Islam has Truth as Demonstrated by USA

[CatholicSpirit]

ChunkMonk you are certainly bringing a lot of information to light.

 

[CatholicSpirit]

anna, my remark was that a relationship likely previously existed when women no longer wanted to be married, and might have used the “till death to us part” clause above the “for better or worse” clause. But, religion preventing them from killing their spouse, could have hired a person to do something evil. While a “no fault divorce” lowered the rate related to divorce, police taking a stronger approach to follow “Football Player TV Meathead Steve Wilkos ideology” it just spilled the problems onto the children with horrid statistics and most with no future. Not only that, my point remains that by turning the cheek and putting the gun in the wife’s hand, encouraging her to shoot (a metaphor), it shows statistically that Islam of 1500 years actually had holy knowledge prophesying what happens to a society. It is not making America great again.

 

[ChunkMonk]

Burden of proof? I wasn’t aware that I was arguing with anyone. Anyway what facts would you like sources for? Don’t say ‘all of them’ because that just means you’re using sources and burden of proof as a tactic rather than an actual desire to engage in discussion. If you have a specific fact you want sourced, I’ll be kind enough to look it up.

If you want to play the game of ‘I refuse to provide my own sources and instead of presenting an argument I’m going to pretend this is an academic setting where I can reject anything if sources aren’t cited’ then I’m going to have to decline. If you’ve got a reason to want sources, you can have them. If you want them because you’ve seen people on the internet ask for them and you’re parroting… Then you can do some googling yourself.

 

[CatholicSpirit]

We didn’t start the fire, it was always burning since the world was turning… No we didn’t light but we’re trying to fight it

 

[Hope_Philomena]

Burden of proof? I wasn’t aware that I was arguing with anyone.

You argued the following assertions based on the statistics you stated:

Taking these facts into consideration, it seems that we can make a few conclusions:

Divorce is a leading cause of child-abuse, poverty, and a whole host of other social ills.

Women initiate divorce more often because they generally have a large financial, emotional, and legal advantage against their husbands.

Financially speaking, marriage is a bad bet for most men. They are now more likely to divorce than remain married, and they will almost universally suffer more financial hardship than their wife in the event of a divorce.

All of these facts coincide with a rising “never-married” rate and a rising “first age of marriage” average.

This problem has been going on for a long time and is not going to be solved any time soon.

You are therefore arguing those points and to state these things without first offering proof of your assertion is misinforming the audience at best.

Anyway what facts would you like sources for?

I would like sources for the following:

Men and women commit adultery at roughly the same rate. Given the nature of adultery, pinning down an exact number is difficult. Most studies confirm they are statistically tied.

Men and women are victims/perpetrators of domestic abuse/violence at roughly the same rate. Once again, pinning down exact numbers is very difficult, but most studies confirm a statistical tie, or even favor the women (more men being victimized than women). Men are vastly, vastly, vastly, more likely to be punished criminally and civilly for spousal-abuse than women.

Mothers abuse and kill their children at higher rates than fathers. This is not counting abuse by a sexual partner, which again skews heavily against women (the post-divorce boyfriend vs. the post divorce girlfriend).

Children in single-mother homes suffer more poverty, abuse, drug addiction, mental illness, criminality, incarceration, bullying, suicide, sexual abuse, and early-death than children in single-father homes.

If you’ve got a reason to want sources, you can have them. If you want them because you’ve seen people on the internet ask for them and you’re parroting…

I’m asking for them because I have heard of studies directly contradicting some of the numbers you provided. This, for example, contradicts your claim that men and women are at a statistical tie of being victims/perpetrators of domestic violence:

Statistics

I want to first make sure your points are even factual before I start arguing against them. I don’t think that’s too much to ask.

Frankly, I have many problems with the “conclusions” you came to based on the statistics you claimed. There’s nothing wrong with wanting sources for things you claim to be fact, especially when you use said claims to come to several misogynistic/sexist conclusions. I’m not surprised, just disappointed.

 

[LilyM]

You offered exactly zero sources. You have the burden of proof, so please do so.

One statistic I can offer - here in Australia one woman a week (or more) is murdered - as in not only abused or harmed, but killed - by her husband or de facto. There is no corresponding occurrence of men being killed at anything approaching the same rate by their wives or de factos.

Merely saying ‘abuse occurs at the same rate’ is only part of the picture if, as seems to be the case, the type and seriousness of abuse perpetrated by men is worse than that by women.

With respect to children - yes, wonen are more often awarded custody of children. In my experience as a family lawyer this usually happens in cases where the woman has done the majority of hands-on care of the children during the relationship and after separation. Barring credible evidence that a person isn’t adequately able to fulfil this task, it is considered to be best for children that they continue with the same parent as primary carer.

 

[Hope_Philomena]

My brother has paranoid schizophrenia and he says a lot of things quite similar to this. Strange, circular thinking that nobody can understand, seemingly coherent and yet not when you actually look at the words, etc.

Listen, I don’t know if I am coming off as mean here but I’m genuinely confused/concerned because the things you’re saying don’t make logical sense. And they are so similar to my brother’s line of thinking that I don’t know whether or not I should just leave the thread.

Are you in an alright state of mind? I just don’t understand… maybe it’s a generational difference?

 

[CatholicSpirit]

It seems my accuracy on the “no-fault” replacing “murder” was an accurate assessment. The beauty of international comparisons is that we are all in different places across the spectrum. Sadly, the easier divorce is a cop-out for the inability to foster a religious approach preventing both death and divorce. I believe that would be part of why Churches exist today with their doctrine and occupations.

Incredible stigma exists in the United States and is propelled by serious cases with approaches of mass punishment as “preventative measures.” It is as if we are living in an attempt at the film “Minority report.” Trying to stop crimes before they happen, but in most cases those who go free are treated as those who commit the worst of crimes and it leads to suicidal behaviors or taking the pain deeper (depression), a silent killer, which may include fugitive lifestyles (very little reporting on this). Unless you are Saddam Hussein in a spider hole with M&M’s, nobody knows what it’s like to be on the run from accusers who lie and feed on public humiliation of their spouse.

In psychology, is a spouse damaging the reputation of the other actually showing a deep inner need for them? If so, they should be first to remarry by court order.

 

[ChunkMonk]

The 2010–2011 report found that whilst 27% of women who experienced IPV reported it to the police, only 10% of men did so, and whilst 44% of women reported to some professional organization, only 19% of men did so.

Britton, Andrew (2011). “Intimate violence: 2010/11 BCS”. In Smith, Kevin. Homicides, Firearm Offences and Intimate Violence, 2010/2011: Supplementary Volume 2 to Crime in England and Wales, 2010/2011. London: Home Office. p. 96.

In a 2005 report carried out by the National Crime Council in the Republic of Ireland, it was estimated that 5% of men who had experienced IPV had reported it to the authorities, compared to 29% of women.

Watson, Dorothy; Parsons, Sara (2005). Domestic Abuse of Women and Men in Ireland: Report on the National Study of Domestic Abuse. Dublin: National Crime Council of Ireland. p. 169.

Keep that in mind while reading the following. Men underreport.

…

the 1975 U.S. National Family Violence Survey carried out by Murray A. Straus and Richard J. Gelles on a nationally representative sample of 2,146 “intact families”. The survey found 11.6% of men and 12% of women had experienced some kind of IPV in the last twelve months, while 4.6% of men and 3.8% of women had experienced “severe” IPV.

the National Comorbidity Study of 1990-1992 found 18.4% of men and 17.4% of women had experienced minor IPV, and 5.5% of men and 6.5% of women had experienced severe IPV.

In England and Wales, the 1995 “Home Office Research Study 191” found that in the twelve months prior to the survey, 4.2% of both men and woman between the ages of 16 and 59 had been assaulted by an intimate.

The Canadian General Social Survey of 2000 found that from 1994 to 1999, 4% of men and 4% of women had experienced IPV in a relationship in which they were still involved, 22% of men and 28% of women had experienced IPV in a relationship which had now ended, and 7% of men and 8% of women had experienced IPV across all relationships, past and present.

The 2005 Canadian General Social Survey, looking at the years 1999–2004 found similar data; 4% of men and 3% of women had experienced IPV in a relationship in which they were still involved, 16% of men and 21% of women had experienced IPV in a relationship which had now ended, and 6% of men and 7% of women had experienced IPV across all relationships, past and present.

 

[ChunkMonk]

There’s nothing wrong with wanting sources for things you claim to be fact, especially when you use said claims to come to several misogynistic/sexist conclusions.

Unless you are willing to put it on the table and say what was sexist/misogynistic about my conclusions, then yes, there is something wrong with it. It means you aren’t arguing in good faith at all. You present no argument other than name-calling, present a single counter-source, yet demand sources of every single point I made.

So here are the ground rules for going forward: you lay out your specific problems and arguments instead of trying to preempt having to argue by demanding sources for well-known facts.

If you aren’t willing to do that, then you are not arguing in good faith and don’t deserve one more minute of my time.

As a show of good faith, I provided sourcing for the only point you legitimately challenged.

 

[CatholicSpirit]

21%

And in the United States, 1 in 5 persons suffer from mental illness.

 

[ChunkMonk]

Hey Hope! You’ve got some hypocrisy to address here:

here in Australia one woman a week (or more) is murdered

Unsourced.

There is no corresponding occurrence of men being killed at anything approaching the same rate by their wives or de factos.

Unsourced.

as seems to be the case, the type and seriousness of abuse perpetrated by men is worse than that by women.

Unsourced.

this usually happens in cases where the woman has done the majority of hands-on care of the children during the relationship and after separation

Unsourced.

best for children that they continue with the same parent as primary carer.

Unsourced.

 

[ChunkMonk]

Here’s another interesting tidbit:

The 1985 U.S. National Family Violence Survey, carried out by Murray A. Straus and Richard J. Gelles on a nationally representative sample of 41 houses where 1 to 10 calls to the police had been made (24 female callers and 17 male callers), found that when a woman called the police to report IPV, the man was ordered out of the house in 41.4% of cases. However, when a man called, the woman was ordered out of the house in 0% of cases. When a woman called, the man was threatened with immediate arrest in 28.2% of cases; when a man called, the woman was threatened with arrest in 0% of cases. When a woman called, the man was threatened with arrest at a later date in 10.7% of cases; when a man called, the woman was threatened with arrest at a later date in 0% of cases. When a woman called, the man was arrested in 15.2% of cases; when a man called, the woman was arrested in 0% of cases. In fact, in 12.1% of cases when the man called, the man himself was arrested.

I bolded the best parts.

 

[CatholicSpirit]

The last part OMFGoodness!!

So, Millennials are inheriting the mess?
And was the conclusion that discrimination against males was the problem or that men behaved worse when police arrived?

 

[LilyM]

Here’s another interesting tidbit:

The 1985 U.S. National Family Violence Survey, carried out by Murray A. Straus and Richard J. Gelles on a nationally representative sample of 41 houses where 1 to 10 calls to the police had been made (24 female callers and 17 male callers), found that when a woman called the police to report IPV, the man was ordered out of the house in 41.4% of cases. However, when a man called, the woman was ordered out of the house in 0% of cases. When a woman called, the man was threatened with immediate arrest in 28.2% of cases; when a man called, the woman was threatened with arrest in 0% of cases. When a woman called, the man was threatened with arrest at a later date in 10.7% of cases; when a man called, the woman was threatened with arrest at a later date in 0% of cases. When a woman called, the man was arrested in 15.2% of cases; when a man called, the woman was arrested in 0% of cases. In fact, in 12.1% of cases when the man called, the man himself was arrested.

I bolded the best parts.

And? What do the stats - thirty year old ones at that - say about cases where the violence is entirely mutual and both male and female parties are cautioned, arrested, charged and/or convicted? Regardless of who calls? You seem to entirely ignore that scenario and imply that only one party ever faces consequences.

You also ignore the likelihood that some perps in dv cases, as with other crimes, will wrongly try to deflect blame from themselves by calling the police and acting like they are the injured party when they are in fact not.

No doubt this applies to females as well as males, but without information as to things like whether one gender is more likely to make a false report than the other, simply comparing reporting to outcomes doesn’t prove anything.

 

[Hope_Philomena]

I’m at a movie theater right now, about to watch Jumanji… but I’ll just reply with this at the moment

There was no name calling
I haven’t even gotten started on offering counterpoints, I supplied one example to explain why I asked for sources
I did not ask for sources on every single one of your points
Clearly you can’t find sources for the things you claimed. Let’s not play games.

See you.