Divorce rates higher in states with gay marriage bans?

fivethirtyeight.com/2010/01/divorce-rates-appear-higher-in-states.html

Seems counter intuitive... Also doesn't say much about rates of marriage, and is over a short time period. Any one looked at this before?

It shows correlation, not causation.

Remember, that the list doesn’t reflect population growth, median age, median age at first marriage, religion (Catholics have a low divorce rate and are concentrated in the Northeast), income, nationality, etc. The states with gay marriage bans tend to be younger, poorer, more foreign, and more evangelical Protestant. And it’s the last condition (being an evangelical Protestant) which tends to lead to gay marriage bans.

Basically, they’re misusing demographic data to take a pot-shot at Evangelicals. Not cool. :mad: The fact is that devout religious faith is positively correlated with higher rates of marriage and lower divorce rates. Even among Evangelicals. Even in the Dirty South.

What nonsense!

Even kids can pick out the flaws in these stats

:thumbsup::thumbsup:

It’s not even a complete graph. Oklahoma was one of the states that changed their Constitution to state that marriage was between one man and one woman. I remember voting for it back during Bush’s second run for office. Find Oklahoma on that graph for me. You can’t do it, it’s not there. Now why do you suppose that is?

I just counted there are only 43 states listed on that graph. :hmmm:

[quote="kimmielittle, post:3, topic:182818"]
What nonsense!

Even kids can pick out the flaws in these stats

[/quote]

No kidding! This is just some random blogger picking out some CDC figures and then extrapolating his own (unreliable) data as a result. He doesn't even have all the states listed (um, where is California?). There's no real statistics going on. Just some appeal to some visual color-coding system he came up with which makes his assertions "obvious."

Ok, so Cali, Oklahoma are missing. Who else is missing?

Hawaii
Indiana
Georgia
Louisiana
and Minnesota

I’ve been seeing a lot of anti-Evangelical and anti-Catholic nonsense like this around the net lately. Could that be because we’re not playing nicely with others anymore? Expect to see much, much more of this garbage.
And we need to stick up for our Christian brethren when they’re being picked on. Even if I don’t agree with them on everything, they’re fighting the good fight and we need to have their back. We can bicker about Mary and the Eucharist at a later time. First things first.

I agree. I think one of the biggest things holding Christians back on the gay marriage, abortion/healthcare, and similar type issues is the general lack of cohesion between “denominations”. As a former Evangelical myself, I used to tell people straight up there were Christians, and non-Christians. I honestly felt (and still do) that there truly is supposed to be one single body of believers.

Our problem today is a part of the human condition. We have a tendency to create me against you, us against them, mentalities. As Catholics, I think we need to make more effort to support non-Catholic Christians when they are standing up for the right things. In the end, we’ll eventually find more support from our non-Catholic brothers/sisters I believe.

As for the correlation between divorce rates and gay marriage bans. I have a hard time seeing how banning gay marriages would cause married heterosexual couples to divorce.

Generally, those states that have gay marriage also have higher rates of cohabitation.

That affects the numbers of marriages\divorces.

pewsocialtrends.org/assets/flash/marriage/

Also article: pewresearch.org/pubs/1380/marriage-and-divorce-by-state

A state’s education levels, for example, tend to be associated with the median age at marriage and the multiple-marriage patterns of its residents. In states with high shares of college-educated adults, men and women marry at older ages, a finding supported by other research indicating that highly educated individuals marry later in life. In states with low shares of college-educated adults, adults are more likely than average to marry three or more times. In states with low income levels, men are more likely than average to have been married three or more times.

For this analysis, correlation also was tested between a state’s marriage or divorce statistics and the share of its 2008 presidential election vote that went Democratic. States with high shares of Democratic votes tended to have lower shares of currently married residents, lower shares of adults married at least three times and low rates of marriages within the previous year. Residents of states with high shares of Democratic votes tend to marry at older ages than residents of states with low shares of Democratic votes.

This analysis did not find a strong correlation between divorce statistics – either a state’s share of divorced adults or its rate of divorce within the previous year – and socioeconomic indicators (income and education) or 2008 presidential election patterns. There was a strong correlation, however, between young age at first marriage for women and a high divorce rate for women within the previous 12 months.

Correlation also was tested to see whether a state’s religiosity was associated with marriage and divorce patterns. Religiosity was expressed as the proportion of a state’s residents who said in response to a survey that religion was “very important” in their life.4 However, this analysis did not find a strong association between a state’s religiosity and its marriage or divorce patterns.

Two things happening at the same time does not mean one is causing the other.

However, its a reminder for us to be cautious even about studies that seem to show support for our beliefs since future studies could always overturn our understandings.

Perhaps we aren’t being fair to the person who compiled these data. For example, the omission of seven states from the tables does not mean the author was cherry picking data to fit his alleged thesis; those states were left out simply because they did not report their divorce rates to the CDC. Or again, many of the above posts suggest that the author is advocating a cause and effect relation between gay “marriage” and a state’s divorce rate, when in fact the author explicitly refuses to draw a causal conclusion from his tables. Indeed, he even proposes in passing some alternatives to such an interpretation. The most humorous of these was the suggestion that the states which forbid gay “marriage” do so because their own marriages are so poor that they do not want to expose anyone else to needless suffering.

In any event, we Catholics have nothing to fear in the possibility that future research may show that allowing gay “marriage” lowers the overall divorce rate. For, if the research were to show that, then it would only be a consequence of gay “marriage,” and Catholic teaching has always been anything but consequentialist.

I found the divorce rates on the CDC's website for anyone interested. With the exception of '99-'03, Oklahoma did list their divorce rates, yet this gentleman excluded them from the list. The other states did did not list their divorce rates between '06-'08. Between '90-'04 they listed them for certain years but not others.

CDC divorce from '90-'04

scroll down towards the bottom of the page for the list.
CDC divorce from '06-'08

In order to be included in the table, a state had to report its divorce rate to the CDC in both 2003 and 2008. Of course, the compiler of these data can be faulted for having chosen arbitrary years, but once he’d made this choice, the exclusion of Oklahoma and the other states was quite necessary.

[quote="chrysostim83, post:15, topic:182818"]
In order to be included in the table, a state had to report its divorce rate to the CDC in both 2003 and 2008. Of course, the compiler of these data can be faulted for having chosen arbitrary years, but once he'd made this choice, the exclusion of Oklahoma and the other states was quite necessary.

[/quote]

Do you know this blogger?

Nope. Aside from a wish to point out that our opposition to gay "marriage" depends more on relations of ideas than matters of fact, I just wanted to point out that the blogger who worked up the tables was actually very cautious about the conclusions that could be drawn from them. If you re-read his commentary you'll definitely be struck by how modest he is about what the data show.

[quote="chrysostim83, post:17, topic:182818"]
Nope. Aside from a wish to point out that our opposition to gay "marriage" depends more on relations of ideas than matters of fact, I just wanted to point out that the blogger who worked up the tables was actually very cautious about the conclusions that could be drawn from them. If you re-read his commentary you'll definitely be struck by how modest he is about what the data show.

[/quote]

I don't see that and yes I re-read his commentary.

[quote="NewEnglandPries, post:12, topic:182818"]
Two things happening at the same time does not mean one is causing the other.

However, its a reminder for us to be cautious even about studies that seem to show support for our beliefs since future studies could always overturn our understandings.

[/quote]

Agreed, correlation is not causation.

Both icecream sales and crime increase when the weather is hot - the numbers actually graph very close. Does anyone think elimating the sale of icecream lower the crime rate?

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.