Home » Religion » Currently Reading:

Favorability Poll on Archbishop Carlson Received More Votes in 24 Hours Than Typical in a Week

June 25, 2014 Religion 17 Comments

The weekly poll here isn’t scientific, the participants self select. Still, the number of participants is pretty consistent week to week. But when last week’s poll, Do you have a favorable or unfavorable opinion of Archbishop Robert Carlson?, had more votes in the first 24 hours than most get after 7 days I knew an effort was on to distort the outcome of the results.

Clearly obedient Catholics in St. Louis have a very favorable opinion of Carlson, however, the early results showed twice as many readers had a very unfavorable opinion as those with a very favorable.

The priest, realistically considered, is the most immoral of men, for he is always willing to sacrifice every other sort of good to the one good of his arcanum — the vague body of mysteries that he calls the truth.
— H L Mencken, Treatise on the Gods (1949)

The very first comment said I “hate the Catholic Church and its teachings.” I view all religions pretty much equally, man-made constructs to control the masses. To me it doesn’t matter is someone is a Baptist, Jehovahs Witness, Muslim, Jewish, Scientologist, Mennonite, Presbyterian or Catholic — all are the same to me.

Another comment said St. Louis is a “Catholic city”.    Yes, I had my alderman (Dorothy Kirner) once ask me what parish I lived in.  Huh?  I wasn’t here long before I realized you’re assumed catholic unless stated otherwise.

A small Arkansas town illustrates the problem with this group mentality. Beebe AR  is apparently a Christian town, the mayor doesn’t want to allow a Pagen Temple.

If God is the mystery of the universe, these mysteries, we’re tackling these mysteries one by one. If you’re going to stay religious at the end of the conversation, God has to mean more to you than just where science has yet to tread.

I know one group that doesn’t have a favorable opinion of Archbishop Csrlson: SNAP (Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests):

The Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests (SNAP) describes Archbishop Robert Carlson’s deposition statements as “mind-boggling,” “stunning,” and “shocking.”

“That Archbishop Carlson says he doesn’t know when he figured out it was a crime to rape a childthat is a frightening statement,” says SNAP’s Barbara Dorris.

Dorris says that Archbishop Carlson contradicted himself by claiming he didn’t know it was a crime, but also admitting that he advised a bishop to claim memory loss if asked about any case. (KMOX)

Attack me all you want, it only reinforces my view of the religious.

— Steve Patterson, Pastafarian

 

Currently there are "17 comments" on this Article:

  1. JZ71 says:

    So what were the final results? Or do we just get the weekly editorial, absent any “data”?

     
    • moe says:

      Well I popped in at just the right time. Data? Be serious. This is UrbanReview of why everyone in St. Louis has it wrong.
      Attack? LOL. Steve attacks others all the time in the name of “fairness”. Attacking religion and it’s members is the same as Catholics attacking Jews or Muslims or non-believers and vice versa. The answer is to respect others views something severely lacking here.

       
      • So back and read the original post introducing the poll, it was completely unbiased. People objected to the question being asked.

         
        • Ted W. says:

          Just because people objected to the question being asked doesn’t mean you can’t provide the results. You asked a question. People voted. It obviously got sent around a lot because it does show up on the Post-Dispatch and it was a controversial question. So why can’t you provide the results? You don’t like the outcome? Is that why?

          Hmm.. I wonder who is being biased here…

           
    • Rick says:

      Steve didn’t like the results so he didn’t post them. UrbanReview is just like Fox news: Fair and Balanced.

       
  2. Guest says:

    So why would anyone care to “attack you”? Your opinion means nothing more than mine, or anyone else’s. To attack you gives a level of credence to your opinion. In a sense, all religious affiliation is a crutch, just as all religious non-affiliation is also a crutch. We gain quite a lot of strength just by being a “member”. You’re a member of a non-believing group. I may be a member of a different group. You appear to boast the most when you find an opportunity to vaguely reference your agnostic beliefs (or something similar) , if that’s truly what you claim to be. If being a non-believing member takes some of the weight off your shoulders in your daily life, then it works for you. The good archbishop hasn’t made it to sainthood, let’s remember that! He’s still a man. He sins and manipulates situations just like we all do. He may be “a better Christian” than I am, or he may not be. He may be even more “un-Christian” than YOU! (Daunting thought, eh?) He may be in the wrong line of work–who knows? Maybe that’s one of those things he’ll have to figure out on his own. But before you rip the guts out of the soul of organized religion, remember that lots and lots of people find comfort and true joy through their “structured” religious affiliation. Structured religion gives reasons for those mysteries that otherwise cannnot be explained. And in my short 37 years of life, I’ve experienced my share of those “mysteries”. I’ve witnessed entire families who lost everything they owned (barns, home, livestock, fences and farm accessories) in hurricanes, and yet they were helped back to recovery partly because of the strength and security that their priests, ministers and rabbis were able to provide. I remember as a kid going back to 4th grade three days after a major hurricane, sitting in a living room of a home that had sustained little or no damage with 24 other students, grades K through 8– almost our entire (public!!) school! Four substitute teachers taught all 8 classes, 1 Catholic priest, 1 Jehovah Witness minister, 1 Jewish Rabbi, and one lay volunteer (an architect from KCMO) who happened to be vacationing in Alabama at the time.. No one worried about “religious affiliation”. No one got raped or otherwise molested. No one was brainwashed by those crazy religious! SNAP does great work. Who can deny it? But similar to Consumer’s Reports (when they get a hard on for a certain car model), SNAP appears to promote the theory that ALL Catholic priests, all brothers and (some) nuns are absolutely guilty until they have been proven innocent and then only after they have jumped through hoops to prove their innocence,their reputations compromised, and their professional and religious vocations and careers destroyed.

     
  3. guest says:

    The “attacking” that goes on here is the steady diatribe of Urban Review/Steve Patterson attacking religions. Steve doesn’t like religion.

     
  4. m says:

    Hi Steve, I would like to see the final results.

     
  5. Stacey says:

    I came on here to see the results of the poll. I voted and I’d like to see the results. Where are they?

     
  6. m says:

    Steve Patterson not being scientific in his rant against religion. What’s new…

    FYI, it is precisely because of Christianity that science wasn’t lost in the barbarian invasions. Most of the early scientists were priests. In fact, the first known academic to propose the theory of the expansion of the Universe was a CATHOLIC PRIEST.

    Proof. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georges_Lema%C3%AEtre

    Check your science facts dude.

     
  7. Mark says:

    Where are the results Steve?

     
    • They don’t represent my weekly readership so they’re meaningless. They won’t be published.

       
      • JZ71 says:

        Steve, you’ve done other polls in the past where special interest groups “stacked” the results, yet you’ve published those results – why should anything be different, here? As you stated in the headline, “Favorability Poll on Archbishop Carlson Received More Votes in 24 Hours Than Typical in a Week.” Your regular readers will understand that the results are not representative of a typical sample or a typical response, so whatever conclusions anyone might draw from them will be based on their own various perspectives and preconceptions (no different than any other poll that you do).

        We readers are also used to you using any results selectively, to justify whatever point you’re trying to make. That’s your prerogative as owner and writer of the site. You also seem to cherish your credibility, and I see more damage being done to it if you don’t publish the results than if you do. And for the subject at hand, I’m pretty sure that members of the Catholic Church will have a different perspective of their leader than outsiders will, no different than how Democrats and Republicans look differently at President Obama or looked differently at President Bush. The leader is a representative of some strong ideas and a lightning rod for opposition views.

        Personally, I don’t pay much attention to the Archbishop, but I understand why other people do. The poll results may be “meaningless” to you, but they are likely meaningful to others. This is needless censorship and serves no real purpose. Just because the results don’t support your beliefs doesn’t mean they’re invalid, no different than your views and beliefs being viewed as somehow inferior, just because they’re different / a minority position. Respect needs to go both ways, and censorship is a very strong form of disrespect . . . .

         
        • Never before has the voting in the first 24 hours exceeded the usual total for an entire week. Smoking. & guns didn’t attract this many hits. I’ve posted results I didn’t agree with, and I will again.

           

Comment on this Article:

Advertisement



FACEBOOK POSTS

Unable to display Facebook posts.
Show error

Error: (#10) To use 'Page Public Content Access', your use of this endpoint must be reviewed and approved by Facebook. To submit this 'Page Public Content Access' feature for review please read our documentation on reviewable features: https://developers.facebook.com/docs/apps/review.
Type: OAuthException
Code: 10
Please refer to our Error Message Reference.

Archives

Categories

Advertisement


Subscribe