http://news.aol.com/story/_a/divorce-unwed-parents-may-cost-billions/20080415093309990003OK First of all, notice the sponsors…
NEW YORK (April 15) – Divorce and out-of-wedlock childbearing cost U.S. taxpayers more than $112 billion a year, according to a study commissioned by four groups advocating more government action to bolster marriages.Sponsors say the study is the first of its kind and hope it will prompt lawmakers to invest more money in programs aimed at strengthening marriages. Two experts not connected to the study said such programs are of dubious merit and suggested that other investments – notably job creation – would be more effective in aiding all types of needy families….The study was conducted by Georgia State University economist Ben Scafidi. His work was sponsored by four groups who consider themselves part of a nationwide “marriage movement” – the New York-based Institute for American Values, the Institute for Marriage and Public Policy, Families Northwest of Redmond, Wash., and the Georgia Family Council, an ally of the conservative ministry Focus on the Family.
All those sponsors are Christian Right groups, right? The Born-again Christians?Then check out the stats…http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_dira.htm
11% of the adult population is currently divorced. 25% of adults have had at least one divorce during their lifetime. Divorce rates among conservative Christians were significantly higher than for other faith groups, and much higher than Atheists and Agnostics experience. George Barna, president and founder of Barna Research Group, commented: “While it may be alarming to discover that born again Christians are more likely than others to experience a divorce, that pattern has been in place for quite some time. Even more disturbing, perhaps, is that when those individuals experience a divorce many of them feel their community of faith provides rejection rather than support and healing. But the research also raises questions regarding the effectiveness of how churches minister to families. The ultimate responsibility for a marriage belongs to the husband and wife, but the high incidence of divorce within the Christian community challenges the idea that churches provide truly practical and life-changing support for marriages.”Religion % have been divorced Jews 30% Born-again Christians 27% Other Christians 24% Atheists, Agnostics 21%
So the protestants are bitching that unwed mothers and divorce are “costing taxpayers Billions (or at least they MAY), but THEY are the primary culprit! Maybe the federally-funded marriage “education” programs they sponsor should include a de-Christianizing program?
Actually this isn’t accurate. Marriage is a civil institution which can be officiated in a religious ceremony if desired but this is in no way required. My parents were married in a secular civil ceremony in the town hall and the same is possible here in the USA. A religiously officiated wedding uses the words “By the power vested in me by the state of (insert state) I now prounouce you married” and not the other way round. The legal power of marriage rests solely with the government of the USA.
No church or other religious institution is forced to marry anyone that they think is unworthy of marriage. Gays in MA are not suing the catholic church to perform their weddings but instead are seeking out churches who are gay friendly or are having secular civil ceremonies.
Marriage is and should remain a civil arrangement but should be extended to all people regardless of sexual orientation.
i smell a rat somewhere. the barna study referenced in the religioustolerance.org study was conducted in 1999. this study has been pulled from their website. the one referenced in phreedm’s post was just completed.
the barna group is xtian group dedicated to “facilitating spiritual transformation” [quote from their vision statement]
so is it possible they took a bunch of flack for the findings in the first study and did the second to tidy things up.
i don’t know which to believe, but either way it does not show or indicate a lot of difference statistically in divorce rates except if you factor education and income. that would be politically incorrect so i’m calling it a wash.
still stand by my statement that “atheists on the whole set and maintain higher moral and ethical standards for ourselves than xtians.”
yeah spending taxpayers money is the answer,i think not.no one is forcing these people to have sex outside of marriage or to break their marital vows we the taxpayers should not have to pay for their lack of judgement,self control.
off topic i wish ellen a safe an pleasant walk thru alabama and miss.that was a good story on mr.moore he was brave but wearing that billboard was not smart.also good story on the couple in missouri they sound like good loving parents with great kids.
Comment from: sayonara
So let me get this straight…instead of actually doing some research yourself, you’d rather make an assumption that would allow you to stand by your “unproven” point of view…?
That speaks volumes of exactly how interested you are in discovering truth in this world…
So much for the scientific method…
I would hazard a guess (a hypothesis, if you) that divorce rates could be influenced by whether or not the couples have lived together per-marriage. It seems to me that in southern states this might be kind of a no-no, and once the couple lives together they run into all sorts of problems. Its probably always been a problem, but back when the wife was expected to be subservient and divorce wasn’t even conceivable, living together before marriage didn’t matter.
To me the worst thing you could do is marry before you know you can actually live with the person. It would be intriguing to see some statistics for that, I’ll have to scrounge around for them.
damnit, that should read (a hypothesis, if you will)
I love it when people who believe in an invisible magical superbeing say stuff like that. Irony rules.
justinw said:
“I love it when people who believe in an invisible magical superbeing say stuff like that. Irony rules.”
my sentiments exactly.
to that i would add in reponse to phreedm:
first;since when does a telephone poll qualify as a “scientific method” of study?
second; i did do some research and discovered that there was a discrepancy in the data. did you?
third, i don’t have the time or interest to research everything fanatically the way you apparently do. the prison data is well published and accepted. that says more about morals and ethics than divorce data anytime.
Dave, thank you for the find. As a Christian, it pains and angers me to see such statistics among Christians, or people who claim to be Christian or born-again. I do think there are a lot of atheists like tyro:
Obviously, if you don’t get married, you can’t get divorced. But my guess (maybe someone has a link to some statistics) is that there are a large percentage of atheists who are (or have been) married. There can be tax and insurance benefits.
While I don’t advocate pre-marital sex, I do think Dave Silverman had some insight in the following quote:
Christians, especially young ones, probably feel more pressure to get married than atheists. My guess is it could be because they want to be married before they have sex (a terrible reason to get married), they lost their virginity to a person and therefore felt the need to marry them, or they just *pursue* marriage, rather than waiting until they’re positive they’ve found someone they can happily spend their life with like an atheist might tend to do. Arguably, it is easier for an atheist to wait as you do not have any obligation to save your virginity.
The second article Dave posted, the one about the Barna study, pointed some things that were insightful to the issue, as well. Until recently, I was a Catholic (I am now a “non-denominational Christian”). The Catholic church has a marriage process that makes other Christian churches’ processes seem like a drive-thru wedding chapel. Most require you to be a member, you have many interviews, counceling, etc. At least that was how it was at the churches I attended. So many Christian churches out there have the theory of, “Oh, you’d like to get married? When are you free?”
Not to mention, there are thousands of Christian churches in this country that are only Christian in name. They’re ignorant of and/or completely lacking the gospel. Ever watched Joel Olsteen on TV? His idea of Christianity is “your path to greatness and accomplishment”, and the Bible is the equivalent of a Jim Cramer “Mad Money” book. Then there are the countless churches who select and skew scripture to fit their personal agendas, like Jeremiah Wright. Not to mention the scam artists on late-night infomercials selling two-for-one deals on miracle spring water and making old ladies jump out of wheelchairs.
I believe the church I’m involved with now is ideal in its structure, size and sense of community, and it has proved its effectiveness in helping struggling marriages. Without using names or anything, there is a young couple in our church who came very close to divorce. It was a classic case of a young girl getting married to the first guy she seriously dated out of high school, because she just wanted to be married. Well, when it became known to the church community (which is about 150 people, so everyone knows each other) that they were struggling, nearly everyone rallied around them, spent time with them, mentored them (long-lived couples), or some other type of help. I firmly believe they would have been divorced had they not been in this church. I also believe that Christians are called to not just be followers and believers individually, but in communities, for reasons just like that.
Anyway, thanks again Dave for articles. My dog is staring at me to go outside
Oh enough of the anecdotal nonsense! It proves nothing. The fact is that people sink a lot of resources into religion and achieve no positive and statistically significant outcomes. This thread highlights this fact once again.
All of the Vatican’s prayer and money wasn’t able to change the prevalence of pedophilia under their gold encrusted roofs.
… roofs as compared to the general population.
What i have to disagree somewhat with you i think that folks like uoflcard,spanders even phreedm get a full return on their money because they are not seeking wealth,power,sex.if religion gives them hope,comfort,joy no problem as long as our rights are respected.
i meant to say not using religion to seek wealth,power,sex.i could be wrong but they do not come across as that type.
uof…wrote:
Ahh yes, the good old “No True Scotsman” fallacy once again!
I can’t speak for phreedm, but I can tell you’re right about me not seeking wealth, power or sex out of religion. Also, I will always respect the rights of others to believe anything they choose or feel compelled to believe (outside of anything that causes harm to others). Will I always try to spread my beliefs? yes, and I understand why that upsets so many people. But I would never *impose* my beliefs, just present them and invite others. Ultimately, it is their decision and I will always respect that
perhaps I did exaggerate a little too far on that one. but my point still stands, that there are 1,000′s of churches that are Christian because they believe that Jesus is the Son of God, sacrificed for our sins, etc. But they preach, teach and walk completely different lives than Christians are called to in the gospel. Just a couple of the examples of the selective teaching of scripture are Jeremiah Wright and Joel Olsteen. Wright has spoken some of the most angry, hateful words of any pastor I’ve ever seen, even though the Bible calls us to love our enemies (in his case, every non-black, non-poor person, and the government). Olsteen preaches the bible to hundreds of thousands of people around the country and world, basically telling them that if you follow Jesus, your dreams and aspirations will come true. Well what about the scripture that says leave your cares and desires behind and let God lead you? I’ve seen hours of his preaching, and I’ve *never* seen him mention the salvation from our sins by Jesus…this is the CORE teaching of the Bible! Whether you believe it or not, it is clear that Olsteen (just as an example of hundreds and hundreds of other churches), does not teach this CENTRAL message of the Bible. It would be like going to a school to learn physics, and they never mention F=ma
adding on to that post…
No church or Christian is perfect, because we are sinful by nature. The only perfect person spiritually was Jesus. But there are churches that do a MUCH better job than others of teach and living how the Bible has called Christians to do. That is what I meant by “only Christian in name”
From David Silverman…
Something that occured to me…if all adults had lots of pre-marital sex, wouldn’t that lead to *lots* more single, unwed parents (which is the point of this survey?) Not all of that tax money is spent on just divorced parents. I’m sure a lot of it goes to those who were never marreid in the first place.
Just a thought, and I’m not saying that scenario is exclusively atheist, or anything. I really don’t mean for it to be applied to any specific religious/non-religious group
“Safe sex” is to protect oneself against STD’s and pregnancy when either you are unable to provide for a child and/or unwilling. Sexually active adults should be responsible with their toys.
Can’t argue with that.
Sin is a word used only by religious nutjobs.
It didn’t take you long to transition into your fantasy world.
Sorry but all the resources that you theists spend in support of your fantasy world does not have any statistically significant effect on behavior. You’re wasting your money and your time.
Reason
Ah, but I stated that they sink lots of “resources into religion and achieve no positive and statistically significant outcomes”. Show me objective data that supports any other conclusion.