"If you want to find stable two-parent families, bypass Palin country and go to Pelosi territory ... The country's lowest divorce rate belongs to none other than Massachusetts, the original home of same-sex marriage ... States that voted for the Democratic presidential candidate in both 2004 and 2008 boast lower average rates of divorce and teenage childbirth than do states that voted for the Republican in both elections. (That is using family data for 2006 and 2007, the latest available.) ... To define the divide in a sentence: In red America, families form adults; in blue America, adults form families."
Source: Jonathan Rauch. "Do 'Family Values' Weaken Families?" NationalJournal.com. 5/01/2010.
In March 2010, Naomi Cahn and June Carbone wrote an article for CSMonitor.com in which they gave some a quick solutions to the problem: "The solution? As we outline in great detail in our book Red Families v. Blue Families, there are three critical steps we can take: (1) promote access to contraception - within marriage as well as outside it; (2) develop a greater ability to combine not only work and family, but family and education; and (3) make sure the next generation stays in school, learns the skills to be employed, and cultivates values that can adapt to the future."
Book Excerpt With More Solutions: "Let Massachusetts permit same-sex unions, Louisiana experiment with covenant marriage, Utah provide for high school courses in marriage preparation, and 1,000 counties prescribe premarital education ... municipalities and regions can determine what works and what fits within local culture and traditions. We predict that the most-effective programs will be those that emphasize planning and delay and that encourage prospective spouses to make sure the relationship is one based on shared interests and a capacity for mutual respect ... the issue worth fighting for -- is more-effective strategies to prevent pregnancies in the teens and early 20s. Early childbearing, whether it increases the nonmarital birthrate or initiates a cycle of marriage and divorce, benefits no one."
Source: Naomi Cahn, June Carbone. Red Families V. Blue Families: Legal Polarization and the Creation of Culture. 2010. pgs. 208-209.
According to Newsweek.com's review of the book: "The most simplistic dichotomy in politics (red state, blue state) has rarely been treated with such rigor. Cahn and Carbone outline two approaches to family: the Republican tendency toward traditional gender roles and early marriage, and the Democratic leanings toward dual-income households and the delay of family until educational and professional milestones have been met. Using a trove of social data and cross-referencing everything by state, they lay bare the failings of the red-family paradigm. The stats are blunt: Red states have higher teen pregnancy rates, more frequent divorces, and lower levels of education, among other ills."
What do you think? Do traditional family values "perpetuate" problems for today's marriages?
I am a Red-state conservative (Libertarian not Republican) who grew up in a rural, small town in southern KY. While I haven’t read the book, let me say that, based upon the review, these two authors are RIGHT ON THE MONEY!! The biggest problem holding back the red states is sub-standard education, particularly, a lack of education in marriage and parenting skills. Contrary to what many would have us believe, there actually are enclaves in America that teach family values that aren’t very much advanced over the values taught by the Taliban. Until we begin teaching children in these areas that there really are alternatives that honor the traditions of the past while respecting individual rights and dignity, we will continue to have problems of broken families, failed marriages, and traumatized children and spouses. We, as a society, have changed our laws and culture to permit those in “bad” marriages to escape from those situations; now we must finish the job and teach them how to transform and heal those marriages (or better yet, have “good” marriages right from the start) for the good of all family members, as well as society as a whole. We, as Americans, promote the virtues of education for bringing about societal changes in third-world countries, yet seem to shy away when it comes to choosing that same path for ourselves. Of course, this reticence stems from our inability to reach consensus on what it is that should be taught in our schools, and this irresolution is a direct consequence of the polarization of political opinion which seems to dominate in America, at this time. Traditional values are great, but they must be evaluated in the context of the societal ‘big picture’, and when they come into conflict with the realities of modern life, and consequently cause significant difficulties to individuals and families, they should be modified or even abandoned. This is at the heart of Conservatism: we do not abandon traditional values lightly, but we can do so when need is demonstrated, and when the change is undertaken with deliberation and caution (not haphazardly and recklessly, as was done during the 60’s and 70’s). Those conservatives whom liberals (actually progressives; very few of them actually believe in classical liberal politics) like to showcase as exemplars of backward, 19th-century moralizing are “hide-bound” conservatives, not open-minded conservatives who are trying to preserve the best parts of traditional values while adapting to the realities of modern society.