The DANGER of "My Body, My Choice"
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 10 พ.ค. 2022
- The idea of "my body my choice doesn't just apply to abortion rights. It is a dangerous approach that leads to the devaluing of all life.
SOCIAL MEDIA:
Newsletter: breakinginthehabit.org/newsle...
Facebook: goo.gl/UoeKWy
Twitter: goo.gl/oQs6ck
Instagram: goo.gl/ShMbhH
Podcast: goo.gl/xqkssG
INTERESTED IN BECOMING A FRIAR?
Holy Name Province: goo.gl/MXKb2R
Find your Vocation Director: goo.gl/2Jc52z
SUPPORT THE MISSION
Order my books: amzn.to/386QDpR
Donate Monthly: goo.gl/UrrwNC
One-time gifts: goo.gl/eKnFJN
MUSIC
Epidemicsound.com
A very interesting video. Thank you. Being a young person who has a degenerative disease I am afraid of doctors taking this a step farther and deciding I'm not worth it, after my last hospital stay two men came to my house and took away my feeding pump. They told me it was because I couldn't keep four pediatric containers of formula down but I never had been able to. I did one container all day long and it sustained me. My Mom told me not to worry that she'd figure it out...so many times I am told I have 2 weeks left or even 2 days I just don't give up. I reckon God will take me in His timing, if I tell that to the hospital councilor person they don't understand me, they told my parents I was mentally ill and yet...that very same hospital sent men in my bedroom to remove my feeding pump, from a girl who has been tube fed for years.
I can't imagine your suffering but your faith is so inspiring!
God Bless You,& Your Family,i am so shocked & sorry & heartbroken to read of your daily struggles to survive,despite ,these ' insurance men/ companies ':which should be prosecuted & imprisoned for their wilfull crimes against humanity,by playing God with your life.This is unethical & wilfully an act of evil: unjustifiable & ammoral .I pray for Lord Jesus ,Son of God,,Blessed Mother of Mercy ,Mary,St.Joseph ,as Your Protector,Your Guardian Angel,All Gods Holy Angels,Saints,Martyrs,Apostles,All Holy & Faithful Clergy, all those of Faith both on earth & departed,to unite in Heaven & Earth to protect You & your family from all evil.May You Always Be Blessed,&may the power of the Holy Spirit,be upon & in You,for You are a child of God,Eternal Father. When God Jesus call's, You Will Be rewarded in highest Heaven ,in Jesus' mighty & sacred name,Amen.God Bless You.I send You love & prayers.💯❤🙏🏽😇💞💯🙏🏽🕊🌹❤
Your faith, stoicism and courage brings a tear to my eye.
When God decides, not before
Much respect and best wishes and prayers for you. 🕯💛
I love the church. I came to Canada and learned how “independent” and “me and myself” view people are. Back in Vietnam, everyone was a community. But the church brought me back to life. Im so grateful
And Canada is a collectivist utopia compared to the individualist culture of the US.
Weird you say the church instead of God but who am I to judge🤷♂️
But then you didnt like Vietnam and all it offers since you went to a different country.
@@thorin8871 very passive-aggressive. Check you honour.
Is it God alone that we are allowed to love, not our neighbours, too? She was talking about community and human values. And you did come across very judgemental
On the euthanasia point, a soul-stirring example of the value of human life is playing out in the UK today. After a five-year battle against cancer, podcaster Deborah James has announced that she is finally entering hospice at home care to be with her family. However, in these last few days of her life, her public bravery has raised £4m for cancer research, earning her a Damehood from the Queen. What a legacy to leave to her children and what an example for all that even at death’s door, God can still have a special purpose for us. God Bless you Deborah.
Eutanasia is cowardice.
@@vittoriovaglio2031 agreed
Dame Deborah James was an amazing person who has done so much good and inspired so many! She literally found her calling in the midst of death.
While I agree with your video and am a total Pro-Life person, believing from conception to natural death. I also wonder when the church is going to speak about the young man's responsibility for creating life. I have seen and heard too many stories of boyfriends dumping the girl and not taking responsibility, or worse yet, demanding that the girl get an abortion. There is also the problem of families deserting the girl because she is pregnant. Also, where is the care for the baby after the child is born. Children are at least an 18 year responsibility and it should not fall on the mother alone. Abortion will end more quickly if we take care of the woman who is carrying the child.
Good points! I am a man and I say the man must take responsibility!
Thank you for bringing this up. The reason why many women get abortions in the first place is because their social network and access to resources is so fickle, especially in the United States. Some of these same women are impoverished or are having to raise the child on their own on top of this. Were they to have better resources or access to care, then the issue wouldn't be as glaring as it is.
@@mairivannella7050 Exactly! When I was a young man my step-father made it clear that I was to be responsible at all times in no uncertain terms. Fifty years ago all men to include young men were considered bums if they did not take care of the woman if something happened and that meant marriage if necessary. The Church used to preach and expect abstinence in no uncertain terms and this included men. Yes, I know all about the scandals but I was at the Church routinely and I went to parochial school fo 8 years with no problems. The men of the greatest generation did not accept failure and were engaged to make their sons real men, not boys on an extended childhood.
@@fmayer1507 father should make their daughter to strong and emotional support in to discern guys they date
" Strong father Strong daughter " book by Dr meg Meeker
Great point, rightly said 👍🏽👍🏽👍🏽
When euthanasia was legalised here in Canada, I remember commenting to my fellow counsellor friends that it would be only a matter of time when they allow euthanasia for those who are deeply mentally ill. Over a decade later, we're now facing a bill that's seeking to allow euthanasia for precisely that reason. It won't stop there, of course. Given time, they'll allow euthanasia for people who are suicidal, depressed, or even just feeling a general ennui in life. The rallying cry? My body, my choice.
Sadly, I believe you are right in your prediction.
Euthanasia for the mentally ill (incl mood disorders like depression) has already been legal for a while in the Netherlands. I'm personally in favour of euthanasia and assisted suicide (i'm not religious at all so I do stand with the argument that it's everyone's own choice to end their live). But, there is of course effort put in to the patient to not opt for euthanasia. And it's not like anyone can walk into the doctors office and claim to be suicidal to get euthanised.
In the Netherlands religion is not big at all (over 50% of the population is non-religous), so the general opinion is that if someone is suffering, letting them go in a peaceful and painfree manner may be the best for them.
I hope the bill passes. If I want to duck out of the game, it should be my right to do so, as long as I don't hurt anybody else.
Not everyone wants to live in this planet - they may not be depressed or terminally ill but have just had enough. If life is considered so sacred why are millions murdered being murdered by their govts, why is it ok to not consider the well-being and lives of animals too?
@@SeansMusicVault agreed!
Abortion is a difficult argument to make, because we can't even force someone to give blood to save a life, even though it is the safest medical procedure in existence. It is an easy step to then say that the fetus is indeed human and alive, but there exists no legal obligation for the mother to extend her bodies protection over it. If you make abortion illegal, why then should we not make blood donation mandatory? Or organ donation? Or indeed vaccines?
As for Euthanasia, I live in a nation where it is legal. My aunt had lung cancer. At the end she spend her days gasping for air, drowning on land. No medications worked, her lungs were simply shot. It was heartbreaking and terrifying. She got euthanised at home. Alongside her family. It is not easy to look a dying woman who is begging for it to end in her eyes and tell her that God would like her to suffer a few months more.
First of all, being pregnant is entirely unlike giving blood which is a completely artificial thing (though a good thing to do certainly). Supposedly 'forcing' someone to stay pregnant really means not artificially intervening to snuff out the life growing in the uterus. Leaving nature to progress is the non-interventionist thing to do. Talking about 'forced' birth is like complaining that you really wanted to be shorter but you were forced to grow to the height you are! Secondly, do you think you are the only one to have a loved one die? It is heartbreaking! But you are not listening to what father is saying. Palliative care is good! Not artificially extending the life of someone dying - that is ethical. It is the deliberate use of medicine or violence to end someone's life that is wrong. So where you got the idea that letting someone die a natural death is someone telling that person God wants them to suffer for a few more months is simply an overwrought reaction on your part. That is not what Father's position is.
I watched my Aunt die of lung cancer as well. She was not euthanized, but she did pray for death the last few months. It was horrific to watch and traumatized me for many years. No one should have to go through that.
@Faith&books Rapists can easily get a woman pregnant. If the law forces her to carry to term, then she will be forced to carry the rapists child. If woman is a 12 year old girl, and the rapists is her own brother: do you think her carrying to term her child is letting nature carry its way out?
@@faithbooks7906 Like I said, palliative care didn't work anymore. There was only the option of suffering for months or euthanasia. I am uncomfortable taking an absolutist position because of cases like my aunt. If I ever get to that point I'm not sure I wouldn't do the same as her.
The ultimate lesson of life: even your body isn’t yours… the water and all minerals of our body preexist before us and they will subsist after us..
It’s also not a good argument in favor of drunk or distracted driving. “My car, my choice” wouldn’t be a defense, either.
Wherein lay the similarities? I can't see any
@@nicnaknoc control over things that are perceived as “my possessions” more than the welfare of others.
So women are comparable to cars?
@@lavacaqueri5454 no, just saying “mine” sometimes leads that way. I chuckled at your comment. I agree we are compared to cars too often.
@@tom-dznuts I'm sorry what? You make even less sense than op. Last time I checked I was/am/have always been my body, it is not a possession, it is ME!
I totally agree with you, I’m not religious, but we are heading to a society that doesn’t value life, only convenience.
feminism is destroying society
A fetus isn't a life but go owf. Making safe abortions illegal will murder more women than "babies"
Thank you for your thoughts on this subject. As a practicing Catholic I have always been pro-life, but have been struggling with this since the recent events have elevated the subject to one of the top news stories. I'm finding it difficult to rejoice that abortion will likely again be illegal because of the anger and emotional suffering it appears to be causing so many, especially females. I keep questioning if this is the correct solution at this time. It appears it'll just widened an already destructive cancer-like divide in this country. Again, thanks for your thoughts on the subject it helped to reaffirm my convictions that it's wrong but I still don't know if the approach of raming our beliefs down the throats of those that don't believe as we do is going to really solve the abortion problem and will only bring much pain and suffering to many women because they're going to try to get rid of the baby regardless only now it'll be illegal. There's so much more that could be said on the subject but will stop here with I hope and pray my fears regarding this are mislaid and all does work out according to God's will whatever that may be.
It will definitely prevent abortions don't worry
You definitely and respectfully highlight the painful nuances of this issue in our country!
Ya i think you hit the spot for the most part i don't think i had too strong of opinion on abortion but i think this issue is more gray than Christians wish it was
Thank you for actually respecting women and their feelings instead of holding a fetus more important and ramming your views down our throats
@@user-fr1fi1uy1z you do know, though, that a fetus is just a word for a very young human being, right? Our understanding of the complicated issues surrounding abortion doesn’t eliminate this reality.
Fight for chastity for all, not abortion and contraceptives.
I get this argument. And as a devout Catholic, I strive to treat my body as a temple. But I also believe separation of church and state. And we must not impose our beliefs and decrees onto others. If we “force” people to be Christians, none of us can “choose” to be Christians. As a devout Catholic, I also try not to judge other Christians who err.
No one is forcing anyone to be catholic or Christian. Being pro life protects the life of an innocent child that liberals want to simply write off as health care or women rights when its really just murder out of selfishness. Soft Christians like this video and comment is why our faith is under attack and we continue to allow satin and his lies to rule the world and lead people to hell.
Separation of Church and state has been condemned already by Pope Pius X.
Well, with this one... I think you really don't have to be a Christian to see that killing children should be illegal. After all, almost everyone in the first world countries believes that parents cannot just kill their born child if they don't want it. Abortion is similar, even though the child looks less human than an infant, it's still an innocent child. And we should demand that it's life isn't in danger. With euthanasia... poeple who have survived a suicide attempt aren't punished for that, but if someone helped them, convinced them to do it, they really should. Euthanasia isn't really different from helping someone with committing suicide. We cannot tolerate this, it is not fir anyone's good. And God wouldn't want that either. So it's problematic if you don't agree with the Church on this, talk about it publically and still want to receive the Communion. It's better to into our conscience, explain publically that we don't agree with that statements anymore
@@reubenkeyz5131 the problem with doing away with separation of church and state is that then the government can come in and tell you what religion and denomination you're allowed to be and what it's allowed to teach you and give heavy consequences if you don't obey. Separation of church and state actually protects religion. It isn't without its problems but say you have a Baptist president who thinks Catholicism isn't Christianity and that the Pope is actually the antichrist. And say he's very fond of executive orders and there isn't any separation of church and state to force him to not make a law banning Catholicism or at least making the lives of Catholics in the US much harder by some other means. And there are quite a lot of protestants, not just Baptists, who think the Pope is the antichrist and Catholics aren't Christian.
Separation of church and state doesn't mean what liberals think that it means.
I agree with you Father, but we also do not have the right to impose our beliefs on others. Just as the Catholic Church argued against Obamacare requiring coverage for birth control, the Catholic Church does not have a right to get involved politically to make any of the topics you have covered illegal. There are religions who believe people should have access to abortion and physician assisted suicide. Just because they are legal does not mean anyone has to partake in them if their morals tells them otherwise.
Is that how you feel about the death penalty? Murder? Tax evasion? If someone is immoral, it's not a matter of "imposing our beliefs on others." It's about being moral.
@@BreakingInTheHabit I do think that if we expect our constitutional right to freedom of religion to be protected we have to make sure the rights of other religions are protected. I am not aware of any religions that advocate murder or tax evasion.
"There are religions who believe people should have access to abortion and physician assisted suicide. " More power to those "religions" then (and I put that word in quotes). They are not MY religion, that's for sure. I'll keep those religions far away from mine, by any means necessary, thank you!
The irony is the Catholic Church is proven to be one of the most immoral organisations on the planet. Horrifically immoral.
When my state removed the law providing criminal exemption when it comes to crimes such as seal of the confessional exemption...catholic leaders openly stated they would rather go to prison so as to protect p@edophiles than obey mandatory reporting laws that protect children. This is truly and empirically morally depraved.
@@whitney2042 but if it did would you say that right should be protected if you are a sane person then your answer should be no we have to draw the line in the sand somewhere if we didn't this world would be chaos imagine if some dude started a religion where burning down buildings was an okay thing to do then he actually did it and used the excuse it's part of my religion and just got away with it that's an actually terrifying thought that anyone could make up any bullcrap and just do anything they want without any consequences
Fr. Casey was spot on about his last point on Suicide. I used to know this young intelligent girl (before she pushed me away) who had (and probably still has) suicidal thoughts. A lot of people in my generation have the mindset of "if I were to eliminate myself, it would be better for everyone." The whole "My body, my choice" mantra would only reinforce that narrative.
Wait…she was intelligent before she pushed you away? 🤔
Thoughts of suicide are very often as a result of mental illness. I suffer from bipolar depression and those thoughts often come to my mind. Suicide is not about exercising one's rights. It's about screaming out for help. However, I fight it with prayer because my life is God's, not mine. Unfortunately, many do not have that belief system and/or faith.
@@marciatinto6582 I see. Well, let’s keep praying for her as I will pray for you.
@@ntmn8444 I think he or she meant "I knew her, but then I never got to know/hang out with her anymore"
@@ToxicPea thank you so much.
Regarding euthanasia, I know so many who think of it as "mercy." But, for me I see such a potential for abuse. What would happen if a family were to convince a dying or infirmed family member that they were a financial burden that they could no longer care for? Isn't it quite conceivable that many euthanasias would not even be true "free choices" but actually the result of familial or societal pressures?
As you say, and as our Church teaches, there is dignity in life, ALL life! I shudder to think that our society reduces it to what is seen as valuable in society's eyes, and not God's.
Although I can understand your opinion I'd like to counter with the Idea that "Mercy" by not having abortions would be possibly bringing that kid into a world where they are a financial burden. And making a child struggle through that life knowing that their birth led to the struggle of their parents can be seen as also cruel. I can't say that I don't get worried about what your version of god is telling you to do especially if he can only see the big picture.
@@physicsofgaming5369 hey at least they'd have a chance at life
@@wat8885 But thats where the problem gets worse, some children don't there are multiple cases where children are stillborn or live maybe a month in constant pain until they die because of birth defects because of problems with the mother.
@@physicsofgaming5369 but that's not very likely to happen it's even less likely to happen if you are healthy everything and anything can kill you or the people you care about you shouldn't do something that drastic when it has a decently low chance of happening life matters and children deserve to at least have a chance to live it if they aren't for sure going to die before being born or shortly after because of health issues with the mother
But making abortions illegal is finite and your point is that in those cases that abortion can effect the likelihood of survival of either the mother or make the suffering of the baby last longer is fine because "If your healthy it probably will be fine" you leave out the group of people that cant have a baby safety or have preexisting conditions that will almost and usually without a doubt will kill the baby.
THIS!!!! I've always struggled to explain to people that I am pro-life... that means I oppose abortion, euthanasia, AND I oppose capital punishment. Our modern (American) political landscape thus leaves me without a place to call my own. You have to support one and oppose the other... I don't. ALL Life is sacred. We didn't give it and thus we can't rightfully take it...
I agree. People usually associate ,,pro-life" with being against abortion, but its about all human life
We're on the same boat, it's hypocritical being pro-life and pro-capital punishment. You cannot be both.
@@Veritas1234 In practice, though, at least in the US, Conservative (with does NOT mean Republican but is usually used interchangeably) is usually assumed to mean pro-capital punishment.
@@samcohen9769 And those are the exact words that I use to describe myself when people take the time to pry a little deeper than just a label. In fact, I tend to use the word "Conservatarian"... conservative when compared to my libertarian friends and libertarian when compared to my conservative friends...
isn't this just called the "consistent life ethic" or something
The best way to have as few abortions as possible is to convince people not to have them. If you make it illegal, that divides the public even further and we will see many women and doctors going to prison, not stopping abortions anyway. We didn't end drug or alcohol addictions by criminalizing them, and we didn't successfully lower youth smoking rates by banning tobacco. Change is achieved through advocacy and convincing, not through criminalizing segments of our own population. Laws are meant to protect society at large, not punish personal behavior.
Thank you for this because yes! I have thought these same thoughts and needed answers! God bless you and your work Father Casey! 💜🙏💜
Keep up the good work Fr.
You aren't alone in your concern. Rehumanize International has been raising the alarm in the disabled community for years :(
From the book "My Heart Will Triumph" by Mirjana Soldo
#
Some things were more difficult to accept. Many of the girls in my school spoke about having abortions as if it was nothing. One might have assumed that they had simply gone to the dentist to have a tooth pulled. In the morning, for example, a girl would go to have an abortion, and then she would show up for afternoon classes and talk about whatever concert or party was happening that night. I suffered whenever I overheard someone talking about it so casually. There were times when I wanted to confront the girls about it, to say something like, “Don’t you know it’s wrong to kill the child within you?” But through my daily apparitions, and through prayer, Our Lady taught me that preaching to them and being judgmental would only drive them farther away. Instead, I learned to show them love, and I tried to live as an example of someone who knew God’s love. I once heard that souls of unbaptized infants and victims of abortion went to a place known as Limbo-a perpetual state of separation from God. But how could God, the Pure Love, exclude innocent babies from Heaven? During an apparition, I asked Our Lady, “Where do they go?” “They are with me in Heaven,” she replied.
Beautiful 🙏🏻
thanks for sharing this bit from mirjana's book. I need to read it.
Ugh, abortion should never be a convenience. But we do need it for emergencies.
Yes, "my body, my choice" is an oversimplification. Heck, it's not even a complete sentence. You can't even prove Pythagorean's Theorem with 4 words. But it fits on a sign and highlights the objects of an argument being promoted. Yes, the unborn are medically, biologically and scientifically human life in the earliest stages of development. BUT ... but does that mean a woman must use her body to carry it to term? That's the question here. What rights do women have to their own bodies? When it comes to the abortion issue, the Church only addresses the experience of the unborn. You never hear what the Church has to say about a woman's choice as to how her body is used. Even the angel Gabriel checked with Mary to see if she was okay with an unplanned pregnancy. (Actually, I'm being generous here because Gabriel's message was more of a notification to Mary about what was going to happen to which Mary gave her consent.) In the end, by not even asking or addressing the question of what rights women have to their own bodies, the Church is behaving as if they have none.
On the euthanasia issue, your arguments are completely religious, and in that context, your conclusions can be entirely understood. But they are based on religious doctrine, and when it comes to government, that can be DANGEROUS. What if the law of the land was dictated by Islamic doctrine? What if all men had to be circumcised per Mosaic law? (Another my body, my choice issue.)
In the end, it all comes down to beliefs. Black and white conclusions of what is absolutely right and wrong (in a world more gray than most people are comfortable admitting) come down to beliefs. I understand why people fight for what they believe in. In the big picture maybe it makes for a better world than one where everyone lives in apathy. Maybe.
And as a wise man once said to me, "You and I are not going to solve this here tonight."
But you are defending a belief too. The belief that the society has the power to kill a human being and it is right because it is about satisfying feelings. In USA they are so used to defending individualism that you miss a broader picture: that life is material and as such the conditions on which a person develops himself affects his views and his actions. In a perfect world you can defend that any person can do whatever he/she wants, but in reality he/she does what the materialistic possibilities allows the person to do. So, if you see deeper, Catholicism as a theory that gives an explanation of what a person is and of meaning of life, is much more optimistic and fair. It supposes that no society has the right to take away any life, no matter the costs for it. First,let's solve the materialistic situations in which we carry our lives: palliative care is much more expensive than assisted suicide.
On the other hand: father Casey is critising another Christian church, that's why his comments are religious.
@@martasanz387 Decisions are based on various inputs: facts, reason, beliefs, thoughts, and feelings. Regardless of the value you place on an input like feelings, the core question to be answered is: does a woman have the sole right to decide the present and future use of her own body. What if she wants a hysterectomy while she's pregnant? It's her uterus. Should she be forced to use her body to gestate another living being against her will? And in civil matters, religious arguments cannot be used because of the dangerous precedent that would create (imagine witch trials and hangings). What about a slippery slope in which in the future pregnancy is very hard (The Handmaid's Tale) where some might wish to forceably impregnate women (an extreme form of being pro life). You say I miss the broader picture which for you is apparently fully based on a religious world view. So, ... I completely understand why you "feel" the way you do. However, to those who are irreligious you represent a threat to their civil liberties. They don't share your view of existence at all. And it sounds like you don't care.
@@marknowak The core of the discussion is not whether I'm religious or not. The point is what kind of society are we ready to create. Your view is based on what a woman " want to do" but sure there are plenty of things we want to do and we can't do them. Simply because we don't have the power or the possibilities to do so. My point is that if we see the matter of the problem as a question of possession and therefore I can use my body anyhow..then what is detaining us from considering slavery, surrogacy or prostituion morally unacceptable? This vision is called Utilitarism and it is nothing new. It has been in history before. Precisely it is through Catholicism that we owe our current vision. On the other hand, we really don't own our bodies: we are ourselves. We own a car, a house or a book but we don't own our bodies. When you mentioned the possibilities of making a woman pregnant because of imposition of some kind of religious fanatics made me think that is exactly what is going on with surrogacy. How many women decide to do it because of freedom of the cause? Or do they do it for money Is this not reproachable? Is it because she really wants it or because she is forced by her situations? And who is the beneficiary of this? Capital and people with money. What catholicism tells you is that we cannot jump the materialistic side of it and this requires moral answers. Catholicism is just another way of presenting solutions in the society. If it manages to create a good mass opinion things will change whether everybody agree or not. Living in democracy is defending different moral views. Ideally, the more points in common, the better. We have passed from seeing abortion as a bad thing but necessary in certain painful situations to seeing it as an act of freedom. What is a stake here is the survival of our own civilization. It was nice interacting with you! M
@@martasanz387 It's true that the core of the discussion is not whether you are religious or not, but your argument is ultimately religious in nature.
It's not what we want that is the core of my argument, but what rights a woman has to her how her body is used. Wants are obviously not rights.
Slavery obviously wouldn't be about one's own body.
"Utilitarianism holds that the most ethical choice is the one that will produce the greatest good for the greatest number. It is the only moral framework that can be used to justify military force or war." So lets not be so quick to discount its merits.
Rights are not intrinsically about materialism or money. You just have to go through the Bill of Rights to see that.
We don't really own our own bodies? I think you will agree that each of us possesses one. (Or I quit.)
Freedom of choice is not unlike freedom of speech in that I may not agree with your choices, but I do believe you have a right to those choices that concern what you and no one else can claim ownership.
What is at stake here is whether one gender can be forced to do something with their bodies against their will under penalty of criminal prosecution.
Best regards, Mark
Islamic doctrine isn't so scary as what non Muslims will have you believe imo, and I feel like a bunch of US-ians circumcise themselves anyway. Either way, great comment!
Been having a rough time listening to all kinds of different arguments from people regarding these issues, really needed this vid❤️
May God continue to grace you Fr Casey!!!❤🙏❤
While I agree with this analysis of "my body, my choice", it is also true that, especially in the case of abortion, "my body my choice" is only one aspect of a much larger issue with respect to civil rights and social welfare. For example, since the draft decision to repeal Roe vs Wade was leaked, some are claiming that banning abortion infringes upon the religious freedom of Jewish people, since (as the argument goes), Jewish tradition emphasizes saving the life of the mother if a pregnancy goes wrong. There's also the simple fact that making abortion illegal does not mean it stops happening - it just gets a lot more unsafe. And then, if you take a good hard look at the reasons why abortions are obtained, societal injustices make up a large proportion of those...things like poverty and job insecurity, sexual violence against women, etc abound. So is it worth it to pursue abortion ban laws? And how far do you go with that? And let's not forget that it takes two to make an unwanted pregnancy...where is the legal consequences for the man involved, if abortion becomes a felony?
I'm of the opinion that abortion and euthanasia will continue until we have built a just and equal society that eliminates all the systemic reasons that people seek abortion, and that properly cares for the needs of the vulnerable among us.
That was melodramatic, but yes you're right, bad things will only stop happening once we have an impossible society
@@Qwerty-jy9mj and Christ calls us to build that impossible society! What else do you think "Build the Kingdom of God" means? It certainly doesn't mean 'passively tolerate injustice and suffering while on Earth in the hopes of being compensated for it one day in Heaven' !
Our calling as Catholics is crystal-clear : to treat each person we meet with compassion and love, not judgement, to alleviate one another's suffering, to show mercy, to generously support each other in both material and intangible ways, so that in the end all may come to Christ and believe. Punitive laws designed to crush the already downtrodden at a point when they may be facing the most difficult choice/challenge they've ever faved in their life, have exactly 0 -ZERO - place in that kind of world.
@@silviag3798
Nope, that is in fact an element of formal heresy.
You work _for_ the kingdom, the express guarantee is that we will never have it in this age. This is why subversions of the gospel like so called "liberation theology" are expressly forbidden by the church, as they attempt to replace Christian scatology with a materialist vision of the end of history.
I think I've heard the Jewish tradition you mention from someone who was trying to claim the Bible was for abortion.
It is exactly in line with the modern pro life position actually, as in if an abortion is necessary to save the mother's life, then abortion is permissible.
I'm pro life and the Jewish tradition isn't something I have any conflict with.
Largely the problem with ideological abortion opposed positions is that it attempts to insert blind ideology into law in what is really nuanced and difficult medical decision. Abortion is generally not a light subject or a light decision and simply needs to remain a medical decision between the mother and their doctors and counselors. When you start injecting blind ideology into it, it just creates problems.
There’s a major distinction between anti-vaxxers and abortionists.
I live in a predominantly catholic country. I have a friend/classmate in high school who was raped by her own father and she was impregnated. No abortion clinics available here since we are Catholics and we actually discourage her from ending the baby's life.. She was able to give birth to her child,courtesy of her father,but months after, she ended her life. She is being accused by her own mother (who's working overseas) that she tolerated her father doing it to herself.
Thank you for sharing. I’m SO sorry that your friend endured a nightmare that ultimately drove her to suicide. All I can think is “What kind of ‘life’ will this child born of incest have?” The Father is also the Grandfather?! How horrible! I am a Christian. I am a Catholic. Dare I say…I am Pro Choice. Pro Choice doesn’t mean I disregard life. Life is so fragile, fleeting and precious. That being said, any woman who has ever contemplated abortion (much less had one) did not do so with a light heart. For the vast majority of women, who are faced with this decision, it is the ABSOLUTE HARDEST thing they will ever face. It is so strange to me that a lot of the people who criticize women who are Pro Choice are the very same people who tell women to “Stop making babies you can’t afford!” Sounds a bit hypocritical to me. Don’t let me get started on men having the “right” to have a vasectomy at any time, without barrier or criticism. No one says a word. NO ONE. We all seem to forget that MEN carry babies before women. Women don’t have sperm people. Let’s not talk about the sheer hypocrisy of the “Good Catholic Girls” who have “quiet” abortions. Technically, these girls/women can still claim “Pro Life” because only immediate family knows about the abortion. Perhaps we women should just stop sharing our bodies. No procreation, no problem. Right?…
@@Mademoyselle Yes? Your body is a temple.
Poor girl. This is so sad and heartbreaking.
@@Mademoyselle That pretty much consolidates what pro-choice is, not a position advocating that people abort; rather a position stating that one is really not in a position where you can make that difficult decision for another.
The thing is though, not everyone measures their life choices and values by your faith. Suffering can no doubt be cathartic for someone who believes it will bring them closer to God. However, for those who are secular, agnostic, atheist or those who live by a different faith and/or philosophy than yours, suffering is just suffering. It's nothing more than pain that you want to stop. It does not add anything to your experience; rather, it makes it so much worse.
On top of that, I truly think even the most devout Roman catholic can become broken in mind and spirit by never ending, brutal pain. What if they at a certain point can't cope anymore? What if they want the pain to stop, and neither pain killers nor end of life/palliative care are an option, because their body can in theory keep going? What do you say then?
I don't think any us should make decisions for other people, when we have no idea how they might feel. At a certain point, keeping someone alive despite immense suffering can easily become cruel and merciless.
I get where you are coming from, and I feel like you've explained yourself, as always, without malice, but I don't agree with this take.
I could be wrong, as I’m not Catholic, but I’m not sure they’re against palliative care. I doubt Catholics would hold that position that you ought to suffer if that is a natural effect of your condition. No, what this boils down to is a certain ethic of medicine. What should the practice of medicine aim at, what is its telos, its overall goal? I’d imagine a Catholic would say that it ought to be restorative. That is to say, its aim should be to restore, to the best it can, the human body to its “natural” state-free of pain, lucid, etc.
I don’t think their prescription on the matter is, “you will *live* even if you will *suffer* !”
well said
I couldn't have said it better myself! I agree with most everything he said until he crossed over into faith territory. I think people who cannot be cured and are suffering too much solhould be able to pass on willingly and consenting. I think it's still complicated for things like abortion though, because what if a woman is raped? Should they then have to live through the pain of giving birth and have an economic crutch for possibly the rest of their lives? I know it sounds awful, but I think realistically we have to weigh the potential of a fetus/baby vs. A woman in that situation. Is adoption a necessarily good option? Is the adoption system well kept? Thoughts? Resources?
It just sounds like being an atheist is a miserable experience.
But just because you devalue life you don't get to devalue others,including other atheists.
@@bookishbrendan8875 Maybe I should've explained better what I meant with 'when palliative care isn't an option'. I know catholics aren't oppposed to palliative care. I think Fr. Casey even mentions this in his video. What I meant by my comment was that not every condition that causes extreme amounts of pain, and thus suffering, is life threatening.
Some years ago, there was a documentary called 'Allow me to die'. It featured a man who had cluster headaches so severe that he became suicidal because he couldn't handle them anymore. He was in the process of applying for euthanasia. He had a young family and he himself was in perfect health, apart from the headaches. Whether you agree with euthanasia or not, the situation this man found himself in must've been excrutiating. Luckily for him, medicine advanced and was able to stop the headaches. Yet, what if no treatment helped to alleviate his pain? What if medicine had no answers? Should he be able to start palliative care, even while being young and healthy?
I'm not saying catholics are cruel and want people to suffer, yet I think when looked case by case, euthanasia provides a solution to people who have nothing left to turn to. When not even the thought of coming closer to God can comfort you.
Thank you for bringing clarity to these complex issues. Honestly, I was deeply confused and did not fully understand why the church held such strong opinions on abortion or euthanasia though I have always found both practices personally disturbing and wrong.
As a health professional, I might add: palliative care exists. This is true caring. Death is not an illness, it is a step in each of our own journeys.
As for abortion and vaccines, the way is clearer. "My body" is not mine, but a part of the whole.
so spot on Fr. Casey! I myself have had the same concern for sometime now, we should really spread awareness!
Thank you Fr Casey for your of wisdom
I say I'm pro-life. That means I'm not going to support the abortion movement any more than I am supporting capital punishment. I am not going to put people's lives in danger because of my own selfishness. I am not going to end ANY life. I am not going to look away from people who need my support or prayers. Very good argument you have presented. Thank you. I hope people will stop and think before choosing sides.
@@davidjones5547 actually, the Catholic Church helps pregnant women in crisis every day. We help get them low cost or free medical care, counseling, clothes, diapers, food, cribs, strollers, etc etc…whatever the woman needs…to help them in their pregnancy and beyond. We help women in every possible way to help them keep the baby. Protestant churches do much of the same too. We do so much to help these women do the right thing. It’s really up to the woman to make that decision, and we pray they will. That’s what being a church is. We are here to hold and to be held. We don’t “hate the child.” We ARE truly pro-life.
@@davidjones5547
If we got parental paid leave right now, would you oppose abortion the next day?
Thank you for this post. There’s so much to pray for in this world. God bless you 💛
I honestly have such a hard time with euthanasia. I understand how it is morally wrong, but when my dog died, I can't imagine having to watch her suffer for days.
We do realize that there is a big different between a dog and a human, though, right?
@@BreakingInTheHabityes, the huge difference is that animal can't speak. And human who's in unimaginable pain can ask to be saved from it. But people like you would choose to let this person suffer in agony because of your stupid beliefs in cruel and judgemental diety.
As I write this, Roe v. Wade has been overturned in the U.S., and many states are rushing to severely limit and/or criminalize abortion. However, nothing has been done to make healthcare, family leave, and childcare more accessible anywhere that I know of (please correct me if I'm wrong). In developed nations with easy/affordable access to healthcare, childcare, paid family leave, free education, etc., the abortion rates are low...even where the unintended pregnancy rate is high and abortion is legal up to at least 12 weeks. When a woman or girl knows that her society has her back (and her child's back), she is more likely to carry to term. Look it up...in the Nordic and other European nations, the number of single parent (mostly single mother) households is staggering. If a woman or girl is socio-economically stressed, she is going to find an abortion provider whether it is legal or not. She'll cross state lines or leave the country. She may try to do it herself (which is where we were before Roe). It is hypocritical for a Christian to demand both criminalization of abortion and low taxes. Are we willing to sacrifice low taxes to protect life? Life isn't cheap.
Was looking for a video on this sentence, and here it is, praise God
Wow, you nailed it. As someone who claims to be anti-abortion, yet pro-choice this was the most balanced video on these subjects I've seen. I do struggle with my stance. It sounds like I'm being wishy washy, but that is not my intention. I don't want to see women die when they have a back alley abortion, I have concerns about the government going crazy and outlawing medically needed "abortions" (ectopic), and I don't want to see the government putting women in jail who abort. Talk about slippery slopes....one person's miscarriage because she didn't get prenatal care is another person's abortion... These are hard topics.
Why don’t you want someone who wantonly kills another human jailed? If you feel some lesser penalty justified why not recite a couple of rosaries as penance?
@@russellmiles2861 You and people like you are why I don't support the pro-life movement, even though I think abortion is wrong. So many anti-abortion supporters have such contempt and hatred for women who have had an abortion. You and your ilk have no compassion for such women at all. We need to convince these women, and society in general, that unborn babies are human lives worth saving. We do not need to throw hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of girls and women in jail.
Those are all flawed arguments. Back alley abortions don’t exist anymore. A lot of abortions are done through pills. If a women kills her child she should be jailed since that’s murder.
I don't see the slippery slopes. By it's very nature an ecoptic pregnancy will end in the death of the child and even the mother so any sane person with a medical advisory board would not criminalize ectopic pregnancies.
Jail for killing a child?..... Um yeah cause effect no slipper slope there. Miscarriage would be on individual basis. Once again with a medical advisory board it all miscarriages would not be criminalized because miscarriage is a reality of pregnancy due to fertility issues etc however there's a difference between a natural miscarriage and someone intentionally causing a miscarriage. Once again I don't see slippery slopes.
@@kadeshswanson3991 I am an outsider but I understand that in the USA there has never been that abortions were a criminal matter. This was enacted once in DC in the 1920s or around then and promptly quashed by the Supreme Court
With regard miscarriages: the medical term is abortion. The medical procedure is the same. The only difference in intention. I gather that no US jurisdiction except Texas records “intention”. And then only for public health. Private doctors have no obligation to report why a medical abortion is carried out; only that it has.
LOVE you for speaking on this topic Fr. Casey❤️❤️
Thank you for your expression. Although I knew I would not be able to agree with your point of view before I clicked on this video, now I'm glad to say that I don't regret listening to your points. They are well made, as usual. The more I am aware of what "reality" means differently to people with different faith, the more I find the absolute necessity to listen to those who I desire to block. It was you who first showed me the intellectual seriousness within a religion, and now you become the voice from "the other side" that I can listen to without unreasonable frustration. As someone who's not your intended audience, I don't think you care about this reaction at all. But anyway, thank you very much.
You can follow whatever rules or teachings of your particular faith you want. You can even pick and choose what you want to follow. But to impose the teachings and beliefs of your religion on those that do not share them is beyond reprehensible. Once we all live in a theocracy then and only then should religion influence public policy.
I've got a moral question that is tangentially related to euthanasia. When doctors remove someone from life support, the patient often doesn't die immediately. All it means is the medical staff cannot intervene and prevent them from dying. Those who don't die immediately eventually die of asphyxiation, dehydration, or maybe even starvation, depending on the level of life support that was required. How is that not considered to be killing another person, if they actively remove the only thing(s) keeping the patient alive? In a non-medical setting, that would be considered to be murder, yet in a medical facility, it's not. I've just always wondered where that line was drawn and why
From a moral standpoint, life support would be removed ONLY if it were medically proven that the patient could not recover even with it-- in other words, that death is inevitable. Palliative care gives comfort during curative treatment, but if the latter has failed and Dr's conclude it's a matter of time, patients (or medical proxy) can accept this reality and refuse life support. It's basically a shift to hospice. Never easy. Nature's course can be a hard one, but it still respects the dignity of life.
Speaking from first-hand experience, my mom was on a breathing machine (tracheotomy) for the last year and a half of her life, due to complications from pneumonia. A week and a half before she died, we discovered she had stage IV melanoma, which had spread from a mole on her foot to her liver and lungs. When she was discharged from the hospital, we were initially waiting on a treatment for her, but a couple days later we learned that what was available to her would put her in respiratory distress and almost certainly kill her, so she was admitted into hospice from her home. A couple days later, she stopped eating, and another day later she stopped drinking and could no longer get out of bed. I was not present on the day she died (I was traveling to get to her), though my family who surrounded her told me that in the final hour before they turned off her breathing machine, it was causing her more discomfort than help. She knew it was the end and she understood that turning off the machine was what had to happen. My mother died peacefully minutes later, and I contend that it wasn't because the breathing machine was turned off- cancer had overtaken her body.
@@Veritas1234 i don't so think so because line between natural and unnatural is a spectrum or arbitrary depending on who you ask and what they believe.
@@katherinemurphy2762 That’s a pretty good question. It brings up the debate of whether or not there is a difference between killing and letting someone die. Killing will result in the patients death which is inevitable but is also directly caused by the physician. Withdrawing aid and letting a patient die will cause them to die but it is not done directly by the physician. For some reason its intuitive to think that killing is automatically worse but letting a patient die is also death through omission. We automatically assume that killing is worse, when really euthanasia can have more benefits to the patient. It also brings up the question of bodily autonomy, consent and the no harm principle. In this case, the patient is not harming anyone else by choosing to die peacefully. However someone could argue that making euthanasia legal will allow people who don’t have legitimate reasons to commit suicide. About consent, a physician cannot euthanize a patient without their consent and they can’t resuscitate a patient who doesn’t want to be. The frustrating thing about philosophy is that there is always going to be someone who disagrees with you. That’s why for situations like these, I just say to leave it up to god. I don’t see it as that black and white.
Thank you for another wonderfully crucial video.
Thank you for making this video. You stated it brilliantly. Keep going.
I've been working as a hospice nurse, I absolutely loathe that disguising "death with dignity" phrase. Every death, I've witnessed over my 18 years of work had it's dignity, coming from a single human being. Suicide, even if assisted by a doctor, doesn't hold any special value. As a Catholic, I see a value in suffering as it can be offered as a penance for our sins. Children from Fatima did so, John Paul II was a living example how suffering has a place and purpose.
I do not want to spend months wasting away from a very painful disease. If I want to die, just let me die
@@kylesmit2690 you can always ask for painkillers at the hospice, refuse additional treatments and medications prolonging life.
@@boem3021 I deserve to end my life if and when I choose to. Not when I'm too sick to walk, talk and think.
That's just it. If as Catholics we understood and valued the place joyful suffering has in our salvation an eternal glory we wouldn't have so much confusion with these topics.
@@taylormcanerney8635 thank you for this comment! Yes, American Catholics seldom recognize value of suffering! But even in Mt 16, 21-27, Jesus talks about taking on our cross and following Him. Christian denominations proclaim that "Gospel of success", where God's blessing has to show itself in the form of money and wealthy lifestyle. Recently, I wrote on one of the nurse's forums against "dying with dignity", most people yelled at me in the comments, accusing me of lack of empathy and quitting work as a nurse. People, even devoted Catholics, don't understand that this life's suffering can be offered as a penence for our own sins. I think that's devil's work in rubbing the meaning and value of suffering from people.
A complicated concept that we don't fully agree on but as usual it's a pleasure hearing you talk on it and you've given me cause to think o n it more deeply, even if my mind hasn't changed. Please keep it up.
You stated my feelings more elegantly than I could have. Thank you.
@@rrkingery Happy to help!
I'm thankful that there are still people who can be respectful even in disagreement.
@@HolyKhaaaaan Thank you! Glad to hear it! Respect should always be the status quo. Trust may need to be earned and friendships need to be inspired but there's no reason respect shouldn't be the status quo. It costs nothing and can mean everything.
I would love to see Fr. Casey and Fr. Mike chatting and exchanging ideas. Video collab?
I wish the bishops would be as adamant about capital punishment as they are about abortion.
While I agree that we have a moral duty to make choices to benefit society, I disagree with how you apply this logic to the vaccine question. I find your argument, and the Covid vaccine argument in general based on many flawed assumptions. First, the Covid Vaccone question is different from our acceptance of other vaccines, and should not be convoluted. Second, there is a plethora of evidence in the scientific community which cast serious doubt on the safety and effecticty of these vaccines, and even evidence that they may cause harm to some people. This robust data from respected scientist have not been reported by mainstream media and our political leaders but suppressed. This phenomenon is widely acknowledged, experienced and even accepted by the vast majority of society. So my question, in this situation, is it more morally beneficial to society to accept and promote a dishonest and potentially dangerous untruth, or to stand against the crowd for the cause of righteousness? I believe that in this situation, the slogan " My body, my choice. " is applicable where it is not applicable in the argument for abortion. Because in the end, what is good for my body, is what is good for society. Health and righteousness is equally applicable to the individual, and to the whole.
Well said
For Christians, we definitely see God as the ultimate owner of our bodies. "You are not your own; you were bought at a price. Therefore honor God with your bodies." (1 Corinthians 6:19b-20)
Thank you, Fr. Very compelling. Amen to your valuable arguments🙏🏼💕🕊
Amen! Beautifully stated!
I consider myself a liberal but abortion is always where I conflict with other liberal people. I was thinking on the bus yesterday about the whole abortion problem and realized that it's very hypocritical how we (liberals) are very anti-death penalty but okay with killing fetuses. My understanding of the "My body, my choice" movement for abortion is that since the baby is inside the mother, it can be removed if she wishes since it is a part of her body. But this isn't true. During pregnancy, a fetus is only connected to the mother by the placenta: the mother and the fetus do not share a brain, a heart, or anything of the sort; the mother is as much a part of the fetus as it is of the mother. As a result of the "My body, my choice" movement, we are called to forget these facts and regard the fetus as an organ or part of the mother, and not as the independent being it is. But, I agree that abortion is important when it is for life-saving purposes or if the baby has no chance of living outside of the womb, not as a form of birth control. It is unfortunate how the "pro-choice" documentaries I have seen are ones which interview the women who have had to make hard choices of aborting their babies for medical reasons, not the women who have done it as a form of birth control, which is the vast majority. Pro-choice movements largely ignore those who have had it performed as a form of birth control since they know abortion is a selfish action otherwise.
You're making the same mistake Fr. Casey and most religious folks make when talking about abortion: reducing it to a moral issue.
Even if we agreed that the fetus is a human being, it still doesn't give the government the right to force the woman to risk her life, her livelihood, her sanity, her body to keep it alive.
Suppose that for some reason you are physically connected to another human being and this physical connection is the only thing that's keeping that person alive. Do you think that the government should have the right to force you to keep that connection? Or do you think it should be entirely your choice whether or not you want to make that sacrifice?
That's what we mean by "my body, my choice". It is not a moral argument, it is legal argument with a single purpose: keeping the government out of women's wombs!!
What about pregnant women who are poor, addicted to drugs, severely mentally ill etc and unable to get help? In their case it isn't necessarily a selfish choice to have an abortion
Wow! A real Pro-Life Progressive in the wild!
Do you support the sexual revolution, whilst still being opposed to abortion? Do you see no contradiction between supporting one and attacking the other?
@@williamk70 So you think is ok to kill another human being because you want to be free. That's what your "experiment of thought" is in the end.
@@Laurelin70 No, that's not what I said. It's not about okay or not okay (morally or ethically), it's about legal or not legal. It's about whether or not we want to give the government the power to force a woman to sacrifice her body, her health, her livelihood or even her life for a fetus. Do you think the government should have that power??
When we breathe, the same Spirit of God, who raised Jesus from the dead, lives in us. The same spirit! Why don't we appreciate it enough?
This was a wonderful perspective, Father. You put it very eloquently. It's has brought forth a whole new way of thinking for me.
Re: Abortion. I believe that the Catholic Church has an obligation to help raise children, once born to the age of 21. That means food, medicine, mental treatment, all that is necessary has to be given not only to
the child, but the parents.
This is a compelling video! I have heard about "my body, my choice" being used for the other cases, but not euthanasia yet. This is an insightful glimpse into what the next culture war issue could be. It would be heartbreaking if any culture gave the approval of state-approved suicide. Once our perspective for human dignity and sacredness of life gets lost, that's the death of a society and culture as we know it.
Everybody uses that phrase..
My body My choice
I should use that phrase if I don't wanna go to work but expect a paycheck every two weeks.
Thankyou Fr Casey. God bless you abundantly.
Well said, Fr Casey! My favourite part was 7:27-7:54. God bless you for having the courage to tackle controversial topics and stand up for the truth. Btw, are you still doing your baseball stadium tour? I want to come out and meet you when you’re in Toronto.
Very well presented Fr. Casey.
The body you kill is not your own but the baby inside you.
On abortion rights: Let the women vote. Only the women.
On abortion rights: Let the unborn vote. Only the unborn.
You mean well. You are ineligible to vote.
This was beautiful... and just perhaps, the most persuasive argument I've ever heard for having faith in the Magisterium, the faith that the Catholic Church can never steer us wrongly in the matters of faith and morals.
Vatican2 is wrong.
@@djf5069 scram, schismatic!
@@DoctorDewgong whatever Protestant.
Well, except for the priests that can't keep their little weenies out of altar boys' rear ends, and the church's penchant for erasing less than flattering facts about their bloody and money-flushed history. Other than THAT, maybe you're right.
It is truly repulsive in every way how someone raised as a Catholic can support abortion on demand.
Thank you, Father. This was an excellent presentation.
Thank you, Fr. Casey. Good, sound arguments. Please keep up the good work!
"My body my choice" is NOT a morally superior argument by any stretch of the imagination.
Absolutely. It’s abhorrent that people hypocritically have adopted this slogan for themselves. I abhor this saying. Totally.
thank you Fr. for a good talk and topic
such a good explanation, I love that you showed both sides to each issue, too
Great explanation, as always. Even in plural societies, Ethics must be based on the consensus about the respect for human dignity, it makes no sense to base it on believing that it is expendable and worthless. Peace be with you!
I think the major thing is consent. A teenager younger than 18 cannot consent by themselves, they need their parents or guardians consent. I'm not saying that makes the idea any more terrifying, but I think the immediate danger would be adults making the argument. Adults can legally consent and thus can legally make that choice. Again, high schoolers/teenagers are minors, they can't consent. Their parents would have to consent.
Edit: There was a VERY problematic typo that I had to fix, so sorry it took 7 months for me to realize it.
Thank you Fr Casey.
I really enjoyed the video. Keep up the good work.
Thank you! I have always known this, but have had a hard time explaining it. This has been helpful. Unfortunately, because the majority of our society has moved away from faith in God, I agree that euthanasia and assisted suicide will be more common.
Very good video, Fr Casey. I congratulate your bravery to discuss these complicated subjects. I wish everyone who see this as clearly as you do. It would be a better world. Unfortunately some people might disagree but I think they do not know yet the voice of the shepherd that cares for them. Hopefully we are going to go to a better world in the near future and the craziness doesn’t spin out of control like seems it is going to do.
I would add something that I believe you couldn’t add there because it might be even more controversial and easily misunderstood it is that by respecting God’s will and if it’s God’s will that we suffer, it’s for our betterment. And that suffering might alleviate so time or amount of suffering on purgatory. I feel this way, and I think that Jesus/Holy Spirit revealed this to me once. Purgatory… “No you don’t want to be there, for anymore time that you are forced to.” It’s a horrible please. And it’s better “to confess a little sin than spending 100 years in purgatory for something small to our eyes”
I agree wholeheartedly. I too would like to add another controversial point. Some Catholics/Christians focus on abortion and euthanasia but not life otherwise. For example, protecting migrants and refugees; lobbying against capital punishment; protecting all that God created (see Pope Francis's encyclical 'Laudato Sì') are pro life choices. It should be from the womb to the tomb.
It is my body and my choice. When you have someone makes laws about your sexual organs then you can have an argument.
Thank you for your perspective.
This video speaks to on numerous levels, my grandmother received her last rites before she got palliative care while on her deathbed. My grandfather did everything to get her the treatment she needed to survive, but in the end all the doctors in the world couldn't save her, so in the end her passing into mercy was eased. But I struggle with some of these issues you raise, on the one hand I will not actively advocate for abortions or euthenasia, and I have had multiple discussions with a friend of why we as christians, and Catholics especially had an obligation to get vaccinated during the pandemic. But when it comes to abortions, I have difficulty in being against a womans right to choose, because I do think it's a choice, but not one to take on a whim, or for opportunistic reasons. But if we look to Judaism or Islam, abortions are permitted within those faith traditions to save the life of the mother, and I think that's a defensible position to take. When it comes to euthenasia, I live in the Netherlands and it's been legal here for over twenty years, but it is done under strict legal guidelines, and doctors who crossed those have been prosecuted. While probably not ideal from a Catholic perspective it is by far not a libertine free for all. Even though there people advocating for looser guidelines, I would oppose those, because as you clearly state we have an obligation to each other to take care of our brothers and sisters, be they healthy, sick or suffering, and assisted suicide might be a permanent solution to a temporary problem. Anyway TL:DR I'm struggling with some of these issues, if you have advice I'm all ears
I am no theologian or moral teacher so don't quote me on this. I was under the understanding that in certain circumstances preserving the life of the mother can be chosen over the child in Catholicism. It has to do with self preservation. If your life is in grave danger you may save yourself at the expense of another, in this case your child. So example would be a medical condition that needs an operation to save you but would kill the child. The death of your child isn't the primary intention but a secondary result of your decision to save yourself. This would be one brutal decision to make though. Hopefully some words for thought.
Mark, there is no medical procedure that saves the life of a mother by committing an abortion; however, if doctors, in an attempt to save the life of the mother, end up losing the child, that is not considered an abortion. The only exception, and I am not sure it actually is one, is en ectopic pregnancy. I know these types are not considered an abortion but I don’t know if t fits the description I first mentioned.
@@tonyschwieterman1170 You're referring to the "Principle of Double Effect" which is "The Principle of Double Effect is used to determine when an action which has two effects, one good and one evil, may still be chosen without sin. This principle is attributed to St. Thomas Aquinas, who used it to show that killing in self-defense is justified (Summa Theologiae I-II q64 art. 7). With respect to voting, it would allow under certain conditions the toleration of the unintended evil of another for a proportionate reason. All four conditions must be satisfied: The action must be morally good, or indifferent, as to object, motive and circumstances.The bad effect(s) may only be tolerated, not directly willed.The good effect must be caused at least as directly as the bad.The good effect(s) must be proportionate to compensate for the bad effect(s)." -- I sourced this from EWTN, but other Catholic sources will offer a similar explanation. In the case of a pregnant woman, if she had uterine cancer, if the cancerous organ was removed to stop the disease from spreading, but causes the death of the fetus in utero, that's double effect. The woman is not willing the death of her child, it would just be a horrible side effect of stopping the cancer from spreading, therefore it's not a sin.
We have to keep in mind that divorce is also tolerated in Judaism and Islam, whereas the Church teaches that marriage is indissoluble. The Church teaches that God permitted divorce because of the hardness of Man's heart before Christ came to save us. Of course, abortion is incomparably worse than divorce, plus it's an offense to the dignity of life. The Church will never change it's position (thanks be to God!).
@@imtired6104 There is a provision for divorce in Bible when the spouse cheats or abandons for long time. I would extend it to severe abuse. Marriage is not indissoluble in Christianity either.
@Breaking in the habit, regarding 10:50 I think a company in Switzerland is taking a step further to make a suicide pod designed for assisted suicide, which has received approval from a Swiss legal review board. I'm not sure if it for if it's for the Aged/dying or just anyone who's mental health issues is deemed to qualify for voluntary assisted dying as in Belgium, Netherland, Canada and Luxembourg. But yeah, it's no longer in the future, it is already happening.
PS. Thanks for the book on beatitudes, it came in the mail not to long ago.
Your statement that in Australia mental health issues qualify you to use our euthanasia laws is incorrect.
@@GrantQuinn1
Thanks for the observation, I wrote from memory and may have confused Australia for Canada and Belgium which provides euthanasia for people with psychiatric and select mental health disorders determined by healthcare professionals as untreatable. I have edited my comment to reflect that.
Either way, in (West) Australia, it can be any disease, illness or medical condition that is advanced, progressive and will cause death, so long as the individual meets eligibility criteria such as;
are aged 18 years or over
are an Australian citizen or permanent resident who has been ordinarily resident in Western Australia for at least 12 months
have been diagnosed with at least 1 disease, illness or medical condition that is advanced, progressive and will cause death; and, will, on the balance of probabilities cause death within a period of 6 months (or 12 months for neurodegenerative); and, is causing suffering that cannot be relieved in a manner that the person considers tolerable
must have decision-making capacity in relation to voluntary assisted dying
must be acting voluntarily and without coercion
must have an enduring request for access to voluntary assisted dying
The point is, medical assisted suicide aren't a thing of the future, but are in current legislative provisions in many countries, and are heralded as "healthcare" even for mental health issues. In fact, recently even the American Psychological Association has called it out as violating the number one tenet of ethics of the profession.
We call it end of life care: the person dies regardless. It is just they have some choice about the circumstances. This occurs in Australian, New Zealand and most Western countries. Although, in Australian this is limited to organic as opposed to mental illness and the person must have an independent diagnosis that their prognosis is limited: can’t live more than 12 months in most jurisdictions.
None of these countries even debate the issue of medical abortion. It is very common: mostly in relation to miscarriages. My late wife a very devout Catholic had an abortion. A priest blessed the child never to be. I have their name tattooed on my arm.
There used to be a link to request a talk; I remember a form to fill in; ti has to be some one from the local parish or so. Can I some one share it please
Thanks for this 💙
I still don’t understand how keeping someone suffering in this world could be worse than doing something that will finally end the pain.
If you can't provide for a child why risk it then? Just abstain.
@@necrowolf77 yay everyone who doesn't believe what i believe do what i believe you should. How is that ever going to work
If you're going to say it like that. I agree. Everyone has their body and they can do whatever they want. I am all for people committing suicide. Your body your choice end your suffering. All of a sudden then people are like "No suicide is horrible they can't do that" look its got to be absolute if you're going to be behind "My body my choice"
Only God has the power over life and death
Because if they’re suffering is caused by ways that are not done by human hands, then it is part of God’s design and plan. If someone who is in pain takes it upon themselves to decide when it should end they are committing sin. Humans are meant to suffer because it brings up closer to God. We all go through hardships in some way even if some of our lives seem blissful and free of stress and pain. Will that suffering last for the rest of our lives or our whole lives? Only God knows. My late grandfather on my mom’s side had been in declining health for a long time and truthfully, he was sick of it. But he never asked to be euthanized. He always trusted God and he finally died back in 2016 when God decided his time was done. Pulling the plug to end someone’s suffering may seem like the compassionate thing to do, but it is not. It is sinful. It is an act of evil.
A Based Breaking in the Habit video! More of this please, I love it!☦️
This might be your most challenging video. Thank you, Father! Also, what's up with the odd music at the end? :)
If I don’t want to live, it’s my choice to remove myself and don’t see anything wrong in that
Are you under 40 years old?
Wow! Thank you for this Fr. Casey, I knew the phrase was a slippery slope, but I had never thought about it in regards to how it may be used with Euthanasia.
My body, my choice - was a reaction to the then prevailing attitude of the dominant male that just because ie was a male, he was entitled to any woman, at any time and whatever way he pleases.
Euthanasia should never be allowed, because every man has his price; this therefore opens the door to legal murder.
Lately I’ve been avoiding videos that are topical politically and socially, especially if I agree with them . So many videos that are a critique of a specific point simply end up sounding ultra critical and negative , and all around just feel like content that is written for an audience who agrees with it already… preaching to the choir . I don’t tend to get that with Fr. Casey’s videos. It is refreshing . He has made me really re consider points of view I have , this video included . I appreciate this channel
I really appreciate this video, thank you so much! I want to visit a Catholic church and attend service but liturgical services are so unfamiliar and I intimidating to me. I have gone once before and had no idea what was going on or what I was doing and was too nervous to go back
Thank you for the video father. It offered information I wasn’t aware of and I’m grateful for it. That said I have a question in regard to vaccines. To defend myself I am by no means against vaccinations and modern medicine. What I will say is I was against how the Covid vaccine was distributed and utilized. From my understanding there is evidence to suggest that companies that produced the vaccines distributed them without sufficient testing and aware of possibly fatal side-effects that wouldn’t be discussed with those who received the vaccine. And that if those individuals knew of the risks then they would not have taken it. Much of this information was only released months after the initial release of the shots. My question then is: is there a moral fallacy in not taking part in a practice the individual has questions of, even if it is regarded to involve the betterment of the community, if that individual feels evidence is lacking to say that it is beneficial? Within reason of course, one can go in circles on the subject and always find something wrong with the evidence given if they deny the truth. If there is nothing objectively to make a point against their concerns however is that person wrong to avoid what it is that concerns them? In my thinking (and please correct me if I speak out of place or guide me to any sources), the Lord gave humanity reason and the ability to discern. When does our ability to discern the world around us end and our need to take up our faith and whatever may come of it begin?
Well stated.
I don't feel bad I was with you as well. Not all of us were "mark of the beast" guys in fact it seems the majority of the anti vaxx team was "they didn't test it very long and why does the only vaccine option HAVE to be mRNA vaccines?"
I mean let's be fair to ourselves had we been given the option to have dead or near dead COVID 19 cells like most vaccines in the past are made from and even what China and most of the Middle East used for their vaccines, I don't think I'd have had as much issue getting it.
But rushing a vaccine out, making that into a political issue on the left until Biden won, then flipping sides and trying to turn us into a police state all while censoring: the inventor of the mRNA vaccine who says it's not meant for mass release because it mutates too quickly in large populations, stories like nurses/doctors/and even Pfizer employees refusing the shot, all the people who had bad reactions doesn't make me feel like it was a safe vaccine at all.
We were right they were wrong and you know when more people do some digging it's going to be a bad scandal because it looks like a lot of people got blood clots and died over the jab.
I think the answer lies in the quote Father Casey read from the Church on vaccines. The Church did not say people were required to put aside questions or hesitations and get vaccinated no matter what. But in such cases, individuals who cannot our do not want to get vaccinated must still be mindful of the common good and take other measures to protect the weak and vulnerable from infectious disease. That might mean wearing high quality masks, forgoing unnecessary social contacts, keeping distance from others.
No person should ever be required to take a vaccine , or have a foreign substance injected into his/her body! The C*j-ab is experimental and declared unsafe by many experts!
If you're a healthy person with no pre-existing conditions it would actually be better to get the covid-19 virus early on. Once you test yourself to see that you have it, isolate yourself until it runs its course, and then you have natural antibodies/natural immunity that's better than the vaccines.
I am a practicing Catholic, a physially disabled woman and someone who has cared for my grandmotehr with dementia. My grandmother did not make any deisions regarding what should be done with her (care home, types of treatments, wher she wants to live, etc.) prior to losing her faculties. It sas extremely hard to make medical decisions on behalf of someone who has lost the abiliy to think critically or ommuniate. I was not sure whether the hoices thaet had to be made supportd her human dignity but from how upset she was when we eventually had to admit that our family was not equipped to care for her and pplaced her in a care home, I wuld guess not.
as a disabled woman, I also get told in my day-to-day that i am a burden on society, I should have been put to death, etc. All this depite the fact that I work as a teaher, so I would say that I contribute to society. but even if I did not, these comments are uncalled for and rip at one's human dignity and it shows that it does not take the my ody my choice and the assisted unaliving of persons for soicety to disard the value of human life.
And lastly, one of my good friends ws an unexpedted and somewhat unwanted child. I say that because the parents have long given up on trying when she ame along and hav set up a comfortable childfree lfie, having mourned. When she came along, instead of feeling joy, they say their new goals destroyed. Because of her religous convictions, her mother kept her but those same beliefs did not keep the parents from abusing her as a child. They both died of unadressed medical issues when she was 12.
What I mean to say with these instances is that I feel like ther are a lot of subtle yet pervasive assaults against human dinity which no professionals or faith leaders seek to eliminate as much as abortion or assisted suicide - both of whih I believvhav to be the subject of professional recommendation and personal reflection before happening but unassisted suicide is surely a matter o professional consutation that needs to be more in-depth than just idatiion (suiial ideation does not necessarily lead to suicide attempsts. Very real and subtle violations against human dignity happen in our world each and every day and I would like to see the Churh adress these with the same vigor and ommitment that they do abortio and suicide.
it is a MEDICAL decision between the patient and physician w/ or without subscription to religious belief.
The Left and the Right both tend to use the same libertarian language because they are both descended from the classical liberal tradition -- a political philosophy based on the atomized autonomous individual, which is a mythical creature that doesn't actually exist in human society. In reality, human beings are social animals who come into existence within thick networks of dependency and care. An authentic political philosophy would recognize this basic dimension of human nature.
I am pro-choice but this video helped me better understand the other side :)
Thank you for being willing to listen. I think it is only by hearing each other's thoughts and concerns that we can find common ground and work towards solutions.
@@SoleaGalilei yes it's valuable to listen to opposing viewpoints but too few people do
@@SoleaGalilei You're so right! Pro-life or Pro-Choice, we won't get anywhere without good, healthy communication with each other. Thank you for checking it out Mary Kate, I'm a Catholic and Pro-Lifer myself, but it makes me really happy that you're wanting to understand both sides. People like you are exactly what we need to better communicate within our country. We don't have to agree on everything, and that's ok! Again, thank you so much, and I hope you all have a great day!
@@kingdiamond9618 then why not pass a social and Christian economic reform and help single mother's or making adoption more easier that's one approach
Thanks for an excellent video that explains well the Church's position on these issues. I will say however that many, many people are not anti-vax in the general sense, but against the COVID vaccines specifically. Their reasons vary, but it mostly comes down to the speed at which they were developed bypassed traditional testing and safeguards. As a result possible long term negative effects are simply not known. There is also the issue of government forcing people to be vaccinated or lose their jobs.
I have been vaccinated, but remain concerned about future effects, including the progressive expansion of government intrusion into our lives. All people of faith should have that concern as well.
I never really thought about the extent of where "my body, my choice" could potentially go. Really interesting! Thank you as always, Fr. Casey.
Thank you Fr. Casey, this is definitely an eye opener. May this vídeo find it’s way to those that need it most 🙏🏽💕
Very well said! Thank you!
This video should be required for everyone in congress and the supreme court. Thank you Father.
It’s one thing if that vaccine actually prevents infection/spread. If it does nothing but potentially prevent severe disease for the individual who gets vaccinated, then there is potentially no obligation to take that vaccine, especially if the risks/benefits aren’t known.
I disagree with most of the points in this video, in particular the majority of your viewpoint on abortion and some of your criticism of euthanasia. Still I appreciate your honesty and uncompromised viewpoint, it's difficult to find a compassionate speaker who won't fold like a twig on thorny issues like this. challenging videos like this are why this channel is a part of my media diet.
Wishing you, and yours health and happiness
Well said Fr. Casey. thanks.
Euthanasia is legal all across Canada. In Canada, there is a constant struggle, especially in the poorer provinces, to cut funding for medical care. Ambulances in my province, for example, are required to drive the speed limit, which effectively ends the "golden hour" of survival for heart attack victims in rural areas. The government ultimately decides what health care you get by deciding how many medical professionals, specialist physicians, dialysis units, hospitals and number/type of drugs on the pharmacy formulary. When Canadians voted to allow MAiD (medical assistance in dying), they did not see they were on the slippery slope of elderly and disabled people "choosing" to be good and patriotic Canadians by "deciding" to cut their lives short and save money and healthcare resources for the common wealth. This is the great social sin in Canadian society that no one wants to talk about, not even Catholic priests and bishops.