Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

Why US married 'conservatives' divorce at a higher rate than do married liberals

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Why US married 'conservatives' divorce at a higher rate than do married liberals

    Reposting as a separate thread because this is a topic worth discussion. The images are omitted for now.

    Originally posted by Starlight View Post
    Except your generalizations of liberals as not committing to their marriages and conservatives being all about long term commitment are just factually false when it comes to the actual behaviors.
    There is a perfectly reasonable explanation that leaps to the eye.

    [edit]Cast your eyes onto the the graph of the nationally aggregated data:


    1)Why the huge spike in divorces/married couple in the 1960s -1980? Those are the liberals divorcing to pursue sexual liberalisation.

    2) But why does it drop after that? Because

    a) The more promiscuous have weeded themselves out of the marrying pool

    b) With the general devaluation of marriage amongst liberals those that marry are those that value it more; those that don't value it have been weeded out.

    c) Many liberals scarred by their parents' divorces naturally tend to marry only when they are committed to the marriage and when they've found a partner with similar commitment because they don't want to scar themselves more or their future children, therefore

    d) Over time those liberals that marry become more committed to keeping the marriage going, despite liberal values being anti-marriage, because those less committed to marriage have been weeded out

    3) But why the spike from 2005-2007? Those are the 'conservatives' who are mostly liberals just a generation or two behind (cf. for example the Catholics embracing contraception and marriage annulment for de facto divorce)*. Many of the 'conservatives' embrace the liberals values and praxes of 1-2 generations earlier and hence divorce at high rates.

    4) All is explained:

    a) Married liberals have over time been more committed to marriage, while conservatives have been less committed to marriage because they've been steadily embracing the liberal values therefore

    b) 'Conservatives' have recently been divorcing at higher rates than liberals (though the actual numbers and proportion of 'conservatives' divorcing is not as great as the 1960/70 liberals, explaining why the second spike is not as great).

    So yes, many 'conservatives' are hypocrites, but the reason why they act hypocritically and divorce is because they have abandoned conservative values for liberal ones, and the reason why married liberals have been more committed is because they've personally experienced the damage caused by liberal values and therefore embrace the conservative commitment to marriage.

    So liberalism (or progressivism) is causing the harm. QED.

    Postscript:
    (*The alert reader might question this interpretation given the short duration of the spike, instead preferring to attribute it to some anomaly. The answer, of course, is that conservatives have been divorcing in increasing numbers all the time from ~1980s, this trend is merely masked by the great national decrease in divorces/married couples due to married liberals being much more committed to marriage. The above image with the relatively large interval is chosen to highlight the general trends.

    For full disclosure, we append a more detailed graph from the range of 1950s to 2009, where the great spike and following decline is still very clear; the various small spikes in the decline are easily explained as the work of the 'conservatives'.)

  • #2
    Divorce rates tend to be higher in the South because marriage rates are also higher in the South,” said Diana Elliott, a family demographer at the Census Bureau. “In contrast, in the Northeast, first marriages tend to be delayed and the marriage rates are lower, meaning there are also fewer divorces.”

    http://www.firstthings.com/blogs/fir...-divorce-rates
    That's what
    - She

    Without a clear-cut definition of sin, morality becomes a mere argument over the best way to train animals
    - Manya the Holy Szin (The Quintara Marathon)

    I may not be as old as dirt, but me and dirt are starting to have an awful lot in common
    Stephen R. Donaldson

    Comment


    • #3
      Irrelevant, given that we're talking about divorces per married couple here (which was explicitly mentioned in the text, and would also be crystal clear if there're images, but oh well) and not divorces/raw population.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Paprika View Post
        Irrelevant, given that we're talking about divorces per married couple here (which was explicitly mentioned in the text, and would also be crystal clear if there're images, but oh well) and not divorces/raw population.
        It's not irrelevant. The Northeast is very highly liberal, and since liberals tend to wait longer to get married, and in fact don't marry at all in some cases, they naturally have more divorces. The link I gave is a direct rebuttal of the study Starlight cited in the post of his you quoted. In fact, in the comment section of the blog I cited, the author responds to a question from a reader and says "(a) from the linked article, 28% of those divorced identified as conservative, 33% as moderate and 37% as liberal". So, as the author states, liberals divorce more than conservatives.
        That's what
        - She

        Without a clear-cut definition of sin, morality becomes a mere argument over the best way to train animals
        - Manya the Holy Szin (The Quintara Marathon)

        I may not be as old as dirt, but me and dirt are starting to have an awful lot in common
        Stephen R. Donaldson

        Comment


        • #5
          Irrelevant because

          1) Your link is dated to 2011, while Starlight was referencing a study published in 2014

          2) Starlight's post and the study he referred to discussed the more accurate statistic of divorces/married couple and not the raw divorce rate, with the finding that divorces/married couple was higher for conservatives than liberals therefore

          3) My response was made with respect to the national divorces/married couples data therefore

          4) Your link criticising the use of divorce/raw population is irrelevant and attacks a strawman since neither Starlight, I, nor the author of the study he cited were making our cases based on that statistic.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Paprika View Post
            Irrelevant because

            1) Your link is dated to 2011, while Starlight was referencing a study published in 2014
            An earlier draft of that study was the source used by the link I provided. See footnote 1 here: http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/...n_tab_contents


            Source: Starlight's link

            Evangelicals and divorce. For a new study appearing later this month in the American Journal of Sociology, Demographers Jennifer Glass at the University of Texas and Philip Levchak at the University of Iowa looked at the entire map of the United States, going county by county, to examine where divorces occurred in 2000 and what the characteristics of those counties were

            © Copyright Original Source




            2) Starlight's post and the study he referred to discussed the more accurate statistic of divorces/married couple and not the raw divorce rate, with the finding that divorces/married couple was higher for conservatives than liberals therefore
            Bologna. From the page Starlight cited:

            Source: Starlight's link

            Their work confirms that one of the strongest factors predicting divorce rates (per 1000 married couples) is the concentration of conservative or evangelical Protestants in that county.

            © Copyright Original Source



            They used the raw divorce rate.

            3) My response was made with respect to the national divorces/married couples data therefore
            Well goodie for you. Starlight's link was perpetuating the error.

            4) Your link criticising the use of divorce/raw population is irrelevant and attacks a strawman since neither Starlight, I, nor the author of the study he cited were making our cases based on that statistic.
            Yes they were. http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/...n_tab_contents

            From the abstract:

            County-level demographic information from all 50 states is combined from a variety of public data sources and merged with individual records from the National Surveys of Family Growth to estimate both aggregated county and multilevel individual models of divorce.



            Source: https://www.barna.org/barna-update/article/15-familykids/42-new-marriage-and-divorce-statistics-released#.VX7uB3YpC70



            (Base: 3792 adults)


            Conservative 28% 1343
            Moderate 33% 1720
            Liberal 37% 474

            (Source: The Barna Group, Ventura, CA)

            © Copyright Original Source



            So, regardless of what Starlight's data thinks it shows, a higher percentage of liberals get divorced than conservatives.
            That's what
            - She

            Without a clear-cut definition of sin, morality becomes a mere argument over the best way to train animals
            - Manya the Holy Szin (The Quintara Marathon)

            I may not be as old as dirt, but me and dirt are starting to have an awful lot in common
            Stephen R. Donaldson

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Bill the Cat View Post
              An earlier draft of that study was the source used by the link I provided.

              Even if it was an earlier draft by the link you provided that was addressed - which has not yet been demonstrated - the relevance to the later draft has not been demonstrated.

              Bologna. From the page Starlight cited:

              Source: Starlight's link

              Their work confirms that one of the strongest factors predicting divorce rates (per 1000 married couples) is the concentration of conservative or evangelical Protestants in that county.

              © Copyright Original Source



              They used the raw divorce rate.
              Dumbass. I've bolded it for you: divorce rates per married couples, and not the raw divorce rates, that is divorces per adult.

              Well goodie for you. Starlight's link was perpetuating the error.

              Yes they were. http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/...n_tab_contents

              From the abstract:

              County-level demographic information from all 50 states is combined from a variety of public data sources and merged with individual records from the National Surveys of Family Growth to estimate both aggregated county and multilevel individual models of divorce.
              Read the paper, idiot.
              Originally posted by Glass and Levchak
              The dependent variable in the analysis is the divorce rate in the 3119 counties of the U.S available for analysis. The rate is literally the proportion of divorces occurring annually among the population of married couples in each county, benchmarked in the year 2000. It is equal to the number of divorces that occurred in a county divided by the quantity of the number of currently married individuals in a county divided by two.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Paprika View Post

                Even if it was an earlier draft by the link you provided that was addressed - which has not yet been demonstrated -
                It isn't. I was wrong there. But the data sets used by both studies is the same census bureau information, so results will be the same.

                the relevance to the later draft has not been demonstrated.
                Yes it has. The paper uses the same census data and states the exact same thing refuted 3 years earlier in the study cited by the source I gave. It matters little WHERE the particular claim came from. It is just as false as the others.


                And, as expected, you failed to address the Barna survey showing liberals divorce at a higher rate than conservatives. And the study cited by you and Starlight, and several prior studies, make the same ecological fallacy. You can't infer and then classify the behavior of individuals from data collected at an aggregate level. The prevalence of conservatives in an area does not mean that it is conservatives (or religious adherents) that are divorcing at the higher rate.
                That's what
                - She

                Without a clear-cut definition of sin, morality becomes a mere argument over the best way to train animals
                - Manya the Holy Szin (The Quintara Marathon)

                I may not be as old as dirt, but me and dirt are starting to have an awful lot in common
                Stephen R. Donaldson

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Bill the Cat View Post
                  Yes it has. The paper uses the same census data and states the exact same thing refuted 3 years earlier in the study cited by the source I gave. It matters little WHERE the particular claim came from. It is just as false as the others.
                  You utter fraud. You claim that the draft used the useless statistic of divorce per adult; clearly the later paper uses divorce/married couple so that criticism of the draft doesn't apply to the later paper.

                  And, as expected, you failed to address the Barna survey showing liberals divorce at a higher rate than conservatives.
                  The data itself as it is is hardly relevant: (assuming the data is representative) it merely demonstrates that of all those still alive married liberals have divorced more than conservatives, which does nothing to contradict the claim of Glass that in the year 2000, the proportion of married conservatives divorcing was higher than the proportion of married liberals divorcing, or my claim that married liberals used to divorce at a high rate but the rate started to decrease while the divorce rates of conservatives overtook it.

                  In fact, Barna's data is completely consonant with my own claims: lots of liberals divorced in 1960s-70s, which is why of those still living liberals have divorced more than conservatives but in recent years conservatives are divorcing at a higher rate.

                  And the study cited by you and Starlight, and several prior studies, make the same ecological fallacy. You can't infer and then classify the behavior of individuals from data collected at an aggregate level. The prevalence of conservatives in an area does not mean that it is conservatives (or religious adherents) that are divorcing at the higher rate.
                  I do believe you are misrepresenting the argument of Glass and Levchak. They are not saying that because there are more conservatives in an area conservatives divorce at a higher rate.

                  Rather, they make the key observation they make is that at the county level, the concentration of the religiously conservative is positively correlated with divorce rates, which is of course highly suggestive. And they do not merely claim that this alone demonstrates their case: they discuss other factors that support their case, such as how certain praxes common amongst the religious conservatives promote higher rates of divorce.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Paprika View Post
                    You utter fraud. You claim that the draft used the useless statistic of divorce per adult; clearly the later paper uses divorce/married couple so that criticism of the draft doesn't apply to the later paper.
                    I admitted I was wrong on that point, moron. Regardless of what ratio was used, the data came from the same source for multiple studies, which all commit the same ecological fallacy. That's what you aren't getting.


                    The data itself as it is is hardly relevant: (assuming the data is representative) it merely demonstrates that of all those still alive married liberals have divorced more than conservatives, which does nothing to contradict the claim of Glass that in the year 2000, the proportion of married conservatives divorcing was higher than the proportion of married liberals divorcing, or my claim that married liberals used to divorce at a high rate but the rate started to decrease while the divorce rates of conservatives overtook it.
                    The fallacious usage of the data is the relevant part. It seriously weakens Glass' claim, which you got wrong anyway.

                    Source: the study


                    The results here show that communities with large concentrations of religious conservatives actually produce higher divorce rates than others

                    © Copyright Original Source



                    Notice that Glass doesn't say that "proportion of married conservatives divorcing was higher than the proportion of married liberals divorcing", she aggregates the divorce rate for a county and draws a conclusion about who is divorcing based on the demographics. It's pure sloppiness, but it still isn't what you claimed it was.

                    In fact, Barna's data is completely consonant with my own claims: lots of liberals divorced in 1960s-70s, which is why of those still living liberals have divorced more than conservatives but in recent years conservatives are divorcing at a higher rate.

                    I do believe you are misrepresenting the argument of Glass and Levchak. They are not saying that because there are more conservatives in an area conservatives divorce at a higher rate.
                    I believe that is what they are saying. Conservative values and traditions cause higher rates of divorce in conservative areas. And I believe that is what your thread title says "Why US married 'conservatives' divorce at a higher rate than do married liberals"

                    Rather, they make the key observation they make is that at the county level, the concentration of the religiously conservative is positively correlated with divorce rates, which is of course highly suggestive. And they do not merely claim that this alone demonstrates their case: they discuss other factors that support their case, such as how certain praxes common amongst the religious conservatives promote higher rates of divorce.
                    They claim that religious conservatism is a cause of higher divorce rates, which is simply not accurate.
                    That's what
                    - She

                    Without a clear-cut definition of sin, morality becomes a mere argument over the best way to train animals
                    - Manya the Holy Szin (The Quintara Marathon)

                    I may not be as old as dirt, but me and dirt are starting to have an awful lot in common
                    Stephen R. Donaldson

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Paprika View Post
                      Reposting as a separate thread because this is a topic worth discussion. The images are omitted for now.


                      There is a perfectly reasonable explanation that leaps to the eye.

                      [edit]Cast your eyes onto the the graph of the nationally aggregated data:


                      1)Why the huge spike in divorces/married couple in the 1960s -1980? Those are the liberals divorcing to pursue sexual liberalisation.

                      2) But why does it drop after that? Because

                      a) The more promiscuous have weeded themselves out of the marrying pool

                      b) With the general devaluation of marriage amongst liberals those that marry are those that value it more; those that don't value it have been weeded out.

                      c) Many liberals scarred by their parents' divorces naturally tend to marry only when they are committed to the marriage and when they've found a partner with similar commitment because they don't want to scar themselves more or their future children, therefore

                      d) Over time those liberals that marry become more committed to keeping the marriage going, despite liberal values being anti-marriage, because those less committed to marriage have been weeded out

                      3) But why the spike from 2005-2007? Those are the 'conservatives' who are mostly liberals just a generation or two behind (cf. for example the Catholics embracing contraception and marriage annulment for de facto divorce)*. Many of the 'conservatives' embrace the liberals values and praxes of 1-2 generations earlier and hence divorce at high rates.

                      4) All is explained:

                      a) Married liberals have over time been more committed to marriage, while conservatives have been less committed to marriage because they've been steadily embracing the liberal values therefore

                      b) 'Conservatives' have recently been divorcing at higher rates than liberals (though the actual numbers and proportion of 'conservatives' divorcing is not as great as the 1960/70 liberals, explaining why the second spike is not as great).

                      So yes, many 'conservatives' are hypocrites, but the reason why they act hypocritically and divorce is because they have abandoned conservative values for liberal ones, and the reason why married liberals have been more committed is because they've personally experienced the damage caused by liberal values and therefore embrace the conservative commitment to marriage.

                      So liberalism (or progressivism) is causing the harm. QED.

                      Postscript:
                      (*The alert reader might question this interpretation given the short duration of the spike, instead preferring to attribute it to some anomaly. The answer, of course, is that conservatives have been divorcing in increasing numbers all the time from ~1980s, this trend is merely masked by the great national decrease in divorces/married couples due to married liberals being much more committed to marriage. The above image with the relatively large interval is chosen to highlight the general trends.

                      For full disclosure, we append a more detailed graph from the range of 1950s to 2009, where the great spike and following decline is still very clear; the various small spikes in the decline are easily explained as the work of the 'conservatives'.)
                      More delusions of the 'conservative white privileged.'
                      Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                      Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                      But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                      go with the flow the river knows . . .

                      Frank

                      I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
                        More delusions of the 'conservative white privileged.'
                        That's what
                        - She

                        Without a clear-cut definition of sin, morality becomes a mere argument over the best way to train animals
                        - Manya the Holy Szin (The Quintara Marathon)

                        I may not be as old as dirt, but me and dirt are starting to have an awful lot in common
                        Stephen R. Donaldson

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Charles Murray's Belmont/Fishtown analysis-- or what I understand of it, anyway-- in Coming Apart is more compelling than the sort of purely values-based analysis in the OP.
                          Don't call it a comeback. It's a riposte.

                          Comment

                          Related Threads

                          Collapse

                          Topics Statistics Last Post
                          Started by rogue06, Today, 09:13 AM
                          8 responses
                          57 views
                          0 likes
                          Last Post mossrose  
                          Started by CivilDiscourse, Yesterday, 09:32 AM
                          16 responses
                          114 views
                          0 likes
                          Last Post Stoic
                          by Stoic
                           
                          Started by mossrose, 11-28-2020, 03:05 PM
                          26 responses
                          205 views
                          1 like
                          Last Post Juvenal
                          by Juvenal
                           
                          Started by CivilDiscourse, 11-28-2020, 01:53 PM
                          26 responses
                          133 views
                          0 likes
                          Last Post rogue06
                          by rogue06
                           
                          Started by Starlight, 11-27-2020, 11:51 PM
                          4 responses
                          44 views
                          2 likes
                          Last Post shunyadragon  
                          Working...
                          X