America's Culture War

[JUGGERNAUT]

Certainly the fault does not lie with Rumsfeld alone. You can argue that training perhaps did not stress the importance of upholding human rights but certainly as this investigation unfolds the majority of soldiers got the message. So I think pysche evaluations & probing the backgrounds of the bad apples throughout the chain of command is in order.

 

But even that being said this is my problem with Rumsfeld on this issue:

He knew in late 2001 when this war unfolded that this was a war of liberation on the road to building an American driven democracy in Iraq. He knew this even when we did not. Given the enormous cost associated with building democracy in Iraq how could he simply stand by & expect business to function normally? This was a propaganda war as much as a military war! These pictures & the pending videos are the WMD's against the prop war. Given all the comments he receives as being incredibly intelligent & detailed oriented how could he not have taken safeguards to prevent this?

 

God help us when the video surfaces. If a picture speaks a 1000 words a video must speak a book.

[JUGGERNAUT]

New Survey by American Marriage Lawyers (as reported in the Christian Science Monitor):

The divorce rate was at 68% last year.

62% attributed to new love interests over the net.

58% attributed to new porn obsessions over the net.

 

Needless to say in a society void of any redeemable values or morals hedonism will find strong roots. At what point to we begin to say "more" is simply excess & a lack of self-restraint & control?

[CrimsonWeltall]

Can you provide a source?

 

A google search for "American Marriage Lawyers" finds 0 results nor is there any information about them on csmonitor.com.

[FlaSoxxJim]

The divorce rate was at 68% last year.

62% attributed to new love interests over the net.

58% attributed to new porn obsessions over the net.

So Internet love interests and internet porn sites accounts for all 120% (?!?) of last year's divorces?

 

Those Christian Scientists are not very good mathematicians. They're not concerned though, they're waiting for the problem to fix itself.

[Wong & Owens]

New Survey by American Marriage Lawyers (as reported in the Christian Science Monitor):

The divorce rate was at 68% last year.

62% attributed to new love interests over the net.

58% attributed to new porn obsessions over the net.

 

Needless to say in a society void of any redeemable values or morals hedonism will find strong roots.  At what point to we begin to say "more" is simply excess & a lack of self-restraint & control?

Nothing says "fair and unbiased" like the Christian Science Monitor.

[JUGGERNAUT]

Nothing says "fair and unbiased" like the Christian Science Monitor.

You people are just sad. First of what in your mind suggests the two groups have to be mutually exclusive? They are clearly not. It's like any other polling question .. independant of the others.

 

Secondly, there isn't a media source on this planet that doesn't have a biased context. Capitalism insures that. Everyone has an agenda whether it's under guise of non-profit or openly profit. So what's the point in making such a statement as to imply that there is? Other than smack there isn't one.

 

I guess I'm just better at googling than you are because I've got you 2 more links:

http://www.divorcemag.com/statistics/statsUS.shtml

http://www.aaml.org/

[JUGGERNAUT]

2000 election stats:

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=stor...edoffbypolitics

2000 election voter turnout

 

186.3 million eligible* voters

60% voted (110.8 million)

53.5% women (59.3 million)

46.5% men (51.5 million)

 

---

 

A closer look at eligible voters, broken down by marital status:

 

44.8 million single women:

52% voted (23.4 million)

48% did not vote (21.4 million)

 

Voted for:

Al Gore (news - web sites) (D) 66%**

George W. Bush ® 30%

Ralph Nader (news - web sites) (G) 4%

 

--

 

34.9 million single men:

44% voted (15.5 million)

56% did not vote (19.4 million)

 

Voted for:

Gore 48%

Bush 45%

Nader 7%

 

--

 

52.8 million married women:

68% voted (35.9 million)

32% did not vote (16.9 million)

 

Voted for:

Gore 49%

Bush 49%

Nader 2%

 

--

 

53.8 million married men:

67% voted (36 million)

33% did not vote (17.8 million)

 

Voted for:

Bush 58%

Gore 40%

Nader 2%

 

*Eligible voters are U.S. citizens age 18 and older.

**Voter returns based on exit poll data.

Numbers are rounded to nearest decimal place.

Sources: U.S. census, Los Angeles Times exit poll

[CrimsonWeltall]

I guess I'm just better at googling than you are because I've got you 2 more links:

 

Neither of which refer to a poll by the "American Marriage Lawyers

(as reported in the Christian Science Monitor)".

 

52.8 million married women:

 

53.8 million married men:

 

OP

[JUGGERNAUT]

Neither of which refer to a poll by the "American Marriage Lawyers

(as reported in the Christian Science Monitor)".

 

 

 

 

 

OP

http://www.aaml.org/ - That's the site for the organization.

 

 

This was your quote:

Can you provide a source?

A google search for "American Marriage Lawyers" finds 0 results nor is there any information about them on csmonitor.com.

 

 

No where did you ask for the article in the csmonitor.com. Further, you already discredited the csmonitor so it would be a waste of time for me to provide you with.

An article also appeared in the NY Daily News. Perhaps you prefer that source instead.

It's not my job to do this. If you are disputing the numbers than go find a source with different numbers, quote from it & be on your way.

[Wong & Owens]

http://www.aaml.org/ - That's the site for the organization.

 

 

This was your quote:

Can you provide a source?

A google search for "American Marriage Lawyers" finds 0 results nor is there any information about them on csmonitor.com.

 

 

No where did you ask for the article in the csmonitor.com.  Further, you already discredited the csmonitor so it would be a waste of time for me to provide you with.

An article also appeared in the NY Daily News.  Perhaps you prefer that source instead.

It's not my job to do this.  If you are disputing the numbers than go find a source with different numbers, quote from it & be on your way.

Actually, it was I who discredited the CS Monitor.

 

I'd be real interested to see the demographics behind those polled, I know the ghetto has a pretty high divorce rate, and believe me, there ain't alot of computers in Englewood.

 

Also, since when is marriage the barometer by which we measure society's values or morals? I know lots of unmarried people(myslef included) who I consider to have very solid morals and values. Again with the attempt to show that life was so much more value-based in say 1950. It is simply not true.

[JUGGERNAUT]

Since you discredit (unjustifiably so) the csmonitor, here is the source information I have from the NY Daily News article. I do not have a link as this was sent to me by a female friend.

 

Last Thursday's New York Daily News:

"Hitting the'escape' key" and written by Melena Z. Ryzik.

 

Summary: divorce lawyers are confirming that nfidelity and pornography on the Internet are destroying marriages.

 

AAML survey:

62% of respondents - internet has played a big role

68% of respondents - new internet love interest

56% of respondents - new obsessive interest in online porn

 

Now go argue with the AAML or produce evidence to the contrary.

[JUGGERNAUT]

A general question for atheists, hedonists, & the like:

Why is it so common & predictable for people like you to discredit the messenger or the source as opposed to the message itself? Does the message scare you or is it simply that you lack the ability to debate it?

 

I'm wondering of course because it flies in the face of being open-minded if your vision is narrowed to only a few sources. Sort of like Moronitti.

[Wong & Owens]

Since you discredit (unjustifiably so) the csmonitor, here is the source information I have from the NY Daily News article.  I do not have a link as this was sent to me by a female friend.

 

Last Thursday's New York Daily News:

"Hitting the'escape' key" and written by Melena Z. Ryzik. 

 

Summary: divorce lawyers are confirming that nfidelity and pornography on the Internet are destroying marriages.

 

AAML survey:

62% of respondents - internet has played a big role

68% of respondents - new internet love interest

56% of respondents - new obsessive interest in online porn

 

Now go argue with the AAML or produce evidence to the contrary.

OK, I got this from Divorce magazine:

 

Percentage of divorces due to irreconcilable differences in 1997: 80%

 

Since I don't think obsession over internet porn, or internet love interests fall under this category, then how can 80% of divorces be due to irreconcilable differences, if 56-62% are due to the factors you've listed?

[Steff]

A general question for atheists, hedonists, & the like:

Why is it so common & predictable for people like you to discredit the messenger or the source as opposed to the message itself?  Does the message scare you or is it simply that you lack the ability to debate it? 

 

I'm wondering of course because it flies in the face of being open-minded if your vision is narrowed to only a few sources.  Sort of like Moronitti.

Why do you put so much stock in them...? To be honest.. I don't believe any of those polls. Quite frankly.. I don't think those answering the questions are honest. If you are really divorcing because you are a POS spouse, are a slob, or can't cook.. are you going to check that box... or the one that says "my ex is a scumbag because of ....."

 

 

I'm also curious as to why you are so hostile when people choose not to follow the line of thinking you do....

[Wong & Owens]

A general question for atheists, hedonists, & the like:

Why is it so common & predictable for people like you to discredit the messenger or the source as opposed to the message itself?  Does the message scare you or is it simply that you lack the ability to debate it? 

 

I'm wondering of course because it flies in the face of being open-minded if your vision is narrowed to only a few sources.  Sort of like Moronitti.

Nope, I'm not scared, I initially though the survey was DONE by the CS Monitor. I misread, and that's my fault.

 

Back to your "The world is heading down a moral sewer" theory, divorce rates have been escalating since marriage peaked around 1960. Last I checked, there was no internet from 1960 through about 1992.

 

I think the message is obvious--marriage, which, in the form I'm sure your suggesting has only truly existed for about 150 years tops, is changing again.

[JUGGERNAUT]

Why do you put so much stock in them...? To be honest.. I don't believe any of those polls. Quite frankly.. I don't think those answering the questions are honest. If you are really divorcing because you are a POS spouse, are a slob, or can't cook.. are you going to check that box... or the one that says "my ex is a scumbag because of ....."

 

 

I'm also curious as to why you are so hostile when people choose not to follow the line of thinking you do....

To Steff:

My question clearly indicates the source & justification for my challenging the hostility of others. My initial post on this subject is anything but hostile but the responses were clearly the opposite. Cause & effect my dear.

 

As to your presumption that people would by & large lie in such belittles the impact of a divorce & the seriousness of the lives it impacts.

 

To TGOWT:

I really am beginning to wonder what they are teaching in college these days because you're thought process seems void of ER. No not the television show. Entity Relationships. The reason why I included the 2 links is to show the correlation of the two polls. Is there a poll at the divorcemag site specific to porn? No. Is there a poll dealing with infidelity? Yes. If you add up the male & female %'s on that issue

it comes very close to 68% that the aaml survey shows. Now is it beyond your comprehension that cyber-sex & cyber-porn might be included in irreconcible differences given that there are not specific questions on these subjects at that site?

 

There is one very telling statistic at the divorcemag site that strongly supports the aaml site:

71% of women polled view cyber-sex as infidelity

46% of men polled view cyber-sex as infidelity.

 

Now when you combine that with the divorcemag stat that infidelity is by & large the single reason for divorce it certainly leads a lot of credence to the aaml survey.

 

Now to point out your falicies: America On-Line existed prior to 1992. So to link cyber-space to the emergence of the public internet or WWW is flat out wrong.

Cyber-space in a private form emerged in the mid-80's. And if you wish to trace back to the emergence of personals it can be traced back to the 60's.

 

Your last statement is so oblivious in nature it's pointless to even comment on.

Apparently you do not believe in cause & effect. Believing in coincidence or rather if you prefer chaos theory (that all things all events will at some time converge with one another thereby making random events seem fated) on a macro level is not necc a bad thing. It has it pros & cons like everything else. But to believe in it on a micro level is simply nonsense. Things happen for a reason. Not fate & not coincidence. Cause & effect. Purpose vs pleasure. There are a ton of philosophy books on the subject & they can teach you better than I can.

 

What the numbers clearly show is that in the face of greater temptation the less morally rigid members of our society will choose pleasure over purpose. You have provided no basis to believe otherwise.

[Steff]

Cause & effect... good argument. I suppose taking the higher road wouldn't be as much fun.

 

And.. speaking from experience.. I know that most people who divorce do nothing but lie. It's all about who gets the best settlement, the china, the larger amount of extortion, etc.. etc...

 

That's a fact.

[JUGGERNAUT]

Cause & effect... good argument. I suppose taking the higher road wouldn't be as much fun.

 

And.. speaking from experience.. I know that most people who divorce do nothing but lie. It's all about who gets the best settlement, the china, the larger amount of extortion, etc.. etc...

 

That's a fact.

What higher road? Any reasonable argument must have a basis & that is rooted in cause & effect. Statisitics, polls, etc. Everything is related to cause & effect at a micro level.

 

I mean no offense here but I trust more in polls involving 100's & 1000's than the personal testimony of one or a few. I can quote many sources as to why but since

you don't share the same view & certainly will find no greater credence in them there's really no point to doing so.

[Steff]

What higher road?  Any reasonable argument must have a basis & that is rooted in cause & effect.  Statisitics, polls, etc. Everything is related to cause & effect at a micro level.

 

I mean no offense here but I trust more in polls involving 100's & 1000's than the personal testimony of one or a few.  I can quote many sources as to why but since

you don't share the same view & certainly will find no greater credence in them there's really no point to doing so.

But of course. A poll of strangers is much more believable than that of folks who actually traveled the road.

 

You know any divorced folks...? Ask them how wonderful and honest the experience was.

 

 

 

You misunderstood my "higher road" comment so no point in revisiting it.

[Queen Prawn]

Cause & effect... good argument. I suppose taking the higher road wouldn't be as much fun.

 

And.. speaking from experience.. I know that most people who divorce do nothing but lie. It's all about who gets the best settlement, the china, the larger amount of extortion, etc.. etc...

 

That's a fact.

Sounds like my FBIL divorce. It wasn't as messy as it could have been (because my FBIL didn't want the kids to have to suffer more than they had to).

[JUGGERNAUT]

But of course. A poll of strangers is much more believable than that of folks who actually traveled the road. 

 

You know any divorced folks...? Ask them how wonderful and honest the experience was. 

 

You misunderstood my "higher road" comment so no point in revisiting it.

If you bothered to visit the divorcemag site & looked at the poll question dealiing with the experience I think you would be less likely to call it enjoyable or honest.

The numbers clearly do not suggest that's the case.

 

Plus it's important to note that these are not random surveys or statisitics as you are suggesting. The sample group is confined to only those who have recently been through a divorce. I know many who are divorced & their testimony wouldn't over shadow a poll either. I consider them no more honest or credible in their testimony than strangers if you will. Familiarity is not a good reason to suggest honor or trust.

 

You're higher road reference was obvious. I just choose to take it in another direction since this is more so a moral issue than a religious one.

[FlaSoxxJim]

You people are just sad.  First of what in your mind suggests the two groups have to be mutually exclusive?  They are clearly not.  It's like any other polling question .. independant of the others.

Certainly that is what is going on, and I was just having fun at the expense of the Christian Scientists.

 

But in truth, when a number of mutually exclusive poll question results are reported, they are reported similar to your oddly tangential 2000 voter stats, wherein each question's results are presented as demographic percentages that add up to 100% or something approximating it allowing for rounding error. Presenting the data on divorce stats the way you did implies a demographic breakdown relative to a single statistic (what is causing divorce), even if a cursory glance at the numbers tells you that cannot be the case.

[Steff]

And obviously you missed my sarcasm in the comment. I don't need to visit a site to read about divorce... I've been there.

 

My higer road comment had nothing to do with morals or religion. Just good old fashioned treating those with a differeing opinion with some respect..

[Steff]

Sounds like my FBIL divorce.  It wasn't as messy as it could have been (because my FBIL didn't want the kids to have to suffer more than they had to).

And that's just plain sad.. and my point. One person sacrafices for the sake of the kids while his ex was likely saying "I'll get this, you'll give me that, etc, etc..." A damn shame.

[Queen Prawn]

And that's just plain sad.. and my point. One person sacrafices for the sake of the kids while his ex was likely saying "I'll get this, you'll give me that, etc, etc..." A damn shame.

And that is exactly what happened.