And that explanation of Vader's Force Choke having to do with Padmé's death doesn't make sense either because it would have led to her suffocating on Mustafar or while giving birth to the twins, which we already went over 2 years ago in the post above. That snippet in that novel was most likely a red herring to make that character believe that Vader was directly responsible for her death when he wasn't.

I’m glad you like my stuff. I don’t post much Star Wars these days, but feel free to follow me for all the random other stuff I’ve been posting.

As for Obi-Wan “knowing” Luke would save Vader, I call B.S. Obi-Wan, like Yoda, firmly believed that there is no path back from the Dark Side. He went to Mustafar to kill Anakin and failed. The reason he didn’t fight harder in ANH is because he a) wasn’t physically up for the fight, b) wasn’t emotionally up for the fight, c) had been suicidal for a good long while, d) thought he could do more good as a Force ghost, and e) figured his death would help give Luke the necessary push to kill Anakin. He looked over at Luke and smirked before throwing the fight. This was after telling Luke that Vader murdered his dad. Obi-Wan deliberately got himself killed in order to further the agenda of having Luke kill Vader. He then straight up told Luke to kill Vader, gaslit him about the fact that he’d lied about Anakin, and did everything in his power to encourage Luke to commit unintentional patricide.

I agree with everything you said. Obi-Wan did a terrible thing that he knew, if it ever came out, would hurt Luke, because he thought it was the only way. Because he thought Sith can never come back from the dark side, and he was an old man, far older than he ought to have been in years, broken by the horrors of the past, and he knew he was no match for Vader/Anakin... and he couldn’t bring himself to kill him on Mustafar. So he set up Luke to do it instead. And Yoda was fully on board with this.

They were good mentors and teachers to Luke (not so much Anakin, especially not Yoda), but they were people. Not perfect avatars of the Light Side of the Force, and not demonic horrible creatures who exist solely to do terrible things to Luke and Anakin. Their hearts were in the right place, but they did some really fucked up things.

It’s the same thing for Obi Wan, Yoda, and the Council. They could have refused to allow a 9-12 year old Anakin to speak alone with Palpatine when the guy pulled rank, but they didn’t because they were too afraid to say no. The Order, including Anakin eventually, could have stood up to the Republic and insisted that the slaves on the outer rims deserved to be freed and cared for, but they didn’t because they were too afraid to say no. Obi Wan could have faced Anakin himself on Mustafar without dragging Padme into the line of fire as bait to lure Anakin into a trap when he knew was clearly out of his mind at that point . He could have tried talking to Anakin, rather than immediately deciding to kill Anakin after he fell like his gut told him to rather than obeying Yoda, but he didn’t because he was too afraid to say no . He could have given Anakin a quick and immediate death penalty on Mustafar when he “got the high ground” and Anakin did that flip, but he didn’t because he was too afraid and too angry to do the right thing, so he cut off his limbs and left him to a fate far worse than death of being burned alive. Then, over the next 19 years, he and Yoda had the option to go face off Vader themselves anytime, but they didn’t because they were too afraid to face the monster their broken system contributed to creating.

Many wrongly believe Anakin choose Padme over the Jedi and that´s why they hate the anidala relationship but that´s actually false, in ROTS, yes Anakin fell to the darkside to try to save Padme from death but that wasn´t the reason why he agreed to destroy the Jedi order the reason why he did it was because he choose the galaxy over the jedi, Palpatine convinced him there would be a non-stop civil war between the sith and the jedi if he didn´t completely destroy the jedi order so darkside Anakin did it, thinking to kill Palpatine right after he killed the separatist leadership . In the clone wars cartoon, they briefly made a reference towards this when darkside Anakin told Obi-Wan he would not understand what he would have to do to stop the civil war.

Anakin: You will not understand what I have to do to end the Clone War. You will try to stop me. Obi-Wan: Anakin! Why?! Anakin: I'm sorry. I have seen that it is the Jedi who will stand in the way of peace.

Worst solution ever given he bassically judged who was able to live and who would have to die for "peace in the galaxy" but honestly that´s exactly what the Jedi order teached him, by deciding to leave his mother in slavery so Anakin could cut his "attachment" to her and yet rescuing the heir of Jabba the Hutt, because it was politically convenient or not rescuing their clone soldiers so they could keep focused on the mission for the war effort. They indirectly teached Anakin some sacrifices would have to be made for the good and peace in the galaxy even if you sacrificed a few individuals. I am sure they didn´t mean this directly but it was actually what they did to Anakin and they just never expected this same logic to be applied to them as a group.

In the PT Anakin went from trying to save his soldiers and obi-wan mid mission even if that was dangerous, sacrifice his own resources to help a planet in distress even if he lost the oportunity to free himself and his mother simply because it was the right thing to do, to agreeging to"destroy both sides of the war" the jedi and the sith and bring peace in the galaxy" which was just darkside Anakin applying teachings from both the Jedi and Palpatine. The reason why he wanted to put Padme on the throne wasn´t just because she was his wife but because he knew for a fact Padme truly cared for the well being of the people in the galaxy.

Anakin would have been better left on Tatooine, become an adult with Shmi, Owen and Beru and deal with the whole galactic drama when he was old enough like Luke to defend his own perspective, being his own self and believing in "helping everybody he could out of compassion" as he did as a child because it was the right thing to do, not the convenient thing to do, instead of being absorbed into the "ends justify the means" mentality both the Jedi and the Sith applied when it was convenient.

Anakin had all the qualities to be a Jedi, just not a prequel era jedi and that´s the tragedy. He finally found out that jedi in Luke, in his choice to be compassionate over revenge on forgiveness over duty, that Jedi inspired him to become the person he used to be, the person Luke and the galaxy truly needed.

The world has so little to offer. An empty cup, that can never be filled. But God, You satisfy my soul. Don’t forget me, Lord, remember me. See me. Hear me. Know me.

Capitalism: After 250 years Corporations eventually monopolize and everyone starves because they can't afford food or homes, then the whole world is destroyed because the billionaires stopped caring about their image and built machines that turned human-caused global warming from a hoax into an imminent reality.

The heart of the pro life cause is recognizing the personhood of the unborn. Fetus, baby, whatever term you feel comfortable using. Since the unborn is a person, they inherently have the rights to life and liberty that every other person has. To end their life via abortion is a violation of their human rights and is murder. By telling women to just “keep their legs closed” as a response to abortion arguments, this point is missed completely.

Another thing that gets missed in making that argument is environmental factors. Poverty, abuse, failed contraceptives, pressure to abort from the partner or family. There are women out there who get abortions because they have no financial or social support. Married women get abortions, women in long term relationships get abortions, women without a partner or husband get abortions. Treating all women who get abortions as whores causes a lot of unnecessary shame when love and kindness would heal more wounds and change more minds.

Finally, placing the blame of sex on women ignores the responsibility men play in creating a pregnancy. You cannot naturally have pregnancy without the participation of both a man and a woman. By simply telling women to keep their legs closed, you make pregnancy seem like a punishment for having sex when pregnancy is simply a natural result of sex and should be celebrated for it is the creation of new life.

Be kind and love the women who seek abortions and the women who have had abortions. Most of the pro life community on tumblr doesn’t have this issue, but I see it in other places online and offline. Encourage people who make these arguments to talk more about the human rights of the unborn rather than heaping blame on the women. The abortion debate has burned many of us - from women being blamed for getting an abortion to pro lifers being called evil for opposing abortion - and it is likely the pro lifers who make that argument had their kindness thrown back in their face and are now bitter because of it.

The heart of the pro life movement has never been about punishing women for having sex. The heart of the pro life movements has never been about taking freedom away from women. While politicians and loud fringe extremists might proclaim that it is those things, that is not what truly convinces people that abortion must be abolished.

The heart of the pro life movement has always been for the life of the unborn and for the well being of women. The heart of the pro life movement has always been about upholding human rights for both the unborn and the mother.

None of these people who are telling women to keep their legs closed are telling men to keep it in their pants. None of these people are willing to discuss men's shared responsibility in the reason why abortion exists.

Every day, more and more, we see the signs of the times ticking by. Jesus Christ will be returning soon, and bringing Judgement with Him. If you are not a follower of Jesus yet, I beg you to consider (or to reconsider) the Gospel, that in Jesus you will find forgiveness of sins, everlasting life, and the right to be called Children of God.

It may be that, near as the return of Jesus is, you won’t live to see it. None of us are promised tomorrow; not a single hour of life is guaranteed to any of us. Some of you will live out your lives, barring Jesus’ return, and die many years from now. Some of you may not make it into tomorrow. Some people die suddenly, with no warning; this fact makes the need to be right with God all the more urgent.

If you haven’t heard the Gospel, or have heard it before and have forgotton, please allow me to share it with you:

In the beginning, God created the Heavens and the Earth. After creating everything else, God finally made humankind. We are unique, the only beings in the Creation made in the Image of God, specifically to be in relationship with Him; to be His inheritance; a people called by His name, meant to share in reciprocal love with God of our own free choice.

After some time in Paradise, loving and being loved by God, our first parents fell into willful sin; that is to say, they deliberately chose to do what they understood to be wrong.

God, being perfect in Justice and Righteousness, could not remain close to those first humans. He could not continue to bless them, commune with them as He had since the beginning. God, by His very nature, must judge and condemn evil. And so He judged our first parents and cast them out of the Paradise He’d made for them. He stripped them not only of their relationship with Him, but also of their immortality; He condemned them to death.

And yet, God is love; He loved humankind, and desired to save us from the fate our first parents brought down upon us (a fate that we deserve through our own willful sins). God, rather than destroying us completely, went to the very outermost edges of the possible to redeem us from our evil, to again make a way for us to be with Him and live forever.

God became a man; that man was Jesus Christ. Jesus lived a perfect life, without any sin at all (a feat none of us could accomplish), and at the appointed time, willingly offered Himself up as a sacrifice, taking upon Himself the guilt of all the sins of all humankind, from our first parents until now, and suffered a fitting punishment for that guilt.

After three days, Jesus rose from the dead by the power of God and ascended to Heaven. God accepted the sacrifice of Jesus as a fitting payment, a propitiation for the sins of humankind, and has in His abundant grace and mercy allowed anyone and everyone to receive forgiveness of sins and eternal life because of that sacrifice.

This is the scandal of God’s grace: no matter the sin, no matter how corrupt, how wicked, how evil a person has been, God stands ready to forgive them. God will relate to the most evil person who’s ever lived as if they have never sinned, on only one condition: faith.

To have faith in the Biblical sense means that we genuinely believe that the God of Israel exists, and that He cares enough to respond to anyone who seeks Him. And that we believe that Jesus Christ is exactly who and what the Bible says He is: the Son of God; God manifest in the flesh; perfect, and without sin; the Savior who, by His sacrificial death and subsequent resurrection, enables God to have mercy on all who trust in Him. Genuine faith leads to genuine repentance.

To repent means that we acknowledge our sins for what they are: willful acts of evil that deserve God’s justice. It means also to be willing to forsake those sins; every habit, every practice, every vice, every indulgence. We must at least be willing to turn away from our sins, and be willing to submit to God in obedience.

Anyone, everyone who calls on the name of the Lord Jesus in sincerity and truth will be saved. They will not come into judgement, but have, at the moment of faith, passed from death to life.

Please, I beg you, if you’re reading this and you do not believe, or you have not forsaken your sins, please, consider doing so now. Pray. Ask God to reveal Himself to you; He will answer, if you ask sincerely. In some way, and in His time, He will answer you. Don’t allow another day to pass by in your sins. Don’t risk your eternity. Don’t throw away the supreme gift of God’s grace.

The Book Is Bad.

Also

The issue is not that scripture promotes or permits abuse and neglect, it's that abusive parents who try to justify themselves using religion see a big flashing "DON'T ABUSE YOUR KIDS, ASSHOLE" sign attached to the bit about children loving their parents and go

Saul wasn't David's father, but he was his father-in-law and almost certainly a parental figure to him. David clearly loved and respected him a lot, both on a personal level and as God's anointed king.

After Saul tries to kill David, David shows an almost superhuman level of grace and respect to him, never uttering a harsh word about him and even expressing outrage at the very idea of raising a weapon to him. (I'm fairly sure David was going to stab the Philistines in the back if they tried to make him fight against the Israelites) Heck, David even kills the man who claims to have killed Saul!

And yet, after Saul tries to kill David, David immediately flees and never comes back. He then spends the rest of Saul's life hiding away from him, to the point of fleeing the country .

Even when he spares Saul (twice!) and Saul apologizes and invites David to come back, David still keeps away. David knew Saul might very well change his mind, and sadly both times he was right, and Saul soon went right back to trying to kill David.

David never held any ill will against Saul, and even showed mercy to Saul when he could have killed him, but he never allowed Saul to harm him. Once he knew Saul was a threat, he fled and did what was necessary to ensure his safety.

My great-grandfather actually died like that. My great-grandmother passed away, and just a few days later, my great-grandfather died too, even though he had been perfectly healthy. I know plenty of stories like that—and not just about romantic love, but family love, too. I’ve seen mothers die after their children were arrested for terrible crimes; they simply couldn't bear the knowledge that their own child had committed the act.

If so, it's the difference between them and Padmé that makes it so hard to believe that she died of a broken heart: that she was so young and healthy and that her condition had no symptoms other than her mysteriously weakening so fast. Plus, there's the fact that she was heavily pregnant at the time. If her stress was so extreme that it would be life-threatening, it should have sent her into premature labor long before she reached Polis Massa.

And it wasn't even a broken heart that she was diagnosed with. The medical droids said that she had "lost the will to live", which was a whole other kind of medical problem with completely different symptoms that didn't match Padmé's condition or mindset. As heartbroken as she was, she also had hope for Anakin's redemption, so she couldn't have been in such despair that she would lose the will to live.

And Padmé’s labor was premature; that assisted delivery was premature and one of the worst things that could have happened to her.

I brought this up because I didn't find the idea of ​​dying of a broken heart absurd: first, because I’ve seen it happen firsthand, and second, because this is a space opera and a Shakespearean Greek tragedy—that’s a fundamental element of the genre.

And according to the *Star Wars Insider Special Edition* (2015), she died of a broken heart:

The former condition, also known as stress-induced cardiomyopathy, involves a weakening or contraction of part of the heart so that it cannot pump blood properly and it is accompanied by cardiac anomalies such as an enlargement of that part of the heart. Its symptoms often include severe chest pain, shortness of breath, and changes in blood pressure, and usually affects people over 50 or with underlying physical or mental health conditions. It can happen quickly and can often be confused for a heart attack.

The latter condition, also known as psychogenic death, is a much more subtle condition that is not accompanied by physical symptoms and can manifest in people who are young and otherwise healthy. However, it is a condition that is caused by people feeling that they are in a hopeless, inescapable position, is usually accompanied by psychological/behavioral symptoms such as social withdrawal, physical inactivity, and/or self-neglect, and it usually takes days at least for victims to succumb to it, depending on their age and/or underlying health conditions.

Your great-grandfather dying from psychogenic death (rather than from a broken heart if he indeed had no other medical symptoms) in a matter of days after his wife's death makes sense because he felt like he was in an inescapable situation and because he was old, and thus, even if he was completely healthy, his physical condition was still fragile compared to younger people. If those younger people you refer took days or weeks to die after their respective traumas and their deaths were preceded by social withdrawal or physical inactivity, it would make sense for them to have died from this condition because they would have felt that they were in a hopeless, inescapable situation.

However, Padmé's death was completely different from all of this. She was young and healthy and strong enough to safely deliver two newborns in a vaginal birth. Her condition was not accompanied by a weakening of the heart, and she showed no signs of chest pain or shortness of breath before being induced into labor on Polis Massa (which, as I meant before, shouldn't have had to happen if she'd been under life-threatening stress because it would have caused spontaneous premature labor long before she reached Polis Massa). Besides that, such a weakening of the heart would have made it much more dangerous for her to deliver two newborns in a vaginal birth than it actually was, so stress-induced cardiomyopathy is ruled out.

As for psychogenic death, her condition doesn't match it because her death took less than a day and was not accompanied by psychological/behavioral symptoms of notable social withdrawal or physical inactivity, there was no time for self-neglect to contribute to her death. She was socially engaged enough to follow instructions and interact with her children and Obi-Wan, and she was active enough to go through extenuating vaginal labor.

Most importantly, (as many skeptics have noted), her last words indicate the opposite of feeling that she was in a hopeless, inescapable situation. She proclaimed her faith in Anakin's goodness and her hope for his redemption, thus, in accordance to her character, motivation to retain a will to live. Considering this and everything stated above, the only in-universe indication of her loss of will to live was the medical droid's diagnosis, and he was just guessing as he admittedly didn't really know what was going on.

If we are going to make sense of this stuff, there's a limit to how much we can suspend our disbelief, especially when it comes to narrative and character consistency.

From my research, Neil Edwards wasn't involved with the writing process of ROTS, just the editing of Star Wars Insider magazine, so he's not a real primary source. And since George Lucas tends to retcon things as he goes along and not give serious thought to his writing, he's not always a reliable source either.

You’re trying to apply real-world science to a space opera that blends Shakespearean tragedy with Greek drama; you simply can't apply our world's science to it, because if you did, a lot of things wouldn't make sense—like putting a fourteen-year-old in a position of power.

You can bring up various facts, have your theories and headcanons, and choose not to believe or accept things—after all, even I don't accept a lot of what is canon in Star Wars, and that’s fine. But if George Lucas says it’s canon—and mind you, he’s approved plenty of questionable things—well, he’s the creator, so who am I to contradict him?

My great-grandfather actually died like that. My great-grandmother passed away, and just a few days later, my great-grandfather died too, even though he had been perfectly healthy. I know plenty of stories like that—and not just about romantic love, but family love, too. I’ve seen mothers die after their children were arrested for terrible crimes; they simply couldn't bear the knowledge that their own child had committed the act.

If so, it's the difference between them and Padmé that makes it so hard to believe that she died of a broken heart: that she was so young and healthy and that her condition had no symptoms other than her mysteriously weakening so fast. Plus, there's the fact that she was heavily pregnant at the time. If her stress was so extreme that it would be life-threatening, it should have sent her into premature labor long before she reached Polis Massa.

And it wasn't even a broken heart that she was diagnosed with. The medical droids said that she had "lost the will to live", which was a whole other kind of medical problem with completely different symptoms that didn't match Padmé's condition or mindset. As heartbroken as she was, she also had hope for Anakin's redemption, so she couldn't have been in such despair that she would lose the will to live.

And Padmé’s labor was premature; that assisted delivery was premature and one of the worst things that could have happened to her.

I brought this up because I didn't find the idea of ​​dying of a broken heart absurd: first, because I’ve seen it happen firsthand, and second, because this is a space opera and a Shakespearean Greek tragedy—that’s a fundamental element of the genre.

And according to the *Star Wars Insider Special Edition* (2015), she died of a broken heart:

The former condition, also known as stress-induced cardiomyopathy, involves a weakening or contraction of part of the heart so that it cannot pump blood properly and it is accompanied by cardiac anomalies such as an enlargement of that part of the heart. Its symptoms often include severe chest pain, shortness of breath, and changes in blood pressure, and usually affects people over 50 or with underlying physical or mental health conditions. It can happen quickly and can often be confused for a heart attack.

The latter condition, also known as psychogenic death, is a much more subtle condition that is not accompanied by physical symptoms and can manifest in people who are young and otherwise healthy. However, it is a condition that is caused by people feeling that they are in a hopeless, inescapable position, is usually accompanied by psychological/behavioral symptoms such as social withdrawal, physical inactivity, and/or self-neglect, and it usually takes days at least for victims to succumb to it, depending on their age and/or underlying health conditions.

Your great-grandfather dying from psychogenic death (rather than from a broken heart if he indeed had no other medical symptoms) in a matter of days after his wife's death makes sense because he felt like he was in an inescapable situation and because he was old, and thus, even if he was completely healthy, his physical condition was still fragile compared to younger people. If those younger people you refer took days or weeks to die after their respective traumas and their deaths were preceded by social withdrawal or physical inactivity, it would make sense for them to have died from this condition because they would have felt that they were in a hopeless, inescapable situation.

However, Padmé's death was completely different from all of this. She was young and healthy and strong enough to safely deliver two newborns in a vaginal birth. Her condition was not accompanied by a weakening of the heart, and she showed no signs of chest pain or shortness of breath before being induced into labor on Polis Massa (which, as I meant before, shouldn't have had to happen if she'd been under life-threatening stress because it would have caused spontaneous premature labor long before she reached Polis Massa). Besides that, such a weakening of the heart would have made it much more dangerous for her to deliver two newborns in a vaginal birth than it actually was, so stress-induced cardiomyopathy is ruled out.

As for psychogenic death, her condition doesn't match it because her death took less than a day and was not accompanied by psychological/behavioral symptoms of notable social withdrawal or physical inactivity, there was no time for self-neglect to contribute to her death. She was socially engaged enough to follow instructions and interact with her children and Obi-Wan, and she was active enough to go through extenuating vaginal labor.

Most importantly, (as many skeptics have noted), her last words indicate the opposite of feeling that she was in a hopeless, inescapable situation. She proclaimed her faith in Anakin's goodness and her hope for his redemption, thus, in accordance to her character, motivation to retain a will to live. Considering this and everything stated above, the only in-universe indication of her loss of will to live was the medical droid's diagnosis, and he was just guessing as he admittedly didn't really know what was going on.

If we are going to make sense of this stuff, there's a limit to how much we can suspend our disbelief, especially when it comes to narrative and character consistency.

From my research, Neil Edwards wasn't involved with the writing process of ROTS, just the editing of Star Wars Insider magazine, so he's not a real primary source. And since George Lucas tends to retcon things as he goes along and not give serious thought to his writing, he's not always a reliable source either.

My great-grandfather actually died like that. My great-grandmother passed away, and just a few days later, my great-grandfather died too, even though he had been perfectly healthy. I know plenty of stories like that—and not just about romantic love, but family love, too. I’ve seen mothers die after their children were arrested for terrible crimes; they simply couldn't bear the knowledge that their own child had committed the act.

If so, it's the difference between them and Padmé that makes it so hard to believe that she died of a broken heart: that she was so young and healthy and that her condition had no symptoms other than her mysteriously weakening so fast. Plus, there's the fact that she was heavily pregnant at the time. If her stress was so extreme that it would be life-threatening, it should have sent her into premature labor long before she reached Polis Massa.

And it wasn't even a broken heart that she was diagnosed with. The medical droids said that she had "lost the will to live", which was a whole other kind of medical problem with completely different symptoms that didn't match Padmé's condition or mindset. As heartbroken as she was, she also had hope for Anakin's redemption, so she couldn't have been in such despair that she would lose the will to live.

there's not much surprising about women not being aware this will happen given how pro choicers talk about fetuses

Hi im so sorry this took so long!! I wanted to give you a very detailed genuine answer since you asked very respectfully I ofc want to return the favor and give you just as much respect and details as you may want and ofc feel free to ask more!

I believe denominations that actively support and affirm LGBTQ+ identities and sexual practices are not faithfully teaching Christianity. The Bible is straightforward: God’s design for sexuality is marriage between one man and one woman (Genesis 1–2, Matthew 19:4-6). Passages like Leviticus 18:22, Romans 1:26–27, 1 Corinthians 6:9–11, and others consistently describe same sex sexual activity as sin. For nearly all of Christian history this was the clear consensus. Affirming denominations have adopted a modern revision that prioritizes cultural feelings over Scripture.

Common objections don’t hold up well(i had to study alot for this loll, but i learned some cool stuff along the way!):

- “Jesus never said anything about it” Jesus directly upheld the Genesis creation model of male-female marriage and sexual ethics. He also affirmed the Old Testament’s moral authority.

- “God is love / love is love”God islove, which is exactly why He calls us out of sin rather than affirming it. An alcoholic may deeply love drinking; someone in adultery may feel genuine love for their partner. Feelings of love or attraction do not override God’s commands. Biblical love rejoices in truth and calls people to repentance.

- “The Bible only condemns abusive or pagan forms, not committed same sex relationships” Romans 1 describes the acts themselves as contrary to God’s natural order, not just context. This is special pleading the text doesn’t make that distinction.

People experiencing same sex attraction or gender dysphoria can absolutely be real Christians. We are all sinners who fall short (Romans 3:23). The answer is the same for every struggle: repent, believe the gospel, and fight sin by the power of the Holy Spirit. “Love the sinner, hate the sin” is the right posture. Welcome people with kindness and truth. No one’s particular temptation makes them worse than anyone else pride, greed, heterosexual lust, homosexual lust, gossip, and a hundred other sins put us all in equal need of grace. Denominations that declare what Scripture calls sin to be good or blessed have compromised on biblical authority and ethics. They may still contain believers and do some positive work, but they are not holding to the faith as it was delivered. True Christianity calls every person to holiness, not to cultural accommodation. The gospel isn’t “God affirms you as you are.” It’s far better: God loves you enough to save you from your sin and make you new in Christ. That’s the message the Church should proclaim with both truth and compassion.

I hope this answers some questions! Like I said if u have any more questions I'll gladly answer them!