Replies

That is what is known as a logical fallacy. There are way too many other variables involved to make that conclusion. One likely has nothing to do with the other.

"Likely"? This isn't the first time that a correlation between (modern) Catholicism and Liberalism has been statistically drawn:

If any corner of the globe should bear the imprint of Catholic values, it’s Latin America. Catholicism has enjoyed a spiritual monopoly in the region for more than 500 years, and today almost half the 1.1 billion Catholics alive are Latin Americans. Moreover, Latin Americans take religion seriously; surveys show that belief in God, spirits and demons, the afterlife, and final judgment is near-universal.
The sobering reality, however, is that these facts could actually support an “emperor has no clothes” accusation against the church. Latin America has been Catholic for five centuries, yet too often its societies are corrupt, violent, and underdeveloped. If Catholicism has had half a millennium to shape culture and this is the best it can do, one might be tempted to ask, is it really something to celebrate?
-- from the thread Why hasn't Catholicism had a more positive effect?
....Compare two lists: According to the USCCB, the five most Catholic states, in population, are: Rhode Island, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York and Connecticut. According to the American Life League, the states with the most pro-life legislation (i.e., inhibiting abortion in various ways) are: Oklahoma, Louisiana, Pennsylvania, Arkansas and Texas. This is a shocker. In short, there is no Catholic political impact in support of life in those states reportedly having the most Catholics. As Archbishop Charles Chaput of Philadelphia put it, after the 2008 election, “[w]e need to stop overcounting our numbers, our influence, our institutions, and our resources, because they are not real.”
— from the thread The Mythical Catholic Vote: The Harmful Consequences of Political Assimilation
....A new European Central Bank study has also found that Catholics are more likely to favour sharing wealth and to support government intervention in the economy than are Protestants....[Max Weber] noted that societies which had more Protestants had a more highly developed capitalist economy and that, in societies with different religions, the most successful business leaders were Protestant. Weber also argued that Catholicism impeded the development of capitalism in the West, as did Confucianism and Buddhism in the East...."relative to Roman Catholicism, Reformed Protestantism has curbed preferences for redistribution and for government intervention in the economy.”
-- from the thread Catholics 'more likely to back state economic intervention'
"The notion that only Protestantism can bring forth a free economy — whereas Catholicism includes no corresponding education to freedom and to the self-discipline necessary to it, favoring authoritarian systems instead — is doubtless even today still very widespread, and much in recent history seems to speak for it."
- Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, Market Economy and Ethics, 1985<

Catholic teaching no more “led the way to homo marriage” just because many people support it in largely Catholic countries any more than Christian teaching led the way to the homo victories in the USA. It is the deviation from and rejection of those teachings.

You can ask why are so many Catholics deserting biblical ideas of morality. You can’t say biblical teachings on morality caused the desertion. In your post you seem to be presenting an argument that Catholicism has failed. That may be a fair question, just as Christianity in the west has generally failed. There are probably a variety of reasons for the failure. The Bible teaches we are always battling sin and our sin nature. History teaches that the war against Truth has suffered many defeats. That does not mean that the teaching caused the failure or even led the way. It is the enemies of the teaching that cause it to fail.

I’m not Catholic and I have many issues with Catholic doctrine. I am speaking of their basic moral teachings. Even there I think they are weak in some spots. Still, where they are right, right teaching does not CAUSE wrong practice. Rebellion against right teaching causes wrong practice.

If Catholicism has had half a millennium to shape culture and this is the best it can do

You are asking the wrong question. The question is one which should be asked whenever we witness a Christian of questionable character: How much worse would he be without the tempering influence of the Church?

That being said, it is not Holy Mother the Church which is to blame, but her shepherds, the clergy — from top to bottom — who are feckless and weak and painfully ignorant of economics.