Glenn Beck Warns Religious Listeners to Avoid Tampa-St. Pete

Aug 13, 2015

Photo courtesy of Patch

By Greg Hambrick

Glenn Beck, a radio host known for stoking controversy among conservatives, warned his listeners Tuesday to avoid the Tampa area.

“Sorry to break it to you, St. Petersburg,” Beck said on air, according to the St. Petersburg Tribune. “These are the cities you don’t want to live anywhere around when things get worse and worse.”

Beck’s list of cities to avoid comes from a new study by the Public Religion Research Institute that looked at religious affiliations in 30 top metro areas.

In Tampa-St. Petersburg, “unaffiliated” accounted for 25 percent of the population. That’s more than any one religion in Tampa and ranks 6th among the unaffiliated in the 30 metro areas.

St. Petersburg Mayor Rick Kriseman shared his response on Twitter: “An honor! #ThanksGlenn”


Read the full article by clicking the name of the source below.

34 comments on “Glenn Beck Warns Religious Listeners to Avoid Tampa-St. Pete

  • @ link – “Sorry to break it to you, St. Petersburg,” Beck told his listeners Tuesday. Without much more detail, he said, “These are the cities you don’t want to live anywhere around when things get worse and worse.”

    For god delusions looking for future homes, the escalating numbers of the “unaffiliated” must be the terrifying face of extinction as the number of potential hosts diminish!

    Beck, a Mormon converted from Catholicism, has regularly denounced what he calls a “vilification” of religious liberty in the country.

    That must be one crazy mixed up god-delusion!

    “If you look at that list, these are the cities that already having trouble,” Beck told listeners. “We haven’t even hit the road bump.”

    When the numbers exceed 90% the god-delusions will be even more afraid of the bump into oblivion and folk-history!



    Report abuse

  • I will assume that Salt Lake City is not on Beck’s avoidance list. Still, one should avoid Salt Lake City as one would avoid any concentration of extremely boring people. Driven through there several times and had no inclination to stop.



    Report abuse

  • Hey Glenn! If secularism is so bad, why don’t you warn your followers to avoid countries founded on secular principles? Like, um, well like the United States!

    Not that you would be able to get any country to accept them, we already have enough uneducated dolts without taking yours



    Report abuse

  • Wrong country, wrong political group. Al Queada also wanted to build a caliphate. Hell, hitchens told us that much. So no. He’s been wrong about so many things, no congratulatory back-slapping free pass.

    Isis is the unfortunate, opportunistic consequence of the Arab Spring, not the cause. For that, he should really be looking inward.

    Lol what’s up with the glasses.



    Report abuse

  • Looking at Beck’s thinning, grey-tinted hair though still robust middle-age countenance, I’ve started to understand the generational demographic shift toward secularism with more than a third of the 18 to 29 year-old cohort opting out of religious affiliation; with between a fifth and a quarter of the general population following suit. To put it crudely, Beck and the legions who still register allegiance to “organized” Christian religion, professing the articles of faith variously construed by different sects but substantively contained in the Nicene Creed, will be flushed out of the population by the grim reaper.

    Some observers have credited the alienation of youth from religion generally to disillusionment with corruption, hypocrisy and greed of church leadership and particularly to such outrages as the child abuse scandal in the Catholic Church, and harmfully by medieval mandates suppressing women’s reproductive rights, gay rights, and healthy human sexuality overall. There is much truth here.

    I would add the factor of cultural revolution that perhaps most decisively sounds the death knell for religion in the 21st century. Younger generations have developed a social consciousness, educated or at least informed by the manifest benefits of science and technology at odds with impotent often punitive superstitions of religion. Emerging from the poor[er] societies of the past, populations realize that science, technology and secularism are not only meeting basic needs and a plethora of new wants but also conditioning people to think automatically of a world exclusively comprised of physical phenomena actually and potentially serving all human needs, interests and purposes. The modern mind no longer finds the cosmic theological narratives of Christianity or Islam remotely credible. The stories are relegated to the fearful ignorant fantasies of the past, contrived superstitions both silly and atavistic.



    Report abuse

  • Right religious affiliation, though, and he got the right general geographic area.

    he was right about the Caliphate (wasn’t he?).

    Not to worry, obzen. I wasn’t being serious (thus the parenthetical). (Though I think he was “right enough” under prophet rules, which are kind of like weatherman rules, only much looser and more open to interpretation.)

    what’s up with the glasses

    Yeah, they are so last year!

    Soooper Focus!! http://www.zdnet.com/article/superfocus-the-ultimate-eyeglasses/

    (They do make him look rather “intellectual”, though, don’t you think?)



    Report abuse

  • science, technology and secularism are not only meeting basic needs
    and a plethora of new wants but also conditioning people to think
    automatically of a world exclusively comprised of physical phenomena
    actually and potentially serving all human needs, interests and
    purposes.

    Except for the answer to the question “Why?”.



    Report abuse

  • Except for the answer to the question “Why?”.

    I searched in vain for that answer when Christopher Hitchens died of throat cancer with 20 or 30 more good years ahead of him. I search in vain for that answer when the evening news reports that 18 people, many of them women and children, died when a suicide bomber blew himself up in a crowded marketplace. We can only find significance by engaging human needs, interests and purposes in the fleeting here and now. There is no transcendent-metaphysical meaning to life.



    Report abuse

  • 13
    NearlyNakedApe says:

    Lol what’s up with the glasses

    It’s a new conservative strategy invented by Texas Gov. Rick Perry in a pathetic attempt to make hopelessly ignorant morons like him look smart. Unfortunately for them, this incredibly lame move can only fool Faux News viewers and equally moronic conservative pundits – Monkey see…



    Report abuse

  • LOL, what’s up with the glasses.

    All I see is a grown-up version of “Ralphy” (‘A Christmas Story‘), a mild case of cognitive dissonance is the result.



    Report abuse

  • We can only find significance by engaging human needs, interests and
    purposes in the fleeting here and now.

    That must be very upsetting to millions of dog and cat lovers.

    There is no transcendent-metaphysical meaning to life.

    That is simply impossible to know (which is not the same as being true – or false, for that matter).



    Report abuse

  • Even Hitler wasn’t wrong about everything. He enjoyed listening to Bruckner and Wagner, He loved his dog and cream cakes…… er… that’s about it.
    But this is Fox News, when Hitchens said the same thing, they scoffed. They have an agenda and that is support (christian) religion so any old bollox by a “believer” is treated seriously however much of a pathetic specimen.



    Report abuse

  • We can only find significance by engaging human needs, interests and
    purposes in the fleeting here and now.

    That must be very upsetting to millions of dog and cat lovers.

    You may be conflating the use of the term “human” with “humane” or with synonyms like “humanity or humanitarian.” Human needs, interests and purposes find expression in anything a human being does. The Aztecs fattened up dogs in cages to be slaughtered for meat. (Humans have eaten horsemeat for centuries with current humane societies finding the practice repellent). For the record I’m a lover of dogs and cats, with a single cherished cat in my household. I feed shelter, and nurture the animal with affection. I would be no less human if I roasted him for dinner.

    There is no transcendent-metaphysical meaning to life.

    That is simply impossible to know (which is not the same as being true – or false, for that matter).

    That’s why the agnostic position on the existence of God is rational. The human dilemma between agnosticism and atheism can only weigh the preponderance of evidence that virtually “proves” there is no God; no supernatural entity who has a plan for our lives; no transcendent -metaphysical meaning beyond our contingent bio-physical existence.



    Report abuse

  • You may be conflating the use of the term “human” with “humane” or
    with synonyms like “humanity or humanitarian.”

    I wasn’t .

    When one reads a statement such as yours (“We can only find significance by engaging human needs, interests and purposes in the fleeting here and now….”), those who (attempt to) find (or create) “significance” engaging the needs of non-humans may have cause for concern (and reason to reject the statement).

    But that’s not the only thing wrong with that statement, particularly when followed up by this one:

    Human needs, interests and purposes find expression in anything a human being does.

    Anything? Including such “doings” as lying, stealing, cheating, rape, murder (shall I go on)?

    Perhaps (definitely) some (most) of us are looking (as we should) for more than mere “significance”.



    Report abuse

  • Well Thank Science! that there were and are people that couldn’t and wouldn’t subscribe to the theory that plagues are from gods and should only be avoided. Thank Science! that some realized a plague isn’t a punishment. Thank Science! that we now have organizations like CDC “Centers for Disease Control and Prevention” which could also be called “Centers for Delusion Control” or “Centers for Deity Control” or “Centers for Deception Control” in this circumstance.



    Report abuse

  • When one reads a statement such as yours (“We can only find significance by engaging human needs, interests and purposes in the fleeting here and now….”), those who (attempt to) find (or create) “significance” engaging the needs of non-humans may have cause for concern (and reason to reject the statement).

    Once more it seems you are reading exceptional stipulations into the clear wording of a generalization. It seems you’re trying to get at some concept of human nature involving a quest for virtue and altruism. Human-needs-interests-purposes include virtues and altruism always defined from a situated human point of view. Most of us are conventionally empathetic, kind; care about other people, animals and the environment. Our efforts to nurture our own children and help family, friends and others who comprise “humanity” express our deepest human needs, interests and purposes.

    Human behavior, like that of any animal behavior, exhibits diverse means to accomplish diverse ends beyond commendable platitudes. A combat soldier sets out with the purpose of killing “enemy’ human beings in order to protect himself and his comrades and to advance the foreign policy interests, and, in common parlance, the values of his nation. Because we can apply moral language from a specific human perspective to these diverse behaviors, we believe we have discovered a transcendent-metaphysical truth about reality. All we “discover” is language that commends one outcome over another , one set of conflicting purposes over another. In hindsight moral language judging an event jells into justification and justification morphs into the delusion of transcendent truth. Many secular humanists work toward a future where human flourishing is maximized and harm to human rights, dignity, opportunity and welfare are minimized. But the devil is in the details not only in verbal arguments but also in the life and death consequences of shifting cooperation and conflict in a predatory environment of scarce resources.



    Report abuse

  • The Controversial Poster Philoctetes
    Aug 14, 2015 at 6:13 pm

    Even Hitler wasn’t wrong about everything. He enjoyed listening to Bruckner and Wagner, He loved his dog and cream cakes

    Even a broken clock is right twice a day!



    Report abuse

  • …reading exceptional stipulations into the clear wording of a generalization.

    I have simply read your “clear” words, interpreted their meaning, and written responses to them, which included objections and explanations for them. (If that’s what you mean by “exceptional stipulations”, then I’m guilty, but I fail to see any reason to repent.)

    Your “generalization[s]” have included the words “all, “only”, and “anything”. They have also included the specific modifier “human”. These qualifiers render your statements inaccurate and objectionable.

    It seems you’re trying to get at some concept of human nature
    involving a quest for virtue and altruism.

    Actually, I’ve simply suggested:

    (1) That “physical phenomena” as explained by “science, technology and secularism” are not “actually… serving all human needs, interests and purposes” (because they cannot).

    (2) That we can also “find significance by engaging” other than human “needs, interests and purposes in the fleeting here and now”.

    (3) That there may be “transcendent-metaphysical meaning to life”.

    Human-needs-interests-purposes include virtues and altruism always
    defined from a situated human point of view
    .

    Which sounds like another way of saying that morality is relative, subjective, conditional, provisional (take your pick). If this is the (current) scientific conclusion, then science does not (cannot) satisfy the human need for a more “objective” view of morality.



    Report abuse

  • That “physical phenomena” as explained by “science, technology and secularism” are not “actually… serving all human needs, interests and purposes” (because they cannot).

    We atheists believe that the universe and all it contains is physical based on empirical and scientific observation. Traditional analytic philosophers internalized the intuitive premise that the “mind,” or more precisely its “conscious contents”: thoughts, ideas, feelings intentions, etc. had to be distinct from anything physical because (for example) the subjective perception of a tree, the subjective love for a child are obviously immaterial- do not occupy space- and therefore must be entities separate from the physical brain, sense organs and nervous system. The science of neurology more recently has made great strides in overturning the traditional model gathering evidence that shows “thoughts” are not metaphysical contents or epiphenomena of the brain but are configurations of mass and energy from the synapse firing between neurons within the brain. Anything one thinks or feels is as physical as everything else.

    The question of moral relativism gets tangled up with the unhelpful language of dualism: mind-body; subjective-objective shaped by language which justifies diverse, sometimes conflicting descriptions of behavior that is said to serve human needs, interests and purposes. A secular humanist and a devout Muslim are equally human, but will “talk about” reality using very different language to affirm what is “good or bad” for people.

    There is no metaphysical ultimate authority, usually God or the Cosmic Force for Moral Progress, if one is more of a spiritual bent, that we can appeal to for justification. As secular humanist-atheists-agnostics, or as believers we can make the case for practices which better serve human flourishing and welfare and try to win a compatible humanist consensus. At the end of the day there is no way that anyone can avoid ethnocentrism, a situated way of viewing the world however evolved and synthesized from historical forces and self-privileged culture. Simply put we are compelled to say, “my ethnocentrism works better than your ethnocentrism to serve human needs, interests and purpose and here’s my justification” The discussion, the argument for us remains open and subject to ceaseless revision and refinement.



    Report abuse

  • …the universe and all it contains is physical…

    There is no metaphysical ultimate authority…

    What makes the universe (the physical reality in which our thoughts exist as “configurations of mass and energy from the synapse firing between neurons within the brain”) behave the way it does (“as far as we know based on empirical and scientific observation”)?



    Report abuse

  • At least until conditions are such that “we” must revise this “rule” in order that it may be more refined in terms of its service to human needs, interests, and purposes. Or is that part of the argument closed?



    Report abuse

  • Doug
    Aug 17, 2015 at 10:36 pm

    What makes the universe (the physical reality in which our thoughts exist) behave the way it does (“as far as we know based on empirical and scientific observation”)?

    The universe and physical laws exist independently of individual human thoughts, which are mental models, confined to one part of one planet, or one solar system.

    What makes the physical reality in which our thoughts exist as behave the way it does

    Physics.

    (“configurations of mass and energy from the synapse firing between neurons within the brain”) (“as far as we know based on empirical and scientific observation”)?

    The biochemistry on neurotransmitters and electricity operate synapses and thought processes, according to the laws of physics.
    No metaphysical magic required –
    http://faculty.washington.edu/chudler/synapse.html



    Report abuse

  • The universe and physical laws exist independently of individual human
    thoughts…

    Yes, Mr. 4discussion, I understand that this is what many believe.
    (But doesn’t this suggest that human thoughts either do or can exist independently of the universe and physical laws?)

    Physics.

    In retrospect, I see that my question was poorly structured.
    But, in any case, okay: what makes physics behave the way it does? Why is physics what physics is?

    I appreciate your attempt to help me understand this, but I am particularly eager to read Melvin’s response.



    Report abuse

  • Doug
    Aug 18, 2015 at 2:22 pm

    The universe and physical laws exist independently of individual human thoughts…

    (But doesn’t this suggest that human thoughts either do or can exist independently of the universe and physical laws?)

    I agree. My point was that the Universe exists independently of human thoughts, not that human thoughts (as theist dualists claim) are in some way independent of the universal natural laws.

    I appreciate your attempt to help me understand this, but I am particularly eager to read Melvin’s response.

    That’s fine! I hope the link I gave helps both of you.

    Why is physics what physics is?

    “Why? questions” in science, lead to a series of “How?” answers, and ultimately to, “We do not know beyond this point at present”!



    Report abuse

  • I suppose there is that miniscule possibility that a very persuasive argument could convince “us” that this view needs revision. Maybe you could
    come up with something? But that may be rather difficult as Melvin is essentially saying that “we” use our reasoning to revise and refine our world
    view, our moral values.

    You seem to be saying that we may use our reasoning to revise our “rule” that we use our reasoning to revise our world
    view and morals. Reminds me of this
    debate between Matt Dillahunty and Sye Ten Bruggencate.



    Report abuse

  • As a resident of the Tampa/St. Pete area I have to say that this one caught me by surprise. Why? Because like many suburban places I drive through, this area is still thoroughly dotted with churches of every denomination on seemingly every other street corner. So that, coupled with the famously elderly population (though this is clearly changing) makes this a bit of a surprise. But kudos to Mayor Kriseman for stating the obvious. It makes me wonder if Scientology was considered (I just read the excerpt, not the source). I live in Clearwater which is half owned (only a slight exaggeration) by the Scientologists.

    In any case, yes Mr. Beck and your cronies, PLEASE stay away. We will be happily unaffiliated without your help.



    Report abuse

Leave a Reply

View our comment policy.