I have a question for you about the new Pope and his librul bias: how big a difference would it make politically if he got the Catholic Church in the US to stop acting like a wing of the Republican party?
In my view, the effect could be enormous. About 25 percent of Americans identify as Catholic and I have to believe that the constant hammering against reproductive rights and marriage equality, the threats to deny Democratic politicians communion and so on, could easily affect the vote of a reasonable proportion of American Catholics. I would not be surprised if 10% of American Catholics are affected in this way, which would make for a little over 2 percent of the American population.
I realize this is speculative, and that any change will be slow, but the eventual potential for change here is immense. If an enormous institution that currently devotes itself to hating gays and sluts started devoting itself to social justice…..
Mike in NC
That ship has sailed, as the saying goes. The cardinals and bishops all play golf and poker with GOP politicians. Individuals, on the other hand – especially Hispanics – could make a difference.
jheartney
Any effect would take years to show up; the current batches of haters would have to go to their Catholic reward before there’d be any significant switches in voting patterns. By that time the demographic tides will have swept the GOP out to sea.
Now if we could have skipped the past 30 years of gay-baiting, that might have been something.
KG
I grew up Catholic, went to a Catholic school through the 6th grade. At least back when I attended church (which granted, was not often), there wasn’t a lot of politicalization of the pulpit. I think most Catholics smile and nod when a celibate clergy tries to tell them how to arrange their lives on matters of sex and relationships. Maybe it’s changed, but I’d guess the 10% number is probably high.
Baud
I think it would have an impact. Religious teachings are like any other form of marketing. What gets emphasized is what sticks in people’s brains.
Cheap Jim
Papa Pancho will have to deal with whomever the Council of Bishops choose to be their next head, which by a coincidence is happening this week. He may be pontiff, but they’re a whole lot closer. And all the diocesan clergy work directly for them.
kindness
They’d kill him before he could change it. They already are wringing their hands over him not having abortion and gays at the top of every list, no matter what the subject.
Alex S.
Hmm… Obama already won the Catholic vote. Many of those who did not vote for him, probably consider themselves more Catholic than the Pope. But I guess it’s good for a percent or two of the national vote. But not more.
scav
Honestly, not that much on the (political) ground is my take, they pretty much ignore the opinions they disagree with while keeping the t-shirt. They can’t church-shop to find a moral mirror that reflects preconceived prejudices, so they’ve developed other coping mechanisms. Attendance, that would shift around but political behavior? I doubt it.
Percysowner
If he was willing to do it, telling them to get off the “we don’t have to pay for contraception for our employees” train would be a good start. Taking a major player off the board and stopping the church from funding these things would make a difference, IMHO>
PeakVT
In my view, the effect could be enormous.
Well, duh. That’s why even atheists like me who think that the creation myth of a bunch of goatherds shouldn’t be used as a guide to anything, let alone modern life, are nonetheless cheering New Pope™ on. Even if he doesn’t change the Church’s teachings a whit on gays, abortion, celibacy, female ordination, and the like, moving the church’s focus from those issues to economic and social justice could have significant positive effects on human welfare here and around the globe. I have no idea if he’ll succeed, but I hope he does.
KG
@Alex S.:
And another good chunk of them have “Catholic” a decent chunk of the way down the list of self-identifying traits
gbear
Bill Donohue would become a Baptist before he gave up hating all the things he hates..
Mullah DougJ
@Alex S.:
He only won the Catholic vote because of Latinos.
Schlemizel
How bid a difference would it make if the Pope could fly? There is an almost equal chance of that as his changing the church at this time. He may be the titular head of the church and the Vicar of Christ but the political machine that runs the place has its own agenda and one guy is not going to fix that in my lifetime.
Schlemizel
How bid a difference would it make if the Pope could fly? There is an almost equal chance of that as his changing the church at this time. He may be the titular head of the church and the Vicar of Christ but the political machine that runs the place has its own agenda and one guy is not going to fix that in my lifetime.
cokane
most self id catholics vote democratic
hells littlest angel
It would make a significant difference — in about thirty years.
jon
@KG: Agree. The assumption that Catholics do as the Church says is not as solid as it could be. There will be some effect, but it would take a positive effort to bring up new issues to make a bigger change.
Phoenician in a time of Romans
There are also liberal Catholics. In my humble opinion, the Church’s position is orthogonal to how Catholics will vote – if it works with them, they’ll cite it as justification, and if it doesn’t, they’ll ignore it.
Bill E Pilgrim
I’m with Alex. Catholics are already far less right-wing than a lot of people think:
Like so many other things in the country, the conservative loudmouths are so loud and get so much attention that you’d think they represented the majority, but they don’t. The Pope not being rabidly right wing on social issues might tip a very small percentage, but that’s about it.
Crusty Dem
25% identify as Catholic, but no more than 2-4% are devout, and even then i think the impact of the leadership in Rome on their behavior is nominal. Example: look at any poll on birth control usage by religion, Catholics are always on top (was going to say “in te missionary position”).
You’re mistaking wingnuts using the church to justify their innate idiocy rather than the converse. A common error.
Bill E Pilgrim
@Mullah DougJ: I’m wondering why that changes anything? I mean wouldn’t any effect the new Pope has affect Latinos as well?
Herbal Infusion Bagger
@Cheap Jim:
However, it’s going to be harder for them to shut up the liberal wing of the Catholic church if you can’t kick them off the faculty of their college, or appoint overseers of “troublesome” orders or organizations (like they’ve tried to do with the Leadership Conference of Women Religious).
So, it’s not going to be good for the cozy relationship the bishops have built with the GOP.
Jay B.
@Bill E Pilgrim:
You are exactly right. It’s like the GOP saying that “if only blacks didn’t vote, our guy would have won” — true, but irrelevant.
@KG: Thirded. The clergy is just about irrelevant at the moment, bishops are unheard by almost anyone who doesn’t already agree with them.
geg6
I think the only Catholics left (only slight hyperbole here) are the ones bitching about this pope. The only three Catholics left in my family (a large Catholic family of siblings who all went to Catholic school) quit the church last year due to all the policking from the altar during the election and over the ACA. So I don’t think it would make much difference in our politics. What would be more interesting to me is if he could entice them back.
dr. bloor
I’d be surprised if the number was that high.
Shinobi (@shinobi42)
I am a recovering catholic with a lot of friends who were also catholic. My experience is that the older “millenial” catholics fall into two categories.
1. People who are catholic because they are catholic but still disagree on some issues and pretty much do whatever they want.
2. People who are ex-Catholics because of the things the church says and does.
We’ve had a lot of conversation around whether or not the church could reform its views. My take is that if the church does try to reform its views, (Say to fall more in line with the rebellious liberal nuns who are actually trying to help people) they will lose people.
The church’s entire foundation is faith in the idea that they are infallible. So for the institution to reverse course on any issue, or try to be more “liberal” essentially threatens the faith of their hatemongers. At best, the new Pope may be able to slow the exodus of young people from the church.
Arclite
I thought it was the Fundies not the Catholics that were the bedrock of the GOP. Aren’t the highest concentration of Catholics up in Mass, for example?
EDIT: In this poll, for example, Hispanic Catholics trend about the same as general non-Hispanics. Hispanic fundies are the GOPers.
http://ams.news21.com/media/uploads/photos/2010/08/26/religion2.jpg
pseudonymous in nc
The institutional change is coming, no matter what: American Catholicism’s first language is Spanish, and while there’s going to be a lag between an increasingly Hispanic congregation and an older, whiter hierarchy, that’s going to change as well.
Commenting at Balloon Juice since 1937
From my experience the Catholics that are influenced by what the Church says today are going to vote Repug any way. The pope will have to appoint some new cardinals, dudes will need to die, then new people will get promoted. The current crop of younger priests were trained at the Vatican during the last two fascist regimes. They’ve effectively purged liberals from their ranks. As other commenters have pointed out, it will take a generation or two to effect a change at the bishop level.
Punchy
Reorganized in order of importance.
Commenting at Balloon Juice since 1937
@geg6: interestingly that’s when my wife and I decided we’ve had enough. The lies from the pulpit were disgusting.
Just Some Fuckhead, Thought Leader
Anyone that still identifies as Catholic after the child rape scandal and cover-up prolly isn’t the sort of person that is reasonable and persuadable.
Dervin
The church isn’t going to make the difference.
My Aunt and Father are both devout Catholics, and they are not on the same political page at all. My Dad is a RINO, hasn’t voted for a Republican in 20 years (except for the local State Rep, because he lives on our block). I’m guessing my dad is anti-abortion, but he’s “who cares let them do what they want”-gay marriage. My Aunt is tea party, she’ll make quips if there’s an obvious homosexual on TV or in the room, etc…
srv
As a retired Catholic, I would probably not call myself that if we’d had Benedict instead of JPII. I think JPII was a horrible pope at the micro level, but he was the right guy for the 80’s – he had more to do with the Soviet collapse than anything Reagan ever did.
Before, Rome was all powerful, and now there are a lot of Opus Dei JPII acolytes running those bishopdoms. There are ~265 active bishops, 195 diocese/archodiocese.
I’ve never understood if the diocese really control policy in the macro scale or how much the archbishops or Rome are responsible. I think there is less variance at the diocese level than there used to be, so somebody is busting those bishops’ balls.
My impression is that the US church doesn’t hold a lot of weight in Rome, so if Benedict wanted to go hippie on them, the rest of the RCC would not care. But I would guess the the US RCC would ride out the storm.
So it depends on how Benedict lives and the non-OD crowd makes a come back. Will take a generation, and probably longer, because hippies aren’t signing up at the seminary.
scav
Even grumpy hard-right Popes coming out against war didn’t slow things, let alone tanks or drones, down in the slightest. Foam fingers all the way for the Abortion is Wrong because the Pope and Beanies and Jebus and the Holy Mother say so crowd. ‘mercan hardline Catholics get things their way as a birthright of ‘mercanhood. So they’ll breeze past the latest admonition that US bishops shouldn’t preach ideology. Immigrants might be trickier, but the could swing either direction based on past circumstances. A lot of Czechs at the turn of the century dropped Catholicism hard once out of the Austrian Emp. and that was even after the Empire had been easing up on the Everybody must be Catholic official line. Other groups use the Church as a point of coalescence for being an immigre, but does that mean they take marching orders? I somehow doubt it as a general rule.
Chris
@Alex S.:
@jon:
@Bill E Pilgrim:
What all of you said.
The important thing to realize is that there is no “Catholic vote.” Hasn’t been for decades. Catholics are pretty well split right down the middle – their vote has been identical to the national vote in all the last elections (if I recall, all the way down to breaking for Gore in 2000 but Bush in 2004). Liberals ignore the bishops; if the hierarchy ever moved over to the other side, conservatives would as well.
Doesn’t mean none of this matters; if there are enough statements from the Pope to convince a few percentage points in the middle, that’s a good thing. More importantly, if he could clean up the American Church, that would rob the Republicans of an institutional support base, which is a big deal – even if half the congregations aren’t listening to you on politics, the clergy is still how you get the other half motivated, turn them out to vote, keep them on the straight and narrow path, etc. The Pope’s a very long way from actually having done that, though.
MattF
It could make some difference at the margin, but in fact, American Catholics have pretty much the same political demographics as Americans generally, and that’s unlikely to change.
kuvasz
The American Catholics I know vote their personal conscience, not the Pope’s. Compared to most other Christians they seem less influenced by the direction of their priests/ministers than others. Which, it seems the current Pope indicated; viz., you are directed by your personal conscience.
I have no argument against that philosophy.
pseudonymous in nc
@Chris:
This is the significant point: having Timmy Dolan on Bullshit Bill Donohue’s speed dial (and vice versa) creates an unhealthy direct line of communication between the hierarchy and wingnut welfare. Donohue has carte blanche to say things that the bishops don’t want attributed to them. Opening some distance between the institutional church and institutional wingnuttia has the potential to change that.
dollared
@Schlemizel: But somebody did do that in your lifetime. In 1980 my congressman was a liberal priest. JPII put an end to that. It can easily reverse if Pancho has 10 years. That’s all it took the last time around.
Betty Cracker
@PeakVT: What you said.
geg6
@Commenting at Balloon Juice since 1937:
My sister got up in the middle of the homily, said out loud (but not shouting) that the priest was a liar and a hypocrite and walked out. Her child and husband right behind. And went directly to an Episcopal church. They like it there.
different-church-lady
Speaking as only one lapsed Catholic, I’d guess there’s a lot of Catholics who are waiting readily for the change.
Chris
@Arclite:
Yes and no. Yes, fundies are the bedrock of the religious right (evangelicals continue to be a majority-GOP demographic, as opposed to Catholics who are up for grabs). But the Catholic connection still matters – it’s how they reach out into urban areas and avoid being confined to just another rural-WASPs-only fraternity.
charluckles
@PeakVT:
Agreed. To me its not so much that he is moving away from beating up the gays and keeping women in their place, its that he is moving towards concerns about social justice. Further its not just that he is going to change Catholics, but that by refocusing Catholics on social justice concerns he may change some of Christianity in general. To have someone in a position of real power and importance begin to really push on the idea that greed is wrong and that helping the poor and downtrodden should be one of our highest priorities could be a real game changer.
dollared
@Chris: Wow, I’m surprised at the collective ignorance on this. I will tell you from personal experience (I know hundreds of little old Catholic ladies that worry about zygotes) that the Catholic bishops – and their allies amongst the parish priests – are definitely worth 10% of the white Catholic vote. That may translate to only 2-3% of the nation, but due to distribution effects we’re talking 5% of Ohio, Pennsylvania, Missouri, Wisconsin, Ilinois and Indiana here. That’s 3 statehouses, 5 senate seats and 15 congressional seats that could swing on that one factor alone, in those states alone.
Add in Florida and Texas, and you could accelerate demographic -ageddon by 10 years if you weaken the white Catholics’ link to Republicans.
Wisconsin, for example, is all about the Catholics supporting Walker. That’s why he hammers so much on school vouchers. @scav: @scav: @kuvasz:
hitchhiker
Ex-Catholic here. I think the right would lose some of their favorite talking points, and the left would gain a passel of new ones. Whether that translates to votes is anybody’s guess.
Example: the GOP will no longer be able to point at ALL “religious people” being in agreement about how it’s morally wrong to care for the disadvantaged, because that must be how God wanted them to live, and it will only encourage their sloth anyway.
They’ll still say things like this, but the blue team will no longer be stuck calling them hypocritical assholes. Instead, we can write our own narratives that aren’t reactionary. Like, “The Pope is right when he says that taking care of the disadvantaged is part of living a decent & fulfilling life.”
Or whatever it is that we like about what he’s saying. I think it could matter a lot because, man, disaffected no-religion types are intensely impressed with this man. I’m talking about the possibility that the 40% of so of Americans who don’t vote might be a titch more likely to do so if it became an easy way to show their solidarity with Francis.
But I’m an optimist.
HumboldtBlue
The problem is the laity still belongs to and supports the fucking church as it is and it’s still a massive collection of sexually repressed shitbirds scamming the masses so they can pretend they are really, really, really close to a non-existent god. Fuck the church and anyone who still belongs to the child rapist protection society.
burnspbesq
@Just Some Fuckhead, Thought Leader:
Fuck off, asshole. Just because you’re too fucking stupid to not conflate things that ought not to be conflated doesn’t mean everyone is. Christ’s teachings on matters of morality are no more or less valid because some people who are supposed to be following them aren’t doing so.
geg6
@burnspbesq:
But you are equating Jesus’ teachings with the religion of Roman Catholicism in that statement. Which would be the same mistake you are accusing JSF of in your comment. One can believe in the teachings of Jesus (hell, even I do for the most part) and still think the RCC is a corrupt, crumbling criminal conspiracy that really isn’t much worth saving.
Villago Delenda Est
I think Francis’ emphasis on lapsed notions of actual Christianity, as opposed to the modern worship of Mammon and the hatred of human sexuality, is the big story here.
Of course, the Protestants are the most prone to Mammon worship, but don’t discount the Opus Dei types as lovers of wealth the wealthy, power and the powerful, and despisers of the poors.
Francis should excommunicate the lot of them. Then sic the Swiss guards on their assess.
EconWatcher
It seems to me the main impact would be cultural and ideological. For the last 30 years, the free market types have had free rein. Social democracy in America has mostly been in retreat as an ideology. But Catholic social doctrine could help create an ideological counterbalance, just as it did in the New Deal era. It would provide some institutional backup and legitimacy for thinkers who want to shape a new ideology (or resurrect an old one).
Villago Delenda Est
Oh, and since I don’t (thank FSM) live in Texas, why am I getting these banner ads for the vile scum that is John Cornyn and his Texas vaginal police squad (which is formally known as Texas Right to Life)?
ranchandsyrup
New Pope is so much better than Pope Classic.
Roger Moore
@burnspbesq:
What do Christ’s teachings have to do with identifying as Roman Catholic? You can be a good Christian without continuing to feed the corrupt culture that is the Catholic hierarchy. I, and I’m sure a lot of other people, would argue that you’re staying closer to Christ’s teachings by refusing to give your money and attention to the gangsters in the Vatican and trying to do some good yourself.
Chris
@srv:
I’m open to correction, but I really don’t see how either of them had all that much to do with the collapse of the Soviet Union.
@kuvasz:
I think Protestants have a more flexible relationship with their denominations, and therefore with their clergy/hierarchy. If you don’t like being X denomination, you can pick up and leave and join Y denomination, and still think of yourself as a good Christian (in the Reformed kind of way). So yes, they may be more influenced by their priests/ministers, but that’s also because they got to choose them in the first place and make sure they were the kind of people they wouldn’t mind listening to.
Catholicism is less flexible. You’re either in or out, and there’s this aura of One, True Church sanctifying the clergy and the institution – there are no alternate Catholic churches out there for you to run to if you don’t like the Pope or bishop. So people have more of a mind block against leaving than Methodists, Lutherans, Presbyterians, Episcopalians etc would have. And, paradoxically, they make up for it by paying less attention to the clerics.
TL/DR: Protestants sort themselves into liberal and conservative by denomination, whereas Catholics, who can only have one denomination, do it by individual voter. (Those who stay, that is).
Keith G
A study of the history of the Catholic Church, from it’s early roots (c. 40 AD), is wicked interesting. It is the story of the development of a major foundation of the Western world and it is an amazing study of human beings human in all their glory and all their darkness. The Church has at the same time been a driving force and a mirror for the human condition.
Part of my time studying was formally academic. Some has been as a history nerd/hobbyist. Either way, get a half dozen or so centuries of inspection and you will learn that there is indeed nothing new under the sun. These story lines have all played out before in slightly different iterations. There always will be reformers and there will always be reactionaries.
That is why I can be cheered when someone like Francis comes along. It’s nice to see a good leader making a strong case for a more humanistic operation. In the past, good things have happened when this occurred. And yet, this is but one step in a very long journey.
Villago Delenda Est
@Roger Moore:
Which is pretty much what that Martin Luther guy was talking about five centuries ago.
Amir Khalid
@Villago Delenda Est:
I am even less of a Texas resident than you, and I get them John Cornyn ads too. I’ve been told that if you click on them, John Cole gets a few coins thrown to this blog. So, once in a while, I do that. You needn’t stay at that site for long; and I can assure you, you won’t want to.
themann1086
If he could get the bishops, cardinals and priests to stop pushing bullshit on Sundays, it would help a lot. True story from last week’s election: an elderly couple was voting and needed my help with the machines (I’m the machine inspector for my ward, so it’s a pretty normal request). They asked me how to vote straight Republican, because (and I’m paraphrasing as best I can remember) “of all the abortion the church told us about Sunday”. Even ignoring the fact that this is definitely a violation of IRS regulations, this was in Pennsylvania: all of the races were for town council and school board! It doesn’t even matter what their views on most national issues are, they don’t have any effect on public policy! There is a deep-rooted disease with the American Catholic Church, and I don’t know how many of its clergy are infected with it.
p.s. This is also the Church where we use to have our elections, and I liked it there; it was a really convenient (and indoors) location. After the 2012 general, they declined to host any future elections. Their public statement cited the Sandy Hook shootings and the children’s safety; this is a lie. They told us on Election Day that we would “never vote here again” because we took down an anti-Obamacare sign that had been hanging over the voting machines, AND which a voter had complained about. Petty, immature liars. Oh, and that voter was a Republican, too.
Chris
@charluckles:
I agree with this. I never expected a Pope who’d change the line on abortion and gay marriage. I’d settle for a Pope who would try to actually apply the full gambit of Catholic teachings – which, on everything except reproductive rights, is closer to the 1960s New Left than to either of our political parties – rather than ignoring them in favor of abortion and gay marriage.
(Note the word “apply.” JP2 and Benny, also, said a lot of nice things about the inherent immorality of laissez-faire economics and the need for social justice and environmental protection and all that. But it was never more than words – the Church certainly never tried to excommunicate or deny communion to Republican politicians the way they did to Democrats. Whether that‘ll actually change still remains to be seen).
Johannes
@different-church-lady: the Episcopal Church Welcomes You! Ok, your sister, in this case.
Twice the incense, half the guilt, none of the hate.
scav
@Roger Moore: Maybe it’s like the tree of liberty’s bloodthirsty roots, with the raped bodies of children being sometimes required collateral damage to demonstrate and nourish the inerrant majesty and moral authority of the bemitered with the proper pedigree.
In other words, I don’t get it either, beyond apparently some really really really needing the magic feather and chrism to do away with having to make complex moral judgements, especially concerning lapses of one’s own team. Odd, in a group that theoretically places such a high value on confession.
wasabi gasp
Completely OT:
Two members of this band (and a third musician) were just killed:
The Yellow Dogs – This City
NYT Link
Keith G
@Chris:
I do not recall any statements coming from the Vatican announcing the planned or actual effort to impose a ferendae sententiae excommunication upon any Catholic Democrats. When did this occur?
Temporarily Max McGee (soon enough to be Andy K again)
@srv:
Nah. Not saying that Reagan had any more to do with it than any other POTUS, but it was the pressure put upon the Soviet Union in the arms race that ruined their economy (and that of their satellites)- poverty and hunger done ’em in.
Frankensteinbeck
I think the big question is how much power the pope has over the bishops. When the 2014 election comes around, can he stop them from campaigning for and especially spending money on Republicans and Republican causes? If he can’t, change will be mighty slow. If he can, that might do something, but it’s hard to say how big an effect it would have.
FlipYrWhig
OK, I’ve been militantly atheist pretty much since sentience, but, still… If it’s possible to identify as a Democrat while still thinking that most current Democratic officials suck, surely it’s possible to identify as a Catholic while still thinking that most current Catholic officials suck. You keep calling yourself one of them because you hope one day they’ll stop sucking, or because you’re actively working on stopping them from sucking as much. It’s not that confusing. Same reason why people disappointed with Democrats don’t form their own party: you figure, I have a party already, it’s just being temporarily occupied by a bunch of dipwads.
epluribusscrotum
@Roger Moore: It’s pretty clear what he meant: just because some people in the RCC aren’t behaving in accordance with Christ’s teachings–obviously as that’s understood by Catholics–doesn’t mean everyone in the Church is as rotten as the institution and hierarchy. Unless you agree that it’s fair to presume that because a person hasn’t renounced their Catholic faith, they are automatically unreasonable and incorrigible, as the original comment stated.
Do lefties in this country believe their sanctimonious bullshit, or do you just not see when you paint in brushstrokes as broad, stupid, and intolerant as the right?
Botsplainer
The Cult of the Fetus© would find itself in a hellacious bind if it were forced by the hierarchy to actually care about things that didn’t involve mere slut-shaming.
Frankensteinbeck
@Temporarily Max McGee (soon enough to be Andy K again):
I don’t think an arms race was necessary. Decades of paranoid overlords who put dogma above even the most basic science or facts destroyed Russia’s economy. The arms race was just their favorite stupidity. Once you got to Lysenkoism, Russia was borked.
Chris
@Keith G:
A quick Internet search and it appears you’re right. I thought I remembered excommunication threats that went along with the threats to deny communion to Kerry and other pro-abortion politicians, but it appears there were none. My mistake.
Omnes Omnibus
@Keith G: Bishops in 2004. And 2009.
ETA: Denial of communion not excommunication.
catclub
@Johannes: “none of the hate.” none is a strong word.
I am a member of the Episcopal church. I wish it was none. I could agree with “we are trying to tamp down the hate, rather than encourage it.”
PeakVT
@Temporarily Max McGee: some will make the argument that the Saudis were the key, as they collapsed the USSR’s oil export revenue when they turned the oil taps back on in 1985 in a big way. That can be credited in part to the Reagan administration, but didn’t gut domestic spending, so Reagan worshipers tend to forget about it. Also, too, Chernobyl sped the process along.
Omnes Omnibus
@Omnes Omnibus: OTOH there is this on excommunication from 2007
LanceThruster
“If this is going to be a Christian nation that doesn’t help the poor, either we have to pretend that Jesus was just as selfish as we are, or we’ve got to acknowledge that He commanded us to love the poor and serve the needy without condition and then admit that we just don’t want to do it.” – Stephen Colbert, Catholic comedian and social satirist
Cris (without an H)
Does somebody have a breakdown of the Catholic vote, split out by other demographic? (e.g. how do Democrats do among non-Hispanic Catholics?)
I bet somebody already linked to it, but you don’t think I actually read these comments, do you
Cris (without an H)
For a rebuttal, let us quote Rebecca Schoenkopf at length:
Botsplainer
@jheartney:
The condom-tossing episodes of ACT-UP at Jesuit ordinations really helped things out, didn’t they?
shortstop
I think Doug has a good point about separating Latino and non-Latino Catholics. Most polls only break things down by race/ethnicity and religion, but I recall seeing one or two that seemed to confirm that the non-Latino Catholic vote is considerably more conservative than its Latino counterpart. I’ll see if I can find them.
Of course, if you break things down still more by age, younger Catholics in general are less conservative. But I think there’s a non-insignificant number of older, non-Hispanic white Catholics who do still listen to the pope. A lot of them went Republican with Reagan and have never come back.
I’d also be curious to see how much the pope’s and the US bishops’ stated opinion actually reinforces opposite voting — people who were going to vote Democratic anyway and are even more determined to do so thanks to some jackassery about vaginas and gay sex and so forth! And how many “moderate” Republican women followed through on their loudly stated threats in 2012 and voted Democratic because of the significantly Catholic war on women? Not possible to quantify, I know, but fun to speculate.
Danack
Pope Francis’ latest surprise: a survey on the modern family
As I wrote on the Orange Satan’s site:
Johannes
@catclub: Fair point. I’m spoiled by living in a progressive diocese, and forget that the situation is more nuanced elsewhere.
Botsplainer
@PeakVT:
Francis is trying to slow the bleed right now. Currently, a large percentage of cultural Catholics are slacker, non-dogmatic Catholics, the remainder being psycho conservative Latin Mass or maximum misery fetishists. While a few of the non-dogmatics will drift by marriage or business marketing into the vast pantheon of American associative evangelical churches, most of the cultural Catholics will slack straight onto a couch on Sunday morning and won’t bother going anywhere (especially when the “anywhere” is being pulpited by a closet case who either has a Mass based on an incomprehensible interpretive dance or is screaming about sluts, abortions and gayness).
If the overall message goes back to the service to humanity that JPII and Der Panzerpope did their best to crush (particularly in South and Central America), then the bleed slows.
Temporarily Max McGee (soon enough to be Andy K again)
@Frankensteinbeck:
Not saying that Lysenkoism didn’t have a horrible effect, but it was abandoned in 1956. That the Soviets employed, basically, a pre-industrial colonial economic model probably had more of an effect throughout their bloc.
@PeakVT:
With or without that oil revenue, the Soviets couldn’t maintain a two-track economy (one military, one domestic). Far too much of their spending went to the military in order to maintain their empire through force. What little domestic spending that existed was poorly (and corruptly) distributed.
The nub of the issue is that when that empire collapsed, it did so because of a shitty economy, not because of religious divisions.
Botsplainer
@gbear:
In my experience, conservative American Irish Catholics are great at hating, and direct that hate primarily at minorities and sluts. After a short run at the bottom of the totem pole of American society, they became positively Cromwellian at how they were able to use any authority, real or perceived, to be complete assholes. They actually not only rival, but in fact beat the Brits in this category.
The Lord Protector would be proud of them these days….
les
@burnspbesq:
typical burnsie bullshit, with a heaping helping of hypocrisy. Who’s conflating the unconflatable?
Has fuck all to do with the RCC institution.
Patricia Kayden
“About 25 percent of Americans identify as Catholic”
And a large chunk of that 25% is Black or Hispanic and lean towards voting Democratic. In 2008, 54% of Catholics voted for President Obama. I assume Republicans will always have the majority of the White Catholic vote into the foreseeable future though.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/nov/07/catholic-voters-heavily-favored-obama-analysis-sho/?page=all
Chris
@Cris (without an H):
@shortstop:
Here’s Reuters for starters http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/11/08/us-usa-campaign-religion-idUSBRE8A71M420121108;
“Reuters/Ipsos exit polling found that 51 percent of Catholics favored President Barack Obama, compared with 48 percent for Republican contender Mitt Romney. A report by the Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life had a similar finding, with 50 percent of Catholics for Obama and 48 percent for Romney, the same as the popular vote in the general population.
Hispanic Catholics were far more likely to favor Obama – by 76 percent to 23 percent – than white Catholics, who favored Romney by 56 percent to 43 percent, according to the Reuters poll. Black Protestants favored Obama by 97 percent to 3 percent, while white Protestants favored Romney by 69 percent compared to 29 percent for Obama.
“When you talk about Catholics, there are really two Catholic votes, the white vote and the Hispanic vote, which look starkly different,” said Robert Jones, chief executive of the Public Religion Research Institute. He said exit polls found that overall, voters were focused mainly on economic issues.”
So the white Catholic vote is Republican, but with a very respectable Democratic showing. I kind of expected that. Those “ethnic white” Catholic families who moved from urban working class to middle class suburbia in the fifties and sixties – there’s a ton of social liberalism among their children and grandchildren, IMO.
The Hispanic vote is much more one-sided. Makes sense. I’m sure there’s quite a few social conservatives there as well, but it kind of gets overriden by the whole “Republicans want me to go back to Mexico [even if that’s not the right country]” thing.
les
@Danack:
This is all well and good; probably, good. But when one chooses to be a member of an organization, with a world wide, centuries old physical and political presence, and which touts itself as Catholic, united and indivisible; well, one better be prepared to live with the association. The institution believes it, and requires it of “real” members; why shouldn’t I believe it.
By the way, the Democratic party analogy mostly fails; in the US, under the current system, if you want to impact policy, you’re a Rep. or a Dem. Religion really doesn’t work that way;
Lurking Buffoon
Even if Pope Hippy the Unpunched only affects miniscule change for the better, it’s still more improvement than was there before him. Personally I’d rather have some small improvement over no improvement, but pragmatism is like that. Sure, he’s more a figurehead than the entire institution itself, but isn’t the point of a figurehead to lead by example? There’s a Ghandi quote I like, “I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ.” If New Pope’s example gets people to act more like Biblical Jesus and less like Walmart/Wingnut Facist-Jeebus then fuck yeah it’s a good thing! And being a good thing, it can only hurt the Rethuglican party.
shortstop
@Chris:
I guess. Here I think our different ages (I seem to remember you’re in your early 20s, but I may be hallucinating that) may skew our perspectives. I’m not old enough to remember most non-Hispanic white Catholics being Democrats — as I said, they began jumping on the Reagan bandwagon in large numbers, and that was when I was just coming of age politically — but I do know from reading and listening to older Catholics that until that time, American Catholics were a much more unified Democratic vote. Forty-six percent would have been unthinkably low.
So what you’re seeing as hopeful — the progressiveness of the younger generation of white Catholics, moving in a direction counter to what you’ve so far experienced — I sort of see as a long-overdue return to roots while shaking my head that such a reversal is even necessary. Your way is more optimistic, which is good.;)
nineone
Well the Boss seems okay. It’s management that acts all hinky. Can’t imagine the congregation enjoy being their punching bags and worse. Have to imagine a revolution could well take place with a little more prompting by the Pope as he becomes more and more popular. And when he does, and he will, those bastards better not touch him.
@Schlemizel:
Perhaps the long lost brother of Sister Bertrille?
It could happen.
Roger Moore
@Lurking Buffoon:
I think he’s more than a figurehead, or at least he’s a figurehead who was chosen because he was expected to represent the direction the organization’s leadership wants to go. The College of Cardinals did not elect a Latin American Jesuit with the hope and expectation that he was going to be just like John Paul II or Benedict XVI. They may have gotten a bit more than they bargained for, but I think Francis is less of a surprise to them than he is to us.
Frankensteinbeck
@Temporarily Max McGee (soon enough to be Andy K again):
I am not specifically blaming Lysenkoism, but rather using it as an example of how the Soviet government so so wildly dislodged from reality that they couldn’t build a functioning economy even without the arms race.
AA+ Bonds
@EconWatcher:
~ the correct post ~
Just Some Fuckhead, Thought Leader
@Cris (without an H): Yeah, except a decades-long (centuries?) child rape scandal was covered up BY THE VATICAN. I’m sorry you are so morally bankrupt you can’t understand what that means.
AA+ Bonds
@Frankensteinbeck:
But that’s stupid, because the net effect of Lysenkoism on Soviet agriculture was actually positive, counterbalancing decreases in production for other reasons by involving the people directly in attempting to increase yields. It’s pretty LOL to look down your nose scientifically at a country directly responsible for the invention and existence of space travel, which landed the first spacecraft on another planet and whose quietly capitalist-exploited legacy is the only working manned space program in the entire world right now
Mullah DougJ
@Cris (without an H):
They usually lose the white Catholic vote, but not by as much as they lose the white vote overall.
AA+ Bonds
@Just Some Fuckhead, Thought Leader:
I think your problem is that you don’t know when to stop complaining that things are going your way
Mullah DougJ
@Cris (without an H):
Here’s a link
Heliopause
I assume you are talking about the hierarchy, because the rank-and-file will become a de facto wing of the Democratic Party if demographic trends continue.
AA+ Bonds
So glad that the research I used to post on every Catholic thread here has completely sunk in and is being used fruitfully. Not being sarcastic in the slightest – it’s in tons of posts all up and down this thread and they’re good posts.
Just Some Fuckhead, Thought Leader
@AA+ Bonds: Take a victory lap.
Temporarily Max McGee (soon enough to be Andy K again)
@AA+ Bonds:
The German rocket scientists who worked in the post-WWII Soviet Union’s and United States’ space programs might argue that a bit differently. And even if they’d concede the importance of the Soviets’ role in advancing space exploration, there were military reasons that motivated the Soviets to green-light their program in the first place. They weren’t exactly climbing Everest because it was there- they wanted to use the lofty vantage point to spy and drop bombs. Not to say that that wasn’t the motivation behind the US kicking its own program into gear, either…
Chris
@Temporarily Max McGee (soon enough to be Andy K again):
“When the Russians put the first man in space, and when the Americans put the first man on the Moon, in secret bunkers around the world, German scientists toasted.”
– I forget who said it first
fuckwit
As a matter of fact, I am a Pope! I have my very own Pope Card, which certifies that I am a Pope.
This is one of the great perks of being a Discordian: everyone is a Pope.
Hail Eris!
Narcissus
Geez, first Talking Heads and then Prince in the same day
It’s like Balloon Juice is inside my head or something
Like you got past my Orgone-powered Reynolds-Aluminum Mind-Shield
I’m on to you juicers
Matt McIrvin
@AA+ Bonds:
Maybe in a short-lived way for agriculture, but it was disastrous for Soviet biology in the longer term.
My impression is that physics wasn’t as badly damaged, because after an initial period when this or that modern theory was denounced as bourgeois obscurantism, some of the leading physicists basically explained that Stalin would get no nuclear bomb unless he cut that shit out. The result was a world-beating Soviet physics establishment in the second half of the 20th century. Grad students in the West still study out of Soviet textbooks sometimes.
Matt McIrvin
…as for the Soviet space program, my impression was that they depended less on German emigres than the Americans did. But it was up and down: there was a rough period in the late 60s-1970s after Korolev died, and that happened to be when the US beat them to the Moon.
The Russians are still the masters at liquid-fueled rocket engines, they were way ahead of the US in space-station construction for decades, and the Soyuz has evolved into a great crewed spacecraft with the world’s most impressive record through decades of gradual design iteration. Though I don’t see the money there for them to keep forging ahead.
Cally 4nIA
@dollared:
Maybe might want to take OH off your list of potential Blue Catholic victories. I’ve been a Catholic in Ohio. Outside of Cleveland, which is already relatively blue, not only do Catholics not influence squat, but the “Real Christians(TM)” will double down even harder on their wingnuttery if it looks like the idol-worshipping papists are swinging left. Seriously, heard a Methodist minister in the Dayton ‘burbs build a sermon around how, when he found out his wife’s grandmother had been Catholic he realized that maybe he should stop burning crosses on his Catholic neighbors’ lawns. It was truly an inspiration to us all.
Matt
Sorry, but handwaving about social justice doesn’t mean shit from the leader of a criminal conspiracy to molest children that also has a RW lobbying arm.
Talk to me about the “liberalization” of the CC after he’s defrocked Dolan, for a bare minimum – better yet, shut the whole damn thing down and given the cash to charities that don’t have to support an entire parasitic hierarchy…
Gex
It will take a generation at least. Too many people I know vote R simply because to vote D means to be in favor of killing babies. I know school teachers who hate the way the Rs treat teachers and cut education funding who will still vote straight ticket R because of the babies. Not a one of them cares that they condemn women to die due to a miscarriage, a child that has zero chance of living, that cannot be aborted because of their religious beliefs. It is literally better to take money away from the kids they teach and to kill other women than to allow women to have the option to have an abortion.