Divorce a growing problem in the Bible Belt – what the hay is going on?


I can’t remember where I saw this, but I read an article recently about the increasing rate of divorces in the Bible Belt and southern states as compared to the more progressive, liberal, northern, blue states. First of all, which states encompass the Bible Belt? Let me see if I can Google this and find out. Hang on….wow….”the Bible Belt predominantly includes those states that were slave states before the American Civil War” (Wikipedia). Oh, really?  oKAy….Hme… Got it now. So in places like Indiana, Alabama, Oklahoma, Florida, Mississippi, Texas, Louisiana, Tennessee, Virgina…these are deep Bible Belt country, baby. And they have a disproportionately high rate of divorce when compared to the rest of the country.


I wonder why? I mean, these are big time church goers, right? Isn’t marriage fundamentally biblical? I remember reading in the Bible years ago that “the Lord thy God hates divorce.” Hates it. I couldn’t tell you the passage. It was a thing I accidentally stumbled upon when I opened the Bible randomly.

But I say that to say that the whole point of the existence of someone in the Bible Belt is this whole thing with religion and the Bible and God and right/wrong and not fornicating and no abortion and NO DIVORCE, right?

So how does one explain this, like, conflicting fact that they have the highest rate of divorce? I mean, I am experiencing a high level of consternation with this, and I’m scratching my head wondering how to square the facts with the facts. How does the Bible Belt have the highest rate of divorce in the country???

And by the way, is divorce a sin? I did a post on that last year. Check it out. http://www.divorcesaloon.com/is-divorce-a-sin  Wonder what those Bible Belters would have to say about that?

IMage credit:

Similar Posts:

9 Responses to "Divorce a growing problem in the Bible Belt – what the hay is going on?"

  1. phoebes-in-santa fe   September 28, 2009 at 4:00 am

    I think the reason the divorce rate is so high is that couples are getting married younger than in the rest of the country because premarital sex is “frowned upon” and girls are encouraged by churches and family to remain virgins – the “most precious gift you can give your husband” – til marriage.

    SO, if you can’t get it any other way, the young couples get married earlier – much earlier – than other, saner couples in other states. And since young marriages tend not to last, so divorce. Then, because they’re not supposed to have sex outside of marriage, the divorced couple jump into other, hasty marriages, and when the sex attraction wears off in THAT marriage, voila, another divorce.

    These so-called “Christian” states are full of hypocrites, preaching one thing and practicing another, opposite thing.

    Something else about these people that gets me with their “chastity balls” and “Jesus rings”, premarital intercourse is prohibited, so young couples get around that by doing oral and anal sex, so the girl stays a “virgin”. Awful and harmful people…

  2. phoebes-in-santa fe   September 28, 2009 at 4:03 am

    Oh, and because sex education is pretty much lacking in the homes and schools, when the young couple DOES have sex – the normal kind – they tend to get knocked up because they don’t know how to prevent it, and so, early marriage, and divorce.

    • admin   September 28, 2009 at 2:49 pm

      Phoebes, I have to agree with you. There is some hypocrisy there.

  3. Samantha Woods   September 28, 2009 at 11:17 pm

    Admin, I read with disappointment your answer to Phoebes. Certainly your viewing public is permitted their opinions. But as a site evidently with members from an attorney group and desire to be credible while providing news-worthy current events in the divorce arena…I would think a flip response to so stereotypical and undocumented opinion would not have been your style. The American Sociological Association and the Census Bureau show very little differences across our country.

    But since the Bible Belt was taken to task by both Phoebes & DS, a review of those states show they are in line with the rest of the country on first time marriage ages and divorce rates. The District of Columbia had the only age over 30 for first time marriages while Utah, Wyoming, West Virginia and Idaho had the relatively lowest ages for first time marriages.

    The actual media age figures for first time marriage according to the Census Bureau is:
    Males: 1994: 26.7 2007: 27.7
    Females: 1994: 24.5 2007: 26.0
    These are hardly teenagers.

    And since Phoebes used Wikipedia as their source…West Virginia was not considered a Bible Belt member…all states with the lowest ages for first time marriage were not in the Bible Belt (UT, WY, WV, ID).

    As to the divorce rate…an average of the median ages of those states that would qualify in your Bible Belt: AL, FL, GA, KY, MS, NC, SC and TN show per 1,000 people the rate in 1990: 5.5 and in 2005: 4.1; a decline in the divorce rate not an increase.

    We live in a great and varied country of many different cultures and beliefs. If I recall my elementary history…one of the reasons for which we were founded. I do not fall in line with the beliefs of the atheist or the fundamentalist…but I’m privileged to live in a country that allows each of us the freedom to believe as we fit…even when we are slightly inaccurate.

    Samantha Woods

    • admin   September 29, 2009 at 12:01 am

      Samantha, thank you for your thoughtful comments, and your criticism is well taken. In defense of Phoebes, it was I who did the “Wikipedia” search. I don’t think Phoebes referenced Wikipedia at all. I did that. Whether West Virginia is or is not a Bible Belt state, I wouldn’t debate the point. It seems that different folks have a different definition of which states are actually in the Bible Belt.

      As for your criticism that I was flippant in agreeing with Phoebes on the issue of “hypocrisy.” You are correct. I was flippant and I did stereotype and stereotyping is never okay so I would like to…recant, if I can and apologize to all the members of those states who may be offended with what I said.

      Finally, it is wonderful to know that people are actually reading and taking what I say seriously. I need to pay more attention to that. I really thought it was only myself and Phoebes who reads this stuff. I see I am wrong and so I will definitely in the future, try to be more responsible in what I say and in the opinions I express.

      Thank you Ms. Woods for bringing this to my attention…but I hope that doesn’t mean that I can’t still occassionally curse? Cause that’s so much fun!

  4. Samantha Woods   September 29, 2009 at 12:41 pm

    Thank you for your gracious reply. There is much debate on the appropriate use of curse words. I personally find a well-placed curse word conveys the emotional gravity or intensity of a particular situation most efficiently. Unfortunately in today’s vernacular, their effectiveness is reduced by overuse. Red Skelton once said it best when asked about Eddie Murphy’s comedic talent…a great comedian with limited vocabulary. Indeed, some of my favorites are his Beverly Hills Cop I and Dr. Dolittle.

  5. Brenda Monteau   October 12, 2009 at 3:04 pm

    Samantha, take a look at this article http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_ID=10961
    what are your thoughts?

  6. admin   October 20, 2009 at 11:33 pm

    No I haven’t yet, Jerry. I’ve been juggling a lot of different projects lately, but I will as soon as I can and report back. Hope it supports rather than contradicts my post?


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Comment moderation is enabled. Your comment may take some time to appear.