Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: MCWAY on June 26, 2011, 12:19:27 PM
-
UI study examines link between teen sex and divorce rate
A University of Iowa study found that women who make their sexual debut as young teens are more likely to divorce, especially if "the first time" was unwanted, or if she had mixed feelings about it.
Published in the April issue of the Journal of Marriage and Family, the analysis found that 31 percent of women who had sex for the first time as teens divorced within five years, and 47 percent divorced within 10 years. The divorce rate for women who delayed sex until adulthood was far lower: 15 percent at five years, and 27 percent at 10 years.
Author Anthony Paik, associate professor of sociology in the UI College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, examined the responses of 3,793 ever-married women to the 2002 National Survey of Family Growth.
A first sexual experience that was unwanted or not completely wanted was strongly associated with divorce. If the young woman chose to lose her virginity as a teen, the results were more nuanced.
When the first intercourse took place early in adolescence –- before the age of 16 –- the women were more likely to divorce, even if that first sexual experience was wanted.
If the young woman waited until age 16 or 17 and the first sex was wanted, there was no direct link to dissolution down the road. But, while the sex itself did not increase the likelihood of a marital split, other factors related to sexuality -– such as a higher number of sexual partners, pregnancy, or out-of-wedlock birth -– increased the risk for some respondents.
Thirty-one percent of women who experienced adolescent sexual debut had premarital sex with multiple partners, compared to 24 percent of those who waited. Twenty-nine percent experienced premarital conceptions, versus 15 percent who waited. And, one in four women who had sex during their teenage years had a baby before they were married, compared to only one in ten who held off.
"The results are consistent with the argument that there are down sides to adolescent sexuality, including the increased likelihood of divorce," Paik said. "But there's also support for the 'more sex positive' view, because if a teen delays sex to late adolescence and it is wanted, that choice in itself doesn't necessarily lead to increased risk of divorce."
Only a small percentage of women who had sex before age 18 said it was completely wanted. Just 1 percent chose to have sex at age 13 or younger, 5 percent at age 14 or 15, and 10 percent at age 16 or 17. Another 42 percent reported first sexual intercourse before age 18 that was not completely wanted, while the remaining portion of the sample waited until age 18 or older to have sex (wanted, 22 percent; unwanted, 21 percent).
Paik said there are a couple potential explanations for the link between teen sex and divorce.
"One possibility is a selection explanation, that the women who had sex as adolescents were predisposed to divorce. The attitudes that made them feel OK about having sex as teens may have also influenced the outcome of their marriage," Paik said. "The other possibility is a causal explanation –- that the early sexual experience led to the development of behaviors or beliefs that promote divorce."
In a statistical analysis, he found more evidence for the latter, suggesting that the sexual experiences as a teen affected the marriage. The results related to unwanted sex supported his hunch. Nevertheless, he cautions that it is too early to rule out the selection explanation.
"If the sex was not completely wanted or occurred in a traumatic context, it's easy to imagine how that could have a negative impact on how women might feel about relationships, or on relationship skills," Paik said. "The experience could point people on a path toward less stable relationships."
Limitations of the study included a lack of information on respondents' work status, which is often used as a control factor in divorce research, and the fact that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention data included some imputed values. Paik arrived at the same results by excluding the imputed figures, but would like to repeat the study with the new 2006-08 data to confirm that the findings still hold.
"It's a timely topic, given the current debate over the sexualization of girls," Paik said. "This study tries to provide some answers about adolescent sexuality and the risk of marital dissolution, and the results show that both the context and early onset of first intercourse are associated with divorce."
http://news-releases.uiowa.edu/2011/june/061411paik_study.html (http://news-releases.uiowa.edu/2011/june/061411paik_study.html)
GENIUS!!!! ::)
REALLY!!!???
These folks needed the University of Iowa to tell them something that their Sunday School teacher or "Rev." could have told them (and probably already had, DECADES AGO)?
-
I haven't read post yet but
Baptists have the highest rate of divorce
Atheist is the lowest
-
I haven't read post yet but
Baptists have the highest rate of divorce
Atheist is the lowest
What's their marriage rates? I've heard people tout low marriage rates among populations which happen to have a much lower amount of religious affiliation. They also have lower marriage rates, overall. You can't get divorced if you don't get married.
-
What's their marriage rates? I've heard people tout low marriage rates among populations which happen to have a much lower amount of religious affiliation. They also have lower marriage rates, overall. You can't get divorced if you don't get married.
I don't think its overall. I think its in proportion. It's been a year since I've read the article.
-
Who cares.
-
I haven't read post yet but
Baptists have the highest rate of divorce
Atheist is the lowest
Baptists have the highest rate of divorce? Will you please post a link?
-
Who cares.
Are you and Jezebelle married ?
-
Baptists have the highest rate of divorce? Will you please post a link?
I typed in "baptist, divorce rate" on google and this is the first result.
http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_dira.htm
-
I typed in "baptist, divorce rate" on google and this is the first result.
http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_dira.htm
Ah, the bias "religioustolerance.org"! Or should I say "Christian Intolerance"?
Take a close look at your link. Their references will take you to this review of their findings, which contradicts what they are claiming:
http://www.adherents.com/largecom/baptist_divorce.html
Divorce has much more to do with economic status, educational level, co-habitation and age of marriage rather than religious conviction.
"People who marry late, earn high incomes and are well-educated have lower divorce rates, studies show"
The Bible belt, where Baptist are concentrated, just happens to be one of the poorest, most uneducated parts of the US.
-
Ah, the bias "religioustolerance.org"! Or should I say "Christian Intolerance"?
Take a close look at your link. Their references will take you to this review of their findings, which contradicts what they are claiming:
http://www.adherents.com/largecom/baptist_divorce.html
Divorce has much more to do with economic status, educational level, co-habitation and age of marriage rather than religious conviction.
"People who marry late, earn high incomes and are well-educated have lower divorce rates, studies show"
The Bible belt, where Baptist are concentrated, just happens to be one of the poorest, most uneducated parts of the US.
It goes with that old saying, "God gave Adam a JOB, before He gave Adam a wife".
And, as you just mentioned, there's the cohabitaton (aka "shacking up") factor. When there's cohabitation, there's usually FORNICATION. And, as this study shows this plays into divorce.
Plus, from the link you provided:
There might be one more reason to question Mr. Barna's survey and many other studies of religious people the hazards of self-identification.
Bill Johnson certainly doesn't deny that Christians are getting divorced. He's divorced himself. He and his second wife, Donna, co-teach Rebuilders, Prestonwood Baptist's ministry to remarried couples. Some people in the class have been married two and three times.
But Mr. Johnson is also a therapist and federal probation officer. His work experience has caused him to note that it's awfully popular to be Baptist. "When I interview criminals going into prison or coming out of prison, most of them are Baptists," he said, laughing. "Everybody seems to be a Baptist, even if they're not religious or Christian." Dr. Nancy T. Ammerman thinks Mr. Johnson has a point.
What does it mean when someone claims to be a Christian, she asks? "In this country, the vast majority of people define themselves as Christians," said Dr. Ammerman, professor of the sociology of religion at Hartford Seminary in Connecticut. "People have a particular denomination with which they identify. That does not mean that they go to church or that they even know anything about that denomination." Southern Baptists are the largest Protestant denomination in the country, and nondenominational churches cover a wide spectrum of beliefs.
-
The Bible belt, where Baptist are concentrated, just happens to be one of the poorest, most uneducated parts of the US.
Interesting.
-
Interesting.
Indeed.
Now, I see (somewhat) why they had the parents set-up the marriages back in the day.
How did that R&B song go again, from back in the day, "Ain't nothin' goin' on but the rent...."
-
Ah yes lets suppress a natural urge - sex with more monogamous lies. Sorry mcway but we were not originally monogamous as a species. HTH.
-
Ah yes lets suppress a natural urge - sex with more monogamous lies. Sorry mcway but we were not originally monogamous as a species. HTH.
Let your girlfriend/wife have some other dude, lay the pipe to her and see how much you brush it off as just a natural urge.
-
I can't type with the entire post quoted.
I don't understand your point. I never claimed that being a baptist will cause someone to become divorced. I only said the two were correlated.
-
UI study examines link between teen sex and divorce rate
A University of Iowa study found that women who make their sexual debut as young teens are more likely to divorce, especially if "the first time" was unwanted, or if she had mixed feelings about it.
Published in the April issue of the Journal of Marriage and Family, the analysis found that 31 percent of women who had sex for the first time as teens divorced within five years, and 47 percent divorced within 10 years. The divorce rate for women who delayed sex until adulthood was far lower: 15 percent at five years, and 27 percent at 10 years.
Author Anthony Paik, associate professor of sociology in the UI College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, examined the responses of 3,793 ever-married women to the 2002 National Survey of Family Growth.
A first sexual experience that was unwanted or not completely wanted was strongly associated with divorce. If the young woman chose to lose her virginity as a teen, the results were more nuanced.
When the first intercourse took place early in adolescence –- before the age of 16 –- the women were more likely to divorce, even if that first sexual experience was wanted.
If the young woman waited until age 16 or 17 and the first sex was wanted, there was no direct link to dissolution down the road. But, while the sex itself did not increase the likelihood of a marital split, other factors related to sexuality -– such as a higher number of sexual partners, pregnancy, or out-of-wedlock birth -– increased the risk for some respondents.
Thirty-one percent of women who experienced adolescent sexual debut had premarital sex with multiple partners, compared to 24 percent of those who waited. Twenty-nine percent experienced premarital conceptions, versus 15 percent who waited. And, one in four women who had sex during their teenage years had a baby before they were married, compared to only one in ten who held off.
"The results are consistent with the argument that there are down sides to adolescent sexuality, including the increased likelihood of divorce," Paik said. "But there's also support for the 'more sex positive' view, because if a teen delays sex to late adolescence and it is wanted, that choice in itself doesn't necessarily lead to increased risk of divorce."
Only a small percentage of women who had sex before age 18 said it was completely wanted. Just 1 percent chose to have sex at age 13 or younger, 5 percent at age 14 or 15, and 10 percent at age 16 or 17. Another 42 percent reported first sexual intercourse before age 18 that was not completely wanted, while the remaining portion of the sample waited until age 18 or older to have sex (wanted, 22 percent; unwanted, 21 percent).
Paik said there are a couple potential explanations for the link between teen sex and divorce.
"One possibility is a selection explanation, that the women who had sex as adolescents were predisposed to divorce. The attitudes that made them feel OK about having sex as teens may have also influenced the outcome of their marriage," Paik said. "The other possibility is a causal explanation –- that the early sexual experience led to the development of behaviors or beliefs that promote divorce."
In a statistical analysis, he found more evidence for the latter, suggesting that the sexual experiences as a teen affected the marriage. The results related to unwanted sex supported his hunch. Nevertheless, he cautions that it is too early to rule out the selection explanation.
"If the sex was not completely wanted or occurred in a traumatic context, it's easy to imagine how that could have a negative impact on how women might feel about relationships, or on relationship skills," Paik said. "The experience could point people on a path toward less stable relationships."
Limitations of the study included a lack of information on respondents' work status, which is often used as a control factor in divorce research, and the fact that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention data included some imputed values. Paik arrived at the same results by excluding the imputed figures, but would like to repeat the study with the new 2006-08 data to confirm that the findings still hold.
"It's a timely topic, given the current debate over the sexualization of girls," Paik said. "This study tries to provide some answers about adolescent sexuality and the risk of marital dissolution, and the results show that both the context and early onset of first intercourse are associated with divorce."
http://news-releases.uiowa.edu/2011/june/061411paik_study.html (http://news-releases.uiowa.edu/2011/june/061411paik_study.html)
GENIUS!!!! ::)
REALLY!!!???
These folks needed the University of Iowa to tell them something that their Sunday School teacher or "Rev." could have told them (and probably already had, DECADES AGO)?
And in the least surprising news of the day . . . . :)
-
I can't type with the entire post quoted.
I don't understand your point. I never claimed that being a baptist will cause someone to become divorced. I only said the two were correlated.
Agreed! But, as the probation officer in the link Loco provided cites, many inmates identify themselves as "Baptists", even though they not even be Bible-believing Christians in practice.
People will often say they're Baptists, simply because their parents were (or are).
-
Let your girlfriend/wife have some other dude, lay the pipe to her and see how much you brush it off as just a natural urge.
She's not 'mine' i don't own her buddy. She can choose to do as she wishes as can I.
-
Study: Christian Divorce Rate Identical to National Average
After months of revived debate over divorce and its increasing acceptance among Americans, a new study affirmed born again Christians are just as likely as the average American couple to divorce. The Barna Group found in its latest study that born again Christians who are not evangelical were indistinguishable from the national average on the matter of divorce with 33 percent having married and divorced at least once. Among all born again Christians, which includes evangelicals, the divorce figure is 32 percent, which is statistically identical to the 33 percent figure among non-born again adults, the research group noted.
http://www.christianpost.com/news/study-christian-divorce-rate-identical-to-national-average-31815/
-
Study: Christian Divorce Rate Identical to National Average
After months of revived debate over divorce and its increasing acceptance among Americans, a new study affirmed born again Christians are just as likely as the average American couple to divorce. The Barna Group found in its latest study that born again Christians who are not evangelical were indistinguishable from the national average on the matter of divorce with 33 percent having married and divorced at least once. Among all born again Christians, which includes evangelicals, the divorce figure is 32 percent, which is statistically identical to the 33 percent figure among non-born again adults, the research group noted.
http://www.christianpost.com/news/study-christian-divorce-rate-identical-to-national-average-31815/
IF they engage in the same behaviors (pre-marital sex, cohabitation, getting married too soon, too young without marital counseling, etc), that should be expected.
-
IF they engage in the same behaviors (pre-marital sex, cohabitation, getting married too soon, too young without marital counseling, etc), that should be expected.
well since their divorce rates are virtually identical I guess (if you believe the results of the study you posted) that they must engage in all the same behaviours.
-
well since their divorce rates are virtually identical I guess (if you believe the results of the study you posted) that they must engage in all the same behaviours.
Unfortunately, that may just be the case. I know, from personal experience of my friends and family, what engaging in these behaviors can do.
-
So which is it?
Do atheists have a lower divorce rate or do Christians?
-
Ozmo - I am out here in cali on family stuff, and must say - this has got to be the biggest collection of fuck ups, dopers, hippies, botoxed women, wierdos, freaks, and bozos I have ever seen.
A lot of homeless too.
-
Ozmo - I am out here in cali on family stuff, and must say - this has got to be the biggest collection of fuck ups, dopers, hippies, botoxed women, wierdos, freaks, and bozos I have ever seen.
A lot of homeless too.
Lol. Where are you in Cali?
And it can't be any worse than the Bronx.
-
Los angeles. Went down to venice beach and said to myself after some doper handed my a communist party pamphlet "this is the decline of america".
went to santa monica and went in the ocean. Nice there. A lot of german tourists. Family has a place in pacific palisades.
Went out and about to get a feel of the place. Gorgeos weather and scenery, but crazy traffic and the homes are priced so insanely expensive, I really thought I had seen it all. Tiny little single level ranch no basement nothing on a postage stamp is 875k. Insane.
-
And that's after the real-estate crash lol
Yeah LA is quite different than northern Cali where i am at.
That Venice beach area is nice though. If you are feeling frisky go to compton lol.
-
Don't know if feel like slumming.
-
Yeah. Jfk is disgusting. Walking through there is like the bronx zoo monorail.
The weather out here is insane. Went into the pacific ocean. Much nice than jones beach and orchard beach for sure. also no spanish music blasting and fat 250 lb puerto ricans in bikins.
-
Ozmo - I am out here in cali on family stuff, and must say - this has got to be the biggest collection of fuck ups, dopers, hippies, botoxed women, wierdos, freaks, and bozos I have ever seen.
A lot of homeless too.
family reunion?
-
Relative dying of cancer. Not that you care.
-
Relative dying of cancer. Not that you care.
I figured you would be able to tell I was just giving you some shit, making a joke, etc
-
I know. I was just trying to make you feel like shit.
-
I know. I was just trying to make you feel like shit.
I feel fine
you don't seem any different than usual
you somehow managed to find time to log on to GB and tell us about all the
"fuck ups, dopers, hippies, botoxed women, wierdos, freaks, and bozos"
-
On my phone. Have time to kill.
-
On my phone. Have time to kill.
sounds like any other day for you
no offense
just saying
-
So which is it?
Do atheists have a lower divorce rate or do Christians?
Have you not been reading, OzmO? :)
So far, studies show that it doesn't matter whether you are atheist or theist, Baptist or Mormon, Christian or not.
According to studies so far, the people who have the lowest divorce rate are those who never marry, or those who have few to no sexual partners before marriage, those who marry later in life, those who have a college degree, those who have a good income, who do not live with their partner before marriage. There are exceptions, but this seems to be the norm.
-
sounds like any other day for you
no offense
just saying
Get a room you two
-
According to studies so far, the people who have the lowest divorce rate are those who never marry,.....
Uh, maybe these researchers need a little vacation time?
-
Uh, maybe these researchers need a little vacation time?
I threw that in there just for humor. :)
-
So which is it?
Do atheists have a lower divorce rate or do Christians?
I thought I answered that. I believe Christians do, for three simple reasons.
One, there are WAY more of them (and more of them marry)
Two, there are fewer atheists (and fewer of them get hitched).
-
I thought I answered that. I believe Christians do, for three simple reasons.
One, there are WAY more of them (and more of them marry)
Two, there are fewer atheists (and fewer of them get hitched).
MCWAY, are you saying that for these two reasons Christians have a higher divorce rate? OzmO was asking who has the lowest.
-
MCWAY, are you saying that for these two reasons Christians have a higher divorce rate? OzmO was asking who has the lowest.
From the link you gave (or the ReligiousTolerance link), I thought it was the Lutherans.
I expect Christians to have higher marriage rates, because marriage is encouraged among believers. It follows that more of a group is getting hitched, there'd be more divorces or a higher divorce rates.
I also agree with the take you cited, regarding education and age being factors. As I said earlier, the quip goes that "God gave Adam a JOB before he gave him a wife."
Marriages were arranged by the parents, back in the day, for FINANCIAL reasons. If you have daugthers (as I do), you'd certainly don't want them marrying some broke pooh-butt who can't pay the bills.
To again cite that old-school 80s jam, "Ain't nothin' going on but the rent!!"
-
Los angeles. Went down to venice beach and said to myself after some doper handed my a communist party pamphlet "this is the decline of america".
went to santa monica and went in the ocean. Nice there. A lot of german tourists. Family has a place in pacific palisades.
Went out and about to get a feel of the place. Gorgeos weather and scenery, but crazy traffic and the homes are priced so insanely expensive, I really thought I had seen it all. Tiny little single level ranch no basement nothing on a postage stamp is 875k. Insane.
Ozmo - I am out here in cali on family stuff, and must say - this has got to be the biggest collection of fuck ups, dopers, hippies, botoxed women, wierdos, freaks, and bozos I have ever seen.
A lot of homeless too.
That's why you need to come to the Sunshine State. We got all the beauty, but far less of the weirdness, of California. Cost of living is cheaper, too.
-
UI study examines link between teen sex and divorce rate
A University of Iowa study found that women who make their sexual debut as young teens are more likely to divorce, especially if "the first time" was unwanted, or if she had mixed feelings about it.
Published in the April issue of the Journal of Marriage and Family, the analysis found that 31 percent of women who had sex for the first time as teens divorced within five years, and 47 percent divorced within 10 years. The divorce rate for women who delayed sex until adulthood was far lower: 15 percent at five years, and 27 percent at 10 years.
Author Anthony Paik, associate professor of sociology in the UI College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, examined the responses of 3,793 ever-married women to the 2002 National Survey of Family Growth.
A first sexual experience that was unwanted or not completely wanted was strongly associated with divorce. If the young woman chose to lose her virginity as a teen, the results were more nuanced.
When the first intercourse took place early in adolescence –- before the age of 16 –- the women were more likely to divorce, even if that first sexual experience was wanted.
If the young woman waited until age 16 or 17 and the first sex was wanted, there was no direct link to dissolution down the road. But, while the sex itself did not increase the likelihood of a marital split, other factors related to sexuality -– such as a higher number of sexual partners, pregnancy, or out-of-wedlock birth -– increased the risk for some respondents.
Thirty-one percent of women who experienced adolescent sexual debut had premarital sex with multiple partners, compared to 24 percent of those who waited. Twenty-nine percent experienced premarital conceptions, versus 15 percent who waited. And, one in four women who had sex during their teenage years had a baby before they were married, compared to only one in ten who held off.
"The results are consistent with the argument that there are down sides to adolescent sexuality, including the increased likelihood of divorce," Paik said. "But there's also support for the 'more sex positive' view, because if a teen delays sex to late adolescence and it is wanted, that choice in itself doesn't necessarily lead to increased risk of divorce."
Only a small percentage of women who had sex before age 18 said it was completely wanted. Just 1 percent chose to have sex at age 13 or younger, 5 percent at age 14 or 15, and 10 percent at age 16 or 17. Another 42 percent reported first sexual intercourse before age 18 that was not completely wanted, while the remaining portion of the sample waited until age 18 or older to have sex (wanted, 22 percent; unwanted, 21 percent).
Paik said there are a couple potential explanations for the link between teen sex and divorce.
"One possibility is a selection explanation, that the women who had sex as adolescents were predisposed to divorce. The attitudes that made them feel OK about having sex as teens may have also influenced the outcome of their marriage," Paik said. "The other possibility is a causal explanation –- that the early sexual experience led to the development of behaviors or beliefs that promote divorce."
In a statistical analysis, he found more evidence for the latter, suggesting that the sexual experiences as a teen affected the marriage. The results related to unwanted sex supported his hunch. Nevertheless, he cautions that it is too early to rule out the selection explanation.
"If the sex was not completely wanted or occurred in a traumatic context, it's easy to imagine how that could have a negative impact on how women might feel about relationships, or on relationship skills," Paik said. "The experience could point people on a path toward less stable relationships."
Limitations of the study included a lack of information on respondents' work status, which is often used as a control factor in divorce research, and the fact that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention data included some imputed values. Paik arrived at the same results by excluding the imputed figures, but would like to repeat the study with the new 2006-08 data to confirm that the findings still hold.
"It's a timely topic, given the current debate over the sexualization of girls," Paik said. "This study tries to provide some answers about adolescent sexuality and the risk of marital dissolution, and the results show that both the context and early onset of first intercourse are associated with divorce."
http://news-releases.uiowa.edu/2011/june/061411paik_study.html (http://news-releases.uiowa.edu/2011/june/061411paik_study.html)
GENIUS!!!! ::)
REALLY!!!???
These folks needed the University of Iowa to tell them something that their Sunday School teacher or "Rev." could have told them (and probably already had, DECADES AGO)?
I read this article too and thought the same thing. LOL "Ya Think???"
-
I read this article too and thought the same thing. LOL "Ya Think???"
I saw this on one of the TVs at my gym, before looking up this particular article.
I just laughed and shook my head in disbelief.
Only the "brilliant" minds of eggheaded researchers in liberal academia would spend hundreds of thousands (if not MILLIONS) of dollars, all to tell you something, that "Rev." has been telling you for years in church.
-
From the link you gave (or the ReligiousTolerance link), I thought it was the Lutherans.
I expect Christians to have higher marriage rates, because marriage is encouraged among believers. It follows that more of a group is getting hitched, there'd be more divorces or a higher divorce rates.
I also agree with the take you cited, regarding education and age being factors. As I said earlier, the quip goes that "God gave Adam a JOB before he gave him a wife."
Marriages were arranged by the parents, back in the day, for FINANCIAL reasons. If you have daugthers (as I do), you'd certainly don't want them marrying some broke pooh-butt who can't pay the bills.
To again cite that old-school 80s jam, "Ain't nothin' going on but the rent!!"
Yours is a very honest and logic answer. I agree with you!
-
divorce rocks. Flooding the market with desperate cougars and milfs. Smart move.
-
I thought I answered that. I believe Christians do, for three simple reasons.
One, there are WAY more of them (and more of them marry)
Two, there are fewer atheists (and fewer of them get hitched).
If 3000 Christians get married and 1000 get divorced and that's compared to 500 atheists getting married and 250 get divorced then Atheists would have a higher rate, but there would be more Christians getting divorced.
So my question isn't about who has more marriages or divorces. Obviously, there are far more "Christian Marriages" My question is who has a higher (or lower) rate? (percentage)
-
If 3000 Christians get married and 1000 get divorced and that's compared to 500 atheists getting married and 250 get divorced then Atheists would have a higher rate, but there would be more Christians getting divorced.
So my question isn't about who has more marriages or divorces. Obviously, there are far more "Christian Marriages" My question is who has a higher (or lower) rate? (percentage)
Bump
-
If 3000 Christians get married and 1000 get divorced and that's compared to 500 atheists getting married and 250 get divorced then Atheists would have a higher rate, but there would be more Christians getting divorced.
So my question isn't about who has more marriages or divorces. Obviously, there are far more "Christian Marriages" My question is who has a higher (or lower) rate? (percentage)
I answered your question. See my reply to Loco.
And, it appears that more universities are "discovering" the blatantly obvious again!!
FIRST-PERSON: Cohabitation & divorce -- there is a correlation
COLORADO SPRINGS, Colo. (BP) -- How many computers or cars do you think Toshiba and Toyota would sell if they didn't let you test them out first? Who in their right mind would make a big commitment of purchase without trying it out first?
But don't we do the same with marriage? We ask young people to make one of the biggest commitments of their lives -- rivaled only by their decision to become parents -- without any prior experience of what marriage is actually like.
More than 60 percent of marriages today are preceded by some form of cohabitation. And 75 percent of current cohabitors enter these relationships with some plans toward marriage, even seeing this live-in relationship as a smart move toward marriage. But does the experience of cohabiting teach couples things that help make them better spouses once they do marry? Does cohabitation contribute to stronger, happier marriages?
Unfortunately, it does not. Not even close!
This is a rare instance where there's a Grand Canyon sized chasm between what many young adults believe and the proven reality of their experience. And it is not the moralizing preachers and traditionalists saying so. A massive body of robust, diverse and conclusive scientific research on this question leaves no doubt about whether cohabiting is helpful to marriage. Graduate and postdoctoral seminars in sociology are held on this topic, and this is what they learn.
Sociologists investigating this question -- working from two leading schools of sociology, the Universities of Chicago and Michigan -- tell us clearly that the "expectation of a positive relationship between cohabitation and marital stability ... has been shattered in recent years by studies conducted in several Western countries, including Canada, Sweden, New Zealand, and the United States."
Their data indicates that people with cohabiting experience who marry have a 50 to 80 percent higher likelihood of divorcing than married couples who never cohabited. A Canadian sociologist explains:
"Contrary to conventional wisdom that living together before marriage will screen out poor matches and therefore improve subsequent marital stability, there is considerable empirical evidence demonstrating that premarital cohabitation is associated with lowered marital stability."
After surveying the data on this question, another leading scholar contends that the only conclusion one could honestly reach was to wholesale "reject the argument" that cohabitation contributes to stronger marriages.
In fact, if a couple wanted to substantially increase their likelihood of divorcing, there are few things they could do to so efficiently guarantee such an outcome than live together before marriage. In fact, this is such a consistent finding in the social science research that scholars have coined a term for it: "the cohabitational effect."
This finding has become a truism partly because the process of cohabiting itself is shown to influence couples to learn to communicate, negotiate and settle differences in ways that are less healthy and honest than do couples who didn't cohabit before marriage. This is probably because without a clearly defined relationship, the cohabiting couple can learn to be more controlling and manipulative with each other. And this leads to relational resentment and mistrust.
And this has nothing to do with social acceptance or rejection of living together. Doctors Claire Kamp-Dush and Paul Amato conducted a unique investigation that tracked two groups of cohabitors who eventually married: one that married between 1964 and 1980 and another that did so between 1981 and 1997. This allowed them to see if there were any changes in the cohabitation effect as cohabitation became more common and more accepted by society.
But they found "there was little evidence that the negative consequences of cohabitation dissipated over time as cohabitation became more prevalent." Even after controlling for various social and economic factors that could account for such a difference, they discovered premarital cohabitors in both groups were significantly more likely to have lower levels of marital happiness, more marital conflict, and higher levels of divorce.
"One of the most clearly defined correlates of cohabitation is an increased risk of marital dissolution," says professor Jay Teachman of Western Washington University. In a more recent examination of cohabitation's impact, he calls cohabitation one of the most "robust predictors of marital dissolution" -- making living together first one of the worst things you can do for your marriage. Teachman also warns that even premarital sex by itself is associated with an increased risk of marital disruption, though at lower rates than living together before marriage.
A 2010 "meta-analysis" looked at 26 peer-reviewed, published studies that followed various couples over time. This analysis found that marrieds who had cohabiting pasts were more likely to face divorce, and that "noncohabitors seem to have more confidence in the future of their relationship, and have less accepting attitudes toward divorce."
And as with other studies, the married couples with no cohabiting past are less likely to engage in aggressive and negative interactions, experience more overtly positive interactions, and enjoy more positive communications. These researchers conclude, based on their review of the best studies to date:
"The major practical implication of this review is that psychologists can inform the public, that despite popular belief, cohabitation is generally associated with negative outcomes both in terms of marital quality and marital stability...."
You see, marriage is not a consumer product that you give a try to see how it suits you. Marriage is a leaving of all other relationships to give yourself completely to your beloved. Cohabitation says, "I'm not sure about you. Can I give you test-drive to see what I think?" Melts your hearts doesn't it, ladies? Marriage says, "I want all of you and I want to give all of myself to you!" This is why cohabitation and marriage are such very different kinds of relationships. It is why the social sciences have come to the conclusions they have about living together before marriage being a poor and unhealthy idea.
http://www.bpnews.net/BPFirstPerson.asp?ID=36263 (http://www.bpnews.net/BPFirstPerson.asp?ID=36263)
-
Haha no agenda there right?
Your argument is bunk and bullsh*t.
-
Haha no agenda there right?
Your argument is bunk and bullsh*t.
Earth to KC. It isn't just my argument.
Plus, this is hardly the first time scientific studies have confirm what we've known all along about people shacking up.
But, just to shoot down yet another pitiful excuse of yours:
Study Finds Cohabiting Doesn’t Make a Union Last
Couples who live together before they get married are less likely to stay married, a new study has found. But their chances improve if they were already engaged when they began living together.
The likelihood that a marriage would last for a decade or more decreased by six percentage points if the couple had cohabited first, the study found.
The study of men and women ages 15 to 44 was done by the National Center for Health Statistics using data from the National Survey of Family Growth conducted in 2002. The authors define cohabitation as people who live with a sexual partner of the opposite sex.
“From the perspective of many young adults, marrying without living together first seems quite foolish,” said Prof. Pamela J. Smock, a research professor at the Population Studies Center at the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. “Just because some academic studies have shown that living together may increase the chance of divorce somewhat, young adults themselves don’t believe that.”
The authors found that the proportion of women in their late 30s who had ever cohabited had doubled in 15 years, to 61 percent.
Half of couples who cohabit marry within three years, the study found. If both partners are college graduates, the chances improve that they will marry and that their marriage will last at least 10 years.
“The figures suggest to me that cohabitation is still a pathway to marriage for many college graduates, while it may be an end in itself for many less educated women,” said Kelly A. Musick, a professor of policy analysis and management at Cornell.
Couples who marry after age 26 or have a baby eight months or more after marrying are also more likely to stay married for more than a decade.
“Cohabitation is increasingly becoming the first co-residential union formed among young adults,” the study said. “As a result of the growing prevalence of cohabitation, the number of children born to unmarried cohabiting parents has also increased.”
By the beginning of the last decade, a majority of births to unmarried women were to mothers who were living with the child’s father. Just two decades earlier, only a third of those births were to cohabiting couples.
The study found that, over all, 62 percent of women ages 25 to 44 were married and 8 percent were cohabiting. Among men, the comparable figures were 59 percent and 10 percent.
In general, one in five marriages will dissolve within five years. One in three will last less than 10 years. Those figures varied by race, ethnicity and sex. The likelihood of black men and women remaining married for 10 years or more was 50 percent. The probability for Hispanic men was the highest, 75 percent. Among women, the odds are 50-50 that their marriage will last less than 20 years.
The survey found that about 28 percent of men and women had cohabitated before their first marriage and that about 7 percent lived together and never married. About 23 percent of women and 18 percent of men married without having lived together.
Women who were not living with both of their biological or adoptive parents at 14 were less likely to be married and more likely to be cohabiting than those who grew up with both parents.
The share who had ever married varied markedly by race and ethnicity: 63 percent of white women, 39 percent of black women and 58 percent of Hispanic women. Among men in that age group, the differences were less striking. Fifty-three percent of white men, 42 percent of black men and 50 percent of Hispanic men were married or had been previously married at the time of the survey.
By their early 40s, most white and Hispanic men and women were married, but only 44 percent of black women were.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/03/us/03marry.html (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/03/us/03marry.html)