Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Unlock unbeatable offers today. Shop here: https://amzn.to/4cEkqYs 🎁
No, it actually helps mine and hurts yours.apples to apples is marriages to marriagescohabitation is irrelevant because it's not the same thing as marriage
to compare marriages, we dont use cohabitation.
you want to change the subject to relationships in general...and there's a reason for that. it's because evangelicals cheapen the sanctity of marriage worse than the average population.
nobody is talking about the sanctity of cohabitation
we are talking about the institution of marriage.
in other words, you're deflecting because you have to, emotionally.
People cohabiting today would be married 50 years ago. Evangelicals are one group bucking that trend, and probably even not completely.
I want to compare apples to apples. You want a bashing point for evangelicals.
And I am a lapsed Catholic at best, so no emotion here.
cohabitation is not marriage
Again, people who would have been married years ago due to societal pressures may just cohabitate today, that robs your attempted analysis of any historical information if you just try to compare marriages.
People have lent more respect to Marriage by not doing it unless they're more certain about it.
By arguing that more people co-habitate, all you're doing is arguing that the regular population got smart, didn't jump into something and thus aren't hurting the institution of marriage like the dummy evangelicals are.
You're literally making the point while being too daft to realize you're doing it.
How can you assume "more respect"? It could also be because they don't care about marriage, and thus don't do it.
You are assuming that people who cohabitate care about the "sanctity" of marriage, and that is their reason to not get married.
All to bash evangelicals.
Fundie marriage is a clear threat to traditional marriage.No, it actually helps mine and hurts yours.apples to apples is marriages to marriagescohabitation is irrelevant because it's not the same thing as marriage
to compare marriages, we dont use cohabitation.
you want to change the subject to relationships in general...and there's a reason for that. it's because evangelicals cheapen the sanctity of marriage worse than the average population.
nobody is talking about the sanctity of cohabitation
we are talking about the institution of marriage.
in other words, you're deflecting because you have to, emotionally.
People cohabiting today would be married 50 years ago. Evangelicals are one group bucking that trend, and probably even not completely.
I want to compare apples to apples. You want a bashing point for evangelicals.
And I am a lapsed Catholic at best, so no emotion here.
cohabitation is not marriage
Again, people who would have been married years ago due to societal pressures may just cohabitate today, that robs your attempted analysis of any historical information if you just try to compare marriages.
People have lent more respect to Marriage by not doing it unless they're more certain about it.
By arguing that more people co-habitate, all you're doing is arguing that the regular population got smart, didn't jump into something and thus aren't hurting the institution of marriage like the dummy evangelicals are.
You're literally making the point while being too daft to realize you're doing it.
How can you assume "more respect"? It could also be because they don't care about marriage, and thus don't do it.
You are assuming that people who cohabitate care about the "sanctity" of marriage, and that is their reason to not get married.
All to bash evangelicals.
No, it actually helps mine and hurts yours.apples to apples is marriages to marriagesPeople cohabiting today would be married 50 years ago. Evangelicals are one group bucking that trend, and probably even not completely.
I want to compare apples to apples. You want a bashing point for evangelicals.
And I am a lapsed Catholic at best, so no emotion here.
cohabitation is not marriage
Again, people who would have been married years ago due to societal pressures may just cohabitate today, that robs your attempted analysis of any historical information if you just try to compare marriages.
People have lent more respect to Marriage by not doing it unless they're more certain about it.
By arguing that more people co-habitate, all you're doing is arguing that the regular population got smart, didn't jump into something and thus aren't hurting the institution of marriage like the dummy evangelicals are.
You're literally making the point while being too daft to realize you're doing it.
How can you assume "more respect"? It could also be because they don't care about marriage, and thus don't do it.
You are assuming that people who cohabitate care about the "sanctity" of marriage, and that is their reason to not get married.
All to bash evangelicals.
"why do marriages fail"
"too many people jump into it prematurely"
<<people stop jumping in prematurely, marriage rate improves>>
Marty: "lets now compare other relationships to marriage and not just marriage to marriage to see whose marriage rates are better."
donkey punch donkey punch donkey punch
Fundie marriage is a clear threat to traditional marriage.No, it actually helps mine and hurts yours.apples to apples is marriages to marriagesPeople cohabiting today would be married 50 years ago. Evangelicals are one group bucking that trend, and probably even not completely.
I want to compare apples to apples. You want a bashing point for evangelicals.
And I am a lapsed Catholic at best, so no emotion here.
cohabitation is not marriage
Again, people who would have been married years ago due to societal pressures may just cohabitate today, that robs your attempted analysis of any historical information if you just try to compare marriages.
People have lent more respect to Marriage by not doing it unless they're more certain about it.
By arguing that more people co-habitate, all you're doing is arguing that the regular population got smart, didn't jump into something and thus aren't hurting the institution of marriage like the dummy evangelicals are.
You're literally making the point while being too daft to realize you're doing it.
How can you assume "more respect"? It could also be because they don't care about marriage, and thus don't do it.
You are assuming that people who cohabitate care about the "sanctity" of marriage, and that is their reason to not get married.
All to bash evangelicals.
Why would you bake a cake for these freaks ?
Im looking at marriages vs marriages. I dont need to conflate marriages with every relationship period merely because my pet identity group has poorer statistics.No, it actually helps mine and hurts yours.apples to apples is marriages to marriages
cohabitation is not marriage
Again, people who would have been married years ago due to societal pressures may just cohabitate today, that robs your attempted analysis of any historical information if you just try to compare marriages.
People have lent more respect to Marriage by not doing it unless they're more certain about it.
By arguing that more people co-habitate, all you're doing is arguing that the regular population got smart, didn't jump into something and thus aren't hurting the institution of marriage like the dummy evangelicals are.
You're literally making the point while being too daft to realize you're doing it.
How can you assume "more respect"? It could also be because they don't care about marriage, and thus don't do it.
You are assuming that people who cohabitate care about the "sanctity" of marriage, and that is their reason to not get married.
All to bash evangelicals.
"why do marriages fail"
"too many people jump into it prematurely"
<<people stop jumping in prematurely, marriage rate improves>>
Marty: "lets now compare other relationships to marriage and not just marriage to marriage to see whose marriage rates are better."
donkey punch donkey punch donkey punch
That's one reason they fail. However plenty of other people jump in early. If you want to say evangelical beliefs cause this you would have to limit the study to early marriages, say pre 23 years old or so.
Again, what you want is an evangelical bashing point. Just admit it.
Im looking at marriages vs marriages. I dont need to conflate marriages with every relationship period merely because my pet identity group has poorer statistics.No, it actually helps mine and hurts yours.Again, people who would have been married years ago due to societal pressures may just cohabitate today, that robs your attempted analysis of any historical information if you just try to compare marriages.
People have lent more respect to Marriage by not doing it unless they're more certain about it.
By arguing that more people co-habitate, all you're doing is arguing that the regular population got smart, didn't jump into something and thus aren't hurting the institution of marriage like the dummy evangelicals are.
You're literally making the point while being too daft to realize you're doing it.
How can you assume "more respect"? It could also be because they don't care about marriage, and thus don't do it.
You are assuming that people who cohabitate care about the "sanctity" of marriage, and that is their reason to not get married.
All to bash evangelicals.
"why do marriages fail"
"too many people jump into it prematurely"
<<people stop jumping in prematurely, marriage rate improves>>
Marty: "lets now compare other relationships to marriage and not just marriage to marriage to see whose marriage rates are better."
donkey punch donkey punch donkey punch
That's one reason they fail. However plenty of other people jump in early. If you want to say evangelical beliefs cause this you would have to limit the study to early marriages, say pre 23 years old or so.
Again, what you want is an evangelical bashing point. Just admit it.
I'm looking at deflections away from the central fact, which is a per capita comparison of marriages...and you wanting to change the convo to relationships in general which is besides the underlying point because Marriage is an institution.Im looking at marriages vs marriages. I dont need to conflate marriages with every relationship period merely because my pet identity group has poorer statistics.No, it actually helps mine and hurts yours.
People have lent more respect to Marriage by not doing it unless they're more certain about it.
By arguing that more people co-habitate, all you're doing is arguing that the regular population got smart, didn't jump into something and thus aren't hurting the institution of marriage like the dummy evangelicals are.
You're literally making the point while being too daft to realize you're doing it.
How can you assume "more respect"? It could also be because they don't care about marriage, and thus don't do it.
You are assuming that people who cohabitate care about the "sanctity" of marriage, and that is their reason to not get married.
All to bash evangelicals.
"why do marriages fail"
"too many people jump into it prematurely"
<<people stop jumping in prematurely, marriage rate improves>>
Marty: "lets now compare other relationships to marriage and not just marriage to marriage to see whose marriage rates are better."
donkey punch donkey punch donkey punch
That's one reason they fail. However plenty of other people jump in early. If you want to say evangelical beliefs cause this you would have to limit the study to early marriages, say pre 23 years old or so.
Again, what you want is an evangelical bashing point. Just admit it.
How are they my "pet identity group"?
You are looking for a bashing point, admit it.
I'm looking at deflections away from the central fact, which is a per capita comparison of marriages...and you wanting to change the convo to relationships in general which is besides the underlying point because Marriage is an institution.Im looking at marriages vs marriages. I dont need to conflate marriages with every relationship period merely because my pet identity group has poorer statistics.How can you assume "more respect"? It could also be because they don't care about marriage, and thus don't do it.
You are assuming that people who cohabitate care about the "sanctity" of marriage, and that is their reason to not get married.
All to bash evangelicals.
"why do marriages fail"
"too many people jump into it prematurely"
<<people stop jumping in prematurely, marriage rate improves>>
Marty: "lets now compare other relationships to marriage and not just marriage to marriage to see whose marriage rates are better."
donkey punch donkey punch donkey punch
That's one reason they fail. However plenty of other people jump in early. If you want to say evangelical beliefs cause this you would have to limit the study to early marriages, say pre 23 years old or so.
Again, what you want is an evangelical bashing point. Just admit it.
How are they my "pet identity group"?
You are looking for a bashing point, admit it.
The jehova witnesses in my area send super hot women to talk the b ible and recruit in my area. I like thier recruiting stratigy but they aint getting me to sign up.I've actually never met an evangelical that wasn't super odd-seeming...like jehovah's witness sorta creepy
Jehovah's witnesses aren't evangelicals as the term is used in general practice.
The jehova witnesses in my area send super hot women to talk the b ible and recruit in my area. I like thier recruiting stratigy but they aint getting me to sign up.I've actually never met an evangelical that wasn't super odd-seeming...like jehovah's witness sorta creepy
Jehovah's witnesses aren't evangelicals as the term is used in general practice.
There's no gotchya necessary. The stats are the stats...that's the "there." A gotchya would be something like a veiled attempt to prove something else, by alluding to it.I'm looking at deflections away from the central fact, which is a per capita comparison of marriages...and you wanting to change the convo to relationships in general which is besides the underlying point because Marriage is an institution.Im looking at marriages vs marriages. I dont need to conflate marriages with every relationship period merely because my pet identity group has poorer statistics."why do marriages fail"
"too many people jump into it prematurely"
<<people stop jumping in prematurely, marriage rate improves>>
Marty: "lets now compare other relationships to marriage and not just marriage to marriage to see whose marriage rates are better."
donkey punch donkey punch donkey punch
That's one reason they fail. However plenty of other people jump in early. If you want to say evangelical beliefs cause this you would have to limit the study to early marriages, say pre 23 years old or so.
Again, what you want is an evangelical bashing point. Just admit it.
How are they my "pet identity group"?
You are looking for a bashing point, admit it.
You want to use the info to bash evangelicals, but won't admit it.
I am trying to look into the numbers and the social factors that play into the numbers.
You probably don't even care about marriage, but are trying for a gotcha moment because evangelicals do. It's obvious from your use of the term "institution"
Nothing dumber than someone trying to be smarter than they actually are.
Evangelicals Have Higher-than-average Divorce Rates, According to a Report Compiled by Baylor for the Council on Contemporary Families
Feb. 5, 2014
WACO, Texas (Feb. 5, 2014) -- Despite their strong pro-family values, evangelical Christians have higher than average divorce rates -- in fact, being more likely to be divorced than Americans who claim no religion, according to findings as cited by researchers from Baylor University.
The research is part of a new report released by the Council on Contemporary Families.
The council report coincides with the 50-year anniversary of the passage of the Civil Rights Act, which made it illegal to discriminate against individuals on the basis of race, national origin, religion or gender. The council's report, which included findings by a dozen researchers, dealt with changes in the past half century for each of the populations affected by the law: religious groups, racial and ethnic minorities and women.
Baylor's portion of the report dealt with 50 years of religious change, from 1964 to 2014. Other findings by Baylor were:
Evangelicals Have Higher-than-average Divorce Rates, According to a Report Compiled by Baylor for the Council on Contemporary Families
ABOUT BAYLOR UNIVERSITY
Baylor University is a private Christian university and a nationally ranked research institution, characterized as having "high research activity" by the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching. The university provides a vibrant campus community for approximately 15,000 students by blending interdisciplinary research with an international reputation for educational excellence and a faculty commitment to teaching and scholarship.
------------------------------------------------
What do you have to say about this , Christians. There doesn't seem to be very many article about this as I assume the Evangelicals and Fundy's do not want to advertise it.
prolly cuz theyre weird/culty
Actually it's probably because they marry at a higher rate, and earlier then the general population.
There's no gotchya necessary. The stats are the stats...that's the "there." A gotchya would be something like a veiled attempt to prove something else, by alluding to it.I'm looking at deflections away from the central fact, which is a per capita comparison of marriages...and you wanting to change the convo to relationships in general which is besides the underlying point because Marriage is an institution.Im looking at marriages vs marriages. I dont need to conflate marriages with every relationship period merely because my pet identity group has poorer statistics.That's one reason they fail. However plenty of other people jump in early. If you want to say evangelical beliefs cause this you would have to limit the study to early marriages, say pre 23 years old or so.
Again, what you want is an evangelical bashing point. Just admit it.
How are they my "pet identity group"?
You are looking for a bashing point, admit it.
You want to use the info to bash evangelicals, but won't admit it.
I am trying to look into the numbers and the social factors that play into the numbers.
You probably don't even care about marriage, but are trying for a gotcha moment because evangelicals do. It's obvious from your use of the term "institution"
Nothing dumber than someone trying to be smarter than they actually are.
No, I very clearly said that evangelicals are weirdos and culty in the very beginning of this thread. And now you're dumb enough to accuse me of trying to hide those sentiments...when I typed them outright.
Peas in a pod.
I get Alexis and Tabby a couple of realy nice looking ladies. I gotta admit I get a smile on my face as they come up the side walk. I have not seen them in a couple of weeks. Tabby is married Alexis is not, I wonder if they are trying to induce me with Alexis. Make that offer I might bite for a while any way. She could keep a fella warm at night I am here to tell ya!The jehova witnesses in my area send super hot women to talk the b ible and recruit in my area. I like thier recruiting stratigy but they aint getting me to sign up.I've actually never met an evangelical that wasn't super odd-seeming...like jehovah's witness sorta creepy
Jehovah's witnesses aren't evangelicals as the term is used in general practice.
Lucky you, I get these guys:
Actions?There's no gotchya necessary. The stats are the stats...that's the "there." A gotchya would be something like a veiled attempt to prove something else, by alluding to it.I'm looking at deflections away from the central fact, which is a per capita comparison of marriages...and you wanting to change the convo to relationships in general which is besides the underlying point because Marriage is an institution.Im looking at marriages vs marriages. I dont need to conflate marriages with every relationship period merely because my pet identity group has poorer statistics.
How are they my "pet identity group"?
You are looking for a bashing point, admit it.
You want to use the info to bash evangelicals, but won't admit it.
I am trying to look into the numbers and the social factors that play into the numbers.
You probably don't even care about marriage, but are trying for a gotcha moment because evangelicals do. It's obvious from your use of the term "institution"
Nothing dumber than someone trying to be smarter than they actually are.
No, I very clearly said that evangelicals are weirdos and culty in the very beginning of this thread. And now you're dumb enough to accuse me of trying to hide those sentiments...when I typed them outright.
Peas in a pod.
You still don't admit that you only care about this because it can be used to bash evangelicals. You admit to the bias, but not your actions.
There's no gotchya necessary. The stats are the stats...that's the "there." A gotchya would be something like a veiled attempt to prove something else, by alluding to it.I'm looking at deflections away from the central fact, which is a per capita comparison of marriages...and you wanting to change the convo to relationships in general which is besides the underlying point because Marriage is an institution.Im looking at marriages vs marriages. I dont need to conflate marriages with every relationship period merely because my pet identity group has poorer statistics.
How are they my "pet identity group"?
You are looking for a bashing point, admit it.
You want to use the info to bash evangelicals, but won't admit it.
I am trying to look into the numbers and the social factors that play into the numbers.
You probably don't even care about marriage, but are trying for a gotcha moment because evangelicals do. It's obvious from your use of the term "institution"
Nothing dumber than someone trying to be smarter than they actually are.
No, I very clearly said that evangelicals are weirdos and culty in the very beginning of this thread. And now you're dumb enough to accuse me of trying to hide those sentiments...when I typed them outright.
Peas in a pod.
You still don't admit that you only care about this because it can be used to bash evangelicals. You admit to the bias, but not your actions.
I get Alexis and Tabby a couple of realy nice looking ladies. I gotta admit I get a smile on my face as they come up the side walk. I have not seen them in a couple of weeks. Tabby is married Alexis is not, I wonder if they are trying to induce me with Alexis. Make that offer I might bite for a while any way. She could keep a fella warm at night I am here to tell ya!The jehova witnesses in my area send super hot women to talk the b ible and recruit in my area. I like thier recruiting stratigy but they aint getting me to sign up.I've actually never met an evangelical that wasn't super odd-seeming...like jehovah's witness sorta creepy
Jehovah's witnesses aren't evangelicals as the term is used in general practice.
Lucky you, I get these guys:
Actions?There's no gotchya necessary. The stats are the stats...that's the "there." A gotchya would be something like a veiled attempt to prove something else, by alluding to it.I'm looking at deflections away from the central fact, which is a per capita comparison of marriages...and you wanting to change the convo to relationships in general which is besides the underlying point because Marriage is an institution.How are they my "pet identity group"?
You are looking for a bashing point, admit it.
You want to use the info to bash evangelicals, but won't admit it.
I am trying to look into the numbers and the social factors that play into the numbers.
You probably don't even care about marriage, but are trying for a gotcha moment because evangelicals do. It's obvious from your use of the term "institution"
Nothing dumber than someone trying to be smarter than they actually are.
No, I very clearly said that evangelicals are weirdos and culty in the very beginning of this thread. And now you're dumb enough to accuse me of trying to hide those sentiments...when I typed them outright.
Peas in a pod.
You still don't admit that you only care about this because it can be used to bash evangelicals. You admit to the bias, but not your actions.
You're really weird.
I'm having a discussion on the internet.
I think evangelicals are weirdos and culty. I said that outright, and so it's no wonder to me that their divorce RATE (still a word you seem to have an issue with) is higher.
I'm asserting that it's no wonder, to me. The higher rate.
You have some sort of weird problem with that. I don't care about your problem, but I will continue to point out your odd deflection to "couples in general" because a certain type of coupling, a "Marriage," has a bad statistic for one of your identity groups.
