Teen birth rates highest in most religious states

[aphex]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32...th-kids_and_parenting/

I see those abstinence programs work great! :roll:

 

[halik]

repost, there's a thread about it in O/T

http://forums.anandtech.com/me...=2335133&enterthread=y

 

[Moonbeam]

Traditional religion controls people via self hate. We are sold on the notion that we are worthless sinners and part of that deal is that sexual pleasure is bad.

Thus so much of religion leads to sexual repression and it is the sexually repressed who give us our deviates, those for whom sex becomes an addiction and sick pleasure rather than a joy. All the guild and conflict create irresponsibility.

 

[shira]

Originally posted by: aphex
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32...th-kids_and_parenting/

I see those abstinence programs work great! :roll:

And it isn't as though this result represents just a minor correlation. Eleven of the twelve most religious states are in the highest 14 in the rate of births to teenage mothers. And 9 of the 11 least religious states are in the lowest 11.

And since teenage mothers and their children have the highest poverty rate (about two-thirds) of any group, and depend the most on state and federal social programs, it is arguable that the most highly religious among us disproportionately burden society with the negative consequences of their beliefs.

But of course, they are just doing God's will.

 

[blackangst1]

Lots of possible skews in the study, admittedly in the article. Interesting this quote too: ...the results showed more abortions among teenagers in the less religious states.

 

[Patranus]

I would like to see which states have the highest abortion rates and compare them to this study.

 

[Strk]

As I said in the other thread, birthrate is stupid. You're only counting those who carry to term. Pregnancy rate is much more important.

A quick search found this (it's a PDF)

 

[TruePaige]

Originally posted by: Strk
As I said in the other thread, birthrate is stupid. You're only counting those who carry to term. Pregnancy rate is much more important.

A quick search found this (it's a PDF)

Why is pregnancy rate more important?

Girls who don't carry to term don't make society pay for their children and overall have a better chance at being a benefit to society.

 

[JSt0rm]

robots making robots

 

[Colt45]

Abstinence programs were designed for this, weren't they?

Maybe it's backwards though. Perhaps ignorant folk with no earthly goals, getting knocked up when they're 13, are more likely to fall for christianity.

 

[JD50]

Originally posted by: TruePaige

Originally posted by: Strk
As I said in the other thread, birthrate is stupid. You're only counting those who carry to term. Pregnancy rate is much more important.

A quick search found this (it's a PDF)

Why is pregnancy rate more important?

Girls who don't carry to term don't make society pay for their children and overall have a better chance at being a benefit to society.

Because the more important issue to society is teens making poor decision and getting pregnant.

 

[Strk]

Originally posted by: TruePaige

Originally posted by: Strk
As I said in the other thread, birthrate is stupid. You're only counting those who carry to term. Pregnancy rate is much more important.

A quick search found this (it's a PDF)

Why is pregnancy rate more important?

Girls who don't carry to term don't make society pay for their children and overall have a better chance at being a benefit to society.

Because it ignores the problem of unsafe sex.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

So someone looked at birth rates and said "hey they have a lot of religious people" and publish a correlation.

OK, Democrats are more likely to commit violent crimes. Can I haz article?

 

[Zstream]

Originally posted by: TruePaige

Originally posted by: Strk
As I said in the other thread, birthrate is stupid. You're only counting those who carry to term. Pregnancy rate is much more important.

A quick search found this (it's a PDF)

Why is pregnancy rate more important?

Girls who don't carry to term don't make society pay for their children and overall have a better chance at being a benefit to society.

Because you are trying to mock religion again. You are trying to put up a weak argument together in terms of religion/birth rate.

As stated above, the pregnancy rate matters if you are going to try and even debate. The point of the thread was not to debate, rather to humiliate those who have religious beliefs.

 

[JD50]

I've always wondered how the anti-religious left deals with the fact that their beloved President attended a radical church for 20 years.

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: JD50
I've always wondered how the anti-religious left deals with the fact that their beloved President attended a radical church for 20 years.

Mostly I regret that it didn't make him radical at all. It totally failed in its mission, sadly.

But that's the way of church. Nobody who goes believes what they hear there. They go to be with their neighbors and maintain social standing. It gives women a chance to run things in the family on Sunday.

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: JD50
I've always wondered how the anti-religious left deals with the fact that their beloved President attended a radical church for 20 years.

I view it as an unfortunate reality. Any atheist who knows anything about politics realizes that no atheist is going to be elected president any time soon, so you just sort of resign yourself to it.

As for whether or not a church is 'radical' or not, that tends to be a judgment call. I personally consider every church that believes a magical man poofed the world into existence to be so far out of touch with reality that the distinctions they draw between each other to make one 'radical' and one not don't really register.

 

[EndGame]

Yeah.......so?

I grew up in one of the states listed, Missouri so this caught my eye when the local news via internet reported this. Seems the highest teen pregnancy rates for that state at least were in St. Louis, Kansas City, Columbia & Springfield........the large cities, college cities, least religious and most predominately democrat areas......so, what does this report actually prove as far as true demographics?

Not saying this holds true for all states listed but for Missouri, the report seems to prove little. The rural areas of the state are the most religious, most republican and have the least teen pregnancies.......

 

[DealMonkey]

Lot's of dumb, ignorant stuff happens more frequently in the most religious states. Honestly, I've stopped keeping track . . .

Originally posted by: JD50
I've always wondered how the anti-religious left deals with the fact that their beloved President attended a radical church for 20 years.

Some people are capable of going through the motions, knowing that you have to for whatever reason. I've done it, I'm sure you've done it in some capacity, and clearly Obama's done it too.

 

[reallyscrued]

Originally posted by: blackangst1
Lots of possible skews in the study, admittedly in the article. Interesting this quote too: ...the results showed more abortions among teenagers in the less religious states.

That doesn't change the fact that there are more teenagers giving birth in the more religious states.

Think of it this way, if OP had said, "New study concludes there are more abortions in the non-religious states", everyone would go, "kthxbye."

Or my favorite: Cool story brah.


I would really like to know what qualifies as a religious state.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Heh, the fapping is strong here

The most violent city is Dem, therefore being Democratic makes one a murderer or rapist.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Here is another correlation. Inner cities are more violent and tend to have a larger minority population. Liberal policies are more in effect and favored by those minorities.

So liberal progressives make rapists out of minorities.

Its fun watching people dig themselves into an intellectual pit. It gives those with reasoning abilities the chance to fill it with water and watch them swim about

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider
Here is another correlation. Inner cities are more violent and tend to have a larger minority population. Liberal policies are more in effect and favored by those minorities.

So liberal progressives make rapists out of minorities.

Its fun watching people dig themselves into an intellectual pit. It gives those with reasoning abilities the chance to fill it with water and watch them swim about

Well that's not exactly how it works. One of the most important parts of a hypothesis is a plausible causal mechanism. I'm pretty sure that more religious states tend (note: tend) to have sex education that deemphasizes comprehensive sex ed and birth control in lieu of an abstinence based policy. Objective research has shown that abstinence only sex education is significantly less effective at preventing teen pregnancy than comprehensive sex ed, and so higher teen birth rates in states that are more likely to employ this sort of education is to be expected.

I'm going to bet that making such a connection between liberal policies and rape would be quite difficult.

 

[AyashiKaibutsu]

When my wife taught, she overheard students talking about how holding your arms above your head for long periods of time could cause a miscarriage among some lesser but still completely retarded birth control notions; this is in Montgomery Alabama.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Not really. Liberal policies enacted welfare. Welfare provides a means whereby people can avoid work. The crime rate in that population is higher and therefore liberal policies may cause crime.

All that study did is look at numbers posit a speculation and leave it there for others to swoon over. Did it look at educational or poverty levels? Did it do a comparison at more local levels? Did anyone actually bother to find out if there is a link at all? No, but there is a lot of "religion causes..."

AT is overwhelmingly anti religious. If this were to be applied to a minority the poster would be banned. Since anything anti religion is sanctioned here I tend to poke holes in stupid arguments, and this "study" which merely cites what would normally be considered conjecture at best has no intellectual merit an therefore neither does any declarative statement based on it.