Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Huffington Post)   Why do "Red States" have higher divorce rates than "Blue States"? Turns out a shotgun wedding to a teenage babymomma doesn't really set a solid foundation for a lifelong partnership   (huffingtonpost.com ) divider line
    More: Obvious, divorce rates, red states, emergency contraception, Ex-wife, University of Texas  
•       •       •

4474 clicks; posted to Main » on 23 Jan 2014 at 1:59 PM (2 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



156 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-01-23 03:43:04 PM  

nocturnal001: Lower pressure to get married means people who don't really want to get married don't feel obligated to do so. Hence lower divorce rates. If I'm not mistaken they also have higher marriage rates as well.

Political snark aside, I'd say this accounts for most of the discrepancy.



Educated people are MORE likely to get married and LESS likely to divorce.
 
2014-01-23 03:44:54 PM  
 Why do "Red States" have higher divorce rates than "Blue States"?

By definition there are more stupid people there. Come on, give me a hard one.
 
2014-01-23 03:46:24 PM  

Arkanaut: As Glass told The Los Angeles Times, "If you live in a marriage market where everybody marries young, you postpone marriage at your own risk. The best catches ... are going to go first."

This is an interesting point, although I dispute the notion that the "best catches" are the ones who dive headlong into marriage before they turn 20.



At 20 years old, you're still too young and inexperienced to recognized what a good catch is.

How about we change the minimum age of marriage until 25, or at least 21?
 
2014-01-23 03:47:06 PM  

Wendy's Chili: jaybeezey: They give it a go in red states, more babies born to unwed mothers in blue.

Hmm...

[www.floatingpath.com image 850x639]


What a polite, thorough and absolute refutation of his point. Well done.
 
2014-01-23 03:50:27 PM  

Wendy's Chili: jaybeezey: They give it a go in red states, more babies born to unwed mothers in blue.

Hmm...

[www.floatingpath.com image 850x639]


You and all your liberal "facts"!
 
2014-01-23 03:51:51 PM  

tom baker's scarf: i've never, ever meet one of these girls that stuck to this.  Never heard of anyone who married or dated one either. I'm all but certain they are just a myth like unicorns or trickle down economics.


I grew up in rural Oklahoma.   I've known more than my fair share of girls/women who "wait until marriage" to have sex, or at least try to.  And I know a couple COUPLES who've waited until marriage to have sex.

I can safely say that abortion is much more frowned up on than divorce in that part of the country.

/ left Oklahoma at 19
// never looked back
/// liberal, pro-choice, slut
 
2014-01-23 03:59:09 PM  

the money is in the banana stand: Simple. There is a lot of long-standing tradition in the South leading to a lot of pressure for young folks to get married. If you aren't married a couple years after college, people find that odd. If you are 30 and not married, there is something wrong with you. From the time you are young, the preferred timeline is ingrained in you. The likelihood that anyone would make the same decision at 18 or 25 as they would in their late twenties to early 30s is extremely rare. Of course divorce rates are higher, you are getting married at an early age. If you haven't had a lot of time together before you are married, haven't faced any significant challenges together, and haven't lived together and communicated about your wants/needs in great detail it will most likely fail. When people don't even know themselves or their partner, it will end in disaster.


I have two friends, a married couple living in a famed Red State, who are now approaching their mid-30s and are just now considering having children.  They've been harassed about kids since the day that got married about 10 years ago.  At this point, people just assume that they're infertile.

'Cause, you know, no one in their neck of the woods deliberately waits to have children.
 
2014-01-23 03:59:56 PM  
This thread is so full of political derp I dont even feel guilty for posting this.

i49.photobucket.com

also

img.photobucket.com
 
2014-01-23 04:00:05 PM  
I am constantly amused and irritated at the same time when everyone in my southern family puts on pressure for me and the bafflerette to get married.  There has not been a single successful marriage anywhere in my extended family.  Everyone has been divorced.  About a third of them more than once.  Me and the bafflerette keep on trucking with our sinful relationship that has outlived almost all of their failed marriages.

And yet, they keep trying...
 
2014-01-23 04:02:23 PM  

MaudlinMutantMollusk: Maybe that unrelenting "everything sucks and our country is dying" negativity has something to do with it?


social conservatism is largely just projection on a national scale

the problems they point out with the rest of the world are really their own problems they refuse to acknowledge and fix
 
2014-01-23 04:04:43 PM  

Ant: Dr Dreidel: Orthodoxy allows for divorce (it's not much different than civil divorce, other than the requirement that "the husband drive his wife away" meaning he has to initiate proceedings).

And if he doesn't want to initiate the proceedings, you can always hire some people to 'persuade' him.


That's actually the last step.

1. He SHOULD acquiesce to her wishes. IIRC, even a hundred years ago, this was the thinking (the wording of the original text is that "he" must drive "her" away, and there's, sadly, no writing around that); that if she was so unhappy in the marriage, that only an evil person would "chain" her using the marriage.
2. If he doesn't, when she takes the issue to [$authority, usually their pulpit Rabbi], he will lay out the possible consequences for his continued refusal, to wit:
3. He'll be barred from participating in religious observance/ceremony (meaning he can't lead OR participate), up to stopping services mid-word if he walks in.
4. People in the community will be barred from doing business with him until he grants the divorce. Anyone who does business with him will be similarly "excommunicated".
(I may be confusing the order of 3 and 4)
5. A group of "concerned citizens" will attempt to persuade him, either through intimidation, or, sadly, physical violence (though most opinions officially disavow this as a legitimate avenue, they unofficially support it - I heard of one case where a guy in jail for tax fraud wouldn't give his wife a divorce, so "they" told his cellmates that he was a suspected kiddie-diddler. The problem then "worked itself out").

I have known personally of several cases that made it to various stages in the above. Thankfully, all of them are currently divorced from the abusive assholes (some have remarried).

// if you want to be depressed, Google the term "agunah"
// literally "guarded", it refers to a woman whose husband refuses to divorce her, and there have been Herculean efforts to try and un-guard affected women
// the easy solution is to stop believing, but that's one more measure of "control" the abuser takes (driving her away from belief whether she wants to or not)
 
2014-01-23 04:06:27 PM  

InterruptingQuirk: what_now: Massachusetts, the first to legalize gay marriage, has the lowest divorce rate.

All the people who got married there went back their home state and can't get divorced there.


I was going to say something very similar, but I only know two couples from "Mass" that got divorced in another state. I wanted to hold out until I knew one more couple before I correlated that metric.
 
2014-01-23 04:06:54 PM  

doubled99: Let the socially acceptable bigotry begin...


Discrimination based on a persons intelligence is not bigotry.  It's common sense.
 
2014-01-23 04:10:53 PM  
I for one am shocked that attempting to force your own morality onto someone who doesn't want it doesn't have a happier ending. So does the god you believe in not want the teens to get married, or is omnipotence not actually powerful enough to keep them together? Oh wait, I know, it's one of those "mysterious ways" exemptions. Never mind.
 
2014-01-23 04:11:24 PM  

FizixJunkee: How about we change the minimum age of marriage until 25, or being a legal adult to at least 21?


FTFY.

I never understood why our government believes that we're responsible enough at age 18 to sign up for the military so we can go off to die but that we aren't responsible enough to drink a beer on our own.  If you believe that people are that irresponsible at 18, then bump everything up.
 
2014-01-23 04:14:22 PM  

Dinjiin: FizixJunkee: How about we change the minimum age of marriage until 25, or being a legal adult to at least 21?

FTFY.

I never understood why our government believes that we're responsible enough at age 18 to sign up for the military so we can go off to die but that we aren't responsible enough to drink a beer on our own.  If you believe that people are that irresponsible at 18, then bump everything up.


you can buy a gun, but not drink
vote, but not drink
not buy cigarettes ...
get married FFS

pretty zero of our age limited laws make any sense at all
 
2014-01-23 04:15:58 PM  

monoski: Molavian: Why do "Red States" have higher divorce rates than "Blue States"?

Because it doesn't count as divorce when your constituency never gets married in the first place?

You know how I know you did not do well in stats class? Divorce rates are taken from the married population. Not those libby libtards living in sin.


Divorce rates in the study are calculated per 1,000 population.
 
2014-01-23 04:16:12 PM  
It's just a function of their broader moral, intellectual, and physical inferiority.
 
2014-01-23 04:21:23 PM  

namatad: you can buy a gun, but not drink


Booze is more dangerous than guns and requires more responsibility, duh.
 
2014-01-23 04:23:08 PM  
other than texas all the red states have more federal handouts than they bring in with taxes..
 
2014-01-23 04:23:30 PM  
Scotty doesn't know,
That Fionna and me,
Do it in my van every Sunday.

She tells him she's in church,
But she doesn't go,
Still shes on her knees, and...
 
2014-01-23 04:29:40 PM  

SuperNinjaToad: Wendy's Chili: SuperNinjaToad: This is a very narrow minded assumption and the 'study' at best reeks of American arrogance not to mention mathematical inaccuracies and projecting a false premise.

IF as implied by the article religious teachings or beliefs are actually counterintuitive to a long lasting marriage and may actually cause divorce, my contention is WHY aren't Muslims divorcing all over the place? Divorce in most middle eastern or Muslim dominated societies are almost unheard of. Same with orthodox Jews etc which when it comes to the subject of divorce, marriage etc are doctrinalyy very similar to Christianity.

The Southern Baptist denomination is more of an industry than a religion. Putting asses in the seats takes precedence over enforcing dogma, and there's no quicker way to lose a Southern audience than criticizing their way of life.

which is fine but then why criticize the entire religion as oppose to just the SBC's views on marriage etc?


The SBC is a cartel of snake oil salesmen who fleece an already impoverished populace of what little money they have. Their failure to crack down on divorce is hardly worth consideration when taken into context.
 
2014-01-23 04:31:01 PM  

tbhouston: other than texas all the red states have more federal handouts than they bring in with taxes..


why did we fight to keep them again??
 
2014-01-23 04:38:07 PM  

Nabb1: give me doughnuts: gopher321: [i43.tinypic.com image 371x388]

Are yew bad mouthin our suthern tradishuns, boy?

In their case, the "South" is South Africa.

Forget it. He's rolling.


What does taking ecstasy have to do with it?
 
2014-01-23 04:42:05 PM  

FizixJunkee: the money is in the banana stand: Simple. There is a lot of long-standing tradition in the South leading to a lot of pressure for young folks to get married. If you aren't married a couple years after college, people find that odd. If you are 30 and not married, there is something wrong with you. From the time you are young, the preferred timeline is ingrained in you. The likelihood that anyone would make the same decision at 18 or 25 as they would in their late twenties to early 30s is extremely rare. Of course divorce rates are higher, you are getting married at an early age. If you haven't had a lot of time together before you are married, haven't faced any significant challenges together, and haven't lived together and communicated about your wants/needs in great detail it will most likely fail. When people don't even know themselves or their partner, it will end in disaster.

I have two friends, a married couple living in a famed Red State, who are now approaching their mid-30s and are just now considering having children.  They've been harassed about kids since the day that got married about 10 years ago.  At this point, people just assume that they're infertile.

'Cause, you know, no one in their neck of the woods deliberately waits to have children.


It's all a part of the "traditional" life equation.  The prohibition on any premarital sex, masturbation, or any sexual outlet causes a built-in pressure in your teens to get married as earliest as legally possible, and the following prohibition on sex being for anything but procreation means you're typically pumping out kids within 9 months of the honeymoon.  And then, the traditional gender role pressure combined with a mindset that marriage isn't supposed to be enjoyable, and "you need to work it out, for the kids" sets up a self-perpetuating co-dependent situation where a combination of responsibility, guilt, and a taboo on divorce forces people to settle.  So they slot themselves into a generic cookie-cutter career path while somehow muddling through a generally unsatisfying and uninteresting life, choosing to instead invest hope and live for the sake of their kids and the promise of a glorious afterlife, where the cycle begins anew.

It's a great little setup for societal stability, but it breeds stagnation and can't keep you competitive over time.  It also makes you easy to control by elite interests in both public and private spheres.  Sure, it probably works for a generation or two while the rest of the world is still a smoking hole in the ground from the last two world wars, giving you a tempting way to assume your current place in the Number 1 spot is due to some kind innate superiority, Godly grace, or culture exceptionalism that always has been and always will be.  But then you wake up 60 years later and realize the rest of the world is catching up, your social and economic mobility is through the floor, all your innovative economic centers have fled to the "heathen" blue centers, you're running tremendous deficits, and the latest generations are following the money and happiness away from you.  Which you can't possibly accept as your own failure, so you need to desperately rationalize as someone else's fault.

The good news is, it gives you a neat way to then project your issues on everyone else, and say the reason your little world is falling apart, and the reason it's no longer competitive, is because of a loss of traditional values and economic sense, or because of (insert long list of conspiracies out to get you).  But that's confusing the cause with the effect.   Of course, you can always pull the predictable political card and throw up a siege/victim mentality, convincing your traditional constituency that they're not at fault, but rather under attack by the forces of evil, and they need to claw back the (retroactively re-imagined) idyllic existence they once had by voting for you.  Which works for a time, until your constituency loses the demographic race, can no longer attain a majority even at 100% turnout, and the whole thing implodes.
 
2014-01-23 04:42:47 PM  

rkettens: Discrimination based on a persons intelligence is not bigotry. It's common sense.


Oh, you called it common sense, I'm going to just jump in here and say you're wrong.
 
2014-01-23 04:48:52 PM  
I bet it's just the years and years of hypocrisy and moral contortions regarding race.
 
2014-01-23 04:53:05 PM  

FizixJunkee: tom baker's scarf: i've never, ever meet one of these girls that stuck to this.  Never heard of anyone who married or dated one either. I'm all but certain they are just a myth like unicorns or trickle down economics.

I grew up in rural Oklahoma.   I've known more than my fair share of girls/women who "wait until marriage" to have sex, or at least try to.  And I know a couple COUPLES who've waited until marriage to have sex.

I can safely say that abortion is much more frowned up on than divorce in that part of the country.

/ left Oklahoma at 19
// never looked back
/// liberal, pro-choice, slut


 glad you got out.  i grew up in Ruralrednecktown, USA too.  If it wasn't for family around there I'd never have gone back. i don't stay long when i do.

 like you wrote they tried to wait until marriage.  i tried to get the the gym this morning, but i didn't try very hard.  I've know of one couple that waited to have sex with each other until marriage but both of them had slept with other people. Surprise, surprise five years later they were divorced.  Reading between the lines sexual incompatibility was a big factor.

for a good laugh watch "Saved".

/hooray for liberal, pro-choice, sluts.
 
2014-01-23 05:00:56 PM  

Dr Dreidel: Ant: Dr Dreidel: Orthodoxy allows for divorce (it's not much different than civil divorce, other than the requirement that "the husband drive his wife away" meaning he has to initiate proceedings).

And if he doesn't want to initiate the proceedings, you can always hire some people to 'persuade' him.

That's actually the last step.

1. He SHOULD acquiesce to her wishes. IIRC, even a hundred years ago, this was the thinking (the wording of the original text is that "he" must drive "her" away, and there's, sadly, no writing around that); that if she was so unhappy in the marriage, that only an evil person would "chain" her using the marriage.
2. If he doesn't, when she takes the issue to [$authority, usually their pulpit Rabbi], he will lay out the possible consequences for his continued refusal, to wit:
3. He'll be barred from participating in religious observance/ceremony (meaning he can't lead OR participate), up to stopping services mid-word if he walks in.
4. People in the community will be barred from doing business with him until he grants the divorce. Anyone who does business with him will be similarly "excommunicated".
(I may be confusing the order of 3 and 4)
5. A group of "concerned citizens" will attempt to persuade him, either through intimidation, or, sadly, physical violence (though most opinions officially disavow this as a legitimate avenue, they unofficially support it - I heard of one case where a guy in jail for tax fraud wouldn't give his wife a divorce, so "they" told his cellmates that he was a suspected kiddie-diddler. The problem then "worked itself out").

I have known personally of several cases that made it to various stages in the above. Thankfully, all of them are currently divorced from the abusive assholes (some have remarried).

// if you want to be depressed, Google the term "agunah"
// literally "guarded", it refers to a woman whose husband refuses to divorce her, and there have been Herculean efforts to try and un-guard affected wom ...

// the easy solution is to stop believing, but that's one more measure of "control" the abuser takes (driving her away from belief whether she wants to or not)

Thanks to you, the band members of Journey are somewhere crying their eyes out right now.
 
2014-01-23 05:14:13 PM  

JesusJuice: It's just a function of their broader moral, intellectual, and physical inferiority.


Above average salaries, below average tax rate.

You spelled superiority wrong :)
 
2014-01-23 05:39:05 PM  

PunGent: Above average salaries


Yeah, no.

If it weren't for Iowa's recent blueward turn, red states would have a monopoly on shiatty paying jobs.

/it's not a bug, it's a feature
 
2014-01-23 05:42:40 PM  
It's not "weird" or "counterintuitive." Those of us who live in "red" states and have more than two brain cells to rub together can tell you why: because the dumbfarks who live in these states and yap about Jesus and morals and who elect people even dumber than they are to public office all care more about how things LOOK than the way things ARE.

They see the world as a nightmarish secular hellscape that only they, the ultra-pure Christian warriors, can deliver from evil. But they're also lazy farkers, so they count voting and yapping about God, abortion and homos as "fighting evil." So the shiat they do is ineffectual, at best, at the thing they claim they're doing ("helping" people by forcing them to have babies they don't want or getting married or pretending they're heterosexual). Who they don't give a shiat about, BTW. They don't care about kids once they slide out of the birth canal and they care even less about women and gay people.

They just care about getting "win" marks on the Bible thumper tote board. The actual humans involved in the situations they claim to care so much about are not that much of a concern to them. And when their "solutions" fail, they get to blame the people they "tried to help."

It's a way to act like you care about other people while at the same time doing things that actively harm them, without having to go to much effort to do so. That's what the idiots in Congress and the state legislatures are for, to do the dirty work of the abusive male assholes and the overweight, dried up, sex-hating old hags who fill the churches.
 
2014-01-23 05:57:33 PM  
o
 
2014-01-23 06:12:55 PM  

tbhouston: other than texas all the red states have more federal handouts than they bring in with taxes..


That's by design (seems clear now). The states don't want to spend THEIR money to help their residents. They'd rather the poors and the illegals just leave, but failing that, they're happy to have everyone else in the other states subsidizing them (Medicaid, AFDC, etc.).

They save their hard-earned money in-state for Jesusy shiat like faith-based marriage and family counseling and tax abatements and other sweetheart deals for corporations and such.
 
2014-01-23 06:13:44 PM  

Smelly Pirate Hooker: It's not "weird" or "counterintuitive." Those of us who live in "red" states and have more than two brain cells to rub together can tell you why: because the dumbfarks who live in these states and yap about Jesus and morals and who elect people even dumber than they are to public office all care more about how things LOOK than the way things ARE.

They see the world as a nightmarish secular hellscape that only they, the ultra-pure Christian warriors, can deliver from evil. But they're also lazy farkers, so they count voting and yapping about God, abortion and homos as "fighting evil." So the shiat they do is ineffectual, at best, at the thing they claim they're doing ("helping" people by forcing them to have babies they don't want or getting married or pretending they're heterosexual). Who they don't give a shiat about, BTW. They don't care about kids once they slide out of the birth canal and they care even less about women and gay people.

They just care about getting "win" marks on the Bible thumper tote board. The actual humans involved in the situations they claim to care so much about are not that much of a concern to them. And when their "solutions" fail, they get to blame the people they "tried to help."

It's a way to act like you care about other people while at the same time doing things that actively harm them, without having to go to much effort to do so. That's what the idiots in Congress and the state legislatures are for, to do the dirty work of the abusive male assholes and the overweight, dried up, sex-hating old hags who fill the churches.


While this is a lovely rant and all, how exactly does this lead to higher divorce rates? You want to know what leads to the higher divorce rates? The South is more economically depressed for one. Finances are a major reason why individuals part-ways. On top of this, there is a lot of societal pressure for young folks to get married in the South - especially if they have kids together. Getting married before you are ready, and at the behest of others is a recipe for disaster that will likely end in a divorce. Further the concept of the Southern cowboy now has devolved from a gentleman, to a boozing deadbeat douchebag. You could also blame this largely on the procreation rates of minorities, coupled with the extremely high pressure for couples who conceive a kid out of wedlock to get married to "save face". All of this is a recipe for disaster that is likely to end in a divorce and is predominant in the South.
 
2014-01-23 06:14:34 PM  

special20: InterruptingQuirk: what_now: Massachusetts, the first to legalize gay marriage, has the lowest divorce rate.

All the people who got married there went back their home state and can't get divorced there.

I was going to say something very similar, but I only know two couples from "Mass" that got divorced in another state. I wanted to hold out until I knew one more couple before I correlated that metric.


Gay couples who 'got married' in Mass & then 'went back to their home state'...aren't married. There's a residency requirement, for starters. Civil ceremonies in p-Town while on vacation aren't legally binding. Gay marriages still aren't recognized in over 30 states, and are therefore not included in marriage OR divorce statistics. Try again.
 
2014-01-23 06:17:27 PM  
the money is in the banana stand:

While this is a lovely rant and all, how exactly does this lead to higher divorce rates? You want to know what leads to the higher divorce rates? The South is more economically depressed for one. Finances are a major reason why individuals part-ways. On top of this, there is a lot of societal pressure for young folks to get married in the South - especially if they have kids together. Gett ...

I'm not seeing how what I wrote is inconsistent with what you wrote, so ... I concur.

/grew up in OK, now live in TX
//mother is a Fox News-loving Jesus freak
 
2014-01-23 06:46:21 PM  
the money is in the banana stand:

While this is a lovely rant and all, how exactly does this lead to higher divorce rates? You want to know what leads to the higher divorce rates? The South is more economically depressed for one. Finances are a major reason why individuals part-ways. On top of this, there is a lot of societal pressure for young folks to get married in the South - especially if they have kids together. Gett ...

I will disagree with one thing: that the south is "more economically depressed." Compared to where? Upper midwest? California? Florida? Actually, southern states (mostly Texas, but there are others) are doing OK economically, overall. Now, there are populations within those states (blacks, Hispanics, high school dropouts) who aren't doing so good, but like I said, the powers that be in those states don't care about "those people." If you're black or poor or undocumented, you don't count in their rendering of economic vitality, blah blah blah. They care about shiat like businesses moving in from other states, "right to work" legislation, tax rates (low, of course), etc. They don't care about metrics like "percentage of people without health insurance/health care" or "unemployment rates among young black people."

Rick Perry doesn't care that Latinos in the border counties are not doing well by any metric. He really only cares about what the affluent white people who voted for him think and care about. Which is not poor Mexicans.

Poor Mexicans do our yard work and clean our office buildings down here. So at least they're bootstrappy. One day, maybe a couple of generations from now, they'll be affluent enough to give a shiat about.

Perry isn't so much a racist (I don't think) as he just doesn't care what poor people think. Poor people can't do anything for him. They're just takers, wanting stuff like health care and education for their kids. And I doubt he really cares about abortion or gay people getting married, that's just the shiat he yaps about to keep the Jesus freaks happy. I'm sure it'll pay off for him big-time when he stops being governor and goes on the Republican speaking circuit. He'll probably make more money doing that than he does now.
 
2014-01-23 06:50:25 PM  

Molavian: monoski: Molavian: Why do "Red States" have higher divorce rates than "Blue States"?

Because it doesn't count as divorce when your constituency never gets married in the first place?

You know how I know you did not do well in stats class? Divorce rates are taken from the married population. Not those libby libtards living in sin.

[i184.photobucket.com image 640x480]


Marriage is the chief cause of divorce. Duh.
 
2014-01-23 06:54:50 PM  

Dinjiin: FizixJunkee: How about we change the minimum age of marriage until 25, or being a legal adult to at least 21?

FTFY.

I never understood why our government believes that we're responsible enough at age 18 to sign up for the military

and tens of thousands of dollars in student loansso we can go off to die but that we aren't responsible enough to drink a beer on our own.  If you believe that people are that irresponsible at 18, then bump everything up.

FTFY
 
2014-01-23 06:58:04 PM  

Arkanaut: As Glass told The Los Angeles Times, "If you live in a marriage market where everybody marries young, you postpone marriage at your own risk. The best catches ... are going to go first."

This is an interesting point, although I dispute the notion that the "best catches" are the ones who dive headlong into marriage before they turn 20.


That, my friend, depends entirely upon where you grow up. If you are in the sticks and want to stay in those sticks you'd better snap up a cutie quick; they're all pregnant/married (either tends to follow the other quickly so order is of minimal relevance) by their early twenties.
 
2014-01-23 08:51:44 PM  

eggrolls: special20: InterruptingQuirk: what_now: Massachusetts, the first to legalize gay marriage, has the lowest divorce rate.

All the people who got married there went back their home state and can't get divorced there.

I was going to say something very similar, but I only know two couples from "Mass" that got divorced in another state. I wanted to hold out until I knew one more couple before I correlated that metric.

Gay couples who 'got married' in Mass & then 'went back to their home state'...aren't married. There's a residency requirement, for starters. Civil ceremonies in p-Town while on vacation aren't legally binding. Gay marriages still aren't recognized in over 30 states, and are therefore not included in marriage OR divorce statistics. Try again.


Read and be enlightened. "For example, an out-of-state couple who goes to Massachusetts to marry, or a couple who lives in-state and then moves away, can't divorce in Massachusetts because they'd have to be a resident for at least a year. And if the couple's home state doesn't recognize gay marriage, they can't divorce there, either."
 
2014-01-23 09:06:12 PM  

Wendy's Chili: PunGent: Above average salaries

Yeah, no.

If it weren't for Iowa's recent blueward turn, red states would have a monopoly on shiatty paying jobs.

/it's not a bug, it's a feature


Are you trolling, unable to do math, or unable to read your own link?

Help me out here.
 
2014-01-23 09:10:29 PM  
Marriage is hard; so quit, and try again with someone else.  Yeah, that'll work.
Too many people think if their marriage isnt a fairy tale replica then they should divorce.

/been with my wife more than half my life
//it's not always easy
 
2014-01-23 09:12:58 PM  

Wendy's Chili: PunGent: Above average salaries

Yeah, no.

If it weren't for Iowa's recent blueward turn, red states would have a monopoly on shiatty paying jobs.

/it's not a bug, it's a feature


Iowa has predominantly been a blue state.
 
2014-01-23 09:19:13 PM  
The red comes from jock itch.
 
2014-01-23 09:25:37 PM  

doubled99: Let the socially acceptable bigotry begin...


Here you go.

www.preparationh.com
 
2014-01-23 10:25:47 PM  

PunGent: Wendy's Chili: PunGent: Above average salaries

Yeah, no.

If it weren't for Iowa's recent blueward turn, red states would have a monopoly on shiatty paying jobs.

/it's not a bug, it's a feature

Are you trolling, unable to do math, or unable to read your own link?

Help me out here.


I can't answer your question because I don't care, but I would like to note that Mississippi was not the worst state on that list. Go Mississippi! Someday soon we'll find a second thing you're not the worst at!
 
2014-01-23 10:45:15 PM  

Wendy's Chili: PunGent: Above average salaries

Yeah, no.

If it weren't for Iowa's recent blueward turn, red states would have a monopoly on shiatty paying jobs.

/it's not a bug, it's a feature


I'm not sure what your point is but Des Moines, Ia. is one of the wealthiest cities in the nation and is fairly representative of all of Iowa.
 
2014-01-24 12:51:08 AM  
Black people don't get married when they pop out 1000 kids, so that skews the data.
 
Displayed 50 of 156 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report