Thursday, March 01, 2012

Catholics are NOT social conservatives

I scratch my head every time pundits refer to Catholics as social conservatives. As a group, they simply are not. Exit polls show that in the Michigan primary a plurality of Catholics voted for Romney, not Santorum. The church has little influence over parishioners.

17 comments:

Anonymous said...

Some odd results in there.

Santorum beats Romney among Democrats (who were allowed to vote in this primary) while Romney wins among Republicans. It's basically tied among independents - 35% to 34% Romnney over Santorum.

However, if you look at the numbers for "Political philosophy", Santorum wins big among those who self-describe as "very conservative" while Romney wins by an equally large margin among those who call themselves "Somewhat conservative" and "Moderate to liberal".

The only conclusion I can come to is that there are still Democrats left who think of themselves as "very conservative".

Although I hear the Tea Party is supposed to be pro-Santorum, the MI voters opinion of the TP was a poor predictor of which man they ended up voting for. People who opposed the TP ended up voting for Santorum, and those who supported it ended up voting for Romney. Perhaps this has something to do with Santorums Democratic supporters having a low opinion of the Tea Party.

Anonymous said...

I agree that Catholics are not as socially conservative as they are sometimes made out to be. But in fairness, Romney is a pretty socially conservative candidate. I would not say that a vote for him is a vote for social liberalism, not by any stretch.

pat said...

Mormons are the most socially conservative major religion. Next would be evangelical Protestants, regular protestants, and then Catholics. Jews are the least socially conservative religion.

I leave out Muslims, Scientologists, Budhists and Orthodox Jews - too minor in America.

In any other election except this one, Romney would be considered a rock ribbed conservative. He is against abortion and gun control and he he for a strong national defense. He has moved rightward as he has aged - haven't we all?

Anonymous said...

"Catholics are NOT social conservatives"


They aren't catholic either.


They let anyone claim to be catholic. Weekly mass attending catholics are actually catholic. They vote more conservatively than catholics who don't go to mass.

sykes.1 said...

Reflecting on my own family, which is nominally 100% Catholic, most Catholics, including those who attend mass weekly are Cafeteria Catholics. They pick and chose what bits and pieces of the Church's teaching that appeal to them and let the rest go.

This has always been the case. When Paul VI issued Humanae Vitae in 1968, it was mostly rejected by the faithful, and still is.

Anonymous said...

You got it wrong.

Nominal "Catholics" like Nancy Pelosi and Joe Biden are NOT Catholics. They're heretics, non-believers and should be ex-communicated.

You're literally counting those who don't even believe in nor practice Catholicism as Catholics. It's despicable.

Saint Louis said...

Anonymous said: "The only conclusion I can come to is that there are still Democrats left who think of themselves as 'very conservative'."

Or the Democrats in Michigan figure Romney has a better chance of beating Obama than Santorum does, so they're trying to set up an easy run for their guy.

Anonymous said...

Most American Catholics, are, as my Catholic friend calls herself, "cafeteria Catholics." They pick and choose what to observer, what not to observe, what to believe, what not to believe, among Church rituals and doctrines.

"Born again" Christians, as opposed to just plain old Protestants, are like recovering smokers and alcoholics--much more doctrinaire.

Anonymous said...

Forgive the bad editing of the above post, but you get my drift.

Anonymous said...

Nah, Romney's not socially conservative in an ACTIVE way, which is why true cultural conservatives are pissed at him. He lives his life conservatively--that's not enough for them, however.

Anonymous said...

OT: sorry for going OT, Ron, but on someone's blog recently, I recall reading the surprise at the low % of self-described gay males in the latest GSS. Now, I can't find that post and those numbers.

However, I know you look at that stuff a lot. I wonder if you've ever compared/contrasted the numbers of gay men since the MMR vaccine has become practically mandated in schools everywhere.

The vaccine came about in early 70s, but I am not sure exactly when its use became truly widespread. I know that most doctors give the first dose around the age of 13 months now, but I don't know if that was true of early MMR vaccines.

Of course, there are complicating factors, the major one being that decades ago, fewer gays were likely to have admitted on a survey that they were gay so maybe looking into it means little, but if you noticed a big difference that corresponded to the giving of the MMR vaccine, you might be on your way to identifying Cochran's bug!

Anonymous said...

"Born again" Christians, as opposed to just plain old Protestants, are like recovering smokers and alcoholics--much more doctrinaire."

Don't born again Christians use artificial Birth control and get divorced and remarried, which makes them bad people and heretics.

Why did Catholic conservatives support Reagan? He was divorced and remarried,probably used birth control and impregnated Nancy before marriage. He didn't believe in Catholic doctrine or would have been a Catholic. He's a heretic, but is beloved by guys like Buchanon and Bennett. If someone can do all the things Reagan did, but still be loved as a great man, then religion doesn't matter in real life. How can you be friends with someone and admire them, but think they are going to hell? Someone who deserves to go to hell you should despise like a mass murderer, not someone who uses artificial birth control. The whole world is going to hell then , including Reagan. And if that is so, how can someone who thinks they are going to heaven be happy knowing just about all their friends are going to hell.

I think the chance God exists is slim and I used to go to mass every week for decades. I think Schopenhauer is probably right: religion is absurd if you take it literally. It must be looked at as an allegory.

I doubt most priests really believe it.

Anonymous said...

What about the great Mel Gibson? Is he a cafeteria Catholic? He's one of the Traditionalist Catholics. But lets look at his life, He had a bunch of sex before he was married. I think he is an alcoholic if I am not mistaken. Then when his marriage breaks up he goes out and gets a woman pregnant. According to his beliefs after he got divorced he should never have sex again. As soon as things got difficult he doesn't follow his religion either.

To be a traditional Catholic you just have to believe it's wrong when your doing it I guess. I guess he'll be forgiven if he says sorry before he dies.

If you die of a heart attack while committing adultery and can't say you are sorry I guess you'll go to hell. But the mass murderer who dies in jail gets to go to heaven. Absurd.

Anonymous said...

"If you die of a heart attack while committing adultery and can't say you are sorry I guess you'll go to hell. But the mass murderer who dies in jail gets to go to heaven. Absurd."

Or premarital sex or not going to mass once will send you to hell if unforgiven, but the rapist in jail goes to heaven.

So God is sitting in heaven saying to the person I would have forgiven you if you had time to say sorry, but now you are going to be tortured forever. That's all God can come up with for this rotten planet.

I read getting a lot drunk was considered a mortal sin. Anybody even confess that anymore? A little drunk is only a venial sin. A lot or a little drunk,wow that's really precise. Did God lower it to .08 when the govt did?

Anonymous said...

Lots of whinging about religion here in the guise of whinging about the Catholic church.



Why did Catholic conservatives support Reagan? He was divorced and remarried,probably used birth control and impregnated Nancy before marriage. He didn't believe in Catholic doctrine or would have been a Catholic. He's a heretic, but is beloved by guys like Buchanon and Bennett. If someone can do all the things Reagan did, but still be loved as a great man, then religion doesn't matter in real life. How can you be friends with someone and admire them, but think they are going to hell?


You don't understand Christianity, in spite of your allegedly having spent decades going to Mass.

Anonymous said...

"Someone who deserves to go to hell you should despise like a mass murderer, not someone who uses artificial birth control."

Just a thimble full of Christian doctrine here:

Everyone deserves to go to Hell.

People liked Reagan's policies. They liked what he did. It wasn't a religion thing. He didn't attack religionists.

Anonymous said...

This has always been the case. When Paul VI issued Humanae Vitae in 1968, it was mostly rejected by the faithful, and still is.


By definition, that is impossible.

If you reject church teaching, you aren't faithful. I would guess that those who agree with Humanae Vitae have much higher weekly attendance rates than those who reject it.