Rubio's Religion

[ClydeR]

An article came out Saturday on Rubio's religious irresolution.


Republican presidential wannabe Marco Rubio, a conservative, anti-gay marriage candidate from Florida, has lost and found his religion several times.

As a child in Miami, he was a Roman Catholic. When his family moved to Las Vegas, he became a Mormon. When the family moved back to Florida he became a Catholic again.

And then, in 2000, he began attending Christ Fellowship in Miami, a fundamentalist mega church that is rigidly opposed to homosexuality and asks employees to sign a declaration saying they've never been in a gay relationship.

Now he attends both Christ Fellowship and a Catholic church, he says.

All of which has sparked intense debate over just what, exactly, Rubio believes when it comes to God. His coat of many religious colors has led political pundits to declare the baby-faced aspirant is courting voters of all conservative faiths.

If he can't decide something as fundamental as religion, experts say his changing beliefs could lead to questions about how he would run the country.

More... (http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/gop-sen-marco-rubio-lost-found-religion-times-article-1.2244263)


The 44-year-old son of Cuban immigrants, who was elected to the Senate in 2010, says he attends Christ Fellowship on Saturday nights and goes to Mass on Sundays at St. Louis Catholic Church.

[Candor]

"If he can't decide something as fundamental as religion, experts say his changing beliefs could lead to questions about how he would run the country"

Sums it up for me.

[Parkbandit]

"If he can't decide something as fundamental as religion, experts say his changing beliefs could lead to questions about how he would run the country"

Sums it up for me.

lolwut?

[kutter]

An article came out Saturday on Rubio's religious irresolution.

I have a lot of questions about Rubio, but what church he attends is not one of them. I could care less, besides, as my mother once said to my brother when he decided to stop attending a Catholic church and was attending a fundamental christian church, 'God is not that small, you are going to church, that is all that matters.'

I would bet the basic belief structure on both churches is not that dissimilar. The new liberal Pope not withstanding, the Catholic church is pretty conservative.

[~Rocktar~]

He is a politician, he has only one religion, the cult of money and power.

[Candor]

He is a politician, he has only one religion, the cult of money and power.

That.

And I am concerned that his flexible beliefs are another indication of his devotion to this cult.

[Silvean]

I've read some academic articles on people who attend both Catholic mass and Protestant megachurch services. It's not unheard of and they get to take advantage of 2 completely different worship styles. It's not uncommon for observant Catholics to supplement mass by watching televangelists either.

Being a politician is a strange business. If I start driving veterans to their medical appointments as a volunteer service, that's a good deed. If I run for city council a couple of years later and mention my volunteer work, it's now a calculated attempt to win votes. Or both. Or maybe it's one more than the other, etc.

[~Rocktar~]

Being a politician is a strange business. If I start driving veterans to their medical appointments as a volunteer service, that's a good deed. If I run for city council a couple of years later and mention my volunteer work, it's now a calculated attempt to win votes. Or both. Or maybe it's one more than the other, etc.

It could be both! How Machiavellian of you.

If you help vets, good on you regardless.

[Latrinsorm]

I'm not that concerned about his changing religions, but I draw the line at his becoming a merman. Humans only, thanks.

[Candor]

I'm not that concerned about his changing religions, but I draw the line at his becoming a merman. Humans only, thanks.

So aliens from another planet would not be entitled to the same basic rights as the rest of us?

[Gelston]

So aliens from another planet would not be entitled to the same basic rights as the rest of us?

Not anymore then a dog from this planet is, no.

[Androidpk]

What about an alien prostitute with 3 titties?

[Thondalar]

What about an alien prostitute with 3 titties?

I'd hit it.

[ClydeR]

Being a politician is a strange business. If I start driving veterans to their medical appointments as a volunteer service, that's a good deed. If I run for city council a couple of years later and mention my volunteer work, it's now a calculated attempt to win votes. Or both. Or maybe it's one more than the other, etc.

There's only one right religion. Rubio is at least half wrong.

[Thondalar]

I would bet the basic belief structure on both churches is not that dissimilar. The new liberal Pope not withstanding, the Catholic church is pretty conservative.

"Christ Fellowship" sounds like Southern Baptists, or some similar unaffiliated evangelical sort...and Roman Catholic is...well...Roman Catholic.

The "belief structure" couldn't be more dissimilar, the "conservative" similarities notwithstanding.

The general distrust and hatred between sects of the same religion, historically, often supersede the same between wholly different religions. I'm a bit surprised Rubio was dumb enough to provide this political wedge free and clear...but then again, I never considered him a front-runner in anything this early.

[Silvean]

Americans increasingly "shop" for religion and mix and match what suits them best. Megachurches do well on the religious "marketplace" because they offer a lot of incentives: coffee shop in the church, rock concert style worship services with high production values, tons of classes and fellowship groups, child care (!), etc.

Conservative religions do better on the marketplace than liberal denominations because they offer certainty and demand a lot of effort from their members. People have a tendency to stick all the more closely to something when they have to put work into it. It's also harder to leave once you have devoted thousands of hours or thousands of dollars to a cause.

This way of looking at things is connected to the "rational choice" theory of religion but the sociology of religion overall supports the conclusions. I don't think many people would try to claim that Americans are not mixing and matching in increasing numbers or that liberal churches are increasing membership overall.

[Thondalar]

Americans increasingly "shop" for religion and mix and match what suits them best.

This started in the late middle ages, but I do believe it has reached its zenith now in the information age. I generally hope I'm wrong in these sorts of things, but this is one where I hope I'm right.


Megachurches do well on the religious "marketplace" because they offer a lot of incentives: coffee shop in the church, rock concert style worship services with high production values, tons of classes and fellowship groups, child care (!), etc.

In more Urban areas I would agree with this...MOST of America still isn't Urban, and most of those non-urban areas still have their local church...although I know it to be true of many other places, I would offer central Florida, Polk County to be specific, for evidence of this...I can't drive 2 miles in any direction from my house without passing a Christian Church of one denomination or another...I find it a bit telling I have to search for a Catholic Church locally, but there are at least 20 Pentecostal/Baptist/etc Christian denominational churches within the same range.


Conservative religions do better on the marketplace than liberal denominations because they offer certainty and demand a lot of effort from their members.

In Judaic times we had to do what God wanted us to do or else he'd destroy us...in modern times, we have to do what Jesus would do, or at least feel bad about it when we don't. Kinda weird to me.


People have a tendency to stick all the more closely to something when they have to put work into it. It's also harder to leave once you have devoted thousands of hours or thousands of dollars to a cause.

A very strange parallel to MMORPGs.


This way of looking at things is connected to the "rational choice" theory of religion but the sociology of religion overall supports the conclusions. I don't think many people would try to claim that Americans are not mixing and matching in increasing numbers or that liberal churches are increasing membership overall.

Even outside of America...the core Roman Catholic Church in Rome is even lightening up a bit...some say because of this new "progressive" Pope, some say because the information age has blown the smoke away from most of their bullshit...who can really say, for sure? I say it's just the natural progression of the human experience...in the same vein that we moved away from polytheism thousands of years ago, we're now moving away from overbearing, indoctrination-style religion of all sorts. I welcome the change...it's all a bunch of crap anyway.

By that, I don't mean there isn't some sort of higher power...I've come to the fact that there is, unequivocally, so...whether is is sentient or not, I can't say. The one thing that can't be explained by any sort of science, even now with the Higgs Boson discovery and everything else...

What made it all start to begin with? I'm cool with the Big Bang...I'm cool with the particles running into each other and creating a massive explosion that created the universe 10-12-15-however many billion years ago...I'm good with all that.

What actually made creation in the first place? What made what created what was made? What made what created what was made that created what was made? Do you people not understand?

We are here. Whether the train ride started 10 billion years ago or 100 million years ago or 100 years ago...we're here. To what end? For what purpose?

Try very, very hard to comprehend time. Just try.

[Androidpk]

As of June 9, 2015, the United States (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States) has a total resident population of 321,043,000, making it the third most populous country (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_population) in the world.[1] (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_the_United_States#cite_note-1) It is very urbanized, with 81% residing in cities and suburbs as of 2014 (the worldwide urban rate is 54%).[2] (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_the_United_States#cite_note-2)

[Thondalar]

As of June 9, 2015, the United States (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States) has a total resident population of 321,043,000, making it the third most populous country (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_population) in the world.[1] (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_the_United_States#cite_note-1) It is very urbanized, with 81% residing in cities and suburbs as of 2014 (the worldwide urban rate is 54%).[2] (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_the_United_States#cite_note-2)


What do they define as Urban? Probably not what you or I would define it as, when compared to China or India.

[Androidpk]

What do they define as Urban? Probably not what you or I would define it as, when compared to China or India.

What? This is 'Murica, not China or India you fucking communist.

[Thondalar]

More to the point...America is the largest country in the world when considering only normally-livable space...Russia and Canada top us in straight square-mileage, but a large portion of that is frozen tundra. While a large portion of our total population resides in "Urban" areas, we have a much larger land area where the rest of the population is spread out...yay, electoral college.

[Thondalar]

What? This is 'Murica, not China or India you fucking communist.

Uh...eh...not even gonna bother.

[Androidpk]

Tundras are inhabitable.

[Androidpk]

Uh...eh...not even gonna bother.

You're the one saying our urban areas don't really count because China and India.

[Thondalar]

Tundras are inhabitable.

Sure, on a mass-level? quit being an idiot.

[Thondalar]

You're the one saying our urban areas don't really count because China and India.

This is where your lack of comprehension comes in to play. I didn't say ours don't count, I said we have MOST of our total population spread out in non-urban areas, whereas the two highest population totals ahead of us, China and India, have a much higher urban population density.

Again, I would ask what metric the UN is using for their assessment. I couldn't find any such information on their site, the one you linked to...perhaps you could assist me.

[Androidpk]

This is where your lack of comprehension comes in to play. I didn't say ours don't count, I said we have MOST of our total population spread out in non-urban areas, whereas the two highest population totals ahead of us, China and India, have a much higher urban population density.

Again, I would ask what metric the UN is using for their assessment. I couldn't find any such information on their site, the one you linked to...perhaps you could assist me.

Okay. While I'm getting that info for you maybe you can share your source too.

[Androidpk]

US Census Bureau says the same thing. 4 out of 5 Americans live in an urban settting.

[Thondalar]

Okay. While I'm getting that info for you maybe you can share your source too.

We're 179th on the list of total population density, and third on the list for total land area. Nobody under us on the list is even close to our total population...Brazil is the closest, still 100m+ under. That's pretty easily researched.

The question, I suppose, is what defines an "urban" area...that's what I'm asking. Your link freely gives that title out, but...

Haha...just realized you quoted the first line of "Demographics in the US" from Wikipedia word-for-word.

This might help a little (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_by_population_density) to understand what I'm talking about.

[Thondalar]

US Census Bureau says the same thing. 4 out of 5 Americans live in an urban settting.

Again, that means nothing without some metric by which they defined it. That's all I'm asking for.

[Androidpk]

Urban settings are places with populations 50,000+.

[Thondalar]

Urban settings are places with populations 50,000+.

Ah. That's a pretty broad margin. I mean, the town I live in is about 200k or so, but I wouldn't call it an "urban" area...tallest building in town is like 12 floors. While it's a pretty large stretch to compare it to Jumping Branch, West Virginia (where my grandparents on my mom's side came from, population eh...maybe a buck fifty), it would be an equally large stretch in the opposite direction to compare it to even Atlanta, let alone NYC or LA.

This is exactly what I was getting at, and something I've often chided Latrin about. Statistics are designed to tell a story...generally, the story the statistician coming up with them wants to tell. We can bend them any way we want to fit our particular narrative...and, like in this case specifically, we don't dally with the details, we just say "look! Here are numbers that may or may not prove something!"

It's ridiculous. Everything over 50k is an "urban area" in the US? Well no shit 82% lives in an "urban area" by that standard. Here's a follow-up...does a square-mileage figure come with that? Is it 50k per X square mile? Just curious, because...for example...Jacksonville, Florida has about a million residents, and is technically the largest "city" in Florida...but it also covers the largest area of land, by far. Practically the entire county is technically "incorporated" as the city...even though you can find lower population areas...back woods, even swamps...still within "city" boundaries.

There aren't two sides to every story...there are about a thousand. Give or take a few.

edit: fixed the population of where I'm at after doing more research...it was less than I thought it was!

[Silvean]

I think the new Pope has made some subtle shifts in emphasis and changed the style of delivery but hasn't made any drastic changes to Catholic teaching or hinted at a shift on the most controversial issues: birth control and clerical celibacy being the most likely candidates (and also the least likely in my opinion but you never know).

Through the 19th and most of the 20th centuries, it was popular to argue that religion was on the decline and would disappear -- sometimes called the secularization thesis. Very few people in the academic study of religion maintain this argument now.

"What actually made creation in the first place? What made what created what was made? What made what created what was made that created what was made?"

This is interesting because the absurdity of infinite regress is part of the classical arguments for God. I don't really have a dog in that fight though. I work in religious studies and adopt the role of interested observer as best as I am able when it comes to theological arguments.

[Wrathbringer]

This started in the late middle ages, but I do believe it has reached its zenith now in the information age. I generally hope I'm wrong in these sorts of things, but this is one where I hope I'm right.



In more Urban areas I would agree with this...MOST of America still isn't Urban, and most of those non-urban areas still have their local church...although I know it to be true of many other places, I would offer central Florida, Polk County to be specific, for evidence of this...I can't drive 2 miles in any direction from my house without passing a Christian Church of one denomination or another...I find it a bit telling I have to search for a Catholic Church locally, but there are at least 20 Pentecostal/Baptist/etc Christian denominational churches within the same range.



In Judaic times we had to do what God wanted us to do or else he'd destroy us...in modern times, we have to do what Jesus would do, or at least feel bad about it when we don't. Kinda weird to me.



A very strange parallel to MMORPGs.



Even outside of America...the core Roman Catholic Church in Rome is even lightening up a bit...some say because of this new "progressive" Pope, some say because the information age has blown the smoke away from most of their bullshit...who can really say, for sure? I say it's just the natural progression of the human experience...in the same vein that we moved away from polytheism thousands of years ago, we're now moving away from overbearing, indoctrination-style religion of all sorts. I welcome the change...it's all a bunch of crap anyway.

By that, I don't mean there isn't some sort of higher power...I've come to the fact that there is, unequivocally, so...whether is is sentient or not, I can't say. The one thing that can't be explained by any sort of science, even now with the Higgs Boson discovery and everything else...

What made it all start to begin with? I'm cool with the Big Bang...I'm cool with the particles running into each other and creating a massive explosion that created the universe 10-12-15-however many billion years ago...I'm good with all that.

What actually made creation in the first place? What made what created what was made? What made what created what was made that created what was made? Do you people not understand?

We are here. Whether the train ride started 10 billion years ago or 100 million years ago or 100 years ago...we're here. To what end? For what purpose?

Try very, very hard to comprehend time. Just try.

Did you know that the current pope was a member of Hitler Youth at age 14? Fascinating.

[Wrathbringer]

That.

And I am concerned that his flexible beliefs are another indication of his devotion to this cult.

You're onto something, sir. Well done.

[Latrinsorm]

In more Urban areas I would agree with this...MOST of America still isn't Urban, and most of those non-urban areas still have their local church...although I know it to be true of many other places, I would offer central Florida, Polk County to be specific, for evidence of this...I can't drive 2 miles in any direction from my house without passing a Christian Church of one denomination or another...I find it a bit telling I have to search for a Catholic Church locally, but there are at least 20 Pentecostal/Baptist/etc Christian denominational churches within the same range.Protestantism has always been more popular in the South. Less % immigrants (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_immigration_to_the_United_States#Histor ical_foreign-born_population_by_state), less % Catholic (http://content.gallup.com/origin/gallupinc/GallupSpaces/Production/Cms/POLL/url4rhe0q0u34rstce4ffa.jpg). Head out to Miami-Dade County and I'll bet you have no problem finding Catholic churches.
Even outside of America...the core Roman Catholic Church in Rome is even lightening up a bit...some say because of this new "progressive" Pope, some say because the information age has blown the smoke away from most of their bullshit...who can really say, for sure? I say it's just the natural progression of the human experience...in the same vein that we moved away from polytheism thousands of years ago, we're now moving away from overbearing, indoctrination-style religion of all sorts. I welcome the change...it's all a bunch of crap anyway.As I'm sure will come as a huge shock to you, I can! :D We moved away from polytheism for the same reason we moved to it in the first place: it was the natural progression from tribes to cities. Thus as we moved from cities to nations, we needed something new, and that need beget absolute monotheism. Now we're starting to move to supranational polities, and so we start to need something new. The means of the religion (i.e. overbearing, indoctrination-style) never changes. Every revolution becomes the status quo.
What made it all start to begin with? I'm cool with the Big Bang...I'm cool with the particles running into each other and creating a massive explosion that created the universe 10-12-15-however many billion years ago...I'm good with all that. What actually made creation in the first place? What made what created what was made? What made what created what was made that created what was made? Do you people not understand? We are here. Whether the train ride started 10 billion years ago or 100 million years ago or 100 years ago...we're here. To what end? For what purpose? Try very, very hard to comprehend time. Just try.You're locked into a flat space time point of view, and as you'll see from the following all human language is so you shouldn't sweat it. At the time* of the Big Bang, the universe was so dense that time was space-like and space was time-like. Like in a black hole (if you could survive it) you would be able to go back and forth in time as easily as we go back and forth on the east-west axis, but you would proceed in one spatial direction as inexorably as we proceed in time. The universe then* started* to expand, but it didn't really start, and it wasn't really then. Asking what happened before* the Big Bang literally does not have meaning. It's like asking how many hours a meter is: a contradiction in dimensions.
We're 179th on the list of total population density, and third on the list for total land area. Nobody under us on the list is even close to our total population...Brazil is the closest, still 100m+ under. That's pretty easily researched.Total population density and % that live in cities are completely unrelated metrics.
This is exactly what I was getting at, and something I've often chided Latrin about. Statistics are designed to tell a story...generally, the story the statistician coming up with them wants to tell. We can bend them any way we want to fit our particular narrative...and, like in this case specifically, we don't dally with the details, we just say "look! Here are numbers that may or may not prove something!"You criticize Andy's figure unjustly, because it's not "Everything over 50k is an 'urban area' in the US?". It's everything over 50k is an urban area everywhere. The definition is constant across all countries. Sometimes when people use numbers to prove you wrong, it's not a scam or trick. You really are just wrong.

[Wrathbringer]

Protestantism has always been more popular in the South. Less % immigrants (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_immigration_to_the_United_States#Histor ical_foreign-born_population_by_state), less % Catholic (http://content.gallup.com/origin/gallupinc/GallupSpaces/Production/Cms/POLL/url4rhe0q0u34rstce4ffa.jpg). Head out to Miami-Dade County and I'll bet you have no problem finding Catholic churches.As I'm sure will come as a huge shock to you, I can! :D We moved away from polytheism for the same reason we moved to it in the first place: it was the natural progression from tribes to cities. Thus as we moved from cities to nations, we needed something new, and that need beget absolute monotheism. Now we're starting to move to supranational polities, and so we start to need something new. The means of the religion (i.e. overbearing, indoctrination-style) never changes. Every revolution becomes the status quo.You're locked into a flat space time point of view, and as you'll see from the following all human language is so you shouldn't sweat it. At the time* of the Big Bang, the universe was so dense that time was space-like and space was time-like. Like in a black hole (if you could survive it) you would be able to go back and forth in time as easily as we go back and forth on the east-west axis, but you would proceed in one spatial direction as inexorably as we proceed in time. The universe then* started* to expand, but it didn't really start, and it wasn't really then. Asking what happened before* the Big Bang literally does not have meaning. It's like asking how many hours a meter is: a contradiction in dimensions.Total population density and % that live in cities are completely unrelated metrics.You criticize Andy's figure unjustly, because it's not "Everything over 50k is an 'urban area' in the US?". It's everything over 50k is an urban area everywhere. The definition is constant across all countries. Sometimes when people use numbers to prove you wrong, it's not a scam or trick. You really are just wrong.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metric_time

Your move.

[Androidpk]

Urban areas aren't classified as such because of building height -_-

[Latrinsorm]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metric_time

Your move.Other units of time, the minute, hour, and day, are accepted for use with the modern metric system, but are not part of it.

Check. Mate. Set. Match game. (More like snatch game.)

[Wrathbringer]

Other units of time, the minute, hour, and day, are accepted for use with the modern metric system, but are not part of it.

Check. Mate. Set. Match game. (More like snatch game.)

Source?

[Latrinsorm]

Yours.

[Wrathbringer]

Yours.

I see you've yet again refused to post any empirical evidence supporting your claims and have instead resorted to name calling. Why am I not surprised?