Can Anti-Same Sex M Advocates Address These Facts?

Personally I don't care who marries who.
But your post is only going to attract those that already agree and piss off those that don't.
I might be the only one that simply doesn't care......eat what you want and I'll do the same.


I'm optimistic opponents will approach the challenge with honesty and a genuine attempt to explain how their causation argument is seriously depleted by the available info.

The reason you never see a rational logical argument for banning same sex marriage is very simple.

There is no such thing.
 
Again I say that is not our words but God's.

Wrong. It's the pastor's. Your god does not exist. This has been proven numerous times. Hello, Avatar proved in another thread that your god doesn't exist.
 
I dont think Blacks should be able to marry whites either. If we change that law, it will destroy marriage and everything it stands for.

Worthless Nazi racist troll.
Actually, he posted the arguments people like Gautama and Dan forwarded against interracial marriage and now use against homosexual unions.

If you missed the point, it's just because you're slow.
 
You call it a lower-tiered argument. I say it's the whole basis of their point of view. In their minds, homosexuality is just plain wrong and any move which seems to legitimize it is to be opposed. It's no more complicated than that.


What was the purpose of DOMA? It was to legally impose a lexicon prison on the definition of marriage. Some claim the only reason gays want marriage is to try and legitimize homosexuality but the most pervasive and common argument has been SSM would destroy marriage. Look at the media coverage when MA legalized SSM back in 04 and you'll see that was the most common reason given for their bigotry.
 
We are all familiar with the claim SSM should not be allowed because it is immoral and will send an atomic wedgie up the nuclear family's fanny. Thus the strongest claim against SSM is for preservation of our Republic. On the question of its moral value: It does not matter. It truly does not. I think it's immoral for Christian churches, who operate tax free, to erect structures in the name of Christ, preach about the Love of God and the call to Sacrifice, then lock the doors to keep the homeless out. Does my indignation based on my moral compass justify robbing those Churches of their rights? No. The Constitution guarantees them the Right to gloriously display their hypocrisy on a regular basis. (this does not apply to all Christian churches, but the majority of US churches are guilty of following Caesar instead of Christ.) The cry of a moral crime without the justification of intrusion is a selfish microphone indeed.

Massachusetts has often been the iconic ridicule of radio pundits and Christian religious groups who claim it is a great example of the product of immorality, and especially in the Same Sex M debate. This demonstrates the fundamental cognitive dissonance of mob mentality. Here is why: MA has long been a leader in respecting and protecting the sanctity of Marriage. We are approaching a 20 year celebration of having the lowest divorce rates of any State in the entire nation:

"Massachusetts and Connecticut rank first and second, respectively, for having the lowest divorce rates in the nation, according to new 1994 divorce data from the National Center for Health Statistics."
STATE-BY-STATE DIVORCE RATES


That was a time when SSM was being lobbied here. Let's jump a decade and see those numbers:


"The District of Columbia had the lowest reported divorce rate, at 1.7, followed by Massachusetts at 2.2 and Pennsylvania at 2.5."
Divorce Statistics, Marriage Statistics: Divorce Rates in America, Marriage

It was around that time the Constitution chalked up another victory of being a more honest National manifesto. The anti-SSM crowds were ballistic with predictions. Five years later:



Provisional 2008 data from the CDC's National Vital Statistics Report show that after over four years of legal same-sex marriage, the divorce rate in Massachusetts has actually dropped, from 2.3 per thousand residents in 2007 to about 2.0 per thousand in 2008, the lowest rate in the nation—and one that hasn’t been seen since the 1940's.
Low Massachusetts divorce rate another defeat for same-sex marriage opponents


Wow. If that is the type of destruction gays bring to the sanctity of marriage and society I am scared as hell to find out what good it could possibly accomplish.

Iam not citing the data in a claim of causation and saying SSM made divorce rates go down. I am citing it to show the argument of causation put forth by anti-SSM crowds that Same Sex Marriage causes enough harm on society to justify burning portions of the Constitution is simply too damn gay to be true.

Are there any facts in this post that need to be addressed? Are there any at all?


It is an indisputable fact MA has been leading the nation in the lowest divorce rates.
 
I haven't heard a compelling reason to change the definition of marriage as being between one man and one woman. Neither have the voters in any venue where it has been put to a vote.

I don't think opponents of it have a thing in the world to explain. It's up to those who want to change the law to make the case.


I don't care if you have or not. That has nothing to do with the OP.
 
I haven't heard a compelling reason to change the definition of marriage as being between one man and one woman. Neither have the voters in any venue where it has been put to a vote.

I don't think opponents of it have a thing in the world to explain. It's up to those who want to change the law to make the case.

Keep in mind that no one is preventing anyone from getting married. Even here in TN any two people can get married.
The state won't sanction such a thing and won't award benefits to such a union. Any reason why they should? I don't see one.


That has nothing to do with the OP.
 
The Abnormal Freaks already have the same civil rights as the Normals.

What the Abnormal Freaks want to do is to impose their views on the Normals so that the Normals change their Religion's definition of MARRIAGE established thru the millenia. With the Concept of PROCREATION being the central premise of that definition.

So, it boils down to the fact that the Abnormal Freaks want to sanctify their predilection for their method of fucking by forcing Religions to officially recognize their method of fucking as being NORMAL.

Unofficially, proportionally speaking, some of the places of worship have succumbed to the Abnormals. However the established, or the Official Church Doctrine of the various Religions has not.

The Abnormal Freaks, in order to get themselves to be considered as Normals.....which they are clearly NOT......want the blessing of the Government as well. In their mind that would give them their ULTIMATE IMAGINARY STATUS of Normality.

But, the Government reflects the will of the people. And the will of the people follows the concept of Marriage as it is defined by the Organized the Religions of the World in effect for millenia.....with the central premise of PROCREATION.

That is why, in spite of the whims of some judges who do not follow the letter of the law, and grant the Abnormal Freaks ephemeral "marriages".....INVARIABLY will lose on appeal. Since the overwhelming majority of the citizens (80% ?) steadfastly follow their Churches OFFICIAL Doctrine.

The Abnormal Freaks will continue to lose.

These are the IMMUTABLE FACTS of SSM (Same Sex Marriage)..... like it or not.

I have spoken.


You have spoken. Unfortunately you have said a damn thing in connection to the OP.
 
We are all familiar with the claim SSM should not be allowed because it is immoral and will send an atomic wedgie up the nuclear family's fanny. Thus the strongest claim against SSM is for preservation of our Republic. On the question of its moral value: It does not matter. It truly does not. I think it's immoral for Christian churches, who operate tax free, to erect structures in the name of Christ, preach about the Love of God and the call to Sacrifice, then lock the doors to keep the homeless out. Does my indignation based on my moral compass justify robbing those Churches of their rights? No. The Constitution guarantees them the Right to gloriously display their hypocrisy on a regular basis. (this does not apply to all Christian churches, but the majority of US churches are guilty of following Caesar instead of Christ.) The cry of a moral crime without the justification of intrusion is a selfish microphone indeed.

Massachusetts has often been the iconic ridicule of radio pundits and Christian religious groups who claim it is a great example of the product of immorality, and especially in the Same Sex M debate. This demonstrates the fundamental cognitive dissonance of mob mentality. Here is why: MA has long been a leader in respecting and protecting the sanctity of Marriage. We are approaching a 20 year celebration of having the lowest divorce rates of any State in the entire nation:

"Massachusetts and Connecticut rank first and second, respectively, for having the lowest divorce rates in the nation, according to new 1994 divorce data from the National Center for Health Statistics."
STATE-BY-STATE DIVORCE RATES


That was a time when SSM was being lobbied here. Let's jump a decade and see those numbers:


"The District of Columbia had the lowest reported divorce rate, at 1.7, followed by Massachusetts at 2.2 and Pennsylvania at 2.5."
Divorce Statistics, Marriage Statistics: Divorce Rates in America, Marriage

It was around that time the Constitution chalked up another victory of being a more honest National manifesto. The anti-SSM crowds were ballistic with predictions. Five years later:



Provisional 2008 data from the CDC's National Vital Statistics Report show that after over four years of legal same-sex marriage, the divorce rate in Massachusetts has actually dropped, from 2.3 per thousand residents in 2007 to about 2.0 per thousand in 2008, the lowest rate in the nation—and one that hasn’t been seen since the 1940's.
Low Massachusetts divorce rate another defeat for same-sex marriage opponents


Wow. If that is the type of destruction gays bring to the sanctity of marriage and society I am scared as hell to find out what good it could possibly accomplish.

Iam not citing the data in a claim of causation and saying SSM made divorce rates go down. I am citing it to show the argument of causation put forth by anti-SSM crowds that Same Sex Marriage causes enough harm on society to justify burning portions of the Constitution is simply too damn gay to be true.

I don't see what facts anyone is supposed to address here. If you are implying that the divorce rate has dropped per capita, that doesn't really mean anything. It is an empty statistic.
 
As a Christian I can tell you we will never advocate ssm. That is not our idea but God's he states that very clearly in the Bible. Wouldn't we be a hypocrite if we did? Obliviously some of you have no idea what a church does in our communities around the country. We are not perfect never claimed to be. We know we will never be perfect. But we do try to follow the instruction of the Bible as closely as we can that is the whole point.

The secular world likes to label us as to what they think we should be like. You know we think we are perfect yet we do not live up to their standard but we always measure up to God's standard. The difference is we have been saved our debt is settled with God and he the only one we are concerned about impressing.

Like I said God says no to ssm or homosexuality period. Again I say that is not our words but God's. Does this mean we get a right to hate gay people no it does not. We should always treat each other with respect that does not mean we get to disrespect God in that effort.

I do not say that ssm will destroy the traditional marriage. We are saying is God does not approve and we are not to disagree with him. Do u understand what I am telling you?

One more thing I assure you their are many Churches that reach out to the lost the hungry and the homeless. The churches are one of the last refuge that when somebody needs help the church will step out and try and help them I have been apart of that on many occasions. One church cannot help everybody in this world but we try and cover as much as we can.

I agree with you on one thing there are Church's out there that are not houses of worship but like you said money grubbers that is very sad but we are not all like that. God will deal with them I assure you. That will be his timing not ours.


Get your self righteous bullshit out of here. Your entire rant has nothing to do with the OP and furthermore, you're so damn arrogant you try to speak for all Christians. You don't represent all Christians.
 
We are all familiar with the claim SSM should not be allowed because it is immoral and will send an atomic wedgie up the nuclear family's fanny. Thus the strongest claim against SSM is for preservation of our Republic. On the question of its moral value: It does not matter. It truly does not. I think it's immoral for Christian churches, who operate tax free, to erect structures in the name of Christ, preach about the Love of God and the call to Sacrifice, then lock the doors to keep the homeless out. Does my indignation based on my moral compass justify robbing those Churches of their rights? No. The Constitution guarantees them the Right to gloriously display their hypocrisy on a regular basis. (this does not apply to all Christian churches, but the majority of US churches are guilty of following Caesar instead of Christ.) The cry of a moral crime without the justification of intrusion is a selfish microphone indeed.

Massachusetts has often been the iconic ridicule of radio pundits and Christian religious groups who claim it is a great example of the product of immorality, and especially in the Same Sex M debate. This demonstrates the fundamental cognitive dissonance of mob mentality. Here is why: MA has long been a leader in respecting and protecting the sanctity of Marriage. We are approaching a 20 year celebration of having the lowest divorce rates of any State in the entire nation:

"Massachusetts and Connecticut rank first and second, respectively, for having the lowest divorce rates in the nation, according to new 1994 divorce data from the National Center for Health Statistics."
STATE-BY-STATE DIVORCE RATES


That was a time when SSM was being lobbied here. Let's jump a decade and see those numbers:


"The District of Columbia had the lowest reported divorce rate, at 1.7, followed by Massachusetts at 2.2 and Pennsylvania at 2.5."
Divorce Statistics, Marriage Statistics: Divorce Rates in America, Marriage

It was around that time the Constitution chalked up another victory of being a more honest National manifesto. The anti-SSM crowds were ballistic with predictions. Five years later:



Provisional 2008 data from the CDC's National Vital Statistics Report show that after over four years of legal same-sex marriage, the divorce rate in Massachusetts has actually dropped, from 2.3 per thousand residents in 2007 to about 2.0 per thousand in 2008, the lowest rate in the nation—and one that hasn’t been seen since the 1940's.
Low Massachusetts divorce rate another defeat for same-sex marriage opponents


Wow. If that is the type of destruction gays bring to the sanctity of marriage and society I am scared as hell to find out what good it could possibly accomplish.

Iam not citing the data in a claim of causation and saying SSM made divorce rates go down. I am citing it to show the argument of causation put forth by anti-SSM crowds that Same Sex Marriage causes enough harm on society to justify burning portions of the Constitution is simply too damn gay to be true.

I don't see what facts anyone is supposed to address here. If you are implying that the divorce rate has dropped per capita, that doesn't really mean anything. It is an empty statistic.

Screaming Eagle,

You are spot on.

The OP plops out an empty statistic and expects the readers to draw all sorts of nuances that aid the SSM cause.

All the negative reactions to the OP's post are rejected as N/A.

The OP is an Abnormal Freak with Abnormal expectations.
 
We are all familiar with the claim SSM should not be allowed because it is immoral and will send an atomic wedgie up the nuclear family's fanny. Thus the strongest claim against SSM is for preservation of our Republic. On the question of its moral value: It does not matter.

Actually, Spiritually speaking it is all about moral values. lowering moral values in a community, in a public way, does lower the community values. That has been seen in many ways over the past 200 years. When a community condones immorality, more immorality will peak it's ugly head in and grab the community. Look at the musif and movie industries, immorality runs them for the most part. Immorality is where the money is.

It truly does not. I think it's immoral for Christian churches, who operate tax free, to erect structures in the name of Christ, preach about the Love of God and the call to Sacrifice, then lock the doors to keep the homeless out.

I agree that churches need to open their doors to any community member. Not necessarily for membership, but certainly to come and worship and fellowship. I believe the majority of churches do, and I know that of the churches that do, the majority of them are the best churches in the world. Most of them are small churches. and the majority of churches in Amrtica, and even in the world, are small chuerches, less than 200-300 members. Those churches are where the majority of the Christians are also. It is also where the majority of the true Gospel ministries are carried out.



This is where you lose any credibility you might have had. You don't care at all about churches "rights." You would rip those rights right our from under ever Christian that you have opportunity to do so with. Yes, there are hypocrites in the Christian church, just like there are on these message boards. (you, for example) If I am not mistaken, Caesar and Christianity do not mix. Caesar gets his part, but Caesar has no control of the church. Right now, Caesar is ripping off all people and taking what is not his.

Massachusetts has often been the iconic ridicule of radio pundits and Christian religious groups who claim it is a great example of the product of immorality, and especially in the Same Sex M debate. This demonstrates the fundamental cognitive dissonance of mob mentality. Here is why: MA has long been a leader in respecting and protecting the sanctity of Marriage. We are approaching a 20 year celebration of having the lowest divorce rates of any State in the entire nation:

That is great. However, that does not mean that morality is not the center of the problem.


"Massachusetts and Connecticut rank first and second, respectively, for having the lowest divorce rates in the nation, according to new 1994 divorce data from the National Center for Health Statistics."
STATE-BY-STATE DIVORCE RATES


That was a time when SSM was being lobbied here. Let's jump a decade and see those numbers:


"The District of Columbia had the lowest reported divorce rate, at 1.7, followed by Massachusetts at 2.2 and Pennsylvania at 2.5."
Divorce Statistics, Marriage Statistics: Divorce Rates in America, Marriage

It was around that time the Constitution chalked up another victory of being a more honest National manifesto. The anti-SSM crowds were ballistic with predictions. Five years later:



Provisional 2008 data from the CDC's National Vital Statistics Report show that after over four years of legal same-sex marriage, the divorce rate in Massachusetts has actually dropped, from 2.3 per thousand residents in 2007 to about 2.0 per thousand in 2008, the lowest rate in the nation—and one that hasn’t been seen since the 1940's.
Low Massachusetts divorce rate another defeat for same-sex marriage opponents


Wow. If that is the type of destruction gays bring to the sanctity of marriage and society I am scared as hell to find out what good it could possibly accomplish.

Iam not citing the data in a claim of causation and saying SSM made divorce rates go down. I am citing it to show the argument of causation put forth by anti-SSM crowds that Same Sex Marriage causes enough harm on society to justify burning portions of the Constitution is simply too damn gay to be true.

That means they must be doing something a little different. However, morality is still the center of the SSM debate, and it is central in finding the right solution.


Who the fuck do you think you are? How can you possibly accuse me of not caring about Church's rights?

My comment about Caesar is how American Christianity on the whole follows Caesar (read: Roman Empire) in terms of adoring wealth and control over others. We are no different than how the Temple operated in 1st century Judea. It's really an amazing historical irony. We have become the very institution Jesus preached against and was killed for.....yet we try to cite Jesus as the underwriter to justify our bullshit. But hey, self righteous Christians like yourself need not worry. Jesus loves us all
 
Personally I don't care who marries who.
But your post is only going to attract those that already agree and piss off those that don't.
I might be the only one that simply doesn't care......eat what you want and I'll do the same.


I'm optimistic opponents will approach the challenge with honesty and a genuine attempt to explain how their causation argument is seriously depleted by the available info.
I would be optimistic that you would be honest in accepting and giving true value to the arguements against it. But I won't hold My breath.

I don't really care about the ghey issue on marriage. I support the elimination of government in the interference of all marriage period.

But I'm always amuse by people who cherry pick information and then wonder if people will acknowledge the data while wholly rejecting any information refuting them simply because they just don't want to hear it.

Nice try though.

That was a waste of time. Why make personal accusations? What info was cherry picked?
 
We are all familiar with the claim SSM should not be allowed because it is immoral and will send an atomic wedgie up the nuclear family's fanny. Thus the strongest claim against SSM is for preservation of our Republic. On the question of its moral value: It does not matter. It truly does not. I think it's immoral for Christian churches, who operate tax free, to erect structures in the name of Christ, preach about the Love of God and the call to Sacrifice, then lock the doors to keep the homeless out. Does my indignation based on my moral compass justify robbing those Churches of their rights? No. The Constitution guarantees them the Right to gloriously display their hypocrisy on a regular basis. (this does not apply to all Christian churches, but the majority of US churches are guilty of following Caesar instead of Christ.) The cry of a moral crime without the justification of intrusion is a selfish microphone indeed.

Massachusetts has often been the iconic ridicule of radio pundits and Christian religious groups who claim it is a great example of the product of immorality, and especially in the Same Sex M debate. This demonstrates the fundamental cognitive dissonance of mob mentality. Here is why: MA has long been a leader in respecting and protecting the sanctity of Marriage. We are approaching a 20 year celebration of having the lowest divorce rates of any State in the entire nation:

"Massachusetts and Connecticut rank first and second, respectively, for having the lowest divorce rates in the nation, according to new 1994 divorce data from the National Center for Health Statistics."
STATE-BY-STATE DIVORCE RATES


That was a time when SSM was being lobbied here. Let's jump a decade and see those numbers:


"The District of Columbia had the lowest reported divorce rate, at 1.7, followed by Massachusetts at 2.2 and Pennsylvania at 2.5."
Divorce Statistics, Marriage Statistics: Divorce Rates in America, Marriage

It was around that time the Constitution chalked up another victory of being a more honest National manifesto. The anti-SSM crowds were ballistic with predictions. Five years later:



Provisional 2008 data from the CDC's National Vital Statistics Report show that after over four years of legal same-sex marriage, the divorce rate in Massachusetts has actually dropped, from 2.3 per thousand residents in 2007 to about 2.0 per thousand in 2008, the lowest rate in the nation—and one that hasn’t been seen since the 1940's.
Low Massachusetts divorce rate another defeat for same-sex marriage opponents


Wow. If that is the type of destruction gays bring to the sanctity of marriage and society I am scared as hell to find out what good it could possibly accomplish.

Iam not citing the data in a claim of causation and saying SSM made divorce rates go down. I am citing it to show the argument of causation put forth by anti-SSM crowds that Same Sex Marriage causes enough harm on society to justify burning portions of the Constitution is simply too damn gay to be true.

I don't see what facts anyone is supposed to address here. If you are implying that the divorce rate has dropped per capita, that doesn't really mean anything. It is an empty statistic.


Holy shit. Did you miss this part?

"Iam not citing the data in a claim of causation and saying SSM made divorce rates go down. I am citing it to show the argument of causation put forth by anti-SSM crowds that Same Sex Marriage causes enough harm on society to justify burning portions of the Constitution is simply too damn gay to be true."
 
Not only are they empty statistics, they're falsely correlative. MA has some of the toughest divorce laws in the country. They always have. It's harder in MA than in most states to actually dissolve a marriage, which thus means, fewer people actually do so. Showing the rate of divorce without also showing the rate of marriage doesn't prove anything. I remember the NYT reporting on MA's low divorce rate and gay marriage being a mixed blessing for LGBTs two years ago (seen here) that mentioned some of the same points. I'm not aware of PA's divorce laws (though I'd guess they're probably as stringent given laws usually don't vary much within certain regions) or DC's divorce laws and rate of marriage, but just mentioning one type of statistic isn't a great argument.

I'd say when people say gay marriage will ruin the institution of marriage, they're not necessarily talking about divorce. To many social conservatives, divorce is a separate issue affecting marriage, and many would likely tell you it's a bigger threat than gay marriage. Social conservatives see marriage as a unique union between a man and a woman for the primary purposes of having and rearing children and perpetuating that ideal in society. They think normalizing gay marriage will further pervert the purpose of marriage in society. I don't think anyone in their right mind would say it's the cause of that perversion, but it could be a definite factor (i.e. no-fault divorce, which many social conservatives opposed in the 70s) which is why they so adamantly oppose it.
 
Last edited:
We are all familiar with the claim SSM should not be allowed because it is immoral and will send an atomic wedgie up the nuclear family's fanny. Thus the strongest claim against SSM is for preservation of our Republic. On the question of its moral value: It does not matter. It truly does not. I think it's immoral for Christian churches, who operate tax free, to erect structures in the name of Christ, preach about the Love of God and the call to Sacrifice, then lock the doors to keep the homeless out. Does my indignation based on my moral compass justify robbing those Churches of their rights? No. The Constitution guarantees them the Right to gloriously display their hypocrisy on a regular basis. (this does not apply to all Christian churches, but the majority of US churches are guilty of following Caesar instead of Christ.) The cry of a moral crime without the justification of intrusion is a selfish microphone indeed.

Massachusetts has often been the iconic ridicule of radio pundits and Christian religious groups who claim it is a great example of the product of immorality, and especially in the Same Sex M debate. This demonstrates the fundamental cognitive dissonance of mob mentality. Here is why: MA has long been a leader in respecting and protecting the sanctity of Marriage. We are approaching a 20 year celebration of having the lowest divorce rates of any State in the entire nation:

"Massachusetts and Connecticut rank first and second, respectively, for having the lowest divorce rates in the nation, according to new 1994 divorce data from the National Center for Health Statistics."
STATE-BY-STATE DIVORCE RATES


That was a time when SSM was being lobbied here. Let's jump a decade and see those numbers:


"The District of Columbia had the lowest reported divorce rate, at 1.7, followed by Massachusetts at 2.2 and Pennsylvania at 2.5."
Divorce Statistics, Marriage Statistics: Divorce Rates in America, Marriage

It was around that time the Constitution chalked up another victory of being a more honest National manifesto. The anti-SSM crowds were ballistic with predictions. Five years later:



Provisional 2008 data from the CDC's National Vital Statistics Report show that after over four years of legal same-sex marriage, the divorce rate in Massachusetts has actually dropped, from 2.3 per thousand residents in 2007 to about 2.0 per thousand in 2008, the lowest rate in the nation—and one that hasn’t been seen since the 1940's.
Low Massachusetts divorce rate another defeat for same-sex marriage opponents


Wow. If that is the type of destruction gays bring to the sanctity of marriage and society I am scared as hell to find out what good it could possibly accomplish.

Iam not citing the data in a claim of causation and saying SSM made divorce rates go down. I am citing it to show the argument of causation put forth by anti-SSM crowds that Same Sex Marriage causes enough harm on society to justify burning portions of the Constitution is simply too damn gay to be true.

I don't see what facts anyone is supposed to address here. If you are implying that the divorce rate has dropped per capita, that doesn't really mean anything. It is an empty statistic.

Screaming Eagle,

You are spot on.

The OP plops out an empty statistic and expects the readers to draw all sorts of nuances that aid the SSM cause.

All the negative reactions to the OP's post are rejected as N/A.

The OP is an Abnormal Freak with Abnormal expectations.


I don't expect any nuances to be drawn. Are you really trying to pretend the mantra of "Gay marriage will destroy traditional marriage" hasn't been at the forefront of your bigotry?
 
Not only are they empty statistics, they're falsely correlative. MA has some of the toughest divorce laws in the country. They always have. It's harder in MA than in most states to actually dissolve a marriage, which thus means, fewer people actually do so. Showing the rate of divorce without also showing the rate of marriage doesn't prove anything. I remember the NYT reporting on MA's low divorce rate and gay marriage being a mixed blessing for LGBTs two years ago (seen here) that mentioned some of the same points. I'm not aware of PA's divorce laws (though I'd guess they're probably as stringent given laws usually don't vary much within certain regions) or DC's divorce laws and rate of marriage, but just mentioning one type of statistic isn't a great argument.

I'd say when people say gay marriage will ruin the institution of marriage, they're not necessarily talking about divorce. To many social conservatives, divorce is a separate issue affecting marriage, and many would likely tell you it's a bigger threat than gay marriage. Social conservatives see marriage as a unique union between a man and a woman for the primary purposes of having and rearing children and perpetuating that ideal in society. They think normalizing gay marriage will further pervert the purpose of marriage in society. I don't think anyone in their right mind would say it's the cause of that perversion, but it could be a definite factor (i.e. no-fault divorce, which many social conservatives opposed in the 70s) which is why they so adamantly oppose it.


Your ability to criticize data is woefully demolished by the fact you made such an unbelievably ridiculous claim to explain MA's lowest divorce State. MA is a "no fault" State:


"Massachusetts permits no-fault divorce based on irreconcilable breakdown of the marriage."
Massachusetts Divorce Forms and Massachusetts Divorce Laws Online


Your claim is exactly backwards. People can download the forms and do their own divorce without ever needing to hire an attorney.

So the $64,000 is this: Are you an honest person? You must now admit the stats are legitimate or you will reveal being dishonest.
 
I don't see what facts anyone is supposed to address here. If you are implying that the divorce rate has dropped per capita, that doesn't really mean anything. It is an empty statistic.

Screaming Eagle,

You are spot on.

The OP plops out an empty statistic and expects the readers to draw all sorts of nuances that aid the SSM cause.

All the negative reactions to the OP's post are rejected as N/A.

The OP is an Abnormal Freak with Abnormal expectations.


I don't expect any nuances to be drawn. Are you really trying to pretend the mantra of "Gay marriage will destroy traditional marriage" hasn't been at the forefront of your bigotry?

That and many other mantras are at the forefront of gaytrauma's bigotry...
 
Last edited:
What has the rate of entering into a matrimonial state done over the same time period? Recent years have seen a trend towards cohabitation.
 

Forum List

Back
Top