Values in Blue states vs Red States

[Babar]

Values in Blue states vs Red States

[Babar]

quote:
The Associated Press, using data supplied by the US Census Bureau, found that the highest divorce rates are to be found in the Bible Belt. The AP report stated that "the divorce rates in these conservative states are roughly 50 percent above the national average of 4.2 per thousand people." The 10 Southern states with some of the highest divorce rates were Alabama, Arkansas, Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Mississippi, North Carolina, Oklahoma, South Carolina, and Texas. By comparison nine states in the Northeast were among those with the lowest divorce rates: Connecticut, Massachusetts, Maine, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and Vermont.

I find it amusing that the state w/ the lowest divorce rate in the Union is Massachusetts, where national attention has been focused because of the state Supremes declaring gay marriage permissible. It seems like all the hollering about gay marriage destroying the institution of marriage and destroying our "bedrock" of the family isn't really founded on anything but hot air.

Dang, forgot a link.

Watch how the states w/ the LOWEST rates of divorce (mostly NE, blue states) give way to the states w/ higher divorce rates, (mostly souther/bible belt, red states).....

[Wunderbolt]

Wow, that's interesting.
But I think a more accurate statistic (you know what they say about lies ...) might be percentage of marriages that end in divorce.

[Babar]

I don't believe they track that number, actually.

[Texmaster]

I'm not sure what your point is.  
How exactly does a higher divorce percentage in a state illegitimate people who are against gay marriage?

[fall-apart]

What it shows is that more people believe gay marriage is wrong than believe divorce is wrong...

[Overkill]

quote:
What it shows is that more people believe gay marriage is wrong than believe divorce is wron

*sighs* No. What is shows is that hypocracy is rife. If you claim to be a 'God fearing' (why should we fear God!!?) Christian then divorce is 'wrong' as well. If these people are REALLY that Christian then divorce rates should be low. Yes? They ain't.

I love listening to these people and the way they toss out their maxims, 'family values' 'Christian morality' etc, without ever once stopping to consider who dreamt them up. Mind you with some of them, I doubt they'd care..........

[fall-apart]

quote:
why should we fear God!!?

Main Entry: fear
Pronunciation: 'fir
transitive senses
1 archaic : FRIGHTEN
2 archaic : to feel fear in (oneself)
3 : to have a reverential awe of
4 : to be afraid of : expect with alarm
intransitive senses : to be afraid or apprehensive
- fear·er noun

I'm not agreeing that divorce is right.  You can point fingers all you like, but obviously more people are okay with divorce than with gay marriage.  Or maybe, people think that gay marriage is a worse threat to the family than divorce.  Agree or disagree, that seems to be the prevailing opinion in the US...  11 states rejected gay marriage.

[Overkill]

So, you can read a dictionary. None of those reasons apply to believing in God.

[fall-apart]

3 : to have a reverential awe of

[Babar]

quote:
What it shows is that more people believe gay marriage is wrong than believe divorce is wrong...

The point I was trying to make is that for all the noise the red states make about gay marriage destroying the institution of marriage, there isn't solid evidence to show that this is indeed the case--just look at Massachusetts, who legalised gay marriage, yet their divorce rate is the lowest in the Union. If gay marriage destroys marriage, then shouldn't marriage in Massachusetts be suffering? (It's not...)

[Overkill]

quote:
3 : to have a reverential awe of

Why? Belief in God and respect for Gods achievements don't mean you have to spend time "in awe"? Besides God fearing with the Relgious right doesn't mean that anyway. Just have a listen to them.......... the usual crap about "hellfire and brimstone" if you don't live the way they (not God, they) proscribe (but rarely follow) is what they mean.

[fall-apart]

WHy wouldn't you be in awe of the person who brought the universe into existence?

[Zut50]

Who, Keith Chegwin?

[ScutMonkey]

quote:
Originally posted by: Babar

quote:
What it shows is that more people believe gay marriage is wrong than believe divorce is wrong...

The point I was trying to make is that for all the noise the red states make about gay marriage destroying the institution of marriage, there isn't solid evidence to show that this is indeed the case--just look at Massachusetts, who legalised gay marriage, yet their divorce rate is the lowest in the Union. If gay marriage destroys marriage, then shouldn't marriage in Massachusetts be suffering? (It's not...)

Except that the people in the Red states also believe that the liberalizing of divorce laws have helped to destroy marriage and their proof is their own backyard.  Gay marriage is just another portion of the problem.  Marriage is too easy to enter into, too easy to get out of, and now is being given to those who shouldn't have it.

What I'd like to see is a statistical analysis of how many people cohabitate in states with lower divorce rates and it's substitution for marriage.  I'd also like to see the cohabitation turnover rates in those states.  FA's point about believing divorce is ok and partaking in it is accurate, but what it doesn't address is the differences in norms when addressing cohabitation and children out of wedlock.  For example, how many single mothers have never been married in both regions?  I bet it's higher in the blue states where "shotgun weddings" are most likely a thing of the past.

I guess my take on these issues is just very different because I'm not religious.  I don't care about Gay Marriage, per se, as long as it can be proved to be as healthy to the children in these marriages.  The few studies done on this subject say it's not, but they aren't focused directly on this specific issue.  They address the generic liberlization of marriage.  Cohabitation, divorce, gay marriage, etc. and the studies show that children raised in these various environments grow up with a severely decreased ability to form healthy bonds with other people.  Not just with a spouse but with friends, family, and coworkers.  This is troubling because this is the pool from which people like Manson and the Unibomber are drawn from (and no, I'm not saying all kids growing up in gay homes would be serial killers - I had two friends raised this way in high school).  Kids who's psyche has been radically affected by divorce and bad parenting in general to the point where they're unable to function and become sociopaths.  In biography after biography of serial killers you'll find the same things.  Bad, broken home with divorced parents which leads to an inability to form healthy bonds with the people in their lives.  If gay marriage ends up creating similar problems in children, even to a lesser degree, then why would we encourage that?  Traditional mother and father homes do not create the problems non stereotypical families do.  I could care less about the religious implications.  I do care about the societal implications.

Here's a fascinating and troubling stat:

Of the people who graduates from high school, do not have a child out of wedlock, and wait until they are 20 to have those children, 92% of those people never live in poverty.

However, 79% of those who do live in poverty have failed to do these three things.  

If you take this stat and break it down, parenting and childrearing is crucial to the well being of people growing up in our country.  When I see a stat like this, I realize how important it is to teach responsibility in each generation and why I can't just write off a generation of children to gay marriage when it hasn't been adequately studied.  More to the point, once it's done you can never take it back.  There is no other area in science where we'd use children as guniea pigs in this fashion.  If the studies come back and say gay parents are just as capable as straight parents, fine, open it all up and do it - especially gay adoption.  God knows the state can't raise those children well in orphinages.  If the studies show gays do a better job then have at it.  However, until a decent set of studies comes back saying these things, I can't get behind the effort and this is reinforced by the fact that the few studies done to the point say the opposite.

[ScutMonkey]

quote:
Originally posted by: Zut50
Who, Keith Chegwin?

Once again your side of the argument feels the need to belittle the heartfelt beliefs and core values of the religious.  At what point to do you realize you do more harm than good when you do this?  When you guys attack these beliefs you immediately create a wall between yourself and those you're arguing with.


At what point do you realize the enormous hypocracy of your actions when your side is the one which constantly, deliberately, and passionately rages against the right when they don't do the same for you and the people you sympathize with.

[Babar]

quote:
Except that the people in the Red states also believe that the liberalizing of divorce laws have helped to destroy marriage and their proof is their own backyard.

I don't understand.

Are you saying that because Massachusetts allows gay marriage, it has no effect on Massachusetts, but rather affects the red states who don't allow gay marriage?

I don't see the connection here. Did you draw it in the air with your crayons?

[Texmaster]

quote:
Originally posted by: Jasper
It shows the hypocrisy of the red states. The perception is that Bush won the red states becacause they are good christians and concerned about morals and family values. Except the reality is, this study shows that people in red states divorce like rabbits (if only rabbits could divorce)

I didn't know you had proof that those people who believe that are the ones who are divorced in those states.

Oh wait, you don't

[ScutMonkey]

quote:
Originally posted by: Babar

quote:
Except that the people in the Red states also believe that the liberalizing of divorce laws have helped to destroy marriage and their proof is their own backyard.

I don't understand.

Are you saying that because Massachusetts allows gay marriage, it has no effect on Massachusetts, but rather affects the red states who don't allow gay marriage?

I don't see the connection here. Did you draw it in the air with your crayons?

No, I'm saying that because marriage and divorce are so easy, it's damaging marriage in areas that place more emphasis on being married.  It is a much troubling sight down south to see a woman with children without a father.  It is certainly looked down upon more to have children out of wedlock here than it is in say, New York.  A result of that is "shotgun weddings" where people get married because it's "the right thing to do" and the marriage falls apart because they never should have gotten married in the first place.  Just from a blanket analysis of the numbers, I'd be more than willing to bet this type of thing largely accounts for this gap because the reality is, the gap between the top and bottom half of this list isn't all that large.  Young, poorly educated, and afraid.  This is not the recipe for a healthy marriage.  The red states are hardly without their problems.  

I'm also saying the statistics do not address children born out of wedlock to single mothers who have no intention of being married.  It doesn't show how many children are born and raised this way in blue states, but studies have shown this trend isn't as healthy for children raised this way than a traditional mother/father family situation.  

It also shows the state infamous for "quicky" marriages leads the list.  Nevada is the home of "take no marriage seriously" thinking and it's no wonder it's worst on the list.  Hell, you could actually say this list means absolutely nothing and I'm tempted to do so.  Oregon and Washington don't do that well on the list and they're much more open to gay marriage.  California's in the lower half - again sympathetic.  Louisianna and Maryland are in the top ten of the best and they ban Gay Marriage but are half a point away from Connecticutt.  In fact, there are plenty of red states in the top 20.  North Dakota, Iowa, Nebraska, South Dakota, along with Maryland and Louisianna.  The Midwest does very well in this list, but is decidedly red.

[Babar]

quote:
It also shows the state infamous for "quicky" marriages leads the list. Nevada is the home of "take no marriage seriously" thinking and it's no wonder it's worst on the list.

Last I checked Nevada voted for Bush.

[Babar]

quote:
No, I'm saying that because marriage and divorce are so easy, it's damaging marriage in areas that place more emphasis on being married.

That's what you said....in response to this question:

quote:
Are you saying that because Massachusetts allows gay marriage, it has no effect on Massachusetts, but rather affects the red states who don't allow gay marriage?

Again.... you're saying that the actions of the "blue" states like Massachuetts which cause "marriage and divorce" to be "so easy," lead red states which "place more emphasis on being married" to suffer as a result? Again, I don't see the connection here...

[fall-apart]

He's saying that because less people get married in Massachesetts, there are less divorces (more people cohabitating).  In a state in which more marriages occur, there will be more divorce.

[ScutMonkey]

quote:
Originally posted by: Babar

quote:
No, I'm saying that because marriage and divorce are so easy, it's damaging marriage in areas that place more emphasis on being married.

That's what you said....in response to this question:

quote:
Are you saying that because Massachusetts allows gay marriage, it has no effect on Massachusetts, but rather affects the red states who don't allow gay marriage?

Again.... you're saying that the actions of the "blue" states like Massachuetts which cause "marriage and divorce" to be "so easy," lead red states which "place more emphasis on being married" to suffer as a result? Again, I don't see the connection here...

Let me approach this from another angle because I don't think I'm doing a good job getting my point across.  There is a belief by many conservative christians that there is an entire agenda and litany of beliefs which liberal secularists have continued to shove down their throats for the last 50+ years.  Gay marriage is a part of this, but not the entire thing.  Common law marriage, cohabitation, premarital sex, ease of marriage, ease of divorce, and gay marriage are all a part of this opening up of marriage and sex in society.  Most of this is a done deal in this country and since the liberalization of these various pieces of traditional marriage and sexual laws have happened, divorce has shot through the roof.  So have various societal ills associated with divorce.  The evidence is spread throughout the country and is not relegated to one state or another.  

Now comes along one of the few remaining things which conservative christians can take a stand on, gay marriage, and they're going to fight it tooth and nail because they've seen the damage they believe was done by the liberalization of marriage in every other past instance.

[Overkill]

quote:
but studies have shown this trend isn't as healthy for children raised this way than a traditional mother/father family situation

Too blanket scut, and worthy of a thread on its own. A traditional mother father situation? In Britain until fairly recently (and sadly in some places still all too common) that would mean the father went out to work (or was unemployed for long and nasty periods) then came home, went down the pub, returned and beat the crap out of the wife.......... in front of the kids. Healthy? I don't think so. Yet surveys of elderly women (and surviving men) show that this was the social norm, happening in a worryingly large number of working and middle class families. As we also know, it tended to be handed down the family line as the sons (and daughters) thought that was how it was meant to be.

Besides, as any genealogist will tell you, illegitimacy is nothing new, and was fairly common amongst the poor long before the 20th C.  

It's no surprise that people who go to college, usually because they are from a "better background" go on to raise "succesful" families. It's easy when you've already got money in the bank, support from parents who have the time, etc....... not so easy when you've got sod all to look forward to but a dead end job, and poxy flat in a high rise.

[fall-apart]

quote:
not so easy when you've got sod all to look forward to but a dead end job, and poxy flat in a high rise.

Yeah, so why try at all?  WHy not just go on welfare and let the taxpayers support you for the rest of your life.  I mean, if you want it easy and all...