Facinating article by Andrew Sullivan...

Little Raven

On Walkabout
Joined
Nov 6, 2001
Messages
4,244
Location
Cozy in an Eggshell
Red State, Blue State
Take two iconic states: Texas and Massachusetts. In some ways, they were the two states competing in the last election. In the world's imagination, you couldn't have two starker opposites. One is the homeplace of Harvard, gay marriage, high taxes, and social permissiveness. The other is Bush country, solidly Republican, traditional, and gun-toting. Massachusetts voted for Kerry over Bush 62 to 37 percent; Texas voted for Bush over Kerry 61 to 38 percent.

So ask yourself a simple question: which state has the highest divorce rate? Marriage was a key issue in the last election, with Massachusetts' gay marriages becoming a symbol of alleged blue state decadence and moral decay. But in actual fact, Massachusetts has the lowest divorce rate in the country at 2.4 divorces per 1,000 inhabitants. Texas - which until recently made private gay sex a criminal offence - has a divorce rate of 4.1. A fluke? Not at all. The states with the highest divorce rates in the U.S. are Alabama, Arkansas, Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Mississippi, North Carolina, Oklahoma, South Carolina, and Texas. And the states with the lowest divorce rates are: Connecticut, Massachusetts, Maine, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and Vermont. Every single one of the high divorce rate states went for Bush. Every single one of the low divorce rate states went for Kerry. The Bible Belt divorce rate, in fact, is roughly 50 percent higher than the national average.

...

But doesn't being born again help bring down divorce rates? Jesus, after all, was mum on the subject of homosexuality, but was very clear about divorce, declaring it a sin unless adultery was involved. A recent study, however, found no measurable difference in divorce rates between those who are "born again" and those who are not. 29 percent of Baptists have been divorced, compared to 21 percent of Catholics. Moreover, a staggering 23 percent of married born-agains have been divorced twice or more. Teen births? Again, the contrast is striking. In a state like Texas, where the religious right is extremely strong and the rhetoric against teenage sex is gale-force strong, the teen births as a percentage of all births is 16.1 percent. In liberal, secular, gay-friendly Massachusetts, it's 7.4, almost half. Marriage itself is less popular in Texas than in Massachusetts. In Texas, the percent of people unmarried is 32.4 percent; in Massachusetts, it's 26.8 percent. So even with a higher marriage rate, Massachusetts manages a divorce rate almost half of its "conservative" rival.

Or take abortion. America is one of the few Western countries where the legality of abortion is still ferociously disputed. It's a country where the religious right is arguably the strongest single voting bloc, and in which abortion is a constant feature of cultural politics. Compare it to a country like Holland, perhaps the epitome of socially liberal, relativist liberalism. So which country has the highest rate of abortion? It's not even close. America has an abortion rate of 21 abortions per 1,000 women aged between 15 and 44. Holland has a rate of 6.8. Americans, in other words, have three times as many abortions as the Dutch. Remind me again: which country is the most socially conservative?
An interesting question. Why do the people most dedicated to legislating morality have the worst track record when it comes to 'moral issues'?
 
Yes I'm glad to see Sullivan coming around. It must be hard to be a gay conservative given the current trends in the Republican Party. I've known about those numbers and comparisons for quite a while now. He could also throw in all the conservative commentators: Limbaugh-druggy, Bennett-gambling nut, O'Reilly-phone sex freak, not to mention how many speakers of the house did we go through during the Clinton Monica affair just to get one Republican who wasn't screwing around? The social issues are really as Pat Buchanan said a cultural war. Why do people believe cultural things? Because their parents and the people around them believe those things. They can not necessarily serve as remedies to social problems, see the thread/data on abstinence education. I guess being born again does not make you better able to get along with your spouse, in fact I suspect rigidity of belief and intolerance of opposing views is rather a negative in spousal relations.
 
Thank you for bringing that article into our lives...

Seriously, that stuff is great. Hypocrisy abound.
 
Little Raven said:
Teen births? Again, the contrast is striking. In a state like Texas, where the religious right is extremely strong and the rhetoric against teenage sex is gale-force strong, the teen births as a percentage of all births is 16.1 percent. In liberal, secular, gay-friendly Massachusetts, it's 7.4, almost half.
In fairness if the gay% was really so high then a low teenage pregnancy rate would be expected. I've heard most of this before but the Holland/US abortion rate was new to me, and unexpected.
 
Excellent article.
 
:goodjob:

Now, what I would really like to see is someone answer the questions raised. Why are all the moral absolutists/far right protecters of morals quiet?
 
Timko said:
In fairness if the gay% was really so high then a low teenage pregnancy rate would be expected. I've heard most of this before but the Holland/US abortion rate was new to me, and unexpected.

At most, 8-10% of Massachusetts is gay, and that's an outside estimate (it's likely closer to 5%). Surely having 10% of the high school population be gay wouldn't cut down teen births by half?

(The main reason for the discrepancy is that Massachusetts teaches contraception and awareness while Texas teaches complete abstinence. Abstinence-focused Sex Ed classes are proven to be far less effective at preventing teen pregnancy than contraception-based classes.)
 
Cuivienen said:
At most, 8-10% of Massachusetts is gay, and that's an outside estimate (it's likely closer to 5%). Surely having 10% of the high school population be gay wouldn't cut down teen births by half?

(The main reason for the discrepancy is that Massachusetts teaches contraception and awareness while Texas teaches complete abstinence. Abstinence-focused Sex Ed classes are proven to be far less effective at preventing teen pregnancy than contraception-based classes.)

Actually, it depends on the number of high schoolers that are sexually (in any way) active, and how many are homosexually active. This would give you an idea of what effect a higher gay percentage has on teen pregnancy. I would guess that it would have a bigger impact than you'd think, but not halving. As for the discrepancy; I'd like to throw in the fact that while my high school was suppose to teach abstinence, our teachers always avoiding telling us what was more effective. In fact, they'd say something like, "Well, if you don't have sex, you can't get an STD; but if you use proper protection you can't, either."
 
Not to threadjack but since I'd already seen this as a result of another recent thread, Massachusetts is also a state that "until recently made private gay sex a criminal offence".

The Massachusetts sodomy law was stuck down in 2002 by the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts. Here's a few other bits from http://www.lawlib.state.ma.us/sex.html

Massachusetts Law Library said:
Fornication

M.G.L. c.272, sec. 18. Fornication.

Whoever commits fornication shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than three months or by a fine of not more than thirty dollars.

Fort v. Fort, 12 Mass. App. Ct. 411, 425 NE2d 754 (1981). "The crimes of fornication, adultery, and lewd and lascivious cohabitation are never, or substantially never, made the subject of prosecution."

Attorney Gen. v. Desilets, 418 Mass. 316, 636 NE2d 233 (1994). "This statute is of doubtful constitutionality, at least as applied to the private, consensual conduct of persons over the age of consent."

Adultery

M.G.L. c.272, sec. 14 Adultery.

A married person who has sexual intercourse with a person not his spouse or an unmarried person who has sexual intercourse with a married person shall be guilty of adultery and shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for not more than three years or in jail for not more than two years or by a fine of not more than five hundred dollars.

Commonwealth v. Stowell, 389 Mass. 171, 449 NE2d 357 (1983). The court held that the Massachusetts adultery statute was not unconstitutional and that it was proper to have applied it to consensual acts between adults in private.

All that aside, I'm intrigued as well - marriage rate, divorce rate, and teen motherhood rate are all opposite what one would expect between Texas and Massachusetts. Unfortunately Mr. Sullivan doesn't compare Texas and Massachusetts for abortion. I'd also be curious about crime rate differences between the two states.
 
IglooDude said:
All that aside, I'm intrigued as well - marriage rate, divorce rate, and teen motherhood rate are all opposite what one would expect between Texas and Massachusetts. Unfortunately Mr. Sullivan doesn't compare Texas and Massachusetts for abortion. I'd also be curious about crime rate differences between the two states.

Same holds true for crime (see below 2000 #s) but why are you surprised that the reality based world is likely to be better at addressing real problems than the faith (fantasy?) based world. Logic suggests this would be the case. All I could Google for abortion were 1996 numbers showing they were the same for TX and MA @ 21/1000 women.


In the year 2000 Massachusetts had an estimated population of 6,349,097 which ranked the state as having the 13th in population. For that year the State of Massachusetts had a total Crime Index of 3,026.1 reported incidents per 100,000 people. This ranked the state as having the 42nd highest total Crime Index. For Violent Crime Massachusetts had a reported incident rate of 476.1 per 100,000 people. This ranked the state as having the 21st highest occurrence for Violent Crime among the states. For crimes against Property, the state had a reported incident rate of 2,550.0 per 100,000 people, which ranked as the state 44th highest. Also in the year 2000 Massachusetts had 2.0 Murders per 100,000 people, ranking the state as having the 41st highest rate for Murder. Massachusetts’s 26.7 reported Forced Rapes per 100,000 people, ranked the state 36th highest. For Robbery, per 100,000 people, Massachusetts’s rate was 91.6 which ranked the state as having the 27th highest for Robbery. The state also had 355.9 Aggravated Assaults for every 100,000 people, which indexed the state as having the 14th highest position for this crime among the states. For every 100,000 people there were 482.0 Burglaries, which ranks Massachusetts as having the 41st highest standing among the states. Larceny -Theft was reported 1,660.5 times per hundred thousand people in Massachusetts which standing is the 49th highest among the states. Vehicle Theft occurred 407.6 times per 100,000 people, which fixed the state as having the 16th highest for vehicle theft among the states.

In the year 2000 Texas had an estimated population of 20,851,820 which ranked the state 2nd in population. For that year the State of Texas had a total Crime Index of 4,955.5 reported incidents per 100,000 people. This ranked the state as having the 8th highest total Crime Index. For Violent Crime Texas had a reported incident rate of 545.1 per 100,000 people. This ranked the state as having the 13th highest occurrence for Violent Crime among the states. For crimes against Property, the state had a reported incident rate of 4,410.4 per 100,000 people, which ranked as the state 10th highest. Also in the year 2000 Texas had 5.9 Murders per 100,000 people, ranking the state as having the 17th highest rate for Murder. Texas’s 37.7 reported Forced Rapes per 100,000 people, ranked the state 17th highest. For Robbery, per 100,000 people, Texas’s rate was 145.1 which ranked the state as having the 16th highest for Robbery. The state also had 356.3 Aggravated Assaults for every 100,000 people, which indexed the state as having the 13th highest position for this crime among the states. For every 100,000 people there were 906.3 Burglaries, which ranks Texas as having the 12th highest standing among the states. Larceny - Theft were reported 3,057.4 times per hundred thousand people in Texas which standing is the 10th highest among the states. Vehicle Theft occurred 446.8 times per 100,000 people, which fixed the state as having the 13th highest for vehicle theft among the states
 
What amazes me is that the American posters to this thread (smart and well read from my experience) didn’t seem to know these numbers, which are rather old, while the 1 Brit posting did. What does that say about this country and its media that the British know more about our social statistics than we do. It is totally depressing. How can you have a real democracy in that environment?
 
Democracy just means the choice of the people, it doesn't mean the choice of the well-informed people.
 
Tomoyo said:
Democracy just means the choice of the people, it doesn't mean the choice of the well-informed people.
What you just described is what Democracy should be but is, unfortunately, not.

"A democratic society depends on an informed and educated citizenry."

"Whenever the people are well-informed, they can be trusted with their own government." -Thomas Jefferson
 
I meant Democracy in the sense of the word. Of course, what Democracy is defined as and what Democracy is are completely different. :(
 
The difference in their divorce rates are quite similar to the disparity in their marriage rates. Texas has a higher rate of marriages and higher rate of divorces.........now there is a shocker for you.......

The relative numbers of each are quite interesting too. Texas has nearly 5 times the number of people getting married.

http://www.stats.indiana.edu/web/state/mar_st01.html
 
Norlamand said:
Texas has a higher rate of marriages and higher rate of divorces.........now there is a shocker for you.......

From the article

"Marriage itself is less popular in Texas than in Massachusetts. In Texas the proportion of people unmarried is 32.4%; in Massachusetts it is 26.8%. So even with a higher marriage rate, Massachusetts has a divorce rate almost half of its “conservative” rival"

The divorce rate is so high in Texas it means that overall less people are married at any one time. Texas has a higher rate of getting married but actually staying married is a totally different thing.
 
Mark1031 said:
What amazes me is that the American posters to this thread (smart and well read from my experience) didn’t seem to know these numbers, which are rather old, while the 1 Brit posting did. What does that say about this country and its media that the British know more about our social statistics than we do. It is totally depressing. How can you have a real democracy in that environment?

Oh, I'd heard the numbers before, but the numbers didn't have an article to go with them. At the same time, the article was quite a good use of those numbers. Unfortunately, no one will ask all the questions, because everyone is afraid of what they'll find if they do. A pity, you are right.
 
Here's an interesting viewpoint that had not occured to me yet:

Statistically speaking, African-American families are far less stable than the average. Indeed, out of all ethnic groups, they have the worst numbers for family stability (I believe it goes blacks, hispanics, whites, asians, in terms of decreasing divorce and single parent rate). Now, southern states tend to have larger black populations than northern states (for obvious reasons), and I do not believe that Texas is an exception to this. It should also be noted that Texas is right on the border with Mexico and has a substantial Hispanic population.

Massachusetts, on the other hand, has large white and asian populations, with very small black and hispanic ones.
 
but the northern states are also more urban, which in turn, are more rife with minorities.

is the black population in say, NY similar to the population in Oklahoma? I bet it is
 
Back
Top Bottom