There is a famous Gemara (Avoda Zara 2b) and Midrash in Eicha and Sifri (beginning of Vezos Habracha) that details the events that preceded Hashem giving the Torah to Bnei Yisrael. We are told that Hashem went to the other nations individually and inquired if they would want to accept the Torah. They each responded with the same question: what is in this Torah? And Hashem told each nation one law that He knew they would find challenging. Upon hearing that such a law existed in the Torah the nation refused to accept the Torah.
When Hashem asked Eisav if he would accept the Torah, he inquired what it would entail. Hashem responded that it says that one may not murder. Eisav responded that he could not accept such a body of laws.
Hashem then asked Yishmael if they had interest in accepting the Torah. When Hashem told them that one of its laws prohibited stealing, they declined the offer. The Midrash concludes that when Hashem offered the Torah to Ammon and Moav, He informed them that adultery was prohibited, which prompted them to refuse acceptance of the Torah.
We all are familiar with that encounter brought in the Midrash. We learned it in nursery and likely every year thereafter. However, there are several glaring questions on this Midrash. How could it be that nations did not want to accept upon itself a body of laws that would outlaw murder, theft and adultery? Aren’t these basic common-sense laws that every civilization abides by? Why would anyone not accept the rule of law that banned such evil practices?
There have been many interpretations offered to explain this complexity over the years. However, in recent days and weeks we have witnessed states and even a federal government pass laws permitting murder and fail to outlaw murder.
In recent weeks New York State passed a law that would allow a woman to “choose” to murder her unborn child even as it prepares to exit the birth canal. If a doctor signs off on it, a woman can “choose” to put an end to the life of a human being that would otherwise have lived a whole life.
But that was not enough for the progressive left. That is not enough progress. Each one must outdo the next in introducing an even more radical approach or law. So, the embattled governor of Virginia brazenly proclaimed that even if the child is born after the mother had “chosen” not to “keep” it, doctors would be permitted to allow it to die and not treat that live human being. The baby has already been born. It is breathing by itself and the Virginia law is that a doctor is not obligated to ensure that it stays alive. He can literally watch it die!
This past Monday the Senate failed to pass a bill that would have protected infants born alive after botched abortion procedures. The bill, sponsored by Senator Ben Sasse (R-NE), failed to pass the Senate with a vote of 53-44, seven votes shy of the required 60.
The Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act would have mandated that doctors attempt to save born-alive infants instead of allowing them to die. The bill would have amended the criminal code to prohibit a health care practitioner from failing to exercise the proper degree of care in the case of a child who survives an abortion or attempted abortion.
Only three Democrats voted for the bill: Senators Bob Casey Jr. (D-PA), Joe Manchin (D-WV), and Doug Jones (D-AL). All seven of the Democratic senators currently running for the 2020 presidential nomination voted against the bill: Cory Booker, Sherrod Brown, Kirsten Gillibrand, Kamala Harris, Amy Klobuchar, Elizabeth Warren, and Bernie Sanders. So, in case anyone was unclear where any of the Democratic hopefuls for 2020 stood on the matter of murder, you have your answer: a woman can choose to murder her already born child.
Given these chilling new tragic realities that we currently live in, is the Midrash really that hard to understand? Is it so far fetched to believe that a nation would not outlaw murder? It should be, but we have just witnessed arguably the most civil nation ever to have existed fail to outlaw murder in pursuit of showing how progressive it can be.