The End of Marriage in Scandinavia

[Key Of David]

And Europe in general, for that matter?

I feel perfectly safe walking through the streets, alone, in the middle of the night. I can sleep with my windows open, and feel perfectly safe.

I really don't care who falls in love with whom, or who sleeps with whom. I just always assumed that's none of my business.

However, I really DO care about feeling safe -- and I can tell you that in the very conservative, very Baptist state of Texas where I live, I would not DARE walk alone where I live in the middle of the night (or even at 9 pm). Trust me: mean, drunk Bubbas can be every bit as much a threat as a gang member.

I'd much rather that we invest our (what will become increasingly limited) resources catching thieves, murderers and rapists and putting them away, rather than getting our underwear all bunched up and knotted about unmarried couples, gays, pot smokers and Janet Jackson's breast.

I'll tell you what....why don't you go sleep on the street in the nearest TX city (since you're not safe in a southern small town...YEAH RIGHT), and then sleep on the street somewhere in the Bronx. Get back to me if you make the second....

 

[feral]

Will this ever end?

This sorry, misguided perspection of homosexual "immorality" has gotten tiresome. In fact the whole perspection of "societies morals" going astray is stupid. You are society. I am society. We need to stop looking at others as the "them", as the "heathen, sexual agenda, taking christianity out of society, bra burning, starbucks drinking, inappropriate content dealing, pedophile them" for it is simply unrealistic. There are no secret societies out there saying "god, I want the world to be messed up for my kids." No. It's fantasy and it's delusion, so quit thinking that way first. No gay couple worrying about family and employer reactions to coming out are saying "how can we corrupt children?". Doesn't happen. You want to look for the reason behind the "downfall of society"? Look in the mirror.

We as a whole, as a huge group of people from all backgrounds, faiths, cultures...of all different ages from all different types of lives have made society what it is. You complain about it. When is the last time you did anything about it? I'm in about fourteen different letter writing activist campaigns. I get letters from Debbie Stabinow weekly. I march for things I believe in and work with agencies that I think make a difference. Is it enough? No. But to stand back and blame something for the downfall of marriage or any other institution, or morals is just foolish.

Marriage is crumbling because we in society, you and me, we've allowed our media to show us our guilty pleasures - sex, violence, murder, betrayal. Media isn't to blame, they are just trying to make a buck, but we the viewers haven't stood up en masse and said "this is disgusting! you're desensitixing us!". People watch those images of frequent hookups and marital bliss, as well as acceptable indifelity and think "this is what life is, ok". We have allowed ourselves in society to become naive. Don't know about you but "marriage planning" in my book was playing house in Mom's high heels when I was five. Marriage is a wreck because people go into it with naive expectations of romance movie bliss - life will forever be kissing on a beach at sunset. Untrue. You want to combat this? Then quit wasting time pointing fingers and start educating yourself. Pre-marriage counseling, excellent idea. Maybe ought to be mandatory. Maybe funds to assist a married couple in the tasks of child raising, allowing spouses to take time off for building families or working on their marriage.

Furthermore, it is unfair to blame "society" for the destruction of a marriage. Things in society could have contributed, yes, definately...but it is the individuals themselves who have thrown up their hands because they are no longer satisfied, because it's a rough patch, because they rushed it with naive assumptions, because they've never learned effective communication or because they are just too selfish. It is silly to blame the legalizing of homosexuality for my personal choice to have an affair. On a small level if my promiscuous friend who happens to be gay encourages it, then maybe...but on a whole level, no. Divorce rates are/were high in many areas before gay marriage was allowed. It's still illegal here until May and divorce rates are 50%. Obviously the problem is individuals and their expectation of marriage...and perhaps there are social contributors to that, but to say "society" as if it was seperate from yourself is to blame is naive.

(Not directed at any one person)
Ivy
(who is done ranting now)

 

[fragmentsofdreams]

Note that I only posted a short excerpt of a very lengthy study. If you go to page 2 of the article, there are comparisons with three groupings of countries, some of which don't yet have gay unions. The ones that seem to be most resistant to cohabitation, family dissolution, and out-of-wedlock births are the southern European countries of Spain, Portugal, Italy, and Greece, and, until recently, Switzerland and Ireland. In Europe, secularism has spread much more quickly than it has in the States, so religion could very well be the key deterrent in some countries. This is why Kurtz feels the gay marriage debate in America is too important to duck.

The problem is that these studies cannot distinguish causation and correlation. The experience of Italy cannot tell us would have happened to Sweeden, since they were coutntries with different cultures, philosophies, histories, and economies before same-sex relationships came up.

 

[UberLutheran]

I'll tell you what....why don't you go sleep on the street in the nearest TX city (since you're not safe in a southern small town...YEAH RIGHT), and then sleep on the street somewhere in the Bronx. Get back to me if you make the second....

There are 1.3 million people within the metropolitan area of where I live.

 

[DaveSZ]

I still fail to see the correlation between homosexual marriages and having children out of wedlock.

The writers of the Weekly Standard are the same people that brought us the Iraqi war; soon to be Iraqi civil war (God forbid).

When did their ideas ever make sense??

 

[Paula]

And Europe in general, for that matter?

I feel perfectly safe walking through the streets, alone, in the middle of the night. I can sleep with my windows open, and feel perfectly safe.

However, I really DO care about feeling safe -- and I can tell you that in the very conservative, very Baptist state of Texas where I live, I would not DARE walk alone where I live in the middle of the night (or even at 9 pm). Trust me: mean, drunk Bubbas can be every bit as much a threat as a gang member.

Interesting observations. As a side note, along with all the personal freedoms and civil liberties we enjoy in the U.S., part and parcel of that is an increase in crime rates. What may be a contributing factor is that countries such as the UK, e.g. seem to have stiffer sentencing requirements than we Americans do for certain crimes; another would be that gun control laws are stricter in Europe than in the U.S.

 

[Paula]

The problem is that these studies cannot distinguish causation and correlation. The experience of Italy cannot tell us would have happened to Sweeden, since they were coutntries with different cultures, philosophies, histories, and economies before same-sex relationships came up.

But the trends are significant and cannot be ignored. How do we explain why traditional countries such as Italy, Spain, Latin America, and even Japan, all have much lower divorce rates than the U.S. and Europe?

 

[Arthur Dietrich]

But the trends are significant and cannot be ignored. How do we explain why traditional countries such as Italy, Spain, Latin America, and even Japan, all have much lower divorce rates than the U.S. and Europe?

Somewhere In (India, I think) they have a divorce rate of less than 2-3%. Maybe the US should take up Hinduism and arranged marriages. I'll have to see if I can find an actual quote sometime. I only heard about it on the television when they were showing a wedding between two 8 year children.

 

[fragmentsofdreams]

But the trends are significant and cannot be ignored. How do we explain why traditional countries such as Italy, Spain, Latin America, and even Japan, all have much lower divorce rates than the U.S. and Europe?

Perhaps, it is because they are more traditional that they have lower divorce rates as well as no legal recognition of same-sex relationships.

Trends don't necessarily show anything. The out of wedlock births would trend to be higher in areas of fairer skin in Europe, but skin color is irrelevent to out of wedlock births.

 

[Firscherscherling]

Interesting observations. As a side note, along with all the personal freedoms and civil liberties we enjoy in the U.S., part and parcel of that is an increase in crime rates. What may be a contributing factor is that countries such as the UK, e.g. seem to have stiffer sentencing requirements than we Americans do for certain crimes; another would be that gun control laws are stricter in Europe than in the U.S.

Hmm. I am trying really hard to get a handle on all of this. Now, the idea is that mariage rates are down and out of wedlock births are up over there. And that is a terrible thing caused in large part by giving homosexuals equal marriage rights.

But you look at crime, health and other significant stats and they are ahead of or equal to us in just about every category. Lower crime, longer life expectancy and the like.

Then you say that our high civil liberties are the reason we have higher crime rates. Idea being that people not getting married is more important than the fact we are killing, raping and imprisoning people here more than any country over there. So on the one hand you are arguing against the civil liberty of equal marriage rights in Norway while on the other you are patting us on the back for providing MORE rights than they do. What the extra rights are that we have but that don't exist in Norway I have no idea, nor does my Norwegian friend, but apparently you know what they are.

Could you please tie all of this together for me. The article posted doesn't. You haven't. I'm willing to listen if there is any sort of reasonable way to decode all of this.

Seems to me the Norwegians are a pretty darned free people with lots of rights and liberties. It also seems that they have more peaceful lives. What is the bad thing happening over there?

 

[Paula]

Hmm. I am trying really hard to get a handle on all of this. Now, the idea is that mariage rates are down and out of wedlock births are up over there. And that is a terrible thing caused in large part by giving homosexuals equal marriage rights.

But you look at crime, health and other significant stats and they are ahead of or equal to us in just about every category. Lower crime, longer life expectancy and the like.

Then you say that our high civil liberties are the reason we have higher crime rates. Idea being that people not getting married is more important than the fact we are killing, raping and imprisoning people here more than any country over there. So on the one hand you are arguing against the civil liberty of equal marriage rights in Norway while on the other you are patting us on the back for providing MORE rights than they do. What the extra rights are that we have but that don't exist in Norway I have no idea, nor does my Norwegian friend, but apparently you know what they are.

Could you please tie all of this together for me. The article posted doesn't. You haven't. I'm willing to listen if there is any sort of reasonable way to decode all of this.

Seems to me the Norwegians are a pretty darned free people with lots of rights and liberties. It also seems that they have more peaceful lives. What is the bad thing happening over there?

You sound really confused. What does gay marriage have to do with crime rates in Norway??????

 

[Paula]

Well, since we are doing the sme thread about a million times, please review my response on the first thread. National stats prove that Scandinavian countries have a far higher rate of 'morality', education, life expectancy per capita than our Christian nation.

Maybe we need to all go gay?

Although you consistently supply no sources, I fail to see any correlation/causative factors between all of the above and gay marriage.

 

[Firscherscherling]

I am not sure how I can give you the source any better than I already have. It is a statistical site www.nationmaster.com. It has a big map. You click on Europe. You then click on Norway. Then you get a big map of Norway and a whole list of statistical categories. You can do this for any country in the world. How hard is that? I ain't spoon feeding you. Is it just that you don't want to know so you are avoiding it?

An in response to your last two posts:

1. You failed to show any sort of moral or societal decline in Norway. Marriage rates may be down there, but what is the result of that? Is it less marriages? If everything else is still good but there are fewer marriages, I don't care.

Look at the per-capita stats under "People". You'll see they have a lower divorce rate per 1000 marriages. You'll see they have a far higher rate of couples with children. You'll also see that they have the exact same number of single parent households as we do. Looks like they are doing better.

I am not saying that gay marriage or secularism is the cause. That wouldn't be my point at all. My point is that you have a false premise that Norway is in decline. My point is that you are trying to back up your false premise by burning a cross in the fron yard of gay marriage.

It is YOUR false causal relationship.

Look at the stats and show me how Norway is in a worse state of affairs than our Christian nation.

 

[Paula]

The following represents 1998 divorce rates per 100 from the nationmaster link. They're pretty consistent with what Kurtz has reported in his groupings by country:

1.Sweden 65 2.Belgium 59 3.Czech Republic 58 4.Finland 57 5.Hungary 57 6.United Kingdom 51 7.New Zealand 50 8.Luxembourg 49 9.United States 49 10.Australia 48 11.Germany 46 12.Switzerland 46 13.Austria 45 14.Canada 45 15.Norway 41 16.France 40 17.Denmark 37 18.Netherlands 37 19.Iceland 31 20.Japan 31 21.Korea, South 25 22.Portugal 22 23.Poland 21 24.Greece 17 25.Spain 17

Among the lowest rates in the world (below Spain) are Mexico (6%), Turkey (6%) and Italy (12%). So there does appear to be some correlation in more traditional/less secular countries with low divorce rates which don't have gay marriage.

Although anthropologist/researcher Stanley Kurtz does see secularism as a driving factor behind gay marriage, he didn't reached his conclusion based on Norwegian stats alone. He's included all countries who presently have gay marriage and compared them with the U.S. But the focus on Scandinavia is important because the're considered more progressive in this area, whereas the concept is relatively new in other countries of the world. This is why he's issued so many valid warnings on the subject.

I further notice that Stanley Kurtz has used cumulative stats more recent than the 1998 figures supplied by Nationmaster. His research includes numerous statistical sources, the U.N. being among them.

 

[Firscherscherling]

The following represents 1998 divorce rates per 100 from the nationmaster link. They're pretty consistent with what Kurtz has reported in his groupings by country:

1.Sweden 65 2.Belgium 59 3.Czech Republic 58 4.Finland 57 5.Hungary 57 6.United Kingdom 51 7.New Zealand 50 8.Luxembourg 49 9.United States 49 10.Australia 48 11.Germany 46 12.Switzerland 46 13.Austria 45 14.Canada 45 15.Norway 41 16.France 40 17.Denmark 37 18.Netherlands 37 19.Iceland 31 20.Japan 31 21.Korea, South 25 22.Portugal 22 23.Poland 21 24.Greece 17 25.Spain 17

Among the lowest rates in the world (below Spain) are Mexico (6%), Turkey (6%) and Italy (12%). So there does appear to be some correlation in more traditional/less secular countries with low divorce rates which don't have gay marriage.

Although anthropologist/researcher Stanley Kurtz does see secularism as a driving factor behind gay marriage, he didn't reached his conclusion based on Norwegian stats alone. He's included all countries who presently have gay marriage and compared them with the U.S. But the focus on Scandinavia is important because the're considered more progressive in this area, whereas the concept is relatively new in other countries of the world. This is why he's issued so many valid warnings on the subject.

I further notice that Stanley Kurtz has used cumulative stats more recent than the 1998 figures supplied by Nationmaster. His research includes numerous statistical sources, the U.N. being among them.

Why is it that you ignore things like the fact that the US, UK and all those others above the scandinavian countries that don't have same sex marriage laws are doing worse than those that do? Why is that ignored? I'd also postulate that if they had these 'people' stats for N. Korea, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Yemen and other such lovely states, that we'd see a very very low divorce rate in them.

But again, I am not seeing the causal link you are talking about. What are the other societal/scioilogical differences in these countries? What about the other stats like crime rates?

I also notice that of the examples you gave of the traditional countries, all but Italy fall way down the list on life expectancy. Am I to draw Gay marriage conclusions from that?

The correlations are bogus. You can't take a single thing like gay marriage and draw sweeping conclusions from them. I can look at the stats with such a perspective make them say all kinds of things. It is way more complicated than that.

I think what bothers me most about this is that I can tell you are a smart person. I disagree with your personal views big time. But this has nothing to do with that. You know better than to draw such conclusions and to accept the methodology used in this study as valid. Its nonsensical.

 

[Paula]

But again, I am not seeing the causal link you are talking about.

From the article, I'd say the causal link seems to be morality which is borne out by the trends:

"Scandinavian marriage is in a state of collapse; out-of-wedlock birthrates are rising; gay marriage has added to the factors pushing those rates higher. Instead of encouraging a society-wide return to marriage, Scandinavian gay marriage has driven home the message that marriage itself is outdated, and that virtually any family form, including out-of-wedlock parenthood, is acceptable."

"In 2002, an extraordinary 82.27 percent of first-born children in Nordland were born out-of-wedlock. A "mere" 67.29 percent of all children born in Nordland in 2002 were born out-of-wedlock . . . many of these births are to unmarried, but cohabiting, couples. Yet cohabiting couples in Scandinavia break up at two to three times the rate of married couples. Since the Norwegian tendency to marry after the second child is gradually giving way, it is likely that the 67-percent figure for all out-of-wedlock births will someday catch up to the 82-percent figure for first-born out-of-wedlock births. At that point, marriage in Nordland will be effectively dead."

What are the other societal/scioilogical differences in these countries? What about the other stats like crime rates?

Crime rates don't factor into the equation.

I also notice that of the examples you gave of the traditional countries, all but Italy fall way down the list on life expectancy. Am I to draw Gay marriage conclusions from that?

From the looks of it, you're still confusing cause and effect (apples and oranges). Evidently, there just aren't enough unbiased, professional reports around to convince you. This is one of those controversial topics like abortion, where we'll just have to agree to disagree and move on. [/QUOTE]

 

[Philosoft]

From the article, I'd say the causal link seems to be morality which is borne out by the trends:

"Scandinavian marriage is in a state of collapse; out-of-wedlock birthrates are rising; gay marriage has added to the factors pushing those rates higher. Instead of encouraging a society-wide return to marriage, Scandinavian gay marriage has driven home the message that marriage itself is outdated, and that virtually any family form, including out-of-wedlock parenthood, is acceptable."

"In 2002, an extraordinary 82.27 percent of first-born children in Nordland were born out-of-wedlock. A "mere" 67.29 percent of all children born in Nordland in 2002 were born out-of-wedlock . . . many of these births are to unmarried, but cohabiting, couples. Yet cohabiting couples in Scandinavia break up at two to three times the rate of married couples. Since the Norwegian tendency to marry after the second child is gradually giving way, it is likely that the 67-percent figure for all out-of-wedlock births will someday catch up to the 82-percent figure for first-born out-of-wedlock births. At that point, marriage in Nordland will be effectively dead."

Even if 'number of out-of-wedlock births' is a moral issue, the fact that such births are increasing does not establish 'overall reduction in morality' as the cause.

Crime rates don't factor into the equation.

Excuse me? You're the one who's insisting that "morality" is the causal factor for increased out-of-wedlock births. Quite reasonably assuming crime is also correlated with morality, then it certainly is a factor.

 

[Firscherscherling]

From the article, I'd say the causal link seems to be morality which is borne out by the trends:

"Scandinavian marriage is in a state of collapse; out-of-wedlock birthrates are rising; gay marriage has added to the factors pushing those rates higher. Instead of encouraging a society-wide return to marriage, Scandinavian gay marriage has driven home the message that marriage itself is outdated, and that virtually any family form, including out-of-wedlock parenthood, is acceptable."

"In 2002, an extraordinary 82.27 percent of first-born children in Nordland were born out-of-wedlock. A "mere" 67.29 percent of all children born in Nordland in 2002 were born out-of-wedlock . . . many of these births are to unmarried, but cohabiting, couples. Yet cohabiting couples in Scandinavia break up at two to three times the rate of married couples. Since the Norwegian tendency to marry after the second child is gradually giving way, it is likely that the 67-percent figure for all out-of-wedlock births will someday catch up to the 82-percent figure for first-born out-of-wedlock births. At that point, marriage in Nordland will be effectively dead."


Crime rates don't factor into the equation.


From the looks of it, you're still confusing cause and effect (apples and oranges). Evidently, there just aren't enough unbiased, professional reports around to convince you. This is one of those controversial topics like abortion, where we'll just have to agree to disagree and move on.

[/QUOTE]
I still don't see a causal link. I could look at a stat that shows they are drinking more and more red wine in the same countries. Would I then be able to make the GIGANTIC leap that gay marriage was the cause? Not at all. The fact that trends in two stats are similar does not a causal link make. It's way more complicated that that.

The other issue is the idea that the standard for a society's noral status is its level of marriage. Again, I'd say a nation with fewer victims of crime has a better handle on morality than one that tops the list.

Personally, I'd rather live in a nation where no one got married and no one got raped, than in one where everyone was married and lots of people got raped. I'd think the first country had a higher standard of decencey. Alas, the world is not that simple. There are many factors that determine the make-up of society.

What is simple is using statistics to justify just about any position you want to take. It's sad that people like Kurtz start with a preconceived notion and then use stats to illustrate it. Especially when the notion is based on a base dislike for a certain class of people.

I wonder if I could look back at examples in the 1930s of people writing statistical studies that proved Jews were evil and trying to take over the economy? I'll look into it.

 

[Paula]

Why is it that you ignore things like the fact that the US, UK and all those others above the scandinavian countries that don't have same sex marriage laws are doing worse than those that do?

Because Kurtz's study centers on European countries that already have gay marriage. To my knowledge, the UK does not have it yet, but soon will.

I'd also postulate that if they had these 'people' stats for N. Korea, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Yemen and other such lovely states, that we'd see a very very low divorce rate in them.

For obvious reasons, totalitarian dictatorships do have very low crime rates.

What about the other stats like crime rates?

Crime rates were not factored into the Kurtz study as they are not relevant to gay marriage. He focuses on vital statistics and trends in countries, both with and without gay marriage.

I also notice that of the examples you gave of the traditional countries, all but Italy fall way down the list on life expectancy. Am I to draw Gay marriage conclusions from that?

What relevance is there between life expectancy and gay marriage? Or crime and gay marriage? You're confusing apples and oranges again.

Personally, I'd rather live in a nation where no one got married and no one got raped, than in one where everyone was married and lots of people got raped. I'd think the first country had a higher standard of decencey.

I pretty much guessed that, judging from your prior negative opinions about the U.S.

What is simple is using statistics to justify just about any position you want to take. It's sad that people like Kurtz start with a preconceived notion and then use stats to illustrate it. Especially when the notion is based on a base dislike for a certain class of people.

FYI, Mr. Kurtz is a research analyst, an anthropologist with a degree from Harvard. His articles are thoroughly researched and well-documented. He's also a non-Christian, so there goes your bias theory.

I wonder if I could look back at examples in the 1930s of people writing statistical studies that proved Jews were evil and trying to take over the economy? I'll look into it.

Non sequitur.

 

[Paula]

Even if 'number of out-of-wedlock births' is a moral issue, the fact that such births are increasing does not establish 'overall reduction in morality' as the cause.

Perhaps not the sole cause, but nonetheless a cause.

Excuse me? You're the one who's insisting that "morality" is the causal factor for increased out-of-wedlock births.

Stanley Kurtz does allude to that fact. Scandinavia's out-of-wedlock birthrates may have risen more rapidly during the cultural revolution of the sixties and seventies, when marriage began its slide:

"Growth in the out-of-wedlock birthrate is limited by the tendency of parents to marry after a couple of births, and also by the persistence of relatively conservative and religious districts. So as out-of-wedlock childbearing pushes beyond 50 percent, it is reaching the toughest areas of cultural resistance. The most important trend of the post-gay marriage decade may be the erosion of the tendency to marry at the birth of a second child. Once even that marker disappears, the path to the complete disappearance of marriage is open."

Quite reasonably assuming crime is also correlated with morality, then it certainly is a factor.

How would you correlate crime with morality? Take Mexico, for instance, a traditional country with a very low 6% divorce rate. Yet it has an unusually high crime rate, and ranks 13th on a list of the top 100 countries with the highest crime rates in the world.