Quote:
Originally Posted by minn_stat
I haven't attempted to address your "very specific reasons" yet because I'm still trying to get you to admit your earlier misstatements and errors, which when confronted about, you simply change the subject. Why would I want to do the work to dig up papers I researched several years ago when your modus operandi indicates you'll just conveniently change the subject?
The "half of all marriages end in divorce" false statistic, for example. It is demonstrably false. Yet you just change the subject. Oh, and here's a link for you on it.
http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/d/divorce.htm
But to address, at least in a limited way, your "very specific reasons" - the data don't have a link because I researched the information primarily the old fashioned way, at a university library. And I didn't keep real good track of my sources because it wasn't for a scholarly paper - I simply had engaged in conversation with an individual who liked what I had said and asked me to write it down for him. So I went to the library to get some sources to tie things together a bit more rigorously than I had been in conversation. I have since wished I had been more rigorous still. So I'd have to do much of the legwork again, and although that has some appeal to me, I don't realistically see me doing that other than making some attempt to see if I can find some of the sources on the internet.
You seem obsessed with numbers, and so I assume you overlooked Kiernan's discussion on the four stages of modern society. Norway, the United States, France, Spain, and others are all transitioning through these stages. All of these stages after stage 1 impact families and more specifically, out of wedlock birth rates. So the United States doesn't act as the control sample that you seem to think it does. According to Kiernan's model, our out-of-wedlock rate is skyrocketing because it is going through similar social transitions to those that raised Norway's 1990 rate to 39% in the first place, before homosexual marriage became legal there.
So the logic and the data you are employing to make your oh-so-smart-and-clever critique of my writing is in itself an atrocious misuse of logic and data, Cali. I have seen it fairly regularly in my career, people who take whatever data they can find and draw conclusions, thinking that the fact that they employ data makes their findings more valid and more impressive.
It is interesting to note that the United States' rate in 2005 was 38%, about the same that Norway's was when homosexual marriage was legalized. Do you have any evidence to show that we aren't just following the same path as Norway, and that legalizing homosexual marriage won't lead to the same rise in out-of-wedlock birth rates in the United States as we saw in Norway? If there is even a, say, 25% chance that a significant portion of such an increase is tied to the legalization of homosexual marriage, would you be willing to say that we at least ought to do more research and move more slowly, given the clear negative effects on children? Or do you say, "Damn the children, the homosexuals have rights"? |
You may be right that not half of all marriages end in divorce. I can't say for sure. I can say it is a statistic I have heard repeatedly, and your only citation to the contrary is a webpage I haven't ever heard of. According to the CDC, it was almost half for the years 2003-2005.
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr54/nvsr54_20.pdf
It certainly appears from the reputable data I have seen (and now posted) that the number is very close to 50%, if just below. You can argue it is at 33% which is clearly better than 50%, and I would be happy if it were that low. Of course, we are talking about whether or not marriage is a huge success (that was the debate, the rest of this is evidence supporting a position in that debate). Assuming 33% divorce rate (which doesn't take into consideration marriages that suffer from infidelity, people who split up without filing for divorce, spousal abuse that doesn't end in divorce, etc). Are you comfortable stating that marriage is an overwhelming success right now?
I didn't overlook the information you provided on "stages," but I didn't find it particularly helpful either. You noted that the stages were tied to liberalization of divorce laws and the use of contraceptives. Divorce and contraceptives apparently got the Scandinavian countries to Stage 3 in the model you cited, and you think gay marriage pushed them into Stage 4. So why aren't you proposing the elimination of divorce and contraceptives? It would seem in your model they are responsible for 75% of the problem.
I don't know how you measure the stages a nation as a whole are in, nor do I see how you can attribute gay marriage to the progression from one stage to another, particularly since the US rate of children born out of wedlock has been at a steady progression for decades now. The legality of gay marriage doesn't appear to have done anything to increase that rate in the US. It seems to be continuing just as before. You don't even bother to attempt to show causation, and when presented with evidence that there isn't similar causation in the US, you simply say "the US isn't a great control sample."
Perhaps Scandinavia isn't a great comparison, then (which your model also assumes- that all nations will progress exactly as Scandinavia has which also assumes that the stages are valid which also assumes that we can measure which stage a nation is in which also assumes we can statistically track the changes in stages through history which also assumes... you get the point).
Finally, you are also assuming that there is some difference between the effect on children born out of wedlock due to gay marriage that wouldn't otherwise be present due to homosexual cohabitation, civil unions, or homosexual sex in general. Why?
And of course I don't just say "damn the children." Please. What I do say is you haven't presented anything remotely compelling to support your conclusion.