Your voice and intonation crack me up!! 🤣 I LOVE IT! You’re so peppy!! God has placed you here to show many that Catholics are NOT boring and mundane. Love you sister!!! Keep it going!! ✊🏽🙌🏽✝️
I have no doubt she will ❤Lizzie and Trevor are both incredibly committed to their faith and will make sure their daughter has a wonderful safe and beautiful life
Wow, 6 years... it feels like it was last year I was watching your conversion journey... time goes by sooo fast! God bless you! We also have to be careful not to use natural fertility tracking with so called "contraceptive mentality".
Thank you for making this video Lizzie. I would love if you could make a video about lgbtq people in the Church. I'm queer and you're one of the only Catholic RUclipsrs i trust to talk about these issues. You are so compassionate and loving. God bless you and your family ❤️
Interesting arguments, thank you for some food for thoughts ❤ Fingers crossed the rest of your pregnancy feels less intense. Your baby girl will have a great mom
I grew up Catholic and I never was taught to be abstinent now I have 2 kids with no father. As an adult I know not to have sex before marriage so now I’m abstinent but I wish I was a long time ago. I was poorly chatecised.
Another thing related is that men and women feel closer to each other when they have sex, so they may also marry someone they otherwise wouldn't. Saving sex before marriage is the best case for all relationships
Very very true! Sex is the ultimate way two people can be close physically. It’s also an incredibly intense form of emotional bonding. When a man and woman are intimate they feel love they this almost unbreakable connection to the other person. Sex can be a key to maintaining a healthy marriage and of course having children as well. To me like you said it makes all the sense in the world to save such a special moment for the person you’re going to spend your life with. If you have sex with any and everyone you meet it becomes almost this animalistic carnal act totally devoid of all beauty and honor. There is no greater way two people can physically express love for each other so why waste such a major thing on some person at a party you like? It’s like the person who lives in Anaheim and goes to Disney every month will not be as emotionally affected by their trips as someone from a far away place who travels there once or twice in their life. Sex can be a wonderful thing if it’s treated in the right way not made into some merely physical act of lust.
One of the rationale, it might be the only reason, for priests aren't allowed to marry is that married men have a responsibility to his Earthly father and a married priest would have to split his attention.
lizzie did you ever think about making something like a patreon and having bible study as a perk? I know you are busy with the baby and everything but I would love to see it! :)
I think she has made vides covering that in the past. But it's hard tk address as Protestantism is so varied. Is there a particular denomination you're interested in a comparison with ?
Hey Liz i just read an article on Huff Post by Rachel Stowe. She described Church of Christ as a cult. What's your take on that since you grew up in it?
I, also a Catholic convert, appreciate the lack of pressure to get married. My protestant family got excited to meet my boyfriend after telling them for a long time I was content single. That relationship did not work out, and I'm okay with that!
All religions, especially Catholicism are lying cults and I can prove as much. Since Passover and Easter are drawing near, I will expose the false preachers and religions who wickedly promote and believe that Jesus was crucified on a Friday and if you are believing this lie then you also know very little about God and scripture. Because many lack knowledge of scripture they cannot comprehend the important and explicit clues that John related in his gospel in regard to the Crucifixion and the Sabbath. This ignorance of truth certainly applies to the pagan cult known as Catholicism since they are one of the many false religions that claim that Jesus was crucified on a Friday and this is why many false Christians choose to celebrate what is known today as Good Friday. Realize that the first day of Passover was considered a Sabbath day to the children of Israel since it was a day of holy convocation and no manner of work was to be done, so it was basically no different than the weekly Sabbath that God commanded the children of Israel to observe every Friday evening. You also need to understand that in a particular year when the Passover Sabbath would begin on a Thursday evening, this was then considered a high day Sabbath or a special Sabbath to the children of Israel since they would now have to recognize two Sabbath days in a row. “‘Six days shall work be done, but the seventh day is a Sabbath of solemn rest, a holy convocation. You shall do no work on it; it is the Sabbath of the Lord in all your dwellings.” Leviticus 23:3 NKJV Now to prove how the special feasts of God were to be treated no differently then the regular Sabbath and that no work was to be done, all we need to do is read what was related in Leviticus 23. Take notice that in the Leviticus 23:23-25 scriptures below, it clearly relates that a holy convocation also included a sabbath rest. ”Then the Lord spoke to Moses, saying, “Speak to the children of Israel, saying: ‘In the seventh month, on the first day of the month, you shall have a SABBATH-REST, a memorial of blowing of trumpets, a holy convocation. You shall do no customary work on it; and you shall offer an offering made by fire to the Lord.’ ” Leviticus 23:23-25 NKJV “‘These are the feasts of the Lord, holy convocations which you shall proclaim at their appointed times. On the fourteenth day of the first month at twilight is the Lord’s Passover. And on the fifteenth day of the same month is the Feast of Unleavened Bread to the Lord; seven days you must eat unleavened bread. On the first day you shall have a holy convocation; you shall do no customary work on it. But you shall offer an offering made by fire to the Lord for seven days. The seventh day shall be a holy convocation; you shall do no customary work on it.’ ” Leviticus 23:4-8 NKJV Now God commanded the Israelites to keep His Passover on the fourteenth day of the first month at twilight and the first month of the year on God’s religious calendar is called Nisan or Abib and it begins in the spring and not in the winter as our current new year does. So because scripture relates that Jesus celebrated Passover at His Last Supper with His disciples many are falsely assuming that Jesus was crucified on Nisan 15 and not on Nisan 14 and that His Last Supper had to occur on a Thursday night since He was crucified on the day of Preparation. Now before I go on, I need you to understand that God commanded the Israelites to always celebrate His Passover but there was actually a period when the children of Israel stopped keeping God’s Passover. (See 2 Kings 23:21-23.) Since the tribes of Israel had stopped keeping the Passover you can read where King Hezekiah and Josiah reinstated the Passover celebration in 2 Chronicles 30 and 35. They now chose to have the people celebrate God’s Passover at the second temple instead of at their homes since they wanted to make sure that the Israelites would stay loyal to God and His commands. So even though they reinstated the Passover celebration they actually were ignoring God’s command since they now started a tradition where many would celebrate God’s Passover at their homes on the beginning of Nisan 14 and then at the second temple in Jerusalem at the end of Nisan 14. Now because the gospels are relating that Jesus was buried on Preparation day, many false preachers and religions are ignorantly assuming that this meant that the crucifixion had to occur on a Friday, since this is the day that the Jewish people would normally begin their preparation for the weekly Sabbath that began every Friday evening. Further below I will definitely prove where their ignorance of scripture has led false preachers and religions astray but first I want you to understand that the Jewish calendar months are completely different then the Gregorian calendar that we currently use, and that the Jewish day actually ends once it becomes dark and not at midnight as our world is accustomed to. So in order to start proving why the crucifixion did not occur on a Friday I will begin by revealing how the gospel of John related some very important information that many deceived believers are not comprehending. First, take notice where John related in 13:1-3 that Jesus celebrated His Last Supper before the Feast of Passover and then understand that John was referencing the Passover celebration that would occur at the temple at twilight on Nisan 14. “NOW BEFORE THE FEAST OF PASSOVER, when Jesus knew that His hour had come that He should depart from this world to the Father, having loved His own who were in the world, He loved them to the end. And supper being ended, the devil having already put it into the heart of Judas Iscariot, Simon’s son, to betray Him, Jesus, knowing that the Father had given all things into His hands, and that He had come from God and was going to God,” John 13:1-3 NKJV Next, I will reveal a couple of scripture verses where John related that when Jesus was crucified it occurred during a year where the Passover Sabbath was going to occur the day before the weekly Sabbath. This would mean that you would have two Sabbath days occurring back to back and since you now had a special Sabbath occurring on Thursday evening this then meant that no work could be done on either Friday or Saturday. So since the Jewish people could do no work once their Friday began (our Thursday at nightfall), this then meant that the day of Preparation would now fall on a Thursday instead of its normal Friday. Once again, take note that when you had a Feast Day Sabbath occurring the day before the weekly Sabbath this was then called a special Sabbath or a HIGH DAY Sabbath by the Jewish people. ”Therefore, because it was the Preparation Day, that the bodies should not remain on the cross on the Sabbath (FOR THAT SABBATH WAS A HIGH DAY), the Jews asked Pilate that their legs might be broken, and that they might be taken away.” John 19:31 NKJV ”Then they led Jesus from Caiaphas to the Praetorium, and it was early morning. But they themselves did not go into the Praetorium, lest they should be defiled, but that they might eat the Passover.” John 18:28 NKJV So notice how John 19:31 related that the Sabbath that was going to occur later that evening was a HIGH DAY SABBATH. This meant that it had to be the Passover Sabbath and not the weekly Sabbath as many false preachers and religions are wrongly teaching. This is also why John 18:28 is relating how the Pharisees did not want to defile themselves on the day that Jesus was crucified since they were desiring to partake in the Passover meal that would occur at the end of that day at the temple. So since John clearly related in scripture that Jesus was crucified on the day of Preparation and he stated that this was the day before a HIGH DAY SABBATH Sabbath then the crucifixion definitely had to occur on a Thursday, otherwise God and scripture would be lying to us. Lastly, in order to fulfill what Jesus related in the Matthew 12 scripture where He stated that He would spend three days and three nights in the heart of the earth here is a time recap of the Last Supper, the Crucifixion and His Resurrection and a complete breakdown of the three days and the three nights that Jesus spent in the heart of the earth. On Wednesday night as Nisan 14 begins this is when Jesus had His Last Supper with His Disciples. Then on Thursday morning which was still Nisan 14 Jesus is crucified at 9 in the morning and He dies on the cross at 3 in the afternoon. Jesus is then buried just before sundown on Thursday evening before the Passover Sabbath celebration begins. Jesus then of course rises from the grave early Sunday morning which is now Nisan 17. Thursday Night #1 - Passover Sabbath Begins Friday Day #1 - Passover Sabbath Ends At Sundown Friday Night #2 - Weekly Sabbath Begins Saturday Day #2 - Weekly Sabbath Ends At Sundown Saturday Night #3 Sunday Day #3 - Jesus Is Resurrected “For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the great fish, so will the Son of Man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.” Matthew 12:40 NKJV So Jesus died on the cross on Thursday Nisan 14 at 3 in the afternoon which was around the time that they began slaughtering the lambs that were needed to celebrate the Passover at the temple and this is why Jesus was known as the Lamb of God who was sacrificed for our sins.
I have a question that I think you might be able to answer If I decide to stay single as a Catholic would I still be able to foster or adopt a child or a baby
Yes you can!! Adoption is not forbidden by the Church but please make sure that you can provide a stable and loving home environment for your future kids.
What does the Catholic church say about birth control pills? Is it wrong using it even when married?! Many women are using it for medical reasons and need it to survive because they can’t function without it if they suffer from severe endomtriosis etc. I just know the Catholic church used to be against all birth control.
I've heard that birth control pills are allowed to treat a medical condition, but not allowed to be used only to prevent a pregnancy. If you have a medical condition that you need to treat with birth control pill, then pregnancy prevention would be just a side effect of your medical treatment.
I didn’t know we could live single without being a nun and that’s still positive. I have kids but I stay single and don’t date cause I don’t remember how lol. 😂
Yeah you can choose to get married or not but if you are in poverty or have an unsecure financial future then you wont be able to feel good about having sex. Also if you are gay even if you dont get married or have a same sex partner you go to hell for even thinking romantically about the same sex during masturbation. Its pretty much bondage if you dont fit in a certain box
There''s a whole heap of problems with this. Long post incoming, sorry... The "theology" of not getting married is not specific to Catholicism, and in practice means pretty much nothing, both historically and in current day. Plus, asserting that women don't have to get married blatantly ignores common practices for most of history in the Christian/Catholic world. And it ignores the patriarchal structure of the Church itself. Premarital abstinence is such a strange thing to argue as supporting fewer abortions. Statistically we know that abstinence teaching leads to _more_ unsafe sex practices and _more_ pregnancies, not less. Taking the Catholic teaching as a whole in this context seems like the worst case scenario for causing unplanned pregnancies, and for female bodily autonomy. And the issue with your birth control effectiveness argument is the same, it just straight out belies the statistics when you look at overall outcomes. You quote statistics about divorce rates for premarital sex, and assume it's causal. That's a huge assumption. (I'll leave aside the assumption of divorce as a negative indicator, which is a problem in itself.) In the US, the low divorce rates of women who have no/minimal sexual experience before marriage is correlated with them attending church frequently. The cause of this could be multiple things. It could mean women who attend church regularly have personality traits that make them adverse to seeking a divorce. Or simply that churches influence women from seeking divorces, or the other way around... churches influence women to not have premarital sex. Or all of these. Or other factors also. It almost certainly isn't just a straight cause/effect of lack of premarital sex. I'd also note that these kind of correlations are actually becoming statistically _weaker_ over time as the US becomes less Christian, which likely indicates a delayed cultural effect, not a causal effect. Your "marriage between man and woman" reference is an interesting one. The problem for you is statistics show overall _better_ outcomes for children who are grouped in a, e.g. a male-male parent relationship, not male-female. So the statement just isn't true at all. And this is without going into other detrimental effects of family size (# of kids) on educational outcomes, etc. which is the direct opposite of what your statement implies. Natural family planning... who cares? Same outcome. Just seems like another way to dissuade/restrict what women can do, over using common birth control mechanisms that we know work very well. Your argument here just completely ignores the overwhelmingly positive impact of these birth control methods. One thing I find odd about your video is you assume much of this only applies outside of marriage. Why? Married couples can have unplanned pregnancies also, no matter what mechanism they use to avoid pregnancies, and then need to manage how they deal with that. Also, what about male birth control methods, why ignore that? And probably the main issue here... you don't address the big elephant in the room, which is why does Catholicism want to assert ideas and rules onto non-Catholics, especially on abortion. Ergo, the Church clearly does want to assert control over women's bodily autonomy, even on non-Catholics. This seems such a fundamentally non-Christian ethos, and impossible to ignore. You're walking around the main event here. It's only in contemporary times where Catholicism has been so strong on topics like abortion (the historicity of this is far from the "what... but we've always supported this position!?!" they want you to believe). So it's hard not to see it as anything other than an attempt to control women. It sinks any other arguments about bodily autonomy. TLDR; I think many of your arguments are (selfishly) selective, ignore history, cheery-pick the stats, and you ignore the main issue.
You'd be mostly right about the arguments if this is strictly concerning North American Catholicism, which is quite odd to Catholics outside the continent.
I respect your arguments but disagree with them let’s discuss 1. You say that Catholicism is not the only authority in allowing for people to have value without marriage. That’s partly true modern feminism and other religions too either discourage or do not advocate the necessity of the custom. The truth is it’s very arguable the Catholic Church does the most impressive job of that because it shows shining examples of people having value within the confines of the church while not married. Priests in Catholicism don’t get married neither do nuns of course. Women and men both can and often are cherished members of. Church communities and serve invaluable roles in their parishes. You mentioned the patriarchal structure of the church that actually helps prove my point. Priests bishops cardinals and the pope himself are single men who are leading the biggest single denomination(Protestantism is not one denomination so that doesn’t count) in the world. They’re able to be with notable exceptions moral authorities for billions of people without a wife or children. It’s a great example of Catholicism having the option of getting married but also not mandating or suppressing someone’s worth if they choose not to marry. You mentioned common practices of marriage in the Christian world. That is honestly irrelevant in this question. What certain Christians in certain parts of the world have or have not done over the years has no bearing on how the church views the issue of marriage. Catholicism teaches that marriage is a beautiful sacred covenant before God but it also has numerous examples at all levels of the hierarchy of non married people achieving major statuses. 2. Premarital abstinence is actually a perfect logical argument for fewer women having abortions. Mainly the causes of abortions these days are inability to care for a child, unwanted pregnancy, lack of money or an unplanned/non consensual sexual encounter. Marriage arguably fixed all of those issues. When someone does not wait to have sex until they are married sex can become almost a carnal animalistic lustful act nothing more. The gravity the enormity of it being able to lead to the conception of a baby can be lost amongst all the physical attraction and lustful pleasures. Those who wait to have sex often times as you mentioned are faithful and Christian yes but they’re also folks who view sex as what it is a beautiful and wonderful thing but also an incredible responsibility. They don’t dislike sex they just see how important it is and will not have it outside of the marriage during which there will be much more possibilities of positive outcomes during and after the pregnancy therefore abortions are not necessary. I would argue that those who wait and don’t have sex before marriage can be more clear headed and sensible about their intentions regarding pregnancy reducing chances of issues that lead women to terminate the pregnancy When a man and woman are one unit one team then can make a choice when to have or not have children and be logical about it. Instead of having sex whenever just for fun and being shocked a baby was conceived married couples can communicate and decide when and if they want to start a family and can plan their lives around it. When a couple is married they can put together their shared knowledge experience and desire to give the baby a perfect or close to home environment. A couple working in harmony are able to share responsibilities alternate difficult tasks double check each others work and be another observer for the baby to not experience bad outcomes due to lack of attention. Married couples when they both love each other and are equally committed to raising a family can greatly reduce the chances of important things being missed or the child being neglected. Of course rape/non consensual sex can happen in or out of marriage or at random but generally two people who have chosen to enter into the God-honoring covenant of marriage love and respect each other and would not do anything to hurt each other and would not of course force themselves on their partners. 3. The argument Lizzie made about divorce rates as they relate to premarital sex is completely logical Having sex with lots of people over the years creates a culture of always seeking the next best thing never being ok with anything except what makes one euphorically happy. Modern feminism teaches women the moment they don’t feel the spark in the relationship they are to get out immediately and seek greener pastures. That manifests in profound ways in the divorce rates. Marriage is a promise a solemn promise before God to love honor and cherish someone till death do you part. Part of that is enduring difficult challenges together whether it be financial romantic health wise or any other. In order to have a long healthy marriage the couple must be able to overcome and persevere through the worst of times. Premarital sex and hookup culture tell people to never wait to never give anything time simply get out the moment things are perfect and ideal. When a couple waits to have sex until they are married they have shown a tremendous ability to resist temptation and to not give in to pressure from peers the popular culture tv news media all of which preach the gospel of sexual liberation and chastise anyone who dares defy them. If a person has been able to stay pure stay chaste through their life and not have sex despite the biological urge to do so and the relentless push from all sides for them to cave it is a be to strong indicator of their ability to handle the strains of a marriage. Yes Christian/Catholic sexual teachings do say that sex during marriage is the ideal and a virtue to be upheld but abstinence is not simply a religious idea. A lot of people choose to not have sex for reasons that have nothing to do with adhering to the authority of a religious institution. Abstaining from sex has some correlations to religion but it can absolutely be its own stand alone idea that can make divorce less likely. 4. Having one male and one female parent actually does lead to more positive outcomes for children because it gives kids a balanced upbringing that doesn’t overemphasize male masculinity or female femininity. The reason the male female nuclear family unit has been a bedrock of society over the generations is because it gives children a holistic set of skills from both parents. Women are naturally more kind nurturing soft spoken and understanding. Men are generally more aggressive competitive and physically imposing. A child growing up with too much male energy can be overly masculine and not have the deft tough the loving warm nature a mother can impart on them. A young person who is exposed to an excessively feminine atmosphere can be timid and shy and unable to speak up for themselves or unwilling to be competitive enough to achieve what is necessary in life. Having the balance that a man and woman traditional marriage unit offers gives kids both sides and gives them the best chance of being well rounded members of society. As to your point of large homes and large families that is about personal responsibility more than anything else. A couple should not have children simply to check a box or say yes we fulfilled our moral obligation. No intelligent couple would have kids or have more than they can reasonably afford or raise. A man and woman who are smart would be thoughtful and pragmatic and only have more if they’re able to safely and competently raise whom they already have and feel that additional pregnancies would not adversely affect the family.
5. Natural family planning? A lot of people care. Maybe you don’t but a lot of people care. It has been around for a long time and has stood the test of time because it works. Instead of relying on the efficacy of some companies chemical formula it gives the power to the people involved in the conception of a baby the husband and wife so they can use anatomy biology and their knowledge of the woman’s reproductive patterns to know exactly when the woman should and shouldn’t or can and can’t get pregnant. It requires attention to detail communication and a teamwork that reinforces the couples ability to work together and be a cohesive well functioning pair. The act of using NFP empowers the husband and wife to find out everything they need to know about their own anatomy and physiology so they can provide a great chance have a happy health pregnancy. 6. Your point about Catholics or Christians “imposing their view of abortion” on everyone is seriously misguided. It fails to realize that every law ever put on the books is an imposition of someone’s morality on the populace. Any law at its most fundamental core is the result of some legislative authorities or chief executives moral judgment that some practice or item or custom is so abhorrent it should be disallowed and those who continue to disobey shall be punished. Whether it be a laws against pedophilia, incest, beastiality, polygamy, assault, rape, theft or anything else those regulations came to be because someone in a position it authority decided those practices should be outlawed. Of course certain legal actions are more widely accepted and are viewed as “common sense” while others are dismissed as “moralizing” but the heart of what they are does not change. The reasons behind laws being passed are the same it is merely the person opining that provides the context as to whether in their mind said law is positive negative or indifferent. Many people on the atheist SJW far left love to decry Christians for forcing non believers to live under religiously inspired laws yet they are no different. Whether it be ruled mandating teaching CRT or transgender transitioning to small young children, wanting abortions on demand, gay marriage, announcing the creation of thousands of new genders, wanting open borders gun control or any other item on their political checklist that is also “moralizing”. The left is demanding America and other Christian nations rip up their very fabric and upend their ages old cultural practices simply to appease them. Perhaps you may be more sympathetic to their points of view perhaps not I don’t know sir but their goals are not some wholly appropriate act of love and reason while conservatives insistence on opposing those ideas makes makes us some kind of monsters. Catholicism is not imposing anything on anyone they are simply sharing ages millennia or wisdom that clearly shows unborn babies are no clumps of cells but independent separate human beings that deserve the same chance to live as anyone else. 7. Your point about Catholicism’s modern push against abortion is very puzzling to put it lightly. Laws against computer crimes didn’t exist until the rise of technology and the prevalence of horrible deeds done using electronic devices. The FAA and the NTSB didn’t need to exist before the invent of cars trains and airplanes because there was no mass causality wrecks to investigate or transportation problems to rectify. Of course rules and regulations and guidelines come about as they are needed in the moment to solve problems that have or may come up not as prophetic predictions of future needs. Before the sexual revolution and the feminist push of sexual openness and promiscuity no fault divorce and the openly stated desire of women to have abortions on massive scales there was no need for rules against those practices because they largely were not a concern. Nowadays when a pregnancy is seen not as a holy responsibility but as some kind of burden to be rid of yes the Catholic Church has taken the lead on pointing out the sanctity of human life and depravity of killing an unborn child simply because it is inconvenient or because of the circumstances surrounding its birth. You seem to want to paint that as some cold of cold blooded oppression and opportunism when it is far from that. The Catholic church’s teachings against abortion are a direct reaction to the cultures shift away from faith based values. The church isn’t making this up out of nothing or demanding some archaic moral code be followed they are simply stating age old wisdom and truth in response to the mass anti Christian anti traditional hysteria being spread by those in the irreligious and liberal communities. Catholics have no objection to a woman exercising autonomy over her body unless it leads to the murder of a superstar independent unique human life. As opposed to your very cynical unnecessary snappy sarcastic ending to your post I will simply say thank you for sharing your view point and I pray for you God Bless you.
@@mikhailboldt3417 Thanks for responding, there's a lot in there. I don't think I can really respond to all the above, so I'll just do the best I can. Another long post incoming, sorry... 1. I was mostly meaning other Christian denominations, but taking it more broadly works also. Generally you don't give very good examples here, they are either obviously flawed, or about men (why?). Also, the Catholic Church view on marriage is entirely interlinked with how Christians behave, past and present. To say otherwise I think just shows a lack of understanding about how the Christian church adopted and developed the marriage institution, and the social function of marriage prior to contemporary times. 2. The problem for you is the evidence on abstinence teaching just doesn't support this assessment, in terms of pregnancies. Doesn't matter if you have a nice logical sounding reasoning, it's the evidence on the outcomes that matters. 3. The data doesn't support what you say here either. If you look at the relationship between number of premarital partners vs. divorce rates, it's a wavy curve, it's not linear. The divorce rates are actually lower for other cohorts also (not only for the "no premarital sex" cohort), and this behavior depends a lot on which decade you are looking at the data for. And like I say above, the correlation is actually getting _weaker_ over time, not stronger. That doesn't support your argument. 4. Again (do I see a theme developing?), your view isn't supported by what data we have on male-female vs. male-male parenting family structures. Also, it displays naivety about the history of nuclear families, which are a mostly just a modern concept. And on family size and outcomes, the data doesn't support the idea that large families can manage this well -- larger families usually mean worse educational outcomes. 5. I still don't care. My point is the outcome is the same. Do whatever works... use natural family planning if you want. 6. When I read/watch well regarded Catholic YT channels (not this one) celebrating openly the removal of rights of women to have abortions, even to the point of not allowing abortions at all despite risks to the mother, I think it's a bit rich to call me seriously misguided. And your idea of laws all being morally based is just wrong. A lot of laws are just driven by data. Laws that force you to wear seat-belts are a good example. Is it moral or immoral to wear a seat-belt? Nope. But it sure does stop people from dying if they wear one. And I think this is the crux of the disagreement here. My points are me trying to look at the evidence and data and base my view on that. Yours seem more rationalizing -- which is fine, but it only gets you so far, and will sometimes draw you to false conclusions. But really, this whole point you make here is not good at all. It reads more like a rant. It's a hodgepodge of grievances that I fail to understand the point of. Mandated teaching of CRT and transgender transitions to small kids? Seriously? I wonder if you even know what CRT is? How would it be possible even to teach it to small kids? How is this related to women's bodily autonomy? So... is Catholicism imposing their rules on others in the US? Of course they are, we see the result of it now. They have mostly succeeded. And it's not just Catholics who have done this. 7. I'll assume then you may not know much about the history of how the Catholic church managed the topic of abortion? Anyway, my point is the Catholic church hasn't sustained any particularly cohesive teaching on this topic over time. Not by any means. It's only relatively recently that they decided their current stance on human embryos and fetuses, and how they should be treated. And they changed their mind on it a few times. Lol about the sexual revolution... the Catholic church had formed their view well before then, it's certainly not a response to cultural shifts away from Christianity. Again, there's a lot of angst and conflated issues here in this section of your response. I suggest you may find it useful to do some self research / reading on the topics. I'm not being cynical here... I really mean it. A lot of the topics you bring up I think reflect a lack of knowledge on those topics, unfortunately. I think it would help you to do some reading on them. I'm not saying I know everything myself. But I certainly know can see when someone is struggling to have their own perspective make sense, and I can see you are just not accepting some of the freely available data on these topics. One final thing. You know a large number of Catholics would disagree with almost everything you said, right? Especially in non-US countries, they can have completely different views. A lot of these views you expressed are just cultural, and I'd argue some fall squarely into the anti-science camp. TLDR; I probably disagree on almost all your views/arguments, I think you miss the point of a lot of mine, and you seem to mostly ignore the evidence/data. (Also, this comment is a summary, it's not cynical, lol.)
This is a brain dead take. That you say the Catholic Church has only recently gotten interested in the abortion question is historically indefensible. You don't know a thing about the history of Christian doctrine.
Хобби
Wonderful!!! Lizzie is BACK on RUclips 😃😃😃
I know its so amazing there’s nothing like a Lizzie video 😊
Your voice and intonation crack me up!! 🤣 I LOVE IT! You’re so peppy!! God has placed you here to show many that Catholics are NOT boring and mundane. Love you sister!!! Keep it going!! ✊🏽🙌🏽✝️
Good listening to you Lizzy. I pray your daughter grows into a beautiful faithful woman, loves Jesus and His Blessed Mother.
I have no doubt she will ❤Lizzie and Trevor are both incredibly committed to their faith and will make sure their daughter has a wonderful safe and beautiful life
Lizzie please do a video about each of the church fathers.
That would be awesome !!! Great idea !!!😊
Love your content so so much!! I’m coming home to the church too boo!!
Thanks for posting! I love to hear you talk. I know your research is extensive and accurate and I love that I can trust you when you teach.
Wow, 6 years... it feels like it was last year I was watching your conversion journey... time goes by sooo fast! God bless you! We also have to be careful not to use natural fertility tracking with so called "contraceptive mentality".
Thank you for making this video Lizzie. I would love if you could make a video about lgbtq people in the Church. I'm queer and you're one of the only Catholic RUclipsrs i trust to talk about these issues. You are so compassionate and loving. God bless you and your family ❤️
Love you're back
Interesting arguments, thank you for some food for thoughts ❤ Fingers crossed the rest of your pregnancy feels less intense. Your baby girl will have a great mom
Congratulations on the pregnancy. Two of my best friends are also pregnant at the moment.
Absolute FIRE girlie!🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥
That’s Lizzie’s entire channel just nonstop 🔥 and truly inspiring uplifting content ❤
Te amo Lizz....
I grew up Catholic and I never was taught to be abstinent now I have 2 kids with no father. As an adult I know not to have sex before marriage so now I’m abstinent but I wish I was a long time ago. I was poorly chatecised.
Another thing related is that men and women feel closer to each other when they have sex, so they may also marry someone they otherwise wouldn't. Saving sex before marriage is the best case for all relationships
Very very true! Sex is the ultimate way two people can be close physically. It’s also an incredibly intense form of emotional bonding. When a man and woman are intimate they feel love they this almost unbreakable connection to the other person. Sex can be a key to maintaining a healthy marriage and of course having children as well. To me like you said it makes all the sense in the world to save such a special moment for the person you’re going to spend your life with. If you have sex with any and everyone you meet it becomes almost this animalistic carnal act totally devoid of all beauty and honor. There is no greater way two people can physically express love for each other so why waste such a major thing on some person at a party you like? It’s like the person who lives in Anaheim and goes to Disney every month will not be as emotionally affected by their trips as someone from a far away place who travels there once or twice in their life. Sex can be a wonderful thing if it’s treated in the right way not made into some merely physical act of lust.
very convincing, insightful, and awesome.
Love you Lizzie 🥰
Welcome back
Congratulations on your pregnancy 🤰 ⭐️🙌
You look beautiful!
One of the rationale, it might be the only reason, for priests aren't allowed to marry is that married men have a responsibility to his Earthly father and a married priest would have to split his attention.
❤❤❤ Lizz ❤❤❤
Missed you
lizzie did you ever think about making something like a patreon and having bible study as a perk? I know you are busy with the baby and everything but I would love to see it! :)
that lavender is a really nice color on you!
Ily Lizzie 🎉❤
I know she loves all her subscribers too ❤
I have a question, could you do a video about the differences between catholicism and protestant ? Thanks
I think she has made vides covering that in the past. But it's hard tk address as Protestantism is so varied. Is there a particular denomination you're interested in a comparison with ?
Hey Liz i just read an article on Huff Post by Rachel Stowe. She described Church of Christ as a cult. What's your take on that since you grew up in it?
There is the option of consecrated virginity
I, also a Catholic convert, appreciate the lack of pressure to get married. My protestant family got excited to meet my boyfriend after telling them for a long time I was content single. That relationship did not work out, and I'm okay with that!
All religions, especially Catholicism are lying cults and I can prove as much.
Since Passover and Easter are drawing near, I will expose the false preachers and religions who wickedly promote and believe that Jesus was crucified on a Friday and if you are believing this lie then you also know very little about God and scripture.
Because many lack knowledge of scripture they cannot comprehend the important and explicit clues that John related in his gospel in regard to the Crucifixion and the Sabbath. This ignorance of truth certainly applies to the pagan cult known as Catholicism since they are one of the many false religions that claim that Jesus was crucified on a Friday and this is why many false Christians choose to celebrate what is known today as Good Friday.
Realize that the first day of Passover was considered a Sabbath day to the children of Israel since it was a day of holy convocation and no manner of work was to be done, so it was basically no different than the weekly Sabbath that God commanded the children of Israel to observe every Friday evening. You also need to understand that in a particular year when the Passover Sabbath would begin on a Thursday evening, this was then considered a high day Sabbath or a special Sabbath to the children of Israel since they would now have to recognize two Sabbath days in a row.
“‘Six days shall work be done, but the seventh day is a Sabbath of solemn rest, a holy convocation. You shall do no work on it; it is the Sabbath of the Lord in all your dwellings.”
Leviticus 23:3 NKJV
Now to prove how the special feasts of God were to be treated no differently then the regular Sabbath and that no work was to be done, all we need to do is read what was related in Leviticus 23. Take notice that in the Leviticus 23:23-25 scriptures below, it clearly relates that a holy convocation also included a sabbath rest.
”Then the Lord spoke to Moses, saying, “Speak to the children of Israel, saying: ‘In the seventh month, on the first day of the month, you shall have a SABBATH-REST, a memorial of blowing of trumpets, a holy convocation. You shall do no customary work on it; and you shall offer an offering made by fire to the Lord.’ ”
Leviticus 23:23-25 NKJV
“‘These are the feasts of the Lord, holy convocations which you shall proclaim at their appointed times. On the fourteenth day of the first month at twilight is the Lord’s Passover. And on the fifteenth day of the same month is the Feast of Unleavened Bread to the Lord; seven days you must eat unleavened bread. On the first day you shall have a holy convocation; you shall do no customary work on it. But you shall offer an offering made by fire to the Lord for seven days. The seventh day shall be a holy convocation; you shall do no customary work on it.’ ”
Leviticus 23:4-8 NKJV
Now God commanded the Israelites to keep His Passover on the fourteenth day of the first month at twilight and the first month of the year on God’s religious calendar is called Nisan or Abib and it begins in the spring and not in the winter as our current new year does. So because scripture relates that Jesus celebrated Passover at His Last Supper with His disciples many are falsely assuming that Jesus was crucified on Nisan 15 and not on Nisan 14 and that His Last Supper had to occur on a Thursday night since He was crucified on the day of Preparation. Now before I go on, I need you to understand that God commanded the Israelites to always celebrate His Passover but there was actually a period when the children of Israel stopped keeping God’s Passover. (See 2 Kings 23:21-23.)
Since the tribes of Israel had stopped keeping the Passover you can read where King Hezekiah and Josiah reinstated the Passover celebration in 2 Chronicles 30 and 35. They now chose to have the people celebrate God’s Passover at the second temple instead of at their homes since they wanted to make sure that the Israelites would stay loyal to God and His commands. So even though they reinstated the Passover celebration they actually were ignoring God’s command since they now started a tradition where many would celebrate God’s Passover at their homes on the beginning of Nisan 14 and then at the second temple in Jerusalem at the end of Nisan 14.
Now because the gospels are relating that Jesus was buried on Preparation day, many false preachers and religions are ignorantly assuming that this meant that the crucifixion had to occur on a Friday, since this is the day that the Jewish people would normally begin their preparation for the weekly Sabbath that began every Friday evening. Further below I will definitely prove where their ignorance of scripture has led false preachers and religions astray but first I want you to understand that the Jewish calendar months are completely different then the Gregorian calendar that we currently use, and that the Jewish day actually ends once it becomes dark and not at midnight as our world is accustomed to.
So in order to start proving why the crucifixion did not occur on a Friday I will begin by revealing how the gospel of John related some very important information that many deceived believers are not comprehending.
First, take notice where John related in 13:1-3 that Jesus celebrated His Last Supper before the Feast of Passover and then understand that John was referencing the Passover celebration that would occur at the temple at twilight on Nisan 14.
“NOW BEFORE THE FEAST OF PASSOVER, when Jesus knew that His hour had come that He should depart from this world to the Father, having loved His own who were in the world, He loved them to the end. And supper being ended, the devil having already put it into the heart of Judas Iscariot, Simon’s son, to betray Him, Jesus, knowing that the Father had given all things into His hands, and that He had come from God and was going to God,”
John 13:1-3 NKJV
Next, I will reveal a couple of scripture verses where John related that when Jesus was crucified it occurred during a year where the Passover Sabbath was going to occur the day before the weekly Sabbath. This would mean that you would have two Sabbath days occurring back to back and since you now had a special Sabbath occurring on Thursday evening this then meant that no work could be done on either Friday or Saturday. So since the Jewish people could do no work once their Friday began (our Thursday at nightfall), this then meant that the day of Preparation would now fall on a Thursday instead of its normal Friday. Once again, take note that when you had a Feast Day Sabbath occurring the day before the weekly Sabbath this was then called a special Sabbath or a HIGH DAY Sabbath by the Jewish people.
”Therefore, because it was the Preparation Day, that the bodies should not remain on the cross on the Sabbath (FOR THAT SABBATH WAS A HIGH DAY), the Jews asked Pilate that their legs might be broken, and that they might be taken away.”
John 19:31 NKJV
”Then they led Jesus from Caiaphas to the Praetorium, and it was early morning. But they themselves did not go into the Praetorium, lest they should be defiled, but that they might eat the Passover.”
John 18:28 NKJV
So notice how John 19:31 related that the Sabbath that was going to occur later that evening was a HIGH DAY SABBATH. This meant that it had to be the Passover Sabbath and not the weekly Sabbath as many false preachers and religions are wrongly teaching. This is also why John 18:28 is relating how the Pharisees did not want to defile themselves on the day that Jesus was crucified since they were desiring to partake in the Passover meal that would occur at the end of that day at the temple. So since John clearly related in scripture that Jesus was crucified on the day of Preparation and he stated that this was the day before a HIGH DAY SABBATH Sabbath then the crucifixion definitely had to occur on a Thursday, otherwise God and scripture would be lying to us.
Lastly, in order to fulfill what Jesus related in the Matthew 12 scripture where He stated that He would spend three days and three nights in the heart of the earth here is a time recap of the Last Supper, the Crucifixion and His Resurrection and a complete breakdown of the three days and the three nights that Jesus spent in the heart of the earth. On Wednesday night as Nisan 14 begins this is when Jesus had His Last Supper with His Disciples. Then on Thursday morning which was still Nisan 14 Jesus is crucified at 9 in the morning and He dies on the cross at 3 in the afternoon. Jesus is then buried just before sundown on Thursday evening before the Passover Sabbath celebration begins. Jesus then of course rises from the grave early Sunday morning which is now Nisan 17.
Thursday Night #1 - Passover Sabbath Begins
Friday Day #1 - Passover Sabbath Ends At Sundown
Friday Night #2 - Weekly Sabbath Begins
Saturday Day #2 - Weekly Sabbath Ends At Sundown
Saturday Night #3
Sunday Day #3 - Jesus Is Resurrected
“For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the great fish, so will the Son of Man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.”
Matthew 12:40 NKJV
So Jesus died on the cross on Thursday Nisan 14 at 3 in the afternoon which was around the time that they began slaughtering the lambs that were needed to celebrate the Passover at the temple and this is why Jesus was known as the Lamb of God who was sacrificed for our sins.
Pena que não tem legenda em português.....😊
Tem sim. Clica na engrenagem, escolha legenda e tradução para o português.
Pretty awesome ❤🎉🎉
Congrats on ur pregnancy!
I have a question that I think you might be able to answer
If I decide to stay single as a Catholic would I still be able to foster or adopt a child or a baby
Yes you can!! Adoption is not forbidden by the Church but please make sure that you can provide a stable and loving home environment for your future kids.
What does the Catholic church say about birth control pills? Is it wrong using it even when married?! Many women are using it for medical reasons and need it to survive because they can’t function without it if they suffer from severe endomtriosis etc. I just know the Catholic church used to be against all birth control.
I've heard that birth control pills are allowed to treat a medical condition, but not allowed to be used only to prevent a pregnancy. If you have a medical condition that you need to treat with birth control pill, then pregnancy prevention would be just a side effect of your medical treatment.
Can you make a video on how you and Trevor fell in love?
I didn’t know we could live single without being a nun and that’s still positive. I have kids but I stay single and don’t date cause I don’t remember how lol. 😂
I don't care for your sing-song elaborations; but I still kinda like you...
Yeah you can choose to get married or not but if you are in poverty or have an unsecure financial future then you wont be able to feel good about having sex. Also if you are gay even if you dont get married or have a same sex partner you go to hell for even thinking romantically about the same sex during masturbation. Its pretty much bondage if you dont fit in a certain box
The Catholic Church also CLOISTERS/SILENCES women! You have NO SAY in ecclesiastical matters at all. 🤐
There''s a whole heap of problems with this. Long post incoming, sorry...
The "theology" of not getting married is not specific to Catholicism, and in practice means pretty much nothing, both historically and in current day. Plus, asserting that women don't have to get married blatantly ignores common practices for most of history in the Christian/Catholic world. And it ignores the patriarchal structure of the Church itself.
Premarital abstinence is such a strange thing to argue as supporting fewer abortions. Statistically we know that abstinence teaching leads to _more_ unsafe sex practices and _more_ pregnancies, not less. Taking the Catholic teaching as a whole in this context seems like the worst case scenario for causing unplanned pregnancies, and for female bodily autonomy. And the issue with your birth control effectiveness argument is the same, it just straight out belies the statistics when you look at overall outcomes.
You quote statistics about divorce rates for premarital sex, and assume it's causal. That's a huge assumption. (I'll leave aside the assumption of divorce as a negative indicator, which is a problem in itself.) In the US, the low divorce rates of women who have no/minimal sexual experience before marriage is correlated with them attending church frequently. The cause of this could be multiple things. It could mean women who attend church regularly have personality traits that make them adverse to seeking a divorce. Or simply that churches influence women from seeking divorces, or the other way around... churches influence women to not have premarital sex. Or all of these. Or other factors also. It almost certainly isn't just a straight cause/effect of lack of premarital sex. I'd also note that these kind of correlations are actually becoming statistically _weaker_ over time as the US becomes less Christian, which likely indicates a delayed cultural effect, not a causal effect.
Your "marriage between man and woman" reference is an interesting one. The problem for you is statistics show overall _better_ outcomes for children who are grouped in a, e.g. a male-male parent relationship, not male-female. So the statement just isn't true at all. And this is without going into other detrimental effects of family size (# of kids) on educational outcomes, etc. which is the direct opposite of what your statement implies.
Natural family planning... who cares? Same outcome. Just seems like another way to dissuade/restrict what women can do, over using common birth control mechanisms that we know work very well. Your argument here just completely ignores the overwhelmingly positive impact of these birth control methods.
One thing I find odd about your video is you assume much of this only applies outside of marriage. Why? Married couples can have unplanned pregnancies also, no matter what mechanism they use to avoid pregnancies, and then need to manage how they deal with that. Also, what about male birth control methods, why ignore that?
And probably the main issue here... you don't address the big elephant in the room, which is why does Catholicism want to assert ideas and rules onto non-Catholics, especially on abortion. Ergo, the Church clearly does want to assert control over women's bodily autonomy, even on non-Catholics. This seems such a fundamentally non-Christian ethos, and impossible to ignore. You're walking around the main event here.
It's only in contemporary times where Catholicism has been so strong on topics like abortion (the historicity of this is far from the "what... but we've always supported this position!?!" they want you to believe). So it's hard not to see it as anything other than an attempt to control women. It sinks any other arguments about bodily autonomy.
TLDR; I think many of your arguments are (selfishly) selective, ignore history, cheery-pick the stats, and you ignore the main issue.
You'd be mostly right about the arguments if this is strictly concerning North American Catholicism, which is quite odd to Catholics outside the continent.
I respect your arguments but disagree with them let’s discuss
1. You say that Catholicism is not the only authority in allowing for people to have value without marriage. That’s partly true modern feminism and other religions too either discourage or do not advocate the necessity of the custom. The truth is it’s very arguable the Catholic Church does the most impressive job of that because it shows shining examples of people having value within the confines of the church while not married. Priests in Catholicism don’t get married neither do nuns of course. Women and men both can and often are cherished members of. Church communities and serve invaluable roles in their parishes.
You mentioned the patriarchal structure of the church that actually helps prove my point. Priests bishops cardinals and the pope himself are single men who are leading the biggest single denomination(Protestantism is not one denomination so that doesn’t count) in the world. They’re able to be with notable exceptions moral authorities for billions of people without a wife or children. It’s a great example of Catholicism having the option of getting married but also not mandating or suppressing someone’s worth if they choose not to marry.
You mentioned common practices of marriage in the Christian world. That is honestly irrelevant in this question. What certain Christians in certain parts of the world have or have not done over the years has no bearing on how the church views the issue of marriage. Catholicism teaches that marriage is a beautiful sacred covenant before God but it also has numerous examples at all levels of the hierarchy of non married people achieving major statuses.
2. Premarital abstinence is actually a perfect logical argument for fewer women having abortions. Mainly the causes of abortions these days are inability to care for a child, unwanted pregnancy, lack of money or an unplanned/non consensual sexual encounter. Marriage arguably fixed all of those issues.
When someone does not wait to have sex until they are married sex can become almost a carnal animalistic lustful act nothing more. The gravity the enormity of it being able to lead to the conception of a baby can be lost amongst all the physical attraction and lustful pleasures. Those who wait to have sex often times as you mentioned are faithful and Christian yes but they’re also folks who view sex as what it is a beautiful and wonderful thing but also an incredible responsibility. They don’t dislike sex they just see how important it is and will not have it outside of the marriage during which there will be much more possibilities of positive outcomes during and after the pregnancy therefore abortions are not necessary. I would argue that those who wait and don’t have sex before marriage can be more clear headed and sensible about their intentions regarding pregnancy reducing chances of issues that lead women to terminate the pregnancy
When a man and woman are one unit one team then can make a choice when to have or not have children and be logical about it. Instead of having sex whenever just for fun and being shocked a baby was conceived married couples can communicate and decide when and if they want to start a family and can plan their lives around it.
When a couple is married they can put together their shared knowledge experience and desire to give the baby a perfect or close to home environment. A couple working in harmony are able to share responsibilities alternate difficult tasks double check each others work and be another observer for the baby to not experience bad outcomes due to lack of attention. Married couples when they both love each other and are equally committed to raising a family can greatly reduce the chances of important things being missed or the child being neglected.
Of course rape/non consensual sex can happen in or out of marriage or at random but generally two people who have chosen to enter into the God-honoring covenant of marriage love and respect each other and would not do anything to hurt each other and would not of course force themselves on their partners.
3. The argument Lizzie made about divorce rates as they relate to premarital sex is completely logical
Having sex with lots of people over the years creates a culture of always seeking the next best thing never being ok with anything except what makes one euphorically happy. Modern feminism teaches women the moment they don’t feel the spark in the relationship they are to get out immediately and seek greener pastures. That manifests in profound ways in the divorce rates. Marriage is a promise a solemn promise before God to love honor and cherish someone till death do you part. Part of that is enduring difficult challenges together whether it be financial romantic health wise or any other. In order to have a long healthy marriage the couple must be able to overcome and persevere through the worst of times. Premarital sex and hookup culture tell people to never wait to never give anything time simply get out the moment things are perfect and ideal.
When a couple waits to have sex until they are married they have shown a tremendous ability to resist temptation and to not give in to pressure from peers the popular culture tv news media all of which preach the gospel of sexual liberation and chastise anyone who dares defy them. If a person has been able to stay pure stay chaste through their life and not have sex despite the biological urge to do so and the relentless push from all sides for them to cave it is a be to strong indicator of their ability to handle the strains of a marriage.
Yes Christian/Catholic sexual teachings do say that sex during marriage is the ideal and a virtue to be upheld but abstinence is not simply a religious idea. A lot of people choose to not have sex for reasons that have nothing to do with adhering to the authority of a religious institution. Abstaining from sex has some correlations to religion but it can absolutely be its own stand alone idea that can make divorce less likely.
4. Having one male and one female parent actually does lead to more positive outcomes for children because it gives kids a balanced upbringing that doesn’t overemphasize male masculinity or female femininity. The reason the male female nuclear family unit has been a bedrock of society over the generations is because it gives children a holistic set of skills from both parents. Women are naturally more kind nurturing soft spoken and understanding. Men are generally more aggressive competitive and physically imposing. A child growing up with too much male energy can be overly masculine and not have the deft tough the loving warm nature a mother can impart on them. A young person who is exposed to an excessively feminine atmosphere can be timid and shy and unable to speak up for themselves or unwilling to be competitive enough to achieve what is necessary in life. Having the balance that a man and woman traditional marriage unit offers gives kids both sides and gives them the best chance of being well rounded members of society.
As to your point of large homes and large families that is about personal responsibility more than anything else. A couple should not have children simply to check a box or say yes we fulfilled our moral obligation. No intelligent couple would have kids or have more than they can reasonably afford or raise. A man and woman who are smart would be thoughtful and pragmatic and only have more if they’re able to safely and competently raise whom they already have and feel that additional pregnancies would not adversely affect the family.
5. Natural family planning? A lot of people care. Maybe you don’t but a lot of people care. It has been around for a long time and has stood the test of time because it works. Instead of relying on the efficacy of some companies chemical formula it gives the power to the people involved in the conception of a baby the husband and wife so they can use anatomy biology and their knowledge of the woman’s reproductive patterns to know exactly when the woman should and shouldn’t or can and can’t get pregnant. It requires attention to detail communication and a teamwork that reinforces the couples ability to work together and be a cohesive well functioning pair. The act of using NFP empowers the husband and wife to find out everything they need to know about their own anatomy and physiology so they can provide a great chance have a happy health pregnancy.
6. Your point about Catholics or Christians “imposing their view of abortion” on everyone is seriously misguided. It fails to realize that every law ever put on the books is an imposition of someone’s morality on the populace. Any law at its most fundamental core is the result of some legislative authorities or chief executives moral judgment that some practice or item or custom is so abhorrent it should be disallowed and those who continue to disobey shall be punished. Whether it be a laws against pedophilia, incest, beastiality, polygamy, assault, rape, theft or anything else those regulations came to be because someone in a position it authority decided those practices should be outlawed. Of course certain legal actions are more widely accepted and are viewed as “common sense” while others are dismissed as “moralizing” but the heart of what they are does not change. The reasons behind laws being passed are the same it is merely the person opining that provides the context as to whether in their mind said law is positive negative or indifferent. Many people on the atheist SJW far left love to decry Christians for forcing non believers to live under religiously inspired laws yet they are no different. Whether it be ruled mandating teaching CRT or transgender transitioning to small young children, wanting abortions on demand, gay marriage, announcing the creation of thousands of new genders, wanting open borders gun control or any other item on their political checklist that is also “moralizing”. The left is demanding America and other Christian nations rip up their very fabric and upend their ages old cultural practices simply to appease them. Perhaps you may be more sympathetic to their points of view perhaps not I don’t know sir but their goals are not some wholly appropriate act of love and reason while conservatives insistence on opposing those ideas makes makes us some kind of monsters.
Catholicism is not imposing anything on anyone they are simply sharing ages millennia or wisdom that clearly shows unborn babies are no clumps of cells but independent separate human beings that deserve the same chance to live as anyone else.
7. Your point about Catholicism’s modern push against abortion is very puzzling to put it lightly. Laws against computer crimes didn’t exist until the rise of technology and the prevalence of horrible deeds done using electronic devices. The FAA and the NTSB didn’t need to exist before the invent of cars trains and airplanes because there was no mass causality wrecks to investigate or transportation problems to rectify. Of course rules and regulations and guidelines come about as they are needed in the moment to solve problems that have or may come up not as prophetic predictions of future needs. Before the sexual revolution and the feminist push of sexual openness and promiscuity no fault divorce and the openly stated desire of women to have abortions on massive scales there was no need for rules against those practices because they largely were not a concern. Nowadays when a pregnancy is seen not as a holy responsibility but as some kind of burden to be rid of yes the Catholic Church has taken the lead on pointing out the sanctity of human life and depravity of killing an unborn child simply because it is inconvenient or because of the circumstances surrounding its birth. You seem to want to paint that as some cold of cold blooded oppression and opportunism when it is far from that. The Catholic church’s teachings against abortion are a direct reaction to the cultures shift away from faith based values. The church isn’t making this up out of nothing or demanding some archaic moral code be followed they are simply stating age old wisdom and truth in response to the mass anti Christian anti traditional hysteria being spread by those in the irreligious and liberal communities. Catholics have no objection to a woman exercising autonomy over her body unless it leads to the murder of a superstar independent unique human life.
As opposed to your very cynical unnecessary snappy sarcastic ending to your post I will simply say thank you for sharing your view point and I pray for you God Bless you.
@@mikhailboldt3417 Thanks for responding, there's a lot in there. I don't think I can really respond to all the above, so I'll just do the best I can. Another long post incoming, sorry...
1. I was mostly meaning other Christian denominations, but taking it more broadly works also. Generally you don't give very good examples here, they are either obviously flawed, or about men (why?). Also, the Catholic Church view on marriage is entirely interlinked with how Christians behave, past and present. To say otherwise I think just shows a lack of understanding about how the Christian church adopted and developed the marriage institution, and the social function of marriage prior to contemporary times.
2. The problem for you is the evidence on abstinence teaching just doesn't support this assessment, in terms of pregnancies. Doesn't matter if you have a nice logical sounding reasoning, it's the evidence on the outcomes that matters.
3. The data doesn't support what you say here either. If you look at the relationship between number of premarital partners vs. divorce rates, it's a wavy curve, it's not linear. The divorce rates are actually lower for other cohorts also (not only for the "no premarital sex" cohort), and this behavior depends a lot on which decade you are looking at the data for. And like I say above, the correlation is actually getting _weaker_ over time, not stronger. That doesn't support your argument.
4. Again (do I see a theme developing?), your view isn't supported by what data we have on male-female vs. male-male parenting family structures. Also, it displays naivety about the history of nuclear families, which are a mostly just a modern concept. And on family size and outcomes, the data doesn't support the idea that large families can manage this well -- larger families usually mean worse educational outcomes.
5. I still don't care. My point is the outcome is the same. Do whatever works... use natural family planning if you want.
6. When I read/watch well regarded Catholic YT channels (not this one) celebrating openly the removal of rights of women to have abortions, even to the point of not allowing abortions at all despite risks to the mother, I think it's a bit rich to call me seriously misguided. And your idea of laws all being morally based is just wrong. A lot of laws are just driven by data. Laws that force you to wear seat-belts are a good example. Is it moral or immoral to wear a seat-belt? Nope. But it sure does stop people from dying if they wear one.
And I think this is the crux of the disagreement here. My points are me trying to look at the evidence and data and base my view on that. Yours seem more rationalizing -- which is fine, but it only gets you so far, and will sometimes draw you to false conclusions.
But really, this whole point you make here is not good at all. It reads more like a rant. It's a hodgepodge of grievances that I fail to understand the point of. Mandated teaching of CRT and transgender transitions to small kids? Seriously? I wonder if you even know what CRT is? How would it be possible even to teach it to small kids? How is this related to women's bodily autonomy?
So... is Catholicism imposing their rules on others in the US? Of course they are, we see the result of it now. They have mostly succeeded. And it's not just Catholics who have done this.
7. I'll assume then you may not know much about the history of how the Catholic church managed the topic of abortion? Anyway, my point is the Catholic church hasn't sustained any particularly cohesive teaching on this topic over time. Not by any means. It's only relatively recently that they decided their current stance on human embryos and fetuses, and how they should be treated. And they changed their mind on it a few times. Lol about the sexual revolution... the Catholic church had formed their view well before then, it's certainly not a response to cultural shifts away from Christianity.
Again, there's a lot of angst and conflated issues here in this section of your response. I suggest you may find it useful to do some self research / reading on the topics. I'm not being cynical here... I really mean it. A lot of the topics you bring up I think reflect a lack of knowledge on those topics, unfortunately. I think it would help you to do some reading on them.
I'm not saying I know everything myself. But I certainly know can see when someone is struggling to have their own perspective make sense, and I can see you are just not accepting some of the freely available data on these topics.
One final thing. You know a large number of Catholics would disagree with almost everything you said, right? Especially in non-US countries, they can have completely different views. A lot of these views you expressed are just cultural, and I'd argue some fall squarely into the anti-science camp.
TLDR; I probably disagree on almost all your views/arguments, I think you miss the point of a lot of mine, and you seem to mostly ignore the evidence/data. (Also, this comment is a summary, it's not cynical, lol.)
This is a brain dead take. That you say the Catholic Church has only recently gotten interested in the abortion question is historically indefensible. You don't know a thing about the history of Christian doctrine.
You have many idols on your wall. God help you to repent from these.