Want to increase your chance of divorce? just be a religiously conservative Protestant

[Sunstone]

This is because of the water....... or it might be the air...... but...... By Jesus?

Evangelicals sometimes call Colorado Springs, "The New Jerusalem of the Rockies", as well as similar terms. Tens of thousands have flocked here since the late 1980s, or early 1990s, looking for utopia on earth.

The ironic thing is that most of the fundie newcomers were recruited. Local fundies send out letters, video messages, etc. to fundie churches around the country asking them to send their best, strongest Chrisitian families here. They are quite specific about wanting families, and families with good male breadwinners at that. So, it's a bit ironic the divorce rate is so high, given that we've got so many "strong" fundie families coming here each year.

 

[Sunstone]

The OP just goes to show Fundamentalists are spending too much time correcting other people's marriages, such as when they "correct" gay folk who want to marry. Fundamentalists need to spend a whole lot more time improving their own marriages, since their divorce rate is way too high.

 

[MysticSang'ha]

My Dad had a theory about another correlation: the nicer the garden, the worse the marriage. He figured that if one of the spouses spends the time to plant flowers, trim bushes, and manicure the lawn to make it immaculate, there's a good chance that it's because he or she is avoiding the other spouse.

Maybe. If it's only one spouse, and that spouse is going over again and again part of a lawn that really doesn't need going over again, then it's possible. Or it's possible that the same spouse is just OCD.

I like seeing spouses taking care of the lawn at the same time. Maybe not together, and maybe they don't talk to each other that much, but they share a similar goal.

 

[Guitar's Cry]

I think some people forget that marriage is not just a romantic ideal, but a day-to-day practical agreement that also involves seeing your partner in all their unmasked glory. No make-up, noisy, smelly bodily functions, weird personal habits, all that jazz. If one truly loves and knows their partner, discovering the truly human side of them is part of the fun.

But since "living in sin" is still probably something to be avoided for religiously conservative folks, I'd be willing to bet that all of people go into marriage not quite learning these things.

 

[MysticSang'ha]

The OP just goes to show Fundamentalists are spending too much time correcting other people's marriages, such as when they "correct" gay folk who want to marry. Fundamentalists need to spend a whole lot more time improving their own marriages, since their divorce rate is way too high.

Not just correcting other peoples marriages, but correcting other peoples hobbies, choice of drink, choice of occupation, what sex education matches with their religious book (man + woman = baby and don't do anything until you're married), and choice of military engagement.

All that time spent wringing their hands and wondering how they can turn the country into a "Christian" nation naturally manifests into a marriage where they want to turn their spouses into something they want, rather than accepting their differences and working together with those differences in mind.

 

[Guitar's Cry]

Not just correcting other peoples marriages, but correcting other peoples hobbies, choice of drink, choice of occupation, what sex education matches with their religious book (man + woman = baby and don't do anything until you're married), and choice of military engagement.

All that time spent wringing their hands and wondering how they can turn the country into a "Christian" nation naturally manifests into a marriage where they want to turn their spouses into something they want, rather than accepting their differences and working together with those differences in mind.

You don't suppose it's because the men aren't manly enough to be married?

 

[4consideration]

Some folks do trawl thru the rubbish to bolster up an agenda.
This might be an example.
They've even blamed the conservation religious folks for their neighbours' divorces....... talk about rubbish in/rubbish out.

I agree. I think it's just trying to give some sort of credibility to something that is nothing more than an excuse to bash and gossip about a group of people -- as long as it's a PC popular group to bash.

 

[Sunstone]

I agree. I think it's just trying to give some sort of credibility to something that is nothing more than an excuse to bash and gossip about a group of people -- as long as it's a PC popular group to bash.

There have been rigorously conducted studies finding a higher divorce rate for fundamentalists going back at least 20 years. I used to have on my book shelf a copy of a study on sexual practices that found higher divorce rates with fundamentalists. The book was massive, Dottie. Well over 1500 pages. There were 100 pages in the intro alone that were exclusively devoted to explaining the rigorous methodology of the study. For you and oldbadger to simply dismiss such studies as "bash and gossip" speaks volumes.

 

[Revoltingest]

There have been rigorously conducted studies finding a higher divorce rate for fundamentalists going back at least 20 years. I used to have on my book shelf a copy of a study on sexual practices that found higher divorce rates with fundamentalists. The book was massive, Dottie. Well over 1500 pages. There were 100 pages in the intro alone that were exclusively devoted to explaining the rigorous methodology of the study. For you and oldbadger to simply dismiss such studies as "bash and gossip" speaks volumes.

Facts are often used to bash others.
And fundies are the low hanging fruit.
They have a valid point.

 

[Sunstone]

Facts are often used to bash others.

Conservatives have a long and mostly imbecilic 40 year history of showing animosity towards anyone or anything that introduces fact and truth into an argument. Back in William Buckley's day, conservatives were justly respected as more likely to get their facts straight than liberals. It's one of the reasons I was a conservative growing up. But conservatives today -- they spend more time whining like you just did than getting their facts straight.

 

[4consideration]

There have been rigorously conducted studies finding a higher divorce rate for fundamentalists going back at least 20 years. I used to have on my book shelf a copy of a study on sexual practices that found higher divorce rates with fundamentalists. The book was massive, Dottie. Well over 1500 pages. There were 100 pages in the intro alone that were exclusively devoted to explaining the rigorous methodology of the study. For you and oldbadger to simply dismiss such studies as "bash and gossip" speaks volumes.

Whatever you think it "speaks volumes" about me -- that's fine. I take that as a personal dig. You're free to have your own opinion about me.

I don't dispute, nor do I care about the divorce rate of fundamentalists. That doesn't keep this from being a discussion about bashing a group of people.

I don't even see where you presented documentation that I have overlooked in this discussion.

Please tell me how a high divorce rate shows that Fundamentalist spend their time fixing other people's marriages. Sure there are some very vocal and imposing types of people within that group. What groups is without the extremists?

But:

The OP just goes to show Fundamentalists are spending too much time correcting other people's marriages, such as when they "correct" gay folk who want to marry. Fundamentalists need to spend a whole lot more time improving their own marriages, since their divorce rate is way too high.

I'd like to see the stat's on how much time individual fundamentalists are spending on doing that -- and why the group as a whole should be held as guilty for the actions of some.

There's big difference between discussing beliefs/thoughts and discussing people -- groups of people.

 

[Revoltingest]

Conservatives have a long and mostly imbecilic 40 year history of showing animosity towards anyone or anything that introduces fact and truth into an argument. Back in William Buckley's day, conservatives were justly respected as more likely to get their facts straight than liberals. It's one of the reasons I was a conservative growing up.

I wasn't addressing conservatives' views....just supporting 4con's & the
old badger's theme that there's an excess of snark towards fundies.
We don't need to be mean to make a point about religion or society.

But conservatives today -- they spend more time whining like you just did than getting their facts straight.

"Whining"? Oh, no, bruderherz.
I was just noting that your dismissal of 4con's & the badger's points was facile.

 

[Sunstone]

Whatever you think it "speaks volumes" about me -- that's fine. I take that as a personal dig. You're free to have your own opinion about me.

I don't dispute, nor do I care about the divorce rate of fundamentalists.

I have utter contempt for any display of contempt for rigorously conducted science. Period. Full stop. Even if the person doing it were my own mother. I do not respect irrationality in anyone.

Having said that, it seems I confused you and Oldbadger as both of you holding the same position. That you were not actually contesting the studies on irrational grounds, escaped me. My genuine apologies. I misunderstood you.

That doesn't keep this from being a discussion about bashing a group of people.

I don't even see where you presented documentation that I have overlooked in this discussion.

Please tell me how a high divorce rate shows that Fundamentalist spend their time fixing other people's marriages. Sure there are some very vocal and imposing types of people within that group. What groups is without the extremists?

But:


I'd like to see the stat's on how much time individual fundamentalists are spending on doing that -- and why the group as a whole should be held as guilty for the actions of some.

There's big difference between discussing beliefs/thoughts and discussing people -- groups of people.

You're right. I was bashing fundamentalists. I will continue to do so. They deserve it so long as there's substantial fact to what is being said. And there is substantial fact to (1) they have a higher divorce rate than most other groups, and (2) they are widely known for meddling in other people's affairs. If you wish to rationally dispute those facts, feel free to do so.

As for your point there's no evidence that their divorce rate is caused by their meddling, you're right. You're also nit-picking. That is, you're being truthful but ultimately irrelevant.

As for your point that most fundamentalists are not extremists, I find that a fair point, albeit I don't agree with it. But at least it isn't nit-picking. I think that even the relatively few fundamentalists who, say, are alright with gay marriage, tend to hold other views that are obnoxious to the freedoms of others. For instance, they may oppose women's reproductive rights, or even a couple's right to sleep together before marriage. They may express their opposition by voting for politicians who will attempt to restrict those rights. And they seem likely to donate to churches, charities, and religious organizations that will use their money to further the goal of fundamentalism to limit the rights of others. Most of the money currently flowing into Uganda in support of Ugandan politicians who want the death penalty for gays is coming from fundamentalist churches in the US. If you're a fundamentalist, just throwing dollars in the collection plate may help bigotry worldwide.

And don't worry , I am certain that nothing I have ever said on this board has ever stopped even one single fundamentalist from dumping on a gay couple. So, you can call it bashing all you want, but the fundamentalist agenda is in no danger from me.

 

[Debater Slayer]

Facts are often used to bash others.
And fundies are the low hanging fruit.
They have a valid point.

Generally, I don't see fundamentalists get bashed any more than religious minorities or atheists. It seems to me that a lot of fundamentalists just view being on equal footing with other groups when it comes to criticism as being "low-hanging fruit."

By the way, there are many benighted corners of the world where such arguments that supposedly attempt to be politically correct toward fundamentalists are used to justify suppressing and silencing any criticism toward them. So we can rest assured they won't be affected by some posts on an Internet forum.

 

[Revoltingest]

Generally, I don't see fundamentalists get bashed any more than religious minorities or atheists. It seems to me that a lot of fundamentalists just view being on equal footing with other groups when it comes to criticism as being "low-hanging fruit."
By the way, there are many benighted corners of the world where such arguments that supposedly attempt to be politically correct toward fundamentalists are used to justify suppressing and silencing any criticism toward them. So we can rest assured they won't be affected by some posts on an Internet forum.

On RF, I think we atheists are treated quite well compared to Xian & Muslim fundies.
But no matter what the general climate towards a particular group, we ought not
over-generalize & demonize people. Tis better to object to particular beliefs & acts.

 

[Sunstone]

Whatever you think it "speaks volumes" about me -- that's fine. I take that as a personal dig. You're free to have your own opinion about me.

I don't dispute, nor do I care about the divorce rate of fundamentalists. That doesn't keep this from being a discussion about bashing a group of people.

I don't even see where you presented documentation that I have overlooked in this discussion.

Please tell me how a high divorce rate shows that Fundamentalist spend their time fixing other people's marriages. Sure there are some very vocal and imposing types of people within that group. What groups is without the extremists?

But:


I'd like to see the stat's on how much time individual fundamentalists are spending on doing that -- and why the group as a whole should be held as guilty for the actions of some.

There's big difference between discussing beliefs/thoughts and discussing people -- groups of people.

I have utter contempt for any display of contempt for rigorously conducted science. Period. Full stop. Even if the person doing it were my own mother. I do not respect irrationality in anyone.

Having said that, it seems I confused you and Oldbadger as both of you holding the same position. That you were not actually contesting the studies on irrational grounds, escaped me. My genuine apologies. I misunderstood you.

You're right. I was bashing fundamentalists. I will continue to do so. They deserve it so long as there's substantial fact to what is being said. And there is substantial fact to (1) they have a higher divorce rate than most other groups, and (2) they are widely known for meddling in other people's affairs. If you wish to rationally dispute those facts, feel free to do so.

As for your point there's no evidence that their divorce rate is caused by their meddling, you're right. You're also nit-picking. That is, you're being truthful but ultimately irrelevant.

As for your point that most fundamentalists are not extremists, I find that a fair point, albeit I don't agree with it. But at least it isn't nit-picking. I think that even the relatively few fundamentalists who, say, are alright with gay marriage, tend to hold other views that are obnoxious to the freedoms of others. For instance, they may oppose women's reproductive rights, or even a couple's right to sleep together before marriage. They may express their opposition by voting for politicians who will attempt to restrict those rights. And they seem likely to donate to churches, charities, and religious organizations that will use their money to further the goal of fundamentalism to limit the rights of others. Most of the money currently flowing into Uganda in support of Ugandan politicians who want the death penalty for gays is coming from fundamentalist churches in the US. If you're a fundamentalist, just throwing dollars in the collection plate may help bigotry worldwide.

And don't worry , I am certain that nothing I have ever said on this board has ever stopped even one single fundamentalist from dumping on a gay couple. So, you can call it bashing all you want, but the fundamentalist agenda is in no danger from me.

I've been thinking about this, and I now believe you're right, 4consideration. Fundamentalists are probably too diverse a group to be properly characterized by one brush stroke, as I was doing. Thanks for bothering to correct my sloppy reasoning. I'll try to bear that in mind in the future and be more cautious about how I phrase things.

 

[Jeremy Mason]

Worse in the nation. Jeebers. Well, given we have over 300 religious non-profit organizations in town, and that tens of thousands of Evangelicals have flocked here lured by the promise of a "New Jerusalem in the Rockies", I'd say it's only natural marriages here should last less long than jobs.

Evangelicals would do well to quit spending so much time disapproving of everyone else's marriages, and spend a whole lot more time improving their own.

No doubt there is some reevaluating the value system regarding our religious transplants.

But, there is another factor and that is wealth distribution. I know there are happy poor married folks out there, but let face it, money has relevance in a marriage. Here's a map that show where the money is.

Colorado Springs, Colorado (CO) income map, earnings map, and wages data

 

[Alceste]

I'm very uncomfortable around guns, so I guess I'm not actually an American.

You are an American - an American communist who hates freedom!!!

 

[Alceste]

Isn't it likely that conservative protestants might be marrying younger (which correlates to a high divorce rate), or that people in red states tend to be poorer (which also correlates with a higher divorce rate)? Or having kids too soon, or too many of them?

My hypothesis is that if you are a young horny person battling your own libido for the sake of sexual "purity", and you've got very particular, gender-specific ideas about how your partner ought to behave, divorce is all but inevitable. And also a blessing, compared to an unhappy marriage.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Isn't it likely that conservative protestants might be marrying younger (which correlates to a high divorce rate), or that people in red states tend to be poorer (which also correlates with a higher divorce rate)? Or having kids too soon, or too many of them?

My hypothesis is that if you are a young horny person battling your own libido for the sake of sexual "purity", and you've got very particular, gender-specific ideas about how your partner ought to behave, divorce is all but inevitable. And also a blessing, compared to an unhappy marriage.

A blessing until you get thrown into Hell, perhaps...ahem...

Actually, I find your hypothesis pretty believable, if unproven. And your point about socio-economic considerations, and marriage age is well made. It would be interesting (but perhaps too much to ask) for a similar 'heat map' on both socio-economic status, and average age of marriage to be overlain on the divorce and religiosity maps I suppose. I'm certainly too lazy to do it.

(Does anyone else just like the sound of 'religiosity'? Not the meaning so much...just sounds kinda....ummm....why are you all looking at me??)