I am vegetarian (not quite vegan). I think other people should be free to eat meat, even though I believe it to be a moral abomination. I don't think PETA should expel me for that.

@neil allen The Catholic church has done a lot to fight that issue and has continuously condemned such actions. Stop pretending like that issue has not addressed.

Boom 💥

@neil allen Mind explaining the logic behind your interpretation of Mt 18:6-14? I'm really not sure how you've arrived at the conclusions you've stated based on the scripture passage you provided Jesus does (roughly) say it would be better for pedophiles to receive millstone necklaces, but it doesn't prescribe that Christians round up pedophiles and strap millstones around their neck. That said, I agree with you that pedophilia in all institutions, from youth sports programs, daycares, classrooms, and even the Church should be dealt with more decisively than it has in the past; society has failed us in this regard and I'm proud of the steps the Church has made in the last few decades to amend this wrong I'll pray for you, friend. You're casting the image of Satan on others without properly discerning their faith or beliefs, be careful to not let that sever your charity toward others

Great, i bought the wrong shoes, ate a hot dog and now I am getting kicked out of PETA.

​@neil allen, the "truth bomb" I'm referring to is Trent's critique of pro-choice politicians accusing the catholic bishops for being, well, catholic. Are you implying, that unless he mentions other causes of suffering and death in the world, he shouldn't have said that? Or even made this video, for that matter?

@neil allen Do you post that fact on every KZfaq channel addressing a social ill. Is BLM or the Susan G Komen Foundation a bunch of frauds because they don't address world hunger?

@neil allen What does that have to do with anything?

@neil allen Neil not in America and we are talking about American stats and the amount of people that starve to death in America is extremely low compared to the babies that are aborted in America . If people saved themselves for marriage we wouldn’t have the abortion problem .

@@CopyPaste88 arnas but still we need to call out the death penalty on the same fervor as abortion but Ted lieu instead of admitting that his views on abortion are absolutely wrong and in support of murder he worries about other people’s grave sins . Both democrats and republicans are hypocrites . The democrats are mostly ok with killing innocent babies and the republicans could car less about the poor and homeless .

YES! This is the WORST FREAKING ARGUMENT I have ever heard against pro life laws! ALL LAWS impose someone's beliefs on other people! And thank God they do!

Its the Anarchist view, or anyone who is pro-freedom.

​@@MasterKeyMagic lel. How about laws against mass murder? Should those be repealed too? I think sense all anarchists hate laws so much, none should protect them.

@@MasterKeyMagic Many pro-freedom people try to impose their beliefs on others. Ex. Many would try to pass a law saying that murder should be illegal.

@@kenanthompson2075 By default you can't be pro-freedom and vote in a dictatorship of the majority. "Pro-freedom people" are left-libertarians where the only rule is controlling others is wrong and doing so allows for the controlled any degree of retaliation against he who trys to control others. Its a volunteer society.

How to be Christian is good too.

bUt ThE dEaTh PeNaLtY tHo. As if the pope himself in the papal states hasn't enacted the death penalty

@@robertbach9376 seems like you’re demonstrating one of the 6 tactics of Pro-Choice Catholics. Based on Trent’s video, i respond: let’s ban all pope’s that lead government executions from communion. If we do that, do you agree that politicians that support the expansion and funding of legalized abortion should be disallowed from the holy sacrament?

AOC

@@JJ-zr6fu Cortez is a sore point for me, besides the fact she's Puerto Rican there isn't even a single trivia point about her that's Christian, let alone Catholic and she keeps hammering this home all the time, she considers herself shepardic jewish too but praises pope Francis over some midwit interpretation about amoris laetitia, etc. It's patently aware she's an atheist, why even go through the pageantry of pretending she's Catholic? I don't get it

@@Qwerty-jy9mj she’s pandering. She will be whatever religion is the flavor of the week. She’s “Jewish” so she can criticize Israel, she’s “Catholic” so she can praise a misinterpretation of the Pope. If an Imam comes out and says that socialism is the cure for everything, she’ll say she’s Muslim. Not a genuine bone in that woman’s body.

I know a young gay neighbor who is everyday in the church praying the Rosary. Doesn't miss Holy Mass but he died of AIDS in his late 20s.

A person could call himself a giraffe but that doesn’t make it so. Maybe these folks that you’ve listed USE their Catholicism when it’s convenient. They shut it down when inconvenient truth rears it’s head.

Agree that this will be very helpful

should've used Roman numerals lol

Thanks. Very helpful for quick review

Yes, it is so saddening. No wonder why Francisco said, "God is so sad. If only I could console him !" Let us continue to pray with mother Mary and offer her our rosary prayers for all politicians

Most anti Catholics are X Catholics.

You should read up on euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide. The elderly and terminally ill have been on the list for a very long time. Read Wesley J. Smith's "Forced Exit."

Already happening in Canada

There’s a country in Europe (can’t remember which though maybe it’s in the northern part) that boasted they had no Down Syndrome kids being born or that the rate was going down. The reason: parents were told the child had strong indicators for being born with Down Syndrome so the parents aborted their babies “to save the child pain and avoid the strain the parents would have to endure.” 😢 I’m not saying taking care of disabled/special needs children is easy at all, but kids aren’t in general and it’s quite a dangerous road to go down. Not too long ago, abortion was forced upon Chinese mothers who had “too many” kids already and was often used to abort girls. Cut to the present and Chinese men have hardly any women to court and untold numbers of girls are no longer there or had to be adopted to other countries to save their lives.

It’s Iceland who has no children born with Down syndrome. A lot of countries with universal healthcare have a high abortion rate for Down syndrome. In the UK, you can abort up until birth for “serious defects” but it’s not defined what that means. I remember reading about a baby who was aborted at 39 weeks for a cleft palate, a condition that can be corrected with surgery. 39 weeks. All my kids were born during my 38th week of pregnancy.

@@EpoRose1 that sounds right and it would not surprise me that “serious defects” is not readily defined. Easier to justify abortion for any ‘medical reason.’ Speaking of the UK, wasn’t there a baby born with a rare medical condition that the NHS refused to further treat and encouraged the parents to euthanize? I know President Trump offered to fly the boy and his family on his own dime to a hospital willing to try an experimental surgery, along with the Vatican and some other countries. But the UK denied them that chance and the boy ended up dying. Not saying he would have had survived the surgery or live a long life, but the UK medical board refusing the parents’ choices like that is so dangerous! My older brother was a premie who a nurse said would never make it, now he’s a healthy adult that farms. It infuriates my dad to this day at what she said. Younger brother nearly died in the womb and besides a small stutter (as in actual stutter, not a Biden Gaff) is healthy. This was over 20-30 years ago in a smallish town clinic. The advances made in medicine, surgery, and human understanding is exponential! Why parents think aborting their baby based on the chance they could be born ‘defective’ boggles my mind. I won’t be surprised when “custom babies” become a thing, just disappointed in what we have become as a society 😢

the point being?

@@Mish844 all laws impose the politicians belief on people. Just because its not religious doesnt mean it doesnt haooen

@@duckmeat4674 no, not all laws impose anyone'a views, cuse not all laws bind. That is in turn because binding is not the only function, the other being protection. To put it into perspective, it's enough to note that law prohibiting religious practices and law protecting them are not equally imposing. People saying "I can't impose my views" know that in some places law ought to protect, not bind, even if that knowledge is only instinctive. In case of i.e abortion laws they know law should protect us from religion

@@Mish844 abortion law is terrible example because then you are imposing the law on the unborn. Watch the video first

@@duckmeat4674 yes, I did watch and this argument of yours is as bad now as it was then. I can't speak to personhood, let alone lawful status of an unborn child, because former is highly questionable, while latter is practically nonexistent. However, I don't have to convince anyone to mother being a full person. We could go around this issue, by adopting a prolife position, which is exceedingly stupid idea when trying to argue for said position, due to classic catch 22.

Purgatory is very optimistic

@@robertbach9376 God is also: (Ezekiel 18:31-32) "Cast away from you all the crimes you have committed, and make for yourselves a new heart and a new spirit. Why should you die, house of Israel? For I find no pleasure in the death of anyone who dies-oracle of the Lord GOD. Turn back and live!"

Great idea. But a difficult one. To find a devout catholic politician... I live in Brazil, the largest Catholic country in the world and can't remember of a single truly catholic politician. There are several protestants, though. But protestantism comes with looser moral rules...

@@marianafaria6960 I don’t think that they are perfect examples but there are definitely some who are doing better job than others. Great point by the way.

Why do you want to leave Hinduism for any Abrahamic religions

It used to be possible to be a faithful Catholic and a Democrat, and maybe one day it will be again, but right now, Democrats impose demands that are incompatible with the Catholic Faith.

@@TheAaronChand Ny Hindu heritage is very important to me however I discovered the Catholic tradition in college and it spoke to me. Social teachings are difficult but beautiful. Great question. I don’t feel like I have anything to lose.

I hope trent reacts to her videos. Its crazy she has a huge influence

How come the Vatican don't kick them out?

It seems reasonable to use the terms they want in order not to poisen the well. It will lead to more people changing their minds and hearts, and is much more charitable. Note that this is different than using someones "pronouns" when the pronouns would make us lie. Using the term "pro-choice" is not a lie. It's simply another and more charible way to state their position. No need to have more conflict on this point as there are many other, more important disagreements with the pro-choice crowd we need to get to.

@@cosmiccatholic2838 I will have to disagree with you there. That is not being charitable at all. I am all for having a polite and civil discussion, but that should be predicated on truth. That being said, putting the discussion of inocent human life in second place to a sof term as "woman's choice" is addering to an euristic and disonest stance on your opponent. No one that is actually sensible to the issue should pander to that. The way I see it, being charitable is not always the same being pleasant and smooth talking, even more so if you are discussing if something is murder or not. Also, the poison the well doesn't apply, as it is not the intent to disprove what they say based on the use of the right term. It is just stating how it is. The whole discussion can still happen with all honesty. I feel you may mistaking charity for human respect, and those are two different and sometimes opposite things.

@@thomazprimoalves7025 the problem is tha using a "you are pro abortion" and going all-out 9 times out of 10 is useless or would just anger a person, also it helps very little with the discussion And saying pro-choice is not wrong or a lie, they believe that a woman should choose to have an abortion. I see nothing wrong with how they identify themselves, even if the "choice" itself is wrong

@@royalsoldierofdrangleic4577 Although this is an interesting subject, this will be my last reply on the topic. Otherwise this will never end. Well, if you truly believe they are right on calling it "a choice", my point still stands firmly. It would be escandalous, for example, to even accept beginning a discussion on "the morality of rape" by calling it "a choice", even if it is by the part of the rapist. If you accept something similar on the issue of killing of a baby in it's mothers womb, you are already losing. No one should aim for being pleasant above being honest. I won't go in an endless loop over this issue, as there are many sides to it, but I do still believe that your reasoning is wrong, and that it serves, in the end, as proof of a succesful manipulation on the other side of the discussion on softing the terms, changing the subject and going on a tangent on the issue of abortion. You can't respond disonesty with flattery and acceptance of an opponents terminology. Tone and urgency are also a part of a discussion, and no one would accept an calm discussion over "was the holocaust wrong?" or "Is rape really that bad?". The way you treat an issue is sometimes as important as the arguments you propose foward or against it. See the concept of Overton Window to understand where I am going with this. If you want an counter-example to the american experience: here in Brazil, where I live, we have severely more strict laws on abortion than probably any the states of the US, and the term used in the discussion is always Abortion, not "choice". If I was a willing to bet, I would guess that if you really dig the cronology of the issue, the use of the term 《choice》 came way before the regulation of abortion, not later. You could infere how it helped on the authorization of abortion from there. But than again, this is a really deep discussion that won't be solved on a youtube comment section. I just hope you can now see my whole point. God Bless!

​@@thomazprimoalves7025 Thank you for the thoughtful response. I still think referring to someone as Pro-Choice is valid. You are right that human respect and charity don't always line up, but this would be a case where they do. Pro-choice already carries a known meaning in our culture (the view that women have the choice to abort her baby) so using the term already carries with it all the needed weight without, as I said, poiesening the well by calling them something they don't wish to be called. Sometimes compromise on these minor issues is okay, and even prudent (notice I said minor issues). It would be like a protestant calling me (a Catholic) a "Papist". This is obviously a derogatory term in most circles, as it refers to someone who will just do whatever the Pope says or something like that. They could say that they will use thee term because "it's just the truth", but that would not incline me to listen to them as it would make me think they are more interested in scoring points than truth (same if someone referred to me as a "heretic" instead of a catholic) I will stress again that "Pro-choice" is not a lie, as it clearly means, in our culture, someone who thinks women should have the right to kill their baby. It implies evil things already. If we want to win people over with truth and charity, as long as we don't compromise our core values, there is no trouble.

Most would argue on suffering. We pull the plug on brain dead people all the time assuming they aren't there anymore in the same way an aborted fetus is considered to be not there.

@@jhoughjr1 but before being aborted that baby was there.😢 And brain dead people still have a soul there, that only God the Creator owns. Life and death is a mystery that need to be treated with dignity and respect. Regarding suffering, there’re two kinds: Wasted Suffering and Redemptive Suffering. Another mystery but we need to trust God. He knows better and love all his creatures.🙏♥️🙏

@@xiomarablanco6516 Where is the campaign to keep people on life-support?

Because they WANT a different outcome than the truth

@@jhoughjr1 you do not understand the issue at all. Natural death proceeds from disconnecting artificial life support. Deliberately killing a human is murder

We're not far away from that exact outcome, people are becoming more and more morally inept and now grotesque situations like public celebrations for abortions are being pushed into the mainstream

Qwerty Well I hope not. That would be just plain psychotic. Feeling guilt at least shows you are human. Glorifying the deed would be straight up evil

@@RamManNo1 The bishop of New York failed to excommunicate Cuomo after he threw a parade in front of the empire state building which was lit in pink to celebrate the legalization of late term and partial birth abortion.

Didn't catch the part where a soul split into two souls when twinning as in identical twins who came from a single zygote.

@@denniswakabayashi4199 He mentioned something about the soul imparted when we are embodied. The zygote split would happen before that. The zygote is not exactly the person anymore than the sperm is. It really doesn't matter though as the existence of a soul is not part of the argument that you are killing a human when they are the most defenseless for reasons of personal convenience. That is why I think the self defense line is a batter pro choice argument. It keeps clear that what is pertinent is when is it justified to kill a human. If someone could time travel to kill a leader before they were born, they would still be killing that person. Just because we are not time traveling to do it, you are still killing a person. I personally dont think abortion should be illegal, just as killing in self defense is not illegal, or in times of war. Abortion wouldn't be an issue were it not for the massive decline in sexual morality the west. Even if we could magically prevent all abortions starting tomorrow, if the underlying moral failing is not rectified it will just continue to get worse.

@@jhoughjr1 I know the normal zygote is not a human being because of inherent ability to twin. Don't know exactly what you are saying about ensoulment? Was there one or two souls in the single zygote?

@@jhoughjr1 the Prolife recognizes the woman's absolute right to procure an abortion by any means since no one is crying to jail or execute women who abort AND all anti-abortion legislation crafted by the Prolife always give absolute immunity to the woman. Where the Prolife make their fight is attempting to take away the doctor's choice of having women who want to abort as patients. Criminalize and punish the doctor but never the woman. The woman is free to take abortion pills, homemade concoction, use the proverbial coat hanger, go horse back riding, play tackle football, starve yourself, etc. to induce a miscarriage all perfectly legal to the Prolife. OK for the woman to self abort but not ok for the doctor to assist with abortion. Not really anti-abortion but anti-doctor anti-safe abortion.

@@jhoughjr1 the Prolife acknowledges "my body my choice" but they some how think they can force women to give birth by taking away the doctor's choice.

Because controlling people is wrong

@@MasterKeyMagicwhy?

@@rudymatheson1415 Because God gave mankind free will to choose or reject him and interfering with that plan interferes with God's plan.

@@rudymatheson1415 the fact that you would even ask why is deeply concerning

It is not likely, because pro-life activists tend to target lawmakers and abortion providers more than religious institutions.

No, as those man-made religious sects have no authority to do, claim nor demand anything from anyone on earth or in heaven.

@@verum-in-omnibus1035 Well, the Roman Catholic Church is a man-made sect.

@@kentfrederick8929 A man named Jesus, sure.

A small organized minority can can a culture look at the LGBT movement what less than 2%. Good catholics for too long have taken the meaning of a good catholic to be someone who has a good Catholic life that's not enough anymore a good Catholic now must stand up and be vocal. If Catholics organized and made consistent and public pushes for policies then we'd change. March for Life is a start we need more. Think about it these politicians only care about keeping their job and they know which groups will hold them accountable. Why do we keep electing "pro-life" candidates that haven't even managed to defund planned parenthood? Why is it candidates have to sit down with evangelical leaders to get evangelical votes but Biden can hold rosary and given the moral authority to support abortion? No majorities don't rule this country its loud organized minorities. Catholics need to start organizing and we need fighters organizing it not people like Catholic Answers and Trent Horn their great but they aren't willing to put in the work and stick their necks out get stuff done.

@@JJ-zr6fu56% of Catholics believe abortion is acceptable, 40% don't believe in transubstantiation - and another 15% were honest enough to at least leave to be evangelical about it. 60% believe they can be sorry for this sins and that is equivalent to the sacrament of confession. Throw Biden and Pelosi into that mix, who people might listen to and say they're correct. Face it, we have ignorant Catholics. The majority of Catholics. We must educate our own. Minorities can be squeaky wheels, but majority rules.

All I can say 139. You formed my inward parts. You have covered me in my mother's womb.... You knew me before I was born. Now how beautiful is that.... He KNEW YOU.... and then you get killed before you can get to know Him.........