What's your tradition, guys?
I'm not sure I'd trust any tradition that said, "Yes" to murdering two year olds because somebody said they should, especially if that somebody said they were God.
The whole notion of Abortion is difficult enough as is. Now the question is stretching to children whom pretty much everybody understands are living, and where there is no debate about the issue at all.
I'm not happy with Abraham for saying, "Yes" to God's request to kill Isaac. I wouldn't have. At least I don't think I would have. I guess if God every talks to me that directly, I'd have to give you a more direct answer then.
I've refused to open doors for people whom I actually believed would kill me for refusing to do so, but then I suppose there's nothing like a nimbus of divine fire to tip the scales one way or another.
Haven't seen one yet, though.
Jonah has always made much more sense to me for daring to ask God if he was, in effect, out of his cotton-picking mind when God asked him to go preach to a tough, out of town crowd. "I don't think so," he said, roughly speaking. "You may scare me, but I don't know that's a good enough reason to do things that make no sense to me."
While you find lots of Anything-you-say-Sir-ing in the Hebrew Bible, you also have a healthy amount of Yeah, sure, right-ing to balance it off. The theme continues into the modern day as well. If you consent to hurt other people other than to save the life of another or for some overriding other concern (the ransom of captives is sometimes considered one of these, but I'm frankly not all that up on the details, and I couldn't say for sure) you're supposed to be the equivalent of a religious idiot in the Jewish Tradition, somebody who stands up for form over substance. A dork.
My understanding of what Jesus preached is that he came out of this same tradition, somewhat like Hillel and Akiva. That's my current understanding.
Somebody says that they're God and that you should kill Children, basically your duty (I believe) in the Jewish tradition is to suggest that the entity claiming to be God go climb a rope. As man is bound by the covenant, God has made promises to man as well. It is as a substitute for the sacrifice of Abraham that God made the covenant with the Jews; and, within the Christian tradition, with man in general as well. Some would say that the agreement was only extended to those who accepted Jesus as a personal savior. I would say that such a statement discredits the Christian notion of God and the Christian notion of Christ in an appallingly cynical fashion, and assumes that the compassion of God is as limited as that of Man. I find this assumption highly unlikely. This seems a highly limited sort of God, one that hasn't really gone beyond His Learner's Permit yet, and not at all like the God of The First Commandment, or the God of Universal Love and Compassion of the Christian bible.
But then I suspect that other people have very different and probably more interesting views of the issue than I do. And I know that some folks certainly lead lives that I admire more than I do my own. What can I say? What do I know?