, but it just doesn’t always make sense to follow that advice. “You raped my daughter, so I’m going to rape yours.” “We bombed Japan, so now they should come and bomb us.” “We invaded Iraq to remove a terrorist leader, so now Russia should come to the US and remove a terrorist leader.” “The mother poisoned her unborn child with nasty drugs, so we should poison her to make up for it.” “An eye for an eye.” Fortunately, the US justice system has progressed a little beyond that mind set. Once again, a literal translation of this part of the Bible encourages us to go beyond the standards we hold dear in our modern society. While we do expect there to be consequences for wrongful acts, “eye for an eye” is often too extreme. Many times the actual punishment turns out to be something much different, and hopefully much more civilized, than the original action.

Your point about how a woman entrusted with nurturing and protecting an unborn child yet willfully endangers or harms that child is a good one. Obviously that is ethically, morally, and (as clearly shown above) religiously a very serious matter and a very bad thing for a mother to do.

Moving on to your New Testament verse, you omitted two related verse that are good, too:

1 Cor. 10:15: What I am saying is for wise men, do you be the judges of it.

: : :

1 Cor. 10:23: We are free to do all things, but there are things which it is not wise to do. We are free to do all things, but not all things are for the common good.

1 Cor. 10:24: Let a man give attention not only to what is good for himself, but equally to his neighbour’s good.

Bible in Basic English

St. Paul, in verse 10, tells the Christians in Corinth that the following advice is stuff that a wise person should follow. The opposite of that should be obvious: Only a fool would ignore this good advice.

When a person acts in a manner that only benefits him or herself, ignoring the common good, that person is acting the part of a fool. The person is not (usually) acting with criminal intent, but rather foolish self-interest. That is not good for society. In the case of a baby born with an addiction, it costs insurance or the government a