Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

NYT debunked on divorce rates in red states (JUNK SCIENCE!)
Freeper Analysis ^ | 11-16-2004 | Beelzebubba

Posted on 11/16/2004 9:30:12 AM PST by Atlas Sneezed

In a recent New York Times Article, Pam Belluck asked the question: "If blue states care less about moral values, why are divorce rates so low in the bluest of the blue states?" Pam's article went on to cite "divorce rates" from federal data showing that strongly pro-Kerry states have low divorce rates, while pro-Bush bible-belt states have high rates.

This is a deeply flawed misuse of statistics. The reported "divorce rate" is not the rate per marriage, but the rate per population. When one looks at CDC data, one finds that of the 10 states with the lowest ratio of divorces to marriage, half are blue states, half are red. The same 50-50 split holds true for the worst dozen states.

There appears to be no meaningful correlation between politics and divorce. Undoubtedly, because Kerry received most of his support from urban areas where young adults tend to defer marriage, many remain unmarried, and where unmarried gays congregate, the use of "divorce rates" per population creates a strong bias. (Would a higher "divorce rate" - per 1000 residents - among gays in San Francisco and Massachusetts have similar importance?)

The graph below shows the data, with marriage meccas Nevada and Hawaii topping the list with lowest number of divorces per marriage. College havens in New England also are high on the list, perhaps in part due to the number of young adults who live there at the time they get married, but who depart soon after, before potentially divorcing.

2004 presidential election winner is indicated by color, with a dark color indicating that the wonner took at least 55% of the state's vote.

1999 (latest) CDC data, which is incomplete for 4 states (including California) and the District of Columbia.

Data source:

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr48/48_19_3.pdf

Chart data here:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1281125/posts?page=13#13


TOPICS: Culture/Society; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: abortion; bias; divorce; mediabias; msm; nytimes
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-35 next last
Original NYT article here:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1279756/posts

1 posted on 11/16/2004 9:30:12 AM PST by Atlas Sneezed
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Beelzebubba

Of course, people who never get married never divorce. Look at how low the marriage rate is in some of those blue states.


2 posted on 11/16/2004 9:34:10 AM PST by dangus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Beelzebubba

Umm.. I may be missing something, but it doesn't seem to make a whole lot of sense to compare new marriages in a specific year with new divorces in a specific year. Seems like lots of local circumstances could fluctuate those numbers. If there were a way to look at how many total married people are in a state, and then divide the number of divorces by that number, it would be more meaningful, IMO.


3 posted on 11/16/2004 9:36:36 AM PST by cwd26
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dangus

Those aren't marriage "rates," they are total numbers (in thousands). You need to divide by population to get a useful rate.


4 posted on 11/16/2004 9:37:07 AM PST by Atlas Sneezed (Your Friendly Freeper Patent Attorney)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Beelzebubba

I quote the NYT article "In 2003, the rate in Massachusetts was 5.7 divorces per 1,000 married people, compared with 10.8 in Kentucky, 11.1 in Mississippi and 12.7 in Arkansas."

Unless they're lying (something I wouldn't put past them), they're using Divorces/Married People, not Divorces/People.


5 posted on 11/16/2004 9:40:43 AM PST by cwd26
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: cwd26

If there were a way to look at how many total married people are in a state, and then divide the number of divorces by that number, it would be more meaningful, IMO.



I agree. Have at it! Or send me the married population of each state in a usable (Excel) format, and I will post the results.

But I have at least shown that the NYT's use of divorce rate per population is deceptive junk. Odds are that there are at most very subtle differences among the states, and there is no reasons to suspect that conservative states tend to have more divorce, as was irresponsibly alleged.


6 posted on 11/16/2004 9:40:47 AM PST by Atlas Sneezed (Your Friendly Freeper Patent Attorney)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Beelzebubba

Heck...before you can even have a divorce you have to have a marriage. The problem with this study is that liberals don't even meet the original prerequisite.


7 posted on 11/16/2004 9:40:48 AM PST by cwb (Red Dawn: A New Morning in America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dangus

For example... Massachusetts had about the same number of marriages as South Carolina, despite having nearly double the population. Tennessee has a smaller population than Mass., but double the number of weddings. Iadho and RI are similar in population, but Idaho has twice the number of marriages.

Why is this? Because the only people who get married in blue states are the ones in the strongest relationships. Trying to make this political is silly: Church-going Catholics, for instance, get divorced rarely, in part because of premarital programs and in part becuase the church discourages divorce. But Kerry lost the Catholic vote, even in Massachusetts, even among Catholics in general. And churchgoing Catholics were twice as likely as non-churchgoing Catholics to vote Republican.


8 posted on 11/16/2004 9:41:49 AM PST by dangus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: cwd26

I quote the NYT article "In 2003, the rate in Massachusetts was 5.7 divorces per 1,000 married people, compared with 10.8 in Kentucky, 11.1 in Mississippi and 12.7 in Arkansas."



I misread. They are cherry picking the data, and can not show a trend.


9 posted on 11/16/2004 9:42:25 AM PST by Atlas Sneezed (Your Friendly Freeper Patent Attorney)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Beelzebubba

Yes, I did.


10 posted on 11/16/2004 9:42:31 AM PST by dangus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Beelzebubba
There appears to be no meaningful correlation between politics and divorce. Undoubtedly, because Kerry received most of his support from urban areas where young adults tend to defer marriage, many remain unmarried, and where unmarried gays congregate, the use of "divorce rates" per population creates a strong bias.

If people in blue states tend to be smarter about making marriage decisions, isn't that something we should celebrate? If people there put off marriage until they are ready and then stay in their marriages longer, isn't that a sign they are living their lives well?

Or, the reverse: if young people in red states are getting married early and divorcing at a high rate, isn't that a sign something is wrong?

11 posted on 11/16/2004 9:43:34 AM PST by xm177e2 (Stalinists, Maoists, Ba'athists, Pacifists: Why are they always on the same side?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Beelzebubba
9% divorce rate in Nevada, versus an 87% divorce rate in Oklahoma? Is that for real?
12 posted on 11/16/2004 9:46:47 AM PST by Physicist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Beelzebubba
Nevada has the lowest rate of divorce to marriage because millions of people go the Vegas to get married and then come back to Texas and get divorced.

Nevada gets credit for the marriage and Texas gets credit for the divorce.

13 posted on 11/16/2004 9:46:51 AM PST by bayourod (Specter's litmus test : "No Christian Judges")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Beelzebubba

Duh! Gay marriage is still illegal!


14 posted on 11/16/2004 9:47:04 AM PST by wannabeyank (The official Voice of Reason)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dangus

Yea... geez... guess they didn't take that factor into consideration!


15 posted on 11/16/2004 9:51:02 AM PST by johnny7 (“We blowed 'em up real good!” -John Candy & Joe Flaherty, SCTV)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Beelzebubba

manufactured news.


16 posted on 11/16/2004 9:51:11 AM PST by Reagan79 (Ralph Stanley Rocks!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Beelzebubba

Typical liberal

They have to lie and bend the statistics to suit their point of view. They must know they are being dishonest. What is the point of trying to move people to the left with lies?


17 posted on 11/16/2004 9:57:56 AM PST by oldbrowser (You lost the election.....................Get over it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Beelzebubba

Being divorced has nothing to do with morality. Being married has nothing to do with morality. Adultery, sodomy, abortion, etc.. have everything to do with morality.


18 posted on 11/16/2004 10:00:48 AM PST by Conspiracy Guy (Make everyday Veterans Day.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Physicist

9% divorce rate in Nevada, versus an 87% divorce rate in Oklahoma? Is that for real?



Nevada is an oddball because of all the people who go there to get married (generations ago, it used to be a destination for divorces, but not since states have liberalized their divorce laws.)

Oklahoma? I guess some research might indicate why people get divorced there. Something odd like reporting divorces form Indian reservations, but no marriages? Who knows?


19 posted on 11/16/2004 10:04:40 AM PST by Atlas Sneezed (Your Friendly Freeper Patent Attorney)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Beelzebubba

Can't get divorced if you NEVER GOT MARRIED!


20 posted on 11/16/2004 10:05:45 AM PST by SMARTY ('Stay together, pay the soldiers, forget everything else." Lucius Septimus Severus, to his sons)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-35 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson