<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Chart of the Day: Red States, Blue States, and Morality</title>
	<atom:link href="http://vox-nova.com/2009/06/30/chart-of-the-day-red-states-blue-states-and-morality/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://vox-nova.com/2009/06/30/chart-of-the-day-red-states-blue-states-and-morality/</link>
	<description>Catholic perspectives on culture, society, and politics</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 11 Feb 2012 03:03:28 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Hmmmmmm....</title>
		<link>http://vox-nova.com/2009/06/30/chart-of-the-day-red-states-blue-states-and-morality/#comment-59740</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Hmmmmmm....]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 20 Jul 2009 11:47:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://vox-nova.com/?p=8200#comment-59740</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Are you kidding me? I have two friends who were born and raised in Utah and HAVE to go back to see their families because of religious reasons. Both of them tell me that the prevalence of sex is high, VERY HIGH in that state!! This chart corroborates what they said. I asked them why. Both told me that it&#039;s because of sexually repressed feelings, high polyamy, and other deviant sexual behaviors. Wait til I show them this chart. Like Sanford, the GOP has placed themselves in an extremely difficult position. Allegedly being the party of &quot;family values&quot; and not caving in to their internal sexual needs.  I agree with what &quot;K&quot; above says about abstinence-only programs. Utah is highly Republican and thus hold very high &quot;family value&quot; oriented positions.  A lot of older white men said that the internet wasn&#039;t around when they were younger and making decisions about marriage. That&#039;s why you see the stories of Craig and Foley&#039;s homosexual behavior; and Vitter, Utah where the Internet infrastructure is growing daily. Ensign&#039;s behavior belies all comprehension and I see no way out for him because of the sledgehammer of legal suits coming against him. His mother can only pay the mistress and her children off so much -- especially in this economy. And she didn&#039;t even pay for the third child so the money must be running out. But I digress. There are a lot of us who know Utahans who would not be shocked by Utah being #1. I, for one, am honestly not shocked. Utah still belives in polygamy, though it&#039;s against the law. There are currently 60,000 polygamists in Utah. Utahans also believe that polygamists and bigamists, which is also prevalent in Utah, 35% of the popluation said that they should not be persecuted! When asked about changing the law, Utahans did NOT want to do but were forced to do it by the Federal Government for issues surrounding statehood. And on and on.....]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Are you kidding me? I have two friends who were born and raised in Utah and HAVE to go back to see their families because of religious reasons. Both of them tell me that the prevalence of sex is high, VERY HIGH in that state!! This chart corroborates what they said. I asked them why. Both told me that it&#8217;s because of sexually repressed feelings, high polyamy, and other deviant sexual behaviors. Wait til I show them this chart. Like Sanford, the GOP has placed themselves in an extremely difficult position. Allegedly being the party of &#8220;family values&#8221; and not caving in to their internal sexual needs.  I agree with what &#8220;K&#8221; above says about abstinence-only programs. Utah is highly Republican and thus hold very high &#8220;family value&#8221; oriented positions.  A lot of older white men said that the internet wasn&#8217;t around when they were younger and making decisions about marriage. That&#8217;s why you see the stories of Craig and Foley&#8217;s homosexual behavior; and Vitter, Utah where the Internet infrastructure is growing daily. Ensign&#8217;s behavior belies all comprehension and I see no way out for him because of the sledgehammer of legal suits coming against him. His mother can only pay the mistress and her children off so much &#8212; especially in this economy. And she didn&#8217;t even pay for the third child so the money must be running out. But I digress. There are a lot of us who know Utahans who would not be shocked by Utah being #1. I, for one, am honestly not shocked. Utah still belives in polygamy, though it&#8217;s against the law. There are currently 60,000 polygamists in Utah. Utahans also believe that polygamists and bigamists, which is also prevalent in Utah, 35% of the popluation said that they should not be persecuted! When asked about changing the law, Utahans did NOT want to do but were forced to do it by the Federal Government for issues surrounding statehood. And on and on&#8230;..</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: K</title>
		<link>http://vox-nova.com/2009/06/30/chart-of-the-day-red-states-blue-states-and-morality/#comment-58909</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[K]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 Jul 2009 03:40:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://vox-nova.com/?p=8200#comment-58909</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[DarwinCatholic,

Much of this thread dissects the &quot;statistics&quot; presented in the graph. So how can you back up your claim that liberals/blue-staters &quot;mock&quot; morals and family values?

I think what liberals mock is the hypocrisy of social conservatives and the often unrealistic ways that they try to enforce those values in society -- NOT the values in of themselves. For example, abstinence. Few liberals would argue that rising teen pregnancy rates are a GOOD thing. What they mock is abstinence-only education because they see it as unrealistic and ineffective. On adulterous politicians, my liberal friends are mostly indifferent. They view a politician&#039;s private life as largely irrelevant, provided it does not affect the quality of his/her public service. What they mock is the self-righteousness of conservative politicians, who for all their trumpeting about family values and for indeed adopting the safeguarding of &quot;family values&quot; as part of their political platform, do not seem to be any more immune to questionable behavior than liberal politicians.  It is also interesting to note that while Democrats such as John Edwards and Eliot Spitzer ended their political careers, Ensign and Vitter are still in the Senate, Gingrich remains prominent, Larry Craig refused to resign, and I don&#039;t believe there is any true expectation for Sanford to resign either.

Meanwhile, there are a number of moral issues that liberals take the higher ground on, and this includes torture.  Just ask yourselves: would Jesus have supported torture? For even questioning the dubious morality and effectiveness of torture, liberals are constantly mocked by Republicans from Limbaugh to Sarah Palin (see &quot;read them their rights&quot; from her convention speech).

If it is not a moral/value that conservatives share, conservatives do not seem to have any qualms whatsoever about belittling liberal beliefs and trying to shut down discussion.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>DarwinCatholic,</p>
<p>Much of this thread dissects the &#8220;statistics&#8221; presented in the graph. So how can you back up your claim that liberals/blue-staters &#8220;mock&#8221; morals and family values?</p>
<p>I think what liberals mock is the hypocrisy of social conservatives and the often unrealistic ways that they try to enforce those values in society &#8212; NOT the values in of themselves. For example, abstinence. Few liberals would argue that rising teen pregnancy rates are a GOOD thing. What they mock is abstinence-only education because they see it as unrealistic and ineffective. On adulterous politicians, my liberal friends are mostly indifferent. They view a politician&#8217;s private life as largely irrelevant, provided it does not affect the quality of his/her public service. What they mock is the self-righteousness of conservative politicians, who for all their trumpeting about family values and for indeed adopting the safeguarding of &#8220;family values&#8221; as part of their political platform, do not seem to be any more immune to questionable behavior than liberal politicians.  It is also interesting to note that while Democrats such as John Edwards and Eliot Spitzer ended their political careers, Ensign and Vitter are still in the Senate, Gingrich remains prominent, Larry Craig refused to resign, and I don&#8217;t believe there is any true expectation for Sanford to resign either.</p>
<p>Meanwhile, there are a number of moral issues that liberals take the higher ground on, and this includes torture.  Just ask yourselves: would Jesus have supported torture? For even questioning the dubious morality and effectiveness of torture, liberals are constantly mocked by Republicans from Limbaugh to Sarah Palin (see &#8220;read them their rights&#8221; from her convention speech).</p>
<p>If it is not a moral/value that conservatives share, conservatives do not seem to have any qualms whatsoever about belittling liberal beliefs and trying to shut down discussion.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Morning's Minion</title>
		<link>http://vox-nova.com/2009/06/30/chart-of-the-day-red-states-blue-states-and-morality/#comment-58850</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Morning's Minion]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 02 Jul 2009 18:11:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://vox-nova.com/?p=8200#comment-58850</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I&#039;m doing very well indeed, Darwin, thanks for asking. And by the way, the litany you refer to as unhinged comes from a recent purusal of some of the content on First Things and Ameican Catholic. Demented as I am, I find these arguments far more problematic from a moral perspective than, say, a post on how Michael Jackson&#039;s music knocked down barriers, or how indicators of immorality are highest in red states. 

On the point you are making, don&#039;t you think it&#039;s a little funny that those who, in your words, routinely mock morality are actually the ones who better live up to it? Of course, I&#039;m talking about a very narrow sexual ethic, but this is what the so-called conservatives harp on about so much. And I&#039;m not sure if the divide is as clear as you claim -- I don&#039;t see any more opposition to divorce on the right than on the left. I don&#039;t see much difference in approaches to adultery, even to pre-marital sex for that matter. The big difference I see relates to homosexual activities, and here, I don&#039;t know what&#039;s worse -- singling out gays for their immoral behavior, or saying that there is no moral issue whatsoever.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m doing very well indeed, Darwin, thanks for asking. And by the way, the litany you refer to as unhinged comes from a recent purusal of some of the content on First Things and Ameican Catholic. Demented as I am, I find these arguments far more problematic from a moral perspective than, say, a post on how Michael Jackson&#8217;s music knocked down barriers, or how indicators of immorality are highest in red states. </p>
<p>On the point you are making, don&#8217;t you think it&#8217;s a little funny that those who, in your words, routinely mock morality are actually the ones who better live up to it? Of course, I&#8217;m talking about a very narrow sexual ethic, but this is what the so-called conservatives harp on about so much. And I&#8217;m not sure if the divide is as clear as you claim &#8212; I don&#8217;t see any more opposition to divorce on the right than on the left. I don&#8217;t see much difference in approaches to adultery, even to pre-marital sex for that matter. The big difference I see relates to homosexual activities, and here, I don&#8217;t know what&#8217;s worse &#8212; singling out gays for their immoral behavior, or saying that there is no moral issue whatsoever.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: DarwinCatholic</title>
		<link>http://vox-nova.com/2009/06/30/chart-of-the-day-red-states-blue-states-and-morality/#comment-58845</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[DarwinCatholic]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 02 Jul 2009 16:10:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://vox-nova.com/?p=8200#comment-58845</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Seriously, MM, are you doing alright these days?  That last comment is a just a trifle...unhinged.

On the content of your post, what you don&#039;t quite seem to be grasping (or at least acknowledging) despite people pointing it out to you repeatedly is that the perceived divide between parties is not, &quot;Republicans are virtuous while Democrats are evil&quot; but rather that far too often traditional moral values in regards to sexuality, life, family, etc. (value which you and I share, so far as I know) are routinely mocked in leftist political circles and given respect (though not necessarily obedience) in conservative ones.

I seriously don&#039;t understand why you see fit to carry the standard cultural leftist talking points and mock conservatives for expressing respect for &quot;family values&quot;.  Would you really rather that both parties openly mocked them?  Would that somehow be better?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Seriously, MM, are you doing alright these days?  That last comment is a just a trifle&#8230;unhinged.</p>
<p>On the content of your post, what you don&#8217;t quite seem to be grasping (or at least acknowledging) despite people pointing it out to you repeatedly is that the perceived divide between parties is not, &#8220;Republicans are virtuous while Democrats are evil&#8221; but rather that far too often traditional moral values in regards to sexuality, life, family, etc. (value which you and I share, so far as I know) are routinely mocked in leftist political circles and given respect (though not necessarily obedience) in conservative ones.</p>
<p>I seriously don&#8217;t understand why you see fit to carry the standard cultural leftist talking points and mock conservatives for expressing respect for &#8220;family values&#8221;.  Would you really rather that both parties openly mocked them?  Would that somehow be better?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John Henry</title>
		<link>http://vox-nova.com/2009/06/30/chart-of-the-day-red-states-blue-states-and-morality/#comment-58841</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[John Henry]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 02 Jul 2009 14:52:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://vox-nova.com/?p=8200#comment-58841</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&lt;i&gt;Yes, I should stop pointing out that the cultural movement that deems itself so morally superior actually scores poorly on sexual ethics and family values.&lt;/i&gt;

Well you didn&#039;t actually point that out. The statistics you cite are irrelevant at best (deliberately misleading at worst) to supporting that claim. You&#039;ve failed to address any of the legitimate criticisms of the divorce or teenage birth statistics, which suggests you are more interested in partisan mudslinging than accuracy. 

Moreover, your eagerness to paint people who advocate sexual ethics and family values as hypocrites is somewhat bizarre, given that you also advocate those things, albeit in a rather idiosyncratic fashion. As to your parade of horribles, the &#039;no enemies to the left&#039; schtick gets tiresome, even when I agree with you.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><i>Yes, I should stop pointing out that the cultural movement that deems itself so morally superior actually scores poorly on sexual ethics and family values.</i></p>
<p>Well you didn&#8217;t actually point that out. The statistics you cite are irrelevant at best (deliberately misleading at worst) to supporting that claim. You&#8217;ve failed to address any of the legitimate criticisms of the divorce or teenage birth statistics, which suggests you are more interested in partisan mudslinging than accuracy. </p>
<p>Moreover, your eagerness to paint people who advocate sexual ethics and family values as hypocrites is somewhat bizarre, given that you also advocate those things, albeit in a rather idiosyncratic fashion. As to your parade of horribles, the &#8216;no enemies to the left&#8217; schtick gets tiresome, even when I agree with you.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Morning's Minion</title>
		<link>http://vox-nova.com/2009/06/30/chart-of-the-day-red-states-blue-states-and-morality/#comment-58837</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Morning's Minion]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 02 Jul 2009 13:49:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://vox-nova.com/?p=8200#comment-58837</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Yes, I should stop pointing out that the cultural movement that deems itself so morally superior actually scores poorly on sexual ethics and family values. That clearly is not a valuable topic. I should probably spend more time talking about things that clearly are more fitting for a Catholic blog - such as the greatness of the secular state of America, why war is good, why torture is OK if Americans do it, why global warming is a conspiracy againt our God-given right to consume as much as we want, how America is turning socialist even when it has the lowest taxes in the OECD, why neocons have always been right and will always be right, how the global financial crisis is the fault of the poor and minorities, why &quot;small government&quot; is the way go except for the military, why Obama is the most &quot;pro-abortion president ever&quot; because Fox News and Rush Limbaugh told me so... Yeah, what was I thinking???]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yes, I should stop pointing out that the cultural movement that deems itself so morally superior actually scores poorly on sexual ethics and family values. That clearly is not a valuable topic. I should probably spend more time talking about things that clearly are more fitting for a Catholic blog &#8211; such as the greatness of the secular state of America, why war is good, why torture is OK if Americans do it, why global warming is a conspiracy againt our God-given right to consume as much as we want, how America is turning socialist even when it has the lowest taxes in the OECD, why neocons have always been right and will always be right, how the global financial crisis is the fault of the poor and minorities, why &#8220;small government&#8221; is the way go except for the military, why Obama is the most &#8220;pro-abortion president ever&#8221; because Fox News and Rush Limbaugh told me so&#8230; Yeah, what was I thinking???</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John Henry</title>
		<link>http://vox-nova.com/2009/06/30/chart-of-the-day-red-states-blue-states-and-morality/#comment-58834</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[John Henry]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 02 Jul 2009 12:44:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://vox-nova.com/?p=8200#comment-58834</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Not only is the data presented ambiguous (do high teenage birth rates mean abortion is eschewed or that there is more teenage pregnancy? Does less divorce per 1,00 mean a lower divorce rate or less marriages?) and insufficiently detailed (no break down by party affiliation w/in the states), but even if it were not, why is it better to reject marriage altogether than to propose it as an unmet ideal? It reminds me of C.S. Lewis&#039;s remark that &quot;..the &#039;frankness&#039; of people sunk below shame is a very cheap frankness,&quot; and Neuhaus&#039;s &quot;...it used to be that hypocrisy was the tribute that vice paid to virtue, whereas now it is the charge that vice hurls at virtue.&quot; 

I&#039;m not sure why MM thinks it&#039;s even worthwhile to waste time putting together specious statistics in service of such a petty point.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Not only is the data presented ambiguous (do high teenage birth rates mean abortion is eschewed or that there is more teenage pregnancy? Does less divorce per 1,00 mean a lower divorce rate or less marriages?) and insufficiently detailed (no break down by party affiliation w/in the states), but even if it were not, why is it better to reject marriage altogether than to propose it as an unmet ideal? It reminds me of C.S. Lewis&#8217;s remark that &#8220;..the &#8216;frankness&#8217; of people sunk below shame is a very cheap frankness,&#8221; and Neuhaus&#8217;s &#8220;&#8230;it used to be that hypocrisy was the tribute that vice paid to virtue, whereas now it is the charge that vice hurls at virtue.&#8221; </p>
<p>I&#8217;m not sure why MM thinks it&#8217;s even worthwhile to waste time putting together specious statistics in service of such a petty point.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kevin</title>
		<link>http://vox-nova.com/2009/06/30/chart-of-the-day-red-states-blue-states-and-morality/#comment-58832</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Kevin]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 02 Jul 2009 12:17:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://vox-nova.com/?p=8200#comment-58832</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[MM,

Aren&#039;t you at all embarassed by these posts of yours?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>MM,</p>
<p>Aren&#8217;t you at all embarassed by these posts of yours?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Joseph</title>
		<link>http://vox-nova.com/2009/06/30/chart-of-the-day-red-states-blue-states-and-morality/#comment-58799</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Joseph]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Jul 2009 20:05:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://vox-nova.com/?p=8200#comment-58799</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&quot;If charts like these can be used to legitimately accuse or condemn people based on their party preference (something I reject), then do it up right. Get granular in your analysis...&quot;

But then his findings wouldn&#039;t match his presuppositions, and his feigned objectivity would be discovered.  Not to mention, making authoritative, chest-thumping accusations that aren&#039;t based on objective analysis is much more fun.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;If charts like these can be used to legitimately accuse or condemn people based on their party preference (something I reject), then do it up right. Get granular in your analysis&#8230;&#8221;</p>
<p>But then his findings wouldn&#8217;t match his presuppositions, and his feigned objectivity would be discovered.  Not to mention, making authoritative, chest-thumping accusations that aren&#8217;t based on objective analysis is much more fun.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rick Lugari</title>
		<link>http://vox-nova.com/2009/06/30/chart-of-the-day-red-states-blue-states-and-morality/#comment-58784</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Rick Lugari]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Jul 2009 18:12:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://vox-nova.com/?p=8200#comment-58784</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Hehe, I caught that misspelling too - it&#039;s an acronym I use a hundred times a day in my line of work.  Okay, so you do not KNOW that, but it&#039;s quite feasible, right?  That if you were going to embark on an analysis project for work it would be something you would be negligent in not considering, right?  (Lord, I hope so anyway)  It&#039;s something that could have a dramatic effect on the results and conclusions and for there to be any credibility should be accounted for.  My whole point of challenging you on this is that I believe you&#039;re the one grappling at straws.  

I make no claim that people in red states don&#039;t engage in sexually immoral behavior, ditto that of Republicans.  Nor do I claim that Democrats do.  FTR, I&#039;m not a Republican, and have little use for that party.  I think it&#039;s so faulty and wrong headed on a host of issues that I can only find one major party that I find worse.

Never mind that we could easily find a ranking Republican operative with a history of serial moral failings and find a charming Democratic couple who have been faithfully married for 50 years.  It means nothing because we could just as easily find a ranking Democrat with serial moral failings and a charming Republican couple who have been married for 50 years.  The differences are that as a parties and  a demographics go, one group is quite lax regarding (or even supportive of) immorality and the other not quite so.  One lobbies for moral standards regardless of individual failings, the other lobbies to demolish those moral standards or characterize them as good.

If charts like these can be used to legitimately accuse or condemn people based on their party preference (something I reject), then do it up right.  Get granular in your analysis, and look at things like unwed pregnancies, abortion rates and live birth ratios.  Get rid of your broadband criteria on porn and look actual sales of all varities of porn.  Compare marriage-divorce ratios and marriage to single parenthood.  Then look up prostitution, rape, murder and other violent crimes, illicit drug use, etc.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hehe, I caught that misspelling too &#8211; it&#8217;s an acronym I use a hundred times a day in my line of work.  Okay, so you do not KNOW that, but it&#8217;s quite feasible, right?  That if you were going to embark on an analysis project for work it would be something you would be negligent in not considering, right?  (Lord, I hope so anyway)  It&#8217;s something that could have a dramatic effect on the results and conclusions and for there to be any credibility should be accounted for.  My whole point of challenging you on this is that I believe you&#8217;re the one grappling at straws.  </p>
<p>I make no claim that people in red states don&#8217;t engage in sexually immoral behavior, ditto that of Republicans.  Nor do I claim that Democrats do.  FTR, I&#8217;m not a Republican, and have little use for that party.  I think it&#8217;s so faulty and wrong headed on a host of issues that I can only find one major party that I find worse.</p>
<p>Never mind that we could easily find a ranking Republican operative with a history of serial moral failings and find a charming Democratic couple who have been faithfully married for 50 years.  It means nothing because we could just as easily find a ranking Democrat with serial moral failings and a charming Republican couple who have been married for 50 years.  The differences are that as a parties and  a demographics go, one group is quite lax regarding (or even supportive of) immorality and the other not quite so.  One lobbies for moral standards regardless of individual failings, the other lobbies to demolish those moral standards or characterize them as good.</p>
<p>If charts like these can be used to legitimately accuse or condemn people based on their party preference (something I reject), then do it up right.  Get granular in your analysis, and look at things like unwed pregnancies, abortion rates and live birth ratios.  Get rid of your broadband criteria on porn and look actual sales of all varities of porn.  Compare marriage-divorce ratios and marriage to single parenthood.  Then look up prostitution, rape, murder and other violent crimes, illicit drug use, etc.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Morning's Minion</title>
		<link>http://vox-nova.com/2009/06/30/chart-of-the-day-red-states-blue-states-and-morality/#comment-58781</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Morning's Minion]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Jul 2009 17:30:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://vox-nova.com/?p=8200#comment-58781</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&lt;em&gt;You know full well that in all probability a couple large blue cities in a rural red state sku the numbers for the state as a whole&lt;/em&gt;. 

I assume by &quot;sku&quot; you mean &quot;skew&quot;. Anyway, I most certainly DO NOT know this. It sounds like grappling at straws -- the only reason people in red states engage in sexually immoral behavior is because they are not Republican supporters. Huh?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><em>You know full well that in all probability a couple large blue cities in a rural red state sku the numbers for the state as a whole</em>. </p>
<p>I assume by &#8220;sku&#8221; you mean &#8220;skew&#8221;. Anyway, I most certainly DO NOT know this. It sounds like grappling at straws &#8212; the only reason people in red states engage in sexually immoral behavior is because they are not Republican supporters. Huh?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rick Lugari</title>
		<link>http://vox-nova.com/2009/06/30/chart-of-the-day-red-states-blue-states-and-morality/#comment-58776</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Rick Lugari]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Jul 2009 15:43:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://vox-nova.com/?p=8200#comment-58776</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Okay, so you&#039;re out to prove hypocrisy. 

1. An expression of agreement that is not supported by real conviction

2. Insincerity by virtue of pretending to have qualities or beliefs that you do not really have

First you have to establish that someone or some group proclaims something like &quot;x is wrong, except when I do it&quot;.  Frankly, that&#039;s not demonstrated in the least by your graphs.  In fact, if you were to actually discuss these things with someone of a conservative bent you might find that they make no exceptions for themselves even if they are personally prone to or have committed such offenses.  For example, I sin and have a strong propensity toward certain sins.  However, I don&#039;t for a moment think that it is okay for me to do it, and in contrast to some others, I don&#039;t try to claim that it&#039;s okay altogether or minimize the gravity for me or anyone else.  

Second, you had to have to manage and narrow your data in a very specific, non-organic, and unreasonable manner to &quot;prove this right wing hypocrisy&quot;.  But I suppose the good end you were getting at justifies it all.

Third, you&#039;re not a dummy or an amateur - you look at numbers for a living.  You have to know that this is garbage.  It is not nearly granular enough of a look to determine anything of merit.  You know full well that in all probability a couple large blue cities in a rural red state sku the numbers for the state as a whole.  If so, that would say nothing about the hypocrisy of the those on the right, but much about the values of the left.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Okay, so you&#8217;re out to prove hypocrisy. </p>
<p>1. An expression of agreement that is not supported by real conviction</p>
<p>2. Insincerity by virtue of pretending to have qualities or beliefs that you do not really have</p>
<p>First you have to establish that someone or some group proclaims something like &#8220;x is wrong, except when I do it&#8221;.  Frankly, that&#8217;s not demonstrated in the least by your graphs.  In fact, if you were to actually discuss these things with someone of a conservative bent you might find that they make no exceptions for themselves even if they are personally prone to or have committed such offenses.  For example, I sin and have a strong propensity toward certain sins.  However, I don&#8217;t for a moment think that it is okay for me to do it, and in contrast to some others, I don&#8217;t try to claim that it&#8217;s okay altogether or minimize the gravity for me or anyone else.  </p>
<p>Second, you had to have to manage and narrow your data in a very specific, non-organic, and unreasonable manner to &#8220;prove this right wing hypocrisy&#8221;.  But I suppose the good end you were getting at justifies it all.</p>
<p>Third, you&#8217;re not a dummy or an amateur &#8211; you look at numbers for a living.  You have to know that this is garbage.  It is not nearly granular enough of a look to determine anything of merit.  You know full well that in all probability a couple large blue cities in a rural red state sku the numbers for the state as a whole.  If so, that would say nothing about the hypocrisy of the those on the right, but much about the values of the left.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

