So Much for Undermining Marriage: Few...

So Much for Undermining Marriage: Fewest Divorces in Marriage-Equality States

There are 185 comments on the EDGE story from Aug 8, 2011, titled So Much for Undermining Marriage: Fewest Divorces in Marriage-Equality States. In it, EDGE reports that:

One would think that the liberal Northeastern states, which include five of the six where marriage equality is legal , would have the highest rate of divorce because they are perceived as more freewheeling.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at EDGE.

The Rainbow Kid

Alpharetta, GA

#21 Aug 8, 2011
flbadcatowner wrote:
<quoted text>I certainly did and it made no mention of the possibility that more people may be choosing cohabitation over marriage and that some states may have a higher percentage of married people than others. There was a reference to people in southern states getting married at younger ages and little else that has anything to do with marriage rates. Your generalized statement that people in the North get married because they want to and Southerners do because they want to have sex is no less bigoted than the epithets hurled at gays.
Well; I could draw you a picture if there was a way to post it on TOPIX; but there's not and I can't so I won't
.
I will have to settle for juicy background info to assist in your thought process increasing your chance of getting the point
.
Let the juicy part begin:
++++++++++
The southern states are known as the 'bible belt' where people are obliged to get married before they can have sex
.
In the not-so-biblical north; people are less likely bound by religious stigma; so people in the north can marry for all the right reasons; i.e.:
.
Consecrated true friendship; two souls become knit as one until death they are parted

“I call it as I see it.”

Since: Jul 09

Retirement City

#22 Aug 8, 2011
eJohn wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, the article is about *marriage*, not cohabitation, so why would they include data about that? It's not about chocolate chip cookies, either, so they didn't include a recipe for them, did they?
<quoted text>The rate of cohabitation vs. marriage does impact the rate of divorces per so many citizens of a state, your rants notwithstanding
Which supports my statement that people in the Bible belt are more likely to get married because they want to have sex, doesn't it?
If you live in an area where premarital sex and those that engage in it are demonized the way it is in the Bible belt and you're really, really, really horny (as most teenagers and early 20-somethings are), what would YOU do? Get married so you can get laid. NOT a great basis for a long-lasting relationship, is it?
Sometimes that works out, but clearly, more often than not, it doesn't.
<quoted text>Are you saying that younger people cannot fall in love? Young people who love each other often choose to get married instead of simply having premarital sex. Is that too hard to understand? your statement reeks of bigotry.
It's not relevant since they're talking about percentages, not quantities. There are clearly enough numbers in their data to make reasonable conclusions or they wouldn't have pursued them.
<quoted text>If fewer people get married, that will drive the divorce rate down. The only reliable measure of measuring how likely marriages are going to stay together is to compare the divorce rate with the total number of married people. My whole point is the methodology of the article in question is flawed.
There are many, many, many studies that have been done about the sociology around marriage and why people engage in it in different cultures. What I said was obviously an over-generalization (duh!), but it's based on scientific fact, not bigoted opinion.
If your "scientific facts" are true, how about backing them up with something other than your say so.

“Together for 24, legal for 5”

Since: Sep 07

Littleton, NH

#23 Aug 8, 2011
The Rainbow Kid wrote:
<quoted text>
Well; I could draw you a picture if there was a way to post it on TOPIX; but there's not and I can't so I won't
.
I will have to settle for juicy background info to assist in your thought process increasing your chance of getting the point
.
Let the juicy part begin:
++++++++++
The southern states are known as the 'bible belt' where people are obliged to get married before they can have sex
.
In the not-so-biblical north; people are less likely bound by religious stigma; so people in the north can marry for all the right reasons; i.e.:
.
Consecrated true friendship; two souls become knit as one until death they are parted
The contradiction to your statement is the higher incidence of unmarried births in the South, particularly among teens. Maybe a simpler answer is hypocrisy.

“I call it as I see it.”

Since: Jul 09

Retirement City

#24 Aug 8, 2011
The Rainbow Kid wrote:
<quoted text>
Well; I could draw you a picture if there was a way to post it on TOPIX; but there's not and I can't so I won't
.
I will have to settle for juicy background info to assist in your thought process increasing your chance of getting the point
.
Let the juicy part begin:
++++++++++
The southern states are known as the 'bible belt' where people are obliged to get married before they can have sex
.
In the not-so-biblical north; people are less likely bound by religious stigma; so people in the north can marry for all the right reasons; i.e.:
.
Consecrated true friendship; two souls become knit as one until death they are parted
People up North marry for all the right reasons? Don't make me laugh. People in the South are less capable of marrying for love than Northerners? You have to be joking. Not to mention that your statements are just as bigoted as those whom you refer to as homophobes.

“I call it as I see it.”

Since: Jul 09

Retirement City

#25 Aug 8, 2011
nhjeff wrote:
<quoted text>
The contradiction to your statement is the higher incidence of unmarried births in the South, particularly among teens. Maybe a simpler answer is hypocrisy.
Unmarried births could also have something to do with not getting an abortion. Abortions are very likely to me more prevalent in the North where there is far less of a social stigma on abortion.
Aida Lott

Phillipsburg, NJ

#26 Aug 8, 2011
flbadcatowner wrote:
<quoted text>Infidelity makes a mockery of marriage regardless of sexual orientation. Infidelity also increases the incidence of STD's.
Infidelity is not responsible for STDs, you dolt....unsafe sex is.

“Marriage Equality”

Since: Dec 07

Lakeland, MI

#27 Aug 8, 2011
nhjeff wrote:
<quoted text>
Catholics do, in fact, take the divorce prohibition slightly more seriously than the prohibition on contraception. Just slightly.
Agreed. But when the bar is set that low, I guess it's easy to hit above it, isn't it?

“I call it as I see it.”

Since: Jul 09

Retirement City

#28 Aug 8, 2011
eJohn wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, the article is about *marriage*, not cohabitation, so why would they include data about that? It's not about chocolate chip cookies, either, so they didn't include a recipe for them, did they?

It's not relevant since they're talking about percentages, not quantities. There are clearly enough numbers in their data to make reasonable conclusions or they wouldn't have pursued them.
The conclusions in the article were drawn on faulty methodology. When people decide to cohabit instead of marry, it will depress the number of marriages and with fewer marriages, it stands to reason that there will be fewer divorces. The only way to get a realistic picture of the rate at which marriages fail is to compare the number of divorces against the number of married people in the state. If a higher rate of cohabitation leads to fewer divorces, why would gays want to marry anyway?

Since: Apr 11

United States

#29 Aug 8, 2011
flbadcatowner wrote:
<quoted text>Is there any hard evidence that gays are more faithful to their spouses than straights?
A bit early in the process isn't it?

“Together for 24, legal for 5”

Since: Sep 07

Littleton, NH

#30 Aug 8, 2011
flbadcatowner wrote:
<quoted text>Unmarried births could also have something to do with not getting an abortion. Abortions are very likely to me more prevalent in the North where there is far less of a social stigma on abortion.
You should do some research on the subject before you proclaim your assumptions as true.

“Marriage Equality”

Since: Dec 07

Lakeland, MI

#31 Aug 8, 2011
JohnInToronto wrote:
<quoted text>
Your family is "incidental" evidence and not a statistic. Of course I agree with you, most Catholics don't give a shit about the Church's teaching on divorce. But there are enough that do that it can affect statistics on the subject when comparing Catholics to Protestants
Yes and no. I know WAY more Catholics than just the ones I'm related to, but the attitudes are pretty universal. There ARE some conservative American Catholics that buy into the "no divorce" and "keep having babies until you're dead" tenets, but by far, most of them simply ignore them.

And, being a counselor that's worked with MANY religious families having issues with their religion (e.g. they were talking to ME and not a mamber of the clergy about it), my point of view is that of one that sees far more people questioning and then rejecting the parts of organized religion that don't work for them.

Usually not using birth control and staying together after a marriage is clearly over are high up on the list to be abandoned by people of ALL flavors of religion. Why? Because it doesn't make sense to be miserable when you don't have to.

“I call it as I see it.”

Since: Jul 09

Retirement City

#32 Aug 8, 2011
eJohn wrote:
<quoted text>

Which supports my statement that people in the Bible belt are more likely to get married because they want to have sex, doesn't it?
If you live in an area where premarital sex and those that engage in it are demonized the way it is in the Bible belt and you're really, really, really horny (as most teenagers and early 20-somethings are), what would YOU do? Get married so you can get laid. NOT a great basis for a long-lasting relationship, is it?
Sometimes that works out, but clearly, more often than not, it doesn't.
People from the Bible Belt are no less capable of falling in love than their counterparts from the North, your rants notwithstanding. Your statements about young Southerners are no less bigoted than those directed at gays by whom you call homophobic.

“Marriage Equality”

Since: Dec 07

Lakeland, MI

#33 Aug 8, 2011
JohnInToronto wrote:
<quoted text>
Your family is "incidental" evidence and not a statistic. Of course I agree with you, most Catholics don't give a shit about the Church's teaching on divorce. But there are enough that do that it can affect statistics on the subject when comparing Catholics to Protestants
Plus, with the unbelievable amount of hypocrisy I see among those who profess to live a "religious" or "Bible-based" lifestyle, I find it really hard to believe that there would be much of a difference overall between the divorce rates between Catholics and Protestants anyway.

When even those that are raking in billions of dollars by preaching their faith can't even keep their pants zipped (or be smart enough to not get caught unzipping them), it's hard to expect their followers to be much different, is it?

“I call it as I see it.”

Since: Jul 09

Retirement City

#34 Aug 8, 2011
Aida Lott wrote:
<quoted text>Infidelity is not responsible for STDs, you dolt....unsafe sex is.
And the problem is that there is too much unsafe sex being practiced by unfaithful lovers. In spite of the pleas of medical associations and professionals, the warnings go in one ear and out the other.

“Marriage Equality”

Since: Dec 07

Lakeland, MI

#35 Aug 8, 2011
flbadcatowner wrote:
<quoted text>If your "scientific facts" are true, how about backing them up with something other than your say so.
I told you before--don't take my word for it! You're sitting at a computer, aren't you? Put some effort into your own argument--Google up some data and see for yourself. You won't believe anything I come up with, anyway, will you?

“Marriage Equality”

Since: Dec 07

Lakeland, MI

#36 Aug 8, 2011
flbadcatowner wrote:
<quoted text>People up North marry for all the right reasons? Don't make me laugh. People in the South are less capable of marrying for love than Northerners? You have to be joking. Not to mention that your statements are just as bigoted as those whom you refer to as homophobes.
You are the only one here pretending the trend is claimed to be an absolute with no variation. The rest of us understand that these are TRENDS, not absolutes. Trends are far more indicative of human behaviour overall than any absolutes could ever be.

Of course some people in the south marry for the right reasons and some people in the north marry for the wrong reasons. But in order for you to debunk the facts you don't like, you have to take these trends to a ridiculous extreme first, THEN claim they're wrong.

Why don't you try working with the facts as presented instead of having to distort them to support your argument?

“I call it as I see it.”

Since: Jul 09

Retirement City

#37 Aug 8, 2011
eJohn wrote:
<quoted text>
I told you before--don't take my word for it! You're sitting at a computer, aren't you? Put some effort into your own argument--Google up some data and see for yourself. You won't believe anything I come up with, anyway, will you?
I seriously doubt you would be happy with the results I came up with at various times in the past on this subject.

“Marriage Equality”

Since: Dec 07

Lakeland, MI

#38 Aug 8, 2011
flbadcatowner wrote:
<quoted text>The conclusions in the article were drawn on faulty methodology.
Only because you don't like the conclusions. Have you reviewed the data used for the article?
flbadcatowner wrote:
<quoted text>When people decide to cohabit instead of marry, it will depress the number of marriages and with fewer marriages, it stands to reason that there will be fewer divorces.
Oh, I agree with what you're saying. When you're encouraged to marry so that you can get laid, you're going to get divorced again about as often as people that DON'T have to get married to get laid break up. It makes perfect sense. And that sex-negative message absolutely would result in a much higher divorce rate. No doubt.

The point of the article, though, is to point out that all the panic the Bible thumpers wish to create over marriage equality forcing innocent straight couples to divorce in unprecedented millions (so they can run out and have gay sex, I suppose) are simply NOT proving to be true. THEIR OWN communities, where same-sex marriage is demonized and forbidden, are still LEADING THE NATION in divorce statistics.

So how's that "marriage equality will destroy marriage" argument holding up there?? Shouldn't demonizing and prohibiting same-sex marriage solve that problem for them? Apparently it isn't....
flbadcatowner wrote:
<quoted text>The only way to get a realistic picture of the rate at which marriages fail is to compare the number of divorces against the number of married people in the state.
What do you think the data is based on? People that didn't get married but are somehow getting divorced without getting married first? How does that happen?
flbadcatowner wrote:
<quoted text>If a higher rate of cohabitation leads to fewer divorces, why would gays want to marry anyway?
What a ridiculous notion. I shouldn't get married so I won't get divorced? I shouldn't get married in order to improve the divorce statistics in my state? You didn't think that through very far before you typed it, did you?

“I call it as I see it.”

Since: Jul 09

Retirement City

#39 Aug 8, 2011
tiqueboy wrote:
<quoted text>
A bit early in the process isn't it?
You do have a point there. I hope people on both sides of the issue take heed to that.

“Marriage Equality”

Since: Dec 07

Lakeland, MI

#40 Aug 8, 2011
flbadcatowner wrote:
<quoted text>People from the Bible Belt are no less capable of falling in love than their counterparts from the North, your rants notwithstanding.
I never said otherwise, your protestations notwithstanding.
flbadcatowner wrote:
<quoted text>Your statements about young Southerners are no less bigoted than those directed at gays by whom you call homophobic.
Again, if I was fabricating the statements based on nothing but my own bigoted view of young Southerners, I would agree with you. But I'm not. These are trends that have been demonstrated by much scientific research for decades now.

The more sex-negative and Bible-thumping conservative a region is, the more likely people are to get married for reasons other than wanting to get married.

They want to get laid, they want to emulate their parents, they believe their God wants them to marry, they believe she should start having children early and often, being married is directly linked to their self-esteem, the humiliation of being an "old maid" or a "bachelor" over the age of 22 is too much to bear, they want to move out of their parents home, they're already pregnant and can't have an illegitimate baby.... LOTS of reasons that have nothing to do with the desire to marry the one and only person they love more than anyone or anything in the world.

If you remove all those other reasons, what other reason do you have left? To marry the one and only person they love more than anyone or anything in the world.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Evergreen State College Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Top Democrats call on Oregon governor to resign (Feb '15) Feb '15 Fa-Foxy 10
News Calling the Global Warming charlatans "Nazis" |... (Mar '14) Mar '14 Brian_G 30
News Calling the Global Warming Charlatans 'Nazis' (Mar '14) Mar '14 LessHypeMoreFact 2
need assistance (Dec '13) Dec '13 em sm 1
News Washington College OK's Exposure of Young Girls... (Nov '12) Mar '13 Sublate 30
News Her Name is Rachel Corrie (Mar '13) Mar '13 Uzi 1
audio engineering students looking for credit (Nov '12) Nov '12 BIGGTRUB 1
More from around the web