Catholic Info
Traditional Catholic Faith => SSPX Resistance News => Topic started by: SeanJohnson on January 19, 2022, 01:03:48 PM
-
Been thinking about this more and more:
If the SSPX and Bishop Sanborn are giving the green light to abortion-tainted jabs, it means some will take advantage of that permission, and we will have vaxed and purebloods mixing unbeknownst to eachother in the same chapels.
Are there reasons why a boy or girl SHOULD want to know about the status of his potential spouse? Should vax status be a "deal breaker?"
-
I agree with all the "yes" answers, but voted for number 3.
-
Been thinking about this more and more:
If the SSPX and Bishop Dolan are giving the green light to abortion-tainted jabs, it means some will take advantage of that permission, and we will have vaxed and purebloods mixing unbeknownst to eachother in the same chapels.
Are there reasons why a boy or girl SHOULD want to know about the status of his potential spouse? Should vax status be a "deal breaker?"
I thought about this right away, as soon as it was known the jabs were likely sterilizing and causing long-term health problems.
P.S. We should try to fight their agenda as you were doing, calling those who refused the vax "purebloods" because you want a 100% positive connotation, reflecting the truth.
"I am unmodified."
Pureblood
etc.
-
P.S. We should try to fight their agenda as you were doing, calling those who refused the vax "purebloods" because you want a 100% positive connotation, reflecting the truth.
"I am unmodified."
Pureblood
etc.
"What is my status, you ask, I'm unadulterated thank you for asking."
As for the poll, I picked the 3rd Yes but if there was an "all of the above" option I would have picked that.
-
Wonder how the stats would look if this poll were posted on the SSPX Facebook page?
-
I can't really vote on this poll because multiple reasons apply:
1) potential sterilization
2) potential health effects (even if they're not sterile, the kids could end up orphaned ... either without a father to support them or a mother to nurture them)
3) jabbers show lack of moral fortitude and ability to stand up against the world (or are stupid sheep)
Perhaps #3 could be excused if someoe were just, say, following the (pernicious) advice of the SSPX. Lay people are not required to be moral theologians, and I could see somone deferrig to the SSPX. But even then if they didn't do their own homework at least about the dangers of the jab, that shows them to be intellectually lazy and able to be manipulated by the powers that be (or by social pressure).
Currently in the poll, the "morals" aspect is #1, but I might put that lower ... just because I could see someone in good faith deferring to the judgment of the SSPX for the reasons stated above.
-
Also, their parent(s) could have forced them.
HOWEVER, even then, you are marrying the family to a certain extent. I know nowadays you can't get too picky (my wife's family is half Novus Ordo and half "nothing") but sometimes the badness of the parents passes on to the children, if you know what I mean. Their values, priorities, beliefs, etc.
But I agree with your post Lad. It does show moral weakness, laziness, and worst of all, a signal that they might be a sheep. NOT a good thing for the coming age.
However important it was to be awake and aware for the past 50 years, it's about to become 10X as important.
Sending your kid to public school in the 80's was a poor choice. In the 90's or 00's it was a much worse choice. Doing so in 2020 could actually be fatal -- due to long term effects of traumatization, propaganda, mask wearing, emotional damage, and mandatory vaccines. That's to say nothing about the current "Woke" nature of the educational system. We celebrated Columbus Day back in the 80's and early 90's (my public school career). Today, they completely vilify the White Man and Columbus in particular. His "day" is now known as "Indigenous Peoples' Day". I'm not kidding.
-
Stars upon thars.
-
As for the poll, I picked the 3rd Yes but if there was an "all of the above" option I would have picked that.
I chose "Yes: Other" for that reason; I think all of the "yes" answers matter.
Having said that, the potential sterilization issue is huge.
And getting at some of what Lad & Matthew spoke of, I think compatibility on important issues can make a big difference in a marriage, even, for example, as far as what the parties think about childhood vассinеs. Opposing opinions on such a question can cause enormous conflict in a marriage.
-
I chose "Yes: Other" for that reason; I think all of the "yes" answers matter.
Having said that, the potential sterilization issue is huge.
And getting at some of what Lad & Matthew spoke of, I think compatibility on important issues can make a big difference in a marriage, even, for example, as far as what the parties think about childhood vассinеs. Opposing opinions on such a question can cause enormous conflict in a marriage.
The sterilization issue, were it shown to be a reality, would indeed be a direct attack upon the sacrament of marriage (and therefore it’s author):
It would pre-empt even the possibility of marriage, and thereby eliminate one of the primary means by which God dispenses His grace for our salvation.
-
Just to clarify, sterilization does not undermine marital validity.
-
Just to clarify, sterilization does not undermine marital validity.
HUGE correction; thank you Mith!!!
I found this, albeit based on the new Code:
“To contract a valid marriage, one must possess the capacity and the will to enter into a permanent and procreative-type of union. (The procreative part requires only that one be capable of having true intercourse, not that that intercourse must be fertile. More on this below.)”
https://www.ewtn.com/catholicism/library/sterilized-couples-seeking-to-marry-5045
Learn something every day😀
-
"sterilization does not undermine marital validity"
FWIW, I was not thinking about the validity, but I just would not want to marry anyone who may have seriously (& so unnecessarily!) compromised his ability to have children, valid marriage or not. I think potential spouses definitely have a right to know if the other has been jabbed. For many reasons, including the potential detriment to fertility.
-
It was already difficult enough finding someone suitable to court!
-
"sterilization does not undermine marital validity"
FWIW, I was not thinking about the validity, but I just would not want to marry anyone who may have seriously (& so unnecessarily!) compromised his ability to have children, valid marriage or not. I think potential spouses definitely have a right to know if the other has been jabbed. For many reasons, including the potential detriment to fertility.
.
Yes, and that is perfectly reasonable. I think the jury is still out on the EXACT effect the vax has on reproduction (the data so far certainly suggests a temporal association between the jab and reproductive difficulties, including miscarriage) so it will be difficult to tell right now whether one's jabbed object of interest will have problems.
Infertility, except in certain cases (e.g. a hysterectomy) rarely means that someone cannot conceive full stop. It is a condition with a wide variety of gradations. Even couples with say five children can be said to struggle from infertility if the wife, say, has suffered several miscarriages.
Planning a marriage is planning a future. If a man or woman has reason to believe conception and pregnancy will be difficult, it should certainly not be kept a secret.
-
But I agree with your post Lad. It does show moral weakness, laziness, and worst of all, a signal that they might be a sheep. NOT a good thing for the coming age.
However important it was to be awake and aware for the past 50 years, it's about to become 10X as important.
Couldn't have said it better myself. We are now living in the age of sheep vs resistance, as regards to the global state/elites. 3 years ago, it was apparent that the new-sspx was, mostly, filled with V2 sheep, who didn't fight against (or know the evils of) new-rome. Now we know that the new-sspx is, mostly, filled with communist sheep, who don't fight against (or know the evils of) the satanic globalist elite. Marrying a sheep has a long, long list of problems. And as Matthew said, as the world gets more chaotic, your problems will grow.
-
HUGE correction; thank you Mith!!!
I found this, albeit based on the new Code:
“To contract a valid marriage, one must possess the capacity and the will to enter into a permanent and procreative-type of union. (The procreative part requires only that one be capable of having true intercourse, not that that intercourse must be fertile. More on this below.)”
https://www.ewtn.com/catholicism/library/sterilized-couples-seeking-to-marry-5045
Learn something every day😀
.
It is the same in the old code.
An inability to perform coitus IS an invalidating impediment. An inability to conceive or carry a pregnancy is not.
-
Just to clarify, sterilization does not undermine marital validity.
It might if it's known beforehand and then concealed.
-
I'm guessing you meant Bishop Sanborn, correct?
-
I'm guessing you meant Bishop Sanborn, correct?
Corrected again. Sheesh! Maybe Matthew can edit the OP to make this correction?
Also seems like the wording of the first poll question should be changed to something like:
”Deliberate concealment of sterilization MIGHT impact marriage validity?”
-
Very precise answer to the question (but from the perspective of the new Code):
https://canonlawmadeeasy.com/2014/04/24/fertility-and-marriage-validity/
Sorry I couldn’t get copy/paste to work on this website.
-
2 people have opined that the Vax status of potential spouses is not relevant to courting.
I would be interested to learn the reasons for that opinion.
I won’t argue with you. Just want to understand your perspective, if you’d be willing to share it.
-
This has been touched on, but not sufficiently underlined:
What IS the purpose of courtship? To get to know your spouse. You are making a LIFE LONG commitment, you are going to be yoked together for better or worse. You better know who you're going to be yoked to! Will they stand up for the truth? Will they fight evil? Will they lay down and just "go along to get along"? Those are all VERY, VERY important things to learn about your potential spouse BEFORE marriage.
The most important thing -- what kind of Catholic are they. But even that is related to the vax! Are they willing to stand up against the world? Go against the grain? Fight the dominant opinion, the peer pressure out there in the world? If not, that says they will probably apostatize at some point. Might not be pleasant, but it's a fact.
The world does NOT make it easy these days. Today, worse than ever. Unless you're near-heroic, you're NOT GONNA MAKE IT.
-
This has been touched on, but not sufficiently underlined:
What IS the purpose of courtship? To get to know your spouse. You are making a LIFE LONG commitment, you are going to be yoked together for better or worse. You better know who you're going to be yoked to! Will they stand up for the truth? Will they fight evil? Will they lay down and just "go along to get along"? Those are all VERY, VERY important things to learn about your potential spouse BEFORE marriage.
The most important thing -- what kind of Catholic are they. But even that is related to the vax! Are they willing to stand up against the world? Go against the grain? Fight the dominant opinion, the peer pressure out there in the world? If not, that says they will probably apostatize at some point. Might not be pleasant, but it's a fact.
The world does NOT make it easy these days. Today, worse than ever. Unless you're near-heroic, you're NOT GONNA MAKE IT.
To that end it would be important to understand WHY they got jabbed, not just that they did. Did they take advice from some SSPX priest or was it due to social pressure? Did they dismiss people who were anti-jab as "conspiracy theorists" ... because they don't understand that the world is rules by forces hostile to both the Church and to humanity?
Of course, there's also the question about possible future birth defects for childen of jabbed parents.
-
You cannot look at this in isolation it makes no sense at all to do so. It is one-dimensional thinking.
Let's assume a scenario where MRNA vaccines cause significant long term health problems. Increased rates of cancer, sterilization, high rate of miscarriage, damage to sperm, higher likelihood of heart attack in males.
1. This won't be immediately known or fully understood. Long term medical problems will only be fully understood in the long term. They will become INCREASINGLY suspected, then known and estimated and over a period of a decade they will be better understood as long term effect.
2. ALL MEN AND WOMEN in the western democracies that took MRNA vaccines will be affected, not just Traditionalists. Unjabbed women and men will have a much higher market value, because frankly who wants to marry someone with health issues or who is sterilized? Or will die and leave you alone at 50? Nearly all western democracies Europe and America and Canada took MRNA vaccines. China, Russia, Brazil and India did not.
3. If the number of Traditional Catholic women and men who are vaccinated is I suspect much lower than the national average then demand will exceed supply and it might be MORE difficult for unvaccinated to marry a Traditionalist from their own country.
4. All of this would take place in an environment where 65% to 90% of the population was vaccinated, the economy would be depressed, people would lack optimism and hope because they were poisoned. Governments would topple.
-
I can foresee the plausibility of a conversation like this in the future:
Young Man: "Mr. Johnson, I'd like to ask your permission and blessing to ask your daughter to marry me."
Me: "May I ask, young man, what your vaccination status is?"
Young Man: "Huh?"
Me: "I'll explain shortly, but just answer, please."
Young Man: "Well, yes, I am fully vaccinated against COVID."
Me: "Well, in that case, I will not be able to permit my daughter to marry you."
Young Man: "But what does that have to do with anything?"
Me: [Begin recounting all the considerations in this thread, which do not bode well for a pairing.]
-
Assuming we still live in a democratic system the vaccinated will be in a majority in most countries. So they will simply bring in a law that your medical records are sealed and asking your vaccine status is against your right to privacy. They might even expunge the medical records if it causes friction. The majority has some power.
Thus the above conversation might simply end up in him saying "no", because many will claim to be unvaccinated.
Change the line what your vaccination status is, to how often do you watch porn on-line and see how many young men answer the father honestly.
With that said, what percentage of young men and women in tradlands are vaccinated? A very low number I suspect. Way less than 10%. Only 1/3 of children aged 15-21 in the general population in the UK are vaccinated. Trads will be MUCH MUCH lower.
I have not see a mask for ages in the SSPX masses or the other Latin Masses I go to.
-
Assuming we still live in a democratic system the vaccinated will be in a majority in most countries. So they will simply bring in a law that your medical records are sealed and asking your vaccine status is against your right to privacy. They might even expunge the medical records if it causes friction. The majority has some power.
Thus the above conversation might simply end up in him saying "no", because many will claim to be unvaccinated.
Change the line what your vaccination status is, to how often do you watch porn on-line and see how many young men answer the father honestly.
With that said, what percentage of young men and women in tradlands are vaccinated? A very low number I suspect. Way less than 10%. Only 1/3 of children aged 15-21 in the general population in the UK are vaccinated. Trads will be MUCH MUCH lower.
I have not see a mask for ages in the SSPX masses or the other Latin Masses I go to.
Your last couple posts are rather prevaricating:
You are not answering the question, but instead seeking to dismiss it altogether (e.g., by making statistical arguments which suggest courtships between vaxed and unvaxed trads are unlikely in the first place).
Its as though you don't want the issue to be relevant, but you never address the concerns adduced above in cases where the vaxed and unvaxed are or will be courting, preferring instead to pre-empt the possibility of two such trads coming together at all (or suggesting that the number of such courtships will be so few as to not be worthy of consideration, even though these hypothetical few will also have souls to save).
OK, then leaving aside the fact that every SSPX teacher in New Zealand is vaxed, and that we've all probably known those SSPXers who say they'd take the jab rather than watch their families (allegedly) go hungry, for the sake of argument, let's stick with your 10% vaxed number:
In these courtships, is vax status a pertinent issue? Why or why not?
-
Assuming we still live in a democratic system the vaccinated will be in a majority in most countries. So they will simply bring in a law that your medical records are sealed and asking your vaccine status is against your right to privacy. They might even expunge the medical records if it causes friction. The majority has some power.
Thus the above conversation might simply end up in him saying "no", because many will claim to be unvaccinated.
1. You're assuming the jabbed will stay alive long enough to benefit from privacy laws.
2. Most jabbed people are proud and open about their status, so why would they need privacy?
3. Every US-health-privacy law only pertains to businesses/govt. You can't outlaw some asking the question "Are you jabbed?" That's free speech (at least in the US).
4. It would be very easy to "spot a liar" when it comes to the jabbed conversation. You just keep probing the conversation and start making comments about health freedom and how the govt lies to us and natural remedies, etc. Most jabbed won't be able to handle the "anti mainstream, anti-sheeple" thinking and will explode with "jab righteousness!" and self-defense. :laugh1:
With that said, what percentage of young men and women in tradlands are vaccinated? A very low number I suspect. Way less than 10%.
Considering that we have the new-sspx, +Sanborn and +Dolan all arguing it's ok, I think 10% is WAY too low.
Only 1/3 of children aged 15-21 in the general population in the UK are vaccinated. Trads will be MUCH MUCH lower.
??
1. Teenagers aged 15-21 are one of the last categories to be able to take it. Too early to tally statistics.
2. Teenagers aged 15-21? What about ADULTS aged 22-35? They are the ones facing pressure from their jobs; they are ones in the "dating pool".
I have not see a mask for ages in the SSPX masses or the other Latin Masses I go to.
Sure, you don't see people wearing masks, but their priests are giving sermons about how it's ok to take the jab. :facepalm:
-
1. You're assuming the jabbed will stay alive long enough to benefit from privacy laws.
If they don't then you will have 100 million dead in North America in 10 years and another 100m sick or looking after sick people.
2. Most jabbed people are proud and open about their status, so why would they need privacy?
Because they won't be proud if it being vaccinated greatly increases the risk of making them sick or unemployable later in life.
3. Every US-health-privacy law only pertains to businesses/govt. You can't outlaw some asking the question "Are you jabbed?" That's free speech (at least in the US).
Sure, you can ask, but you cannot find out the truth if there are strict privacy laws.
4. It would be very easy to "spot a liar" when it comes to the jabbed conversation. You just keep probing the conversation and start making comments about health freedom and how the govt lies to us and natural remedies, etc. Most jabbed won't be able to handle the "anti mainstream, anti-sheeple" thinking and will explode with "jab righteousness!" and self-defence.
Now they might, at the stage where the vaccine was the mark of Cain they would not.
-
I can foresee the plausibility of a conversation like this in the future:
Young Man: "Mr. Johnson, I'd like to ask your permission and blessing to ask your daughter to marry me."
Me: "May I ask, young man, what your vaccination status is?"
Young Man: "Huh?"
Me: "I'll explain shortly, but just answer, please."
Young Man: "Well, yes, I am fully vaccinated against COVID."
Me: "Well, in that case, I will not be able to permit my daughter to marry you."
Young Man: "But what does that have to do with anything?"
Me: [Begin recounting all the considerations in this thread, which do not bode well for a pairing.]
(https://i.imgur.com/45d6bvz.png)
-
1. You're assuming the jabbed will stay alive long enough to benefit from privacy laws.
If they don't then you will have 100 million dead in North America in 10 years and another 100m sick or looking after sick people.
The govt's number of jabbed is a total lie. It's more like 1/3 of the US population - so probably 100m dead/sick, not 200m. But you get the point.
2. Most jabbed people are proud and open about their status, so why would they need privacy?
Because they won't be proud if it being vaccinated greatly increases the risk of making them sick or unemployable later in life.
It'll be too late by then. If you come across some 22 year old who has heart problems or an auto-immune disease, and if they weren't born with this problem, you'll know the cause.
3. Every US-health-privacy law only pertains to businesses/govt. You can't outlaw some asking the question "Are you jabbed?" That's free speech (at least in the US).
Sure, you can ask, but you cannot find out the truth if there are strict privacy laws.
:confused: You can't find out now? I can't call up a person's doctor and ask them "Did Susie get jabbed?"
4. It would be very easy to "spot a liar" when it comes to the jabbed conversation. You just keep probing the conversation and start making comments about health freedom and how the govt lies to us and natural remedies, etc. Most jabbed won't be able to handle the "anti mainstream, anti-sheeple" thinking and will explode with "jab righteousness!" and self-defence.
Now they might, at the stage where the vaccine was the mark of Cain they would not.
Mark of Cain?
-
You are not answering the question, but instead seeking to dismiss it altogether (e.g., by making statistical arguments which suggest courtships between vaxed and unvaxed trads are unlikely in the first place).
Its as though you don't want the issue to be relevant, but you never address the concerns adduced above in cases where the vaxed and unvaxed are or will be courting, preferring instead to pre-empt the possibility of two such trads coming together at all (or suggesting that the number of such courtships will be so few as to not be worthy of consideration, even though these hypothetical few will also have souls to save).
OK, then leaving aside the fact that every SSPX teacher in New Zealand is vaxed, and that we've all probably known those SSPXers who say they'd take the jab rather than watch their families (allegedly) go hungry, for the sake of argument, let's stick with your 10% vaxed number:
In these courtships, is vax status a pertinent issue? Why or why not?
It's pretty simple. In a world in which the small percentage of Trad men or women are very likely to be sterile or have cancer or auto-immune diseases show up, then 100 million Americans are also since the vaccine won't distinguish between the religious and non-religious. That is a whole different world.
Vax status is pertinent IF there are long term effects from the vaccine of course. I would not marry someone with a greatly heightened chance of dying in middle age, assuming a normal world of mortgage payments, housing costs, school cost, pensions and retirement.
Let's say the vaccine gives cancer, AI diseases or sterilizes 1 in 1000 people and they die at 40 and the other 999 live life seemingly unaffected. Then the economy can continue fairly normally and the risk of my wife or husband dying on me is not really that significant. I would not be concerned about their vaccine status. It is a small risk and needs to be seen in light of other small risks. A vaxxed wife who drove safely or did not smoke cigarettes and had old parents and grandparents would be a better bet than an unvaxxed wife who drove carelessly or whose mother died of breast cancer.
1 in 100, I would be more concerned, but we are now getting into a national (perhaps global) situation where 3 million additional Americans per year would die in their 30s 40s 50s, almost doubling the death rate. That is a political earthquake with major changes that would happen in terms of economy, lawsuits, political disruption. My future spouses willingness to leave the USA or move to Alaska might be more important than the 1 in 100 chance of them dying young. Alternatively the USA may pay families to have children and then a vaxxed wife from a large family who wanted 15 children may be a better catch than an unvaxxed women whose mother and sister were not able to have more than 2 children each.
1 in 10. Mad Max territory, completely unpredictable how life would look. I would probably marry any woman who could shoot straight.
-
The govt's number of jabbed is a total lie. It's more like 1/3 of the US population - so probably 100m dead/sick, not 200m. But you get the point.
It'll be too late by then. If you come across some 22 year old who has heart problems or an auto-immune disease, and if they weren't born with this problem, you'll know the cause.
:confused: You can't find out now? I can't call up a person's doctor and ask them "Did Susie get jabbed?"
Mark of Cain?
It's not a lie here in the UK. Most of the people I know who are not Traditionalist Catholics are vaccinated. About 70% of the UK.
If the 22 year old is sick, then just like now you would factor that in to a decision. But we are talking about people who are not sick but have a much higher chance of being sick later at say 40 or 50. Life is not so neat that it delivers you the person sick to make a decision. You marry and they are healthy and they then get sick.
If the person was vaccinated as a child, not sick but very pious I might still marry them if I were a young man. The piety might be desirable versus the risk of sickness. I would rather a sick or dead pious wife than one who divorced me and that is not a rare outcome in Trad marriages. It happens.
Mark of Cain, is an idiom meaning An association of disgrace or public disapproval over some crime, wrongdoing, personal failing, or controversial action.
-
Vax status is pertinent IF there are long term effects from the vaccine of course.
If? Are you seriously arguing that the jab isn't dangerous? Or that "we don't know yet"? If so, you are about 18 months late to the party. It's common knowledge these things are dangerous, which is why Sean brought up the topic.
-
Is the "vaccine" killing some people. Yes, all vaccines do. A few people have bad reactions. There are multiple different types of vaccine for Covid used all over the world. They are not equally risky.
Is the MRNA "vaccine" that they developed in a rush killing more people than yellow fever or measles vaccines do. They seem to be, yes. Well over 2 billion people have been vaccinated. If one in 50,000 died that would be over 40,000 deaths. Do I believe it is that many, yes, there are alot of adverse reactions. 40,000 to 100,000 I believe. This is a lot compared to the healthy people who died of Covid. Most people who died of Covid were old and comorbid.
Does that mean there are long term negative health effects of the vaccines which will kill millions? I don't know that. It is a reasonable postulation but there is no rock solid evidence of the long term health effects. It might turn out that the vaccines were more dangerous than a regular vaccine but the death toll is hand waived away because of the emergency nature.
My instinct says that the vaccine will likely have long term health effects. But I can't confirm this until time has passed
-
Is the "vaccine" killing some people. Yes, all vaccines do. A few people have bad reactions. There are multiple different types of vaccine for Covid used all over the world. They are not equally risky.
Is the MRNA "vaccine" that they developed in a rush killing more people than yellow fever or measles vaccines do. They seem to be, yes. Well over 2 billion people have been vaccinated. If one in 50,000 died that would be over 40,000 deaths. Do I believe it is that many, yes, there are alot of adverse reactions. 40,000 to 100,000 I believe. This is a lot compared to the healthy people who died of Covid. Most people who died of Covid were old and comorbid.
Does that mean there are long term negative health effects of the vaccines which will kill millions? I don't know that. It is a reasonable postulation but there is no rock solid evidence of the long term health effects. It might turn out that the vaccines were more dangerous than a regular vaccine but the death toll is hand waived away because of the emergency nature.
My instinct says that the vaccine will likely have long term health effects. But I can't confirm this until time has passed
Yes, Tallin, its just another vaccine. Nothing to see here. :facepalm:
"A few people have had bad reactions." Um, over 1 million reported on te VAERS, and that's with most hospitals being prevented from reporting to it.
The death toll from the experimental gene serum exceeded all deaths from all vaccines combined in just the first few months.
Myocarditis, heart attacks, strokes, Bell's Palsy, and blood clots are now commonplace in children which were rare (practically unknown) occurrences a year ago.
In other words, we don't need to wait and see about long term adverse events: We're having short term consequences all over the planet right now.
But this is all just more prevaricating on your part: Harmfullness/non-harmfulness of the jab was not even one of the poll options.
After several posts, you still refuse to answer the poll question, or explain why any of the options given as potential concerns for courting couples should not be relevant.
Instead, you continue to invent arguments and reasons why that question should not be asked.
So I'll get you back on track and ask you specific questions from the poll:
Tallin: Do you believe it is important for courting couples to share the same morals? If not, why not?
-
Yes, Tallin, its just another vaccine. Nothing to see here. :facepalm:
Tallinn is right. The difference is just quantity. Earlier vaccines have used HEK123 (or whatever), earlier vaccines have killed or disabled people or caused "autoimmune diseases" or whatever else. New is: many more deaths and adverse effects, but still too few to be really noticeable for the average citizen.
-
Mark 79 won't agree, but what's happening here is not new. It's the common slaughter of the medical industrial complex, as has been going on for decades, now somewhat boostered.
-
Vax status is pertinent IF there are long term effects from the vaccine
Am I on Tumblr or CathInfo here?
Good thread Sean, but I'd add an "Yes: All of the above" option. Obviously they have different weights but I think most would pick that option.
Also I will definitely not give the okay for any non-pureblood marriages with my children.
-
SeanJohnson, did you cancel your health insurance coverage, to not support the crimes going on? I did 20 years ago. And did you destroy at least one vaccination center, or one ICU bed today, or only some 5G installations?
-
(https://i.imgur.com/45d6bvz.png)
:laugh1:
-
Tallin: Do you believe it is important for courting couples to share the same morals? If not, why not?
Still waiting for answer to this^^^^
Marion is free to answer as well😀
-
Tallin: Do you believe it is important for courting couples to share the same morals? If not, why not?
Still waiting for answer to this^^^^
Marion is free to answer as well
I think you're right caring about the courting of your kids. I think it's your right and your duty.
(https://i.imgur.com/45d6bvz.png)
-
Still waiting for answer to this^^^^
Marion is free to answer as well
I think you're right caring about the courting of your kids. I think it's your right and your duty.
(https://i.imgur.com/45d6bvz.png)
I tell the young men, "we have pigs. they will never find your body."
-
Spouse A with Radiation Sickness or Spouse B who was vaccinated for Covid before the nuclear war?
Decisions in the future are not neat and made in the world of today.
Spouse C, as in no spouse. Be celibate.
-
Spouse C, as in no spouse. Be celibate.
A monk at the monastery in Silver City, NM, told me "spouse C" is the best choice. When I objected and said, "But then the human race would end," he replied "what a way to go!"
He is right!!
-
I said yes as in "other", as I would say "all of the above" to the "yes" options listed, with the exception of the known sterilization answer, as I am sure on that issue.
I definitely won't court a girl who got the jab, it's a red flag. I'm pureblood, and I want my potential wife and children to be the same. Morals are a part of it for sure, another thing to be concerned with are the evident health side-effects. Why would I want to proverbially roll the dice with a jabbed girl and find out that I really can't have children with her because of it? After all, I know that I possibly could not annul that marriage, and I'd rather not have to go through that process in the first place.
Part of the survival of the Catholic Faith is the survival of married life and the family, and why should we put that in jeopardy by essentially rewarding those who got the jab with a spouse when we know that it is immoral and that it has a high chance of destroying one's fertility?
Sure, it may narrow my options, but it's worth it. I believe in the Providence of God, and moreover, I only have to marry one woman if married life is for me. It's like this quote from hockey coach Herb Brooks in the movie Miracle:
If we play 'em [the Russians] 10 times, they might win nine. But NOT this game.
If I were to court ten young Catholic women (not at once of course), nine of those courtships might fall through, perhaps even on account of this issue. But I only need one courtship to work out in order to get married.
In the thread that Legion Camp posted, he linked this article (https://thecovidworld.com/vaccinated-women-are-now-lying-about-their-vax-status-as-more-men-see-them-as-infertility-risk/), which is really telling. It's about how plenty of young men are avoiding women who got the jab like a plague, and how jabbed women in return are attempting to lie about their status in order to retain prospective suitors. Here's an excerpt:
Women in New York have started lying about their vaccination status because of widespread perception among men that they are infertile or will bear children with birth defects. One man, who wants to remain anonymous, said:
“In clubs, they claim they’re NOT vax’d. They say things like ‘Oh COVID is bullshit‘ or ‘I don’t want to try this new experimental shot‘.
However, after going out with them several times, the women finally admit they took the vax . . . and watch as most potential husbands leave them almost on the spot.”
The person went on to say that at least two separate women asked him why he would break off relations with them over something like the jab, and he told them:
“I don’t want defective children and I won’t get closer to a girl who lied to my face from the start.”
If this is what worldly men are doing today, then Catholic men should learn a lesson in fortitude from them if they're on the fence about taking a firm stance against marrying GMWs (Genetically Modified Women).
-
A monk at the monastery in Silver City, NM, told me "spouse C" is the best choice. When I objected and said, "But then the human race would end," he replied "what a way to go!"
He is right!!
Well then, don't let any of us stop you.
https://youtu.be/PVrEwCa8nSA
-
I said yes as in "other", as I would say "all of the above" to the "yes" options listed, with the exception of the known sterilization answer, as I am sure on that issue.
I definitely won't court a girl who got the jab, it's a red flag. I'm pureblood, and I want my potential wife and children to be the same. Morals are a part of it for sure, another thing to be concerned with are the evident health side-effects. Why would I want to proverbially roll the dice with a jabbed girl and find out that I really can't have children with her because of it? After all, I know that I possibly could not annul that marriage, and I'd rather not have to go through that process in the first place.
Part of the survival of the Catholic Faith is the survival of married life and the family, and why should we put that in jeopardy by essentially rewarding those who got the jab with a spouse when we know that it is immoral and that it has a high chance of destroying one's fertility?
Sure, it may narrow my options, but it's worth it. I believe in the Providence of God, and moreover, I only have to marry one woman if married life is for me. It's like this quote from hockey coach Herb Brooks in the movie Miracle:
If I were to court ten young Catholic women (not at once of course), nine of those courtships might fall through, perhaps even on account of this issue. But I only need one courtship to work out in order to get married.
In the thread that Legion Camp posted, he linked this article (https://thecovidworld.com/vaccinated-women-are-now-lying-about-their-vax-status-as-more-men-see-them-as-infertility-risk/), which is really telling. It's about how plenty of young men are avoiding women who got the jab like a plague, and how jabbed women in return are attempting to lie about their status in order to retain prospective suitors. Here's an excerpt:
If this is what worldly men are doing today, then Catholic men should learn a lesson in fortitude from them if they're on the fence about taking a firm stance against marrying GMWs (Genetically Modified Women).
Fantastic post, brother!
-
They talk about a "vaccine gender gap": it's a retarded term but does express the ultimate reality, that women cave more than men to pressures. It's incuмbent on us to provide for that "gap" where girls in secular society usually move out and are on their own before marriage. This is all so basic but situations like this really hammer home proper parenting. If you don't fill the "gap" they will with vaccines and worldliness. I highly doubt as many trad women are getting the jab (or jabs period) as secular women and it's downstream of all of the other factors that contribute to single women moving out.
I am a fan of GMW as a term... Definitely going to go over that one with my sons :)
-
Fantastic post, brother!
Thank you! I owe anything useful I say to God, from whom all good springs.
They talk about a "vaccine gender gap": it's a retarded term but does express the ultimate reality, that women cave more than men to pressures. It's incuмbent on us to provide for that "gap" where girls in secular society usually move out and are on their own before marriage. This is all so basic but situations like this really hammer home proper parenting. If you don't fill the "gap" they will with vaccines and worldliness. I highly doubt as many trad women are getting the jab (or jabs period) as secular women and it's downstream of all of the other factors that contribute to single women moving out.
I am a fan of GMW as a term... Definitely going to go over that one with my sons :)
True words indeed, glad you like the GMW term. I had to think of something on the spot that sounded like GMO, since calling them GMO women would be redundant. Trad women, like trad men, are wise enough in general to see through this kind of stuff for what it is. However, we must be aware that converts from NO or any of the thousands of false creeds out there may not have been smart or brave enough to avoid this stuff.
-
2 people have opined that the Vax status of potential spouses is not relevant to courting.
I would be interested to learn the reasons for that opinion.
I won’t argue with you. Just want to understand your perspective, if you’d be willing to share it.
Me. Simply because I won't demand what I cannot offer. I have not written in the thread because it's a particular situation, not a general answer.
-
I voted Yes #2, since besides the question of sterilization, there is the concern that the vaccinated can spread bad health effects to the unvaccinated through intimacy, etc.
My guess is that these vaccines are going to further devastate society.
-
The damage from the clot shot goes right to a woman's ovaries -- including the ovaries of any baby girls she manages to have. Remember, men and woman are not the same. Men are constantly producing gametes, while women are born with all the eggs they will ever have. So something that happens in-utero to a baby girl, for example, will have much longer-term consequences.
The jab is evil. In many ways.
-
This is an excellent poll!
The poor souls who accepted the vax for whatever reason, are in grave physical jeopardy.
Their genome has been poisoned and sterilization is just one problem they are faced with. In reality, anyone vaxed is high risk for a sudden death.
Sadly, the vaxed should be preparing to leave this world :facepalm:
-
The damage from the clot shot goes right to a woman's ovaries -- including the ovaries of any baby girls she manages to have. Remember, men and woman are not the same. Men are constantly producing gametes, while women are born with all the eggs they will ever have. So something that happens in-utero to a baby girl, for example, will have much longer-term consequences.
The jab is evil. In many ways.
Yes, but I'm afraid I have no choice. It's going to be do that or stay single. If we can't or shouldn't have kids, well, bad luck, she wouldn't have a choice either. It's not the ideal situation, but I have no other.
I think it's unfeasible to marry me with an unvaccinated traditional Catholic women. But I can marry one who was vaccinated and repented.
-
Yes, but I'm afraid I have no choice. It's going to be do that or stay single. If we can't or shouldn't have kids, well, bad luck, she wouldn't have a choice either. It's not the ideal situation, but I have no other.
I think it's unfeasible to marry me with an unvaccinated traditional Catholic women. But I can marry one who was vaccinated and repented.
I would recommend following some of the protocols that have been developed to rid the body of jab. As Matthew pointed out, men produce fresh sperm throughout their lives, and the question is whether the jab would remain in the body and continue effecting the new sperm vs. with a woman, where all the ova are there with her for life.
Just pray to God about where He should lead you. You could marry a vaccinated woman, but I should think that the risk of birth defects. I think that the most important thing is to be honest with a prospective spouse about your jab status.
-
Yes, but I'm afraid I have no choice. It's going to be do that or stay single. If we can't or shouldn't have kids, well, bad luck, she wouldn't have a choice either. It's not the ideal situation, but I have no other.
I think it's unfeasible to marry me with an unvaccinated traditional Catholic women. But I can marry one who was vaccinated and repented.
Have you ever considered moving to a location where you might be able to find a spouse who isn't vaccinated? Or corresponding via ling distance originally?
One of my friends here in the states originally met her Italian husband online. 😅
-
Have you ever considered moving to a location where you might be able to find a spouse who isn't vaccinated? Or corresponding via ling distance originally?
One of my friends here in the states originally met her Italian husband online. 😅
I think he feels guilty about marrying an unvaccinated woman because he himself is vaccinated.
-
I would recommend following some of the protocols that have been developed to rid the body of jab. As Matthew pointed out, men produce fresh sperm throughout their lives, and the question is whether the jab would remain in the body and continue effecting the new sperm vs. with a woman, where all the ova are there with her for life.
I have already done that, and I noticed a great improvement. The question is whether reverse transcription of RNA occurs. There is a Swedish study in which it happened in 6 hours after the shoot. But it may not happen in all cases.
But if it happens, it would be impossible to remove, I could only minimize the evil effects.
-
I have already done that, and I noticed a great improvement. The question is whether reverse transcription of RNA occurs. There is a Swedish study in which it happened in 6 hours after the shoot. But it may not happen in all cases.
But if it happens, it would be impossible to remove, I could only minimize the evil effects.
That's great. Just don't fret too much over spilled milk.
-
I think he feels guilty about marrying an unvaccinated woman because he himself is vaccinated.
Ah.. Gotcha... :pray:
-
That's great. Just don't fret too much over spilled milk.
I am worried that it will cause sterility, I need to get tested, I haven't done it yet, but that would limit me to seeking women who are also sterile, no fertile traditional catholic woman would marry a sterile. The other problem is whether the generated protein can be spread by sɛҳuąƖ contact, I don't know if this is the case, but if that happens and the reverse transcription would also limit me to women in the same situation. The problem is that I have no way of knowing without checking it personally.
The stigma of having fallen into that is a problem, but it would be overcome if I show other things.
-
I am worried that it will cause sterility, I need to get tested, I haven't done it yet, but that would limit me to seeking women who are also sterile, no fertile traditional catholic woman would marry a sterile. The other problem is whether the generated protein can be spread by sɛҳuąƖ contact, I don't know if this is the case, but if that happens and the reverse transcription would also limit me to women in the same situation. The problem is that I have no way of knowing without checking it personally.
The stigma of having fallen into that is a problem, but it would be overcome if I show other things.
Is it even possible to morally check your fertility as a man?
If not, you have no responsibility to do so, you just have to state you are vaccinated.
-
I don't know how one would establish fertility / infertility in a moral way. And then there's the question of possible birth defects ... probably less likely for a man, since new sperm are always being created by the body.