JakeStraw seems to have retained his Jewish/Talmudic sense of morality although he professes to be a convert to Christianity.
The Jewish Babylonian Talmud actually encourages and condones sex with children. The Talmud is the foundational doctrinal manual for modern Judaism. I would be glad to provide the citations from the Talmud for anyone who doubts this fact.
Who else would find abuse of 4 year old children a joking matter?
You can check these talmudic passages for yourself:
come-and-hear.com
Quote from the Talmud:
AND THERE IS WITH REGARD TO THEM NO CHARGE OF NONVIRGINITY. A WOMAN PROSELYTE, A WOMAN CAPTIVE AND A WOMAN SLAVE, WHO HAVE BEEN REDEEMED, CONVERTED, OR FREED [WHEN THEY WERE] MORE THAN THREE YEARS AND ONE DAY OLD — THEIR KETHUBAH IS A MANEH, AND THERE IS WITH REGARD TO THEM NO CHARGE OF NON-VIRGINITY.
GEMARA. Rab Judah said that Rab said: A small boy who
Dilling Exhibit 136
Begins
has intercourse with a grown-up woman makes her [as though she were] injured by a piece of wood.1 When I said it before Samuel he said: 'Injured by a piece of wood' does not apply to2 flesh. Some teach this teaching by itself:3 [As to] a small boy who has intercourse with a grown-up woman. Rab said, he makes her [as though she were] injured by a piece of wood; whereas Samuel said: 'Injured by a piece of wood' does not apply to flesh. R. Oshaia objected: WHEN A GROWN-UP MAN HAS HAD INTERCOURSE WITH A LITTLE GIRL, OR WHEN A SMALL BOY HAS INTERCOURSE WITH A GROWN-UP WOMAN, OR WHEN A GIRL WAS ACCIDENTALLY INJURED BY A PIECE OF WOOD — [IN ALL THESE CASES] THEIR KETHUBAH IS TWO HUNDRED [ZUZ]; SO ACCORDING TO R. MEIR. BUT THE SAGES SAY: A GIRL WHO WAS INJURED ACCIDENTALLY BY A PIECE OF WOOD — HER KETHUBAH IS A MANEH!4 Raba said, It means5 this: When a grown-up man has intercourse with a little girl it is nothing, for when the girl is less than this,6 it is as if one puts the finger into the eye;7 but when a small boy has intercourse with a grown-up woman he makes her as 'a girl who is injured by a piece of wood,' and [with regard to the case of] 'a girl injured by a piece of wood,' itself, there is the difference of opinion between R. Meir and the Sages.
Rami b. Hama said: The difference of opinion8 is [only] when he9 knew her,10 for R. Meir compares her11 to a mature girl,12 and
Dilling Exhibit 137
Begins
the Sages compare her to a woman who had intercourse with a man.13 But if he did not know her,14 all agree15 that she has nothing.16 And why does R. Meir compare her to a mature girl? Let him compare her to a woman who had intercourse with a man! — [In the case of] a woman who had intercourse with a man, a deed had been done to her by a man;17 but in her case18 — no deed has been done to her by a man. — And why do the Rabbis compare19 her to a woman who had intercourse with a man? Let them compare her to a mature girl! [In the case of] a mature girl no deed whatsoever has been done to her,20 but in her |
