Bible bashers are sinful and the liberals pure

[Neil D]

[:"blue"] Found this interesting article. It is a commentary, and the stats have not been checked. However, assuming that the author is even close, it is something to ponder about. [/]

Comment: Andrew Sullivan: Where the Bible bashers are sinful and the liberals pure

When America sat down last week for its annual rite of national Thanksgiving, some would argue that two different nations celebrated: upright, moral, traditional red America and the dissolute, liberal blue states clustered on the periphery of the heartland. The truth is much more complicated and interesting.

Take two iconic states: Texas and Massachusetts. In some ways they were the two states competing in the last election. One is the home of Harvard, gay marriage, high taxes and social permissiveness.

The other is Bush country, solidly Republican, traditional and gun-toting. Massachusetts voted for John Kerry over George W Bush 62% to 37%; Texas voted for Bush over Kerry 61% to 38%.

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 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 crime, has a divorce rate of 4.1.

A fluke? Not at all. The states with the highest divorce rates are Alabama, Arkansas, Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Mississippi, North Carolina, Oklahoma, South Carolina and Texas. The states with the lowest divorce rates are: Connecticut, Massachusetts, Maine, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island and Vermont.

Every one of the high divorce rate states went for Bush. Every one of the low divorce rate states went for Kerry. The Bible Belt divorce rate is roughly 50% higher than the national average.

Some of this discrepancy can be accounted for by the fact that couples tend to marry younger in the Bible Belt and many do not have the maturity to know what they are getting into. There is some correlation, too, between rates of college education and stable marriages, with the Bible Belt lagging behind a highly educated state such as Massachusetts.

The irony still holds, however. Those parts of America that most fiercely uphold what they believe are traditional values are not those parts where traditional values are healthiest. Hypocrisy? Perhaps. A more insightful explanation is that socially troubled communities cling to absolutes in the abstract because they cannot live up to them in practice.

Doesn’t being born again help to bring down divorce rates? Jesus was clear about divorce, declaring it a sin unless adultery was involved. A recent study found no measurable difference in divorce rates between those who are “born again” and those who are not; 29% of Baptists have been divorced, compared with 21% of Catholics. Moreover, a staggering 23% of married born agains have been divorced twice or more.

Teenage births? Again, the contrast is striking. In a state such as Texas where the religious right is strong and the rhetoric against teenage sex is gale-force strong, teen births as a percentage of all births are 16.1%. In liberal, secular Massachusetts they are 7.4%, less than half.

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.

Take abortion. America is one of the few western countries where the legality of abortion is still ferociously disputed. It is 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 with a country such as Holland, perhaps the epitome of social liberalism. Which country has the highest rate of abortion? It is not even close. America has a 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?

Even a cursory look at the leading members of the forces of social conservatism in America reveals the same pattern. Rush Limbaugh, the top conservative talk-radio host, has had three divorces and an addiction to painkillers. Bill O’Reilly, the most popular conservative television personality, just settled a sex harassment suit that indicated a highly active adulterous sex life. Bill Bennett, guru of the social right, was for many years a gambling addict. Bob Barr, the conservative Georgian congressman who wrote the Defense of Marriage Act, has had three wives. The states that register the highest ratings for Desperate Housewives, the hot new television show, are Bush states.

The complicated truth is that America is a divided and conflicted country. But it is a grotesque exaggeration to say that the split is geographical or correlated with Democrat and Republican states. Many of America’s biggest “sinners” are those most intent on upholding virtue. It may be partly because they know sin close up that they want to prevent its occurrence among others.

complete article

[Gerr]

As you know there is more to statistics than meets the eye. Consider these possibilities:

1) That screwing around by one spouse is grounds for divorce in conservative states, whereas tolerated and perhaps even considered normal by the liberals.

2) That there is a high concentration of Catholics in the northern blue states; divorce is a no no.

3) That illegitimate births in the red states is higher because abortion is a no no, whereas it is ok in the blue states?

4) That the devil works harder on believers than those he knows are already in his camp? <img src="/adventist/images/graemlins/mittelgr124.gif" alt="" />

5) That the theology which states that one remains saved no matter what one does may be contributing to this discrepancy between profession & practice?

Gerry

[Dr. Shane]

This article is typical SPIN where the author uses selective statistics to support his predetermined bais. This is the type of stuff that Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hanity do every day, three hours a day. Well, Sean Hanity gets a little extra time in the evening but Alan Combs is there to balance him out.

[Neil D]

You say that this is spin...Where is your stats to support that ?

Either shut up or put up, Shane....And I do hope that you will put up.... <img src="/adventist/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

[Dr. Shane]

In our home we slap little mouths that say "shut up". It does not reflect our high calling.

The author of the article is trying to show that a liberal state has more healthy families than a conservative state. While that could be true, it may have nothing to do with the reasons he has given. He is comparing southern states which also happen to be conservative to a northern state which happens to be liberal. The reason divorce rates in the south are higher than those in the north may have nothing to do with political preference.

That is why listeners of Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hanity are criticized as mind-numb robots. These idealogues feed out "facts" simular to these and many (not all) of their listeners eat it up hook, line and sinker.

[Tom Wetmore]

Reading the rest of the article, the part that Neil didn't post, tends to neutralize the knee-jerk defensive conservative response that it is just biased spin. I think it is revealing of how the rest of the world sees us. We Americans are conflicted idealists that consistently fail to live up to our "high calling" and most aggressively project our own faults on others in spasms of self-righteous indignation and judgment. Here is the rest of the article, FWIIW:

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />

Some of those states that have the most liberal legal climate — the northeast and parts of the upper Midwest — are also in practice among the most socially conservative. To ascribe all this to “hypocrisy” seems to me too crude an explanation. America is simply a far more complicated and diverse place than crude red and blue divisions can explain.

The spasms of moralism that have punctuated American history from the Puritans all the way through prohibition and now the backlash against gay marriage are not a war of one part of the country against another. They are a war within the souls of all Americans.

Within many a red state voter there is a blue state lifestyle. And within many a blue state liberal there is a surprisingly resilient streak of moralism. It is this internal conflict that makes America such a vibrant and compelling place.

The conflict exists perhaps most powerfully within the Republican states themselves as they grapple with the “sin” of their own practices and the high standards of their own aspirations. It is worth remembering that Bill Clinton was a product of a Republican state and that for more than half his life Bush was a dissolute wastrel from a Democrat-state family.

These contradictions are not the exceptions. They are the American rule. If you love this tortured and fascinating country they are one more reason to be thankful that it still exists.

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

[Dr. Shane]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />

We Americans are conflicted idealists that consistently fail to live up to our "high calling"

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

I think the words "Speak for yourself" are appropriate. If someone can't see the spin in that story, they just can't see spin. I am not a top. I don't spin.

[Parade Orange]

the sacredness of marriage

[Neil D]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />

If someone can't see the spin in that story, they just can't see spin. I am not a top. I don't spin.

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

You do too spin...Your post is spin.

Evidence: While you present NO facts to suport your claims, you, instead, disparage anyone who agrees with the article...As Captain Hook [in Peter Pan]says "Bad form! Baaaad Form!"...Your post implys that everyone is stupid for agreeing with the article. And I say to you, Shane, bad form...Baaad form...

I fear that a debating teacher would give you demerits for your reply. <img src="/adventist/images/graemlins/smirk.gif" alt="" />

[olger]

A simple question:

Did someone confuse Bible Thumper with Bible basher? This headline makes very little sense to me.

olger

[Neil D]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />

olger said:

A simple question:

Did someone confuse Bible Thumper with Bible basher? This headline makes very little sense to me.

olger

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

And what does this question have to do with the thrust of the article - [:"green"] socially troubled communities cling to absolutes in the abstract because they cannot live up to them in practice and therefore legislate those values? [/]

[olger]

Dear Neil: The National price index has risen 3.2 in the last fiscal quarter and there has not been a corresponding increase in the funds allocated to....

What is a Bible Basher? and how is it different from a Liberal?

thanks

[Dr. Shane]

The term SPIN is commonly used within political circles. I use the word so that everyone knows what I am trying to say. Both sides SPIN and I think it takes conscience effort not to SPIN.

Take a look at how the author states the divorce statistics:

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />

But in 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 crime, has a divorce rate of 4.1.

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

Although I have read a lot of books and articles about marriage and divorce, I have never seen the statisics stated in that way. What I usally see is the percentage of marriages that end in divorce, not the ratio divorces per the population. So that alone causes one to raise their eyebrows and the SPIN dectector starts to make noise.

Then comes the cause and effect relationship. If the percentage of marriages that end in divorce is actaully greater in the south than it is in the northeast, what evidence does the author give that it is impacted by the political preference of the south? Again, it seems the author is leading us to water in hopes that we will drink without asking questions.

Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hanity do this same kind of thing. Once in a while they get a good caller that calls them on it and they have a good discussion. However most of the time they go unchallendged.

[Bravus]

i think 'bible bashers' is a term for those who tend to bash others with the bible... bible thumpers would be those who pound the pulpit or whatever... just regional variations in terminology.

perhaps it can be called spin, but do we have the divorces-per-marriage stats for Texas and Massachusetts? Are they comparable to those quoted, or to one another? i think there's a pretty solid difference notable on all sorts of measures. the author's suggested explanation - even if he is trying to be charitable - is pure speculation...

bottom line: "christians, you got some 'splainin' to do!"

[Dr. Shane]

There ara a lot of differences between the northeast and the southern United States. There is a greater lower economic class in the south. There are more racial minorities in the south. There are more protestants in the south. There are more immirgrants in the south. The public school systems are all different. So there are a lot of things to consider.

[Neil D]

Divorce rate by state can be view from here-

StateMaster-Lifestyles-divorce rate

DEFINITION: Divorce rate by state. Data does not include Oklahoma, Louisiana and Indiana. Data for California is from 1990. All other data is from 2002.

And the population stats for texas is thus-

Population, 2005 estimate 22,859,968

And the poulation stats for Mass. is thus-

Population, 2005 estimate 6,398,743

Source: US Census

While I know that these stats are not from the author's sources, they are comparable...and the article is dated, if I remember correctly...Still, the implications are interesting....

[Neil D]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />

There ara a lot of differences between the northeast and the southern United States. There is a greater lower economic class in the south. There are more racial minorities in the south. There are more protestants in the south. There are more immirgrants in the south. The public school systems are all different. So there are a lot of things to consider.

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

Which the article attempts to point out. But you missed the main thrust of the article which is this....

[:"green"] The irony still holds, however. Those parts of America that most fiercely uphold what they believe are traditional values are not those parts where traditional values are healthiest. Hypocrisy? Perhaps. [/] [:"red"] A more insightful explanation is that socially troubled communities cling to absolutes in the abstract because they cannot live up to them in practice. [/]

They seek to legislate that which they don't understand....an outgrowth of the philosophy that if they can not control it, then they kill it.

[Dr. Shane]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />

They seek to legislate that which they don't understand....an outgrowth of the philosophy that if they can not control it, then they kill it.

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

and more SPIN...

I am not a top, please do not try to spin me.

[Dr. Shane]

SPIN is reporting a story in a way to try and convince the readers/viewers/listeners to believe the same as the reporter.

In order not to SPIN, one needs to present all sides of a story from the various view points. That is very hard for one person to do. Bill O'Reilly is known for the "No Spin Zone" but that isn't to say that he doesn't spin the news himself. What he does is invite guests on his program that disagree with him so that the viewers can be exposed to more than just his prespective to a given story.

In this report, it seems, the arthor is trying to convince the reader to agree that a more libertarian approach to governoring produces better morality. That would mean that with alcohol legal, we actually have less people drinking than when it was illegal - which is false. It would mean nations with legal abortion actually have less abortion per captia than nations where abortion is illegal - which is false. While not everyone in a given society will abide by its laws, the behavior of most will be impacted by what is and what is not illegal.

[Dr. Shane]

I will add this...

The best no-spin newsman I have seen is NBC's Tim Russert. I know he use to work for a Democrat senator so he is probbally a Democrat but he does an excellent job on Meet The Press and handling election night coverage.

[bevin]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />

In this report, it seems, the arthor is trying to convince the reader to agree that a more libertarian approach to governoring produces better morality. That would mean that with alcohol legal, we actually have less people drinking than when it was illegal - which is false. It would mean nations with legal abortion actually have less abortion per captia than nations where abortion is illegal - which is false.

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

That is NOT what this author is arguing. He does not claim that making activities legal reduces their incidence.

He is arguing is that states WITH higher rates regardless of the cause THEN pass laws to stop the activity.

The relevant quote is this...

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />

A more insightful explanation is that socially troubled communities cling to absolutes in the abstract because they cannot live up to them in practice.

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

In short, they are not fixing the CAUSE of the failure - they are just putting a lid on the boiling pot, without turning off the burner.

/Bevin

[Neil D]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />

They seek to legislate that which they don't understand....an outgrowth of the philosophy that if they can not control it, then they kill it.

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

and more SPIN...

I am not a top, please do not try to spin me.

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

What? As if you don't do it????

Name one abortion thread that doesn't have YOUR VALUES plastered at least once a page, or any other thread that doesn't reflect YOUR VALUES. You are always pushing your values as if they were SDA/church values. THAT's spin!

And there is more room for tolerance in Church values than your values, which have closer resembleance to the Republican NeoCon values, which has looked a good deal like the Beast's values. That is what is scary....An SDA pushing an agenda that resembles the mark of the Beast.

[Bravus]

Play nice, boys. (I'm not a mod here, just a friend, encouraging you to make your points civilly.)

[Dr. Shane]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />

He is arguing is that states WITH higher rates regardless of the cause THEN pass laws to stop the activity.

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

I took something else away from the article. I say he tied legal gay marriage to the divorce rates in the respective states. I don't see a connection nor that he was able to make one.

[Dr. Shane]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />

Name one abortion thread that doesn't have YOUR VALUES plastered at least once a page, or any other thread that doesn't reflect YOUR VALUES.

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

The name of the thread is "Abortion Again". I list six different political positions on abortion and a link to the church's official position, which I am in complete agreement with. (Guidelines on Abortion) I state I am not sure where I stand politically.

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />

the Republican NeoCon values, which has looked a good deal like the Beast's values.

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

Well, the "beast" is symbolically the same as the Northern King of Daniel 11. I agree that conservative Republican values can be called "beast" values. However (let's try not to spin) liberal Democrat values can also be called the values of the King of the South. So don't we really want to be in the middle - somewhere between a moderate conservative and a moderate liberal?