Instigator / Pro
prefix's avatar
prefix
1500
rating
1
debates
100.0%
won
Topic
#4509

It is commonly stated that 50% of all marriages end in divorce. PRO contends that the actual number is less than 10%.

Status
Debating

Waiting for the next argument from the instigator.

Round will be automatically forfeited in:

00
DD
:
00
HH
:
00
MM
:
00
SS
Tags
Society
Parameters
Publication date
Last updated date
Type
Standard
Number of rounds
5
Time for argument
Three days
Max argument characters
10,000
Voting period
One week
Point system
Multiple criterions
Voting system
Open
Contender / Con
Nyxified's avatar
Nyxified
1593
rating
19
debates
63.16%
won
Description

The divorce rate in the USA is NOT 50%. It is actually much much lower.

Round 1
prefix's avatar
prefix
Pro
#1
The debate is thus” It is commonly stated that 50% of all marriages end in divorce. PRO contends that the actual number is less than 10%.”

PRO argues that:

  1. It is commonly stated that 50% of all marriages end in divorce.
  2. The 50% statistic is false 
  3. The actual number is less than 10%



PRO asks con upon which of these three we agree so we have a starting point.

In other words does con agree with statement A above; B above; and C above?

Also what number does con  purport to be the correct percentage ?

Nyxified's avatar
Nyxified
Con
#2
As to try and keep this debate balanced, I will only answer pro's question and elaborate on my reasoning in this speech.

To answer my opponent's question: I agree that it is commonly stated that 50% of marriages end in divorce. Depending on the country, this number may be more or less true. Calculating the international divorce rate presents a difficulty because of the lack of reliable data and record-keeping in many developing countries and because many countries make it incredibly difficult to attain a divorce even if a couple is divorced in all but name.

The actual percentage of marriages that end in divorce is irrelevant so long as I can prove that it is above 10%, which it very clearly is in most countries and on average internationally[1][2][3]. The only thing I must contend to win this debate is that the divorce rate is not below 10%.

Most countries with a relatively low divorce rate have several factors which should lead us to be skeptical (India, for example):
  1. Lack of accurate record-keeping.
  2. Incredibly difficult/impossible to obtain a divorce.
  3. Tax codes that favour married couples leading to couples remaining married only in-name.
  4. Social stigma.
All of these factors give us good reason to believe that a very considerable portion of marriages in countries with low divorce rates (which almost always tend to be developing countries) are marriages only in-name. We can choose to define divorce in the legal sense (a marriage is legally annulled) or in the social sense (The couple no longer lives together, lives separate lives, seeks romance with a partner(s) outside the couple, etc...).

If a couple is divorced in the social sense but not in the legal sense, it is far more useful to consider them divorced because their 'marriage' is effectively meaningless. It is far more useful and accurate to consider them divorced. This is not even to speak on how any polling or record-keeping in developing countries largely neglects much larger rural populations for a multitude of reasons.

For all of the reasons above I have mentioned, I have shown that most countries (which represent a majority of the world's population) have a divorce rate considerably exceeding 10%, and that countries with lower divorce rates (which are almost always developing countries) have several factors which makes any data on their divorce rate unreliable.


Round 2
prefix's avatar
prefix
Pro
#3
PRO realized too late that PRO had erred in the debate configuration and that gave con a huge advantage. But what is done is done and PRO will try to debate with reason.

So in round one, con concedes that the 50% statistic is commonly stated. 

Does con also concede that the common statistic is incorrect?

122.8 million US adults are legally married (1)

Number of legally divorced persons is 29 million. (2) 

This would represent about 25% of marriages ending in divorce. 

Will con concede this figure and accept his rebuttal to dwell in the universe of 10% to 25% of marriages ending in divorce?

One reason PRO  put up this debate was due to the effect this bad statistic has on the population. Many people believe that the institution of marriage is crumbling, when it is not. Here I will use con’s source as proof  “...[The use of a badly calculated statistic ]... which may lead people to think that the community's relationships are extremely unstable, despite the number of married people not changing”  (3)

Historically the number of married couples has been on an upward trend since 1960.(4 )  Per the Census there were 40.6 million married couples in 1960 and 61.44 million in 2021.  I did not use 2022 numbers as the numbers for 2022 were reported prior to year end.

Thus it is shown that the common statement “50% of all marriages end in divorce “ is in error.




  1. https://www.statista.com/statistics/183663/number-of-married-couples-in-the-us/
  2. ibid
  3. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divorce_demography
  4. https://www.statista.com/statistics/183663/number-of-married-couples-in-the-us/

Nyxified's avatar
Nyxified
Con
#4
To begin, I concede that the percentage of marriages which end in divorce is not 50%. However, it is not necessary for con to argue that the divorce rate is 50% in order to have met con's burden of proof.

The resolution has two halves. First: "It is commonly stated that 50% of all marriages end in divorce." This is simply a statement that is not a part of the actual contention within this debate. We are not here to argue if it is, in fact, commonly stated that 50% of marriages end in divorce. That is contextually obvious from the debate description, pro's first speech, and the second half of the resolution.

The second half of the resolution is: "PRO contends that the actual number (of marriages that end in divorce) is less than 10%." Clear as day, pro is outlining that the conflict of this debate is centred solely around if the percentage of marriages that end in divorce is less than 10%.

We can look at either the divorce rate internationally or only within the USA. The description implies that this is referring to the USA, but irrespective of which you choose, my arguments stand. My sources from the previous round (1, 2, & 3) all show that the number of countries with a divorce rate less than 10% do not constitute a majority of the world's population.

Pro's own source concedes that the divorce rate in America is 25%. This is far enough above 10% that we can rule out sampling bias or any other significant errors as being potential counter-arguments, since the chance well-respected polling services would be repeatedly wrong by a factor of 2.5 is astronomical.

You can judge the resolution in three ways:
1. The divorce rate in the USA (which my opponent concedes is above 10%)
2. The divorce rate worldwide (as my sources prove, almost every country on Earth [constituting a majority of the population] has a divorce rate exceeding 10%)
3. The median divorce rate country-by-country (as my sources prove, there are very few countries that have a divorce rate at or below 10%)
In each of these interpretations, it is clear that the divorce rate exceeds 10% by a considerable amount.

I apologize if this was not the debate pro was looking for (as they mentioned they defined it in a way that gave con a very significant advantage), but I must argue this debate in accordance with the rules and resolution that was set up.

For all the reasons I have mentioned, this resolution falls.
Round 3
prefix's avatar
prefix
Pro
#5
It is a given that PRO likes to debate commonly held beliefs  that are factually false. PRO would hope that following such a debate viewers would no longer accept non facts as facts.

In this case PRO erred in setting up the debate.

PRO takes full responsibility for the error.

In moving ahead, it is hoped that others will look into the statistical calculations involved in many “facts”  and find reason over agenda. 

From the standpoint of this debate, PRO offers these literary sources:

 “Divorce Rate: It's Not as High as You Think” (1)

“IS THE 50% DIVORCE RATE A MYTH?” (2)

“The common statistic that 'half of marriages end in divorce' is bogus” (3)

“Professions with lowest divorce rates:l

  • Farmers – 7.63
  • Podiatrists – 6.81
  • Clergy – 5.61
  • Optometrists – 4.01
  • Agricultural Engineers – 1.78” (4)

Do these sources favor PRO’s position?  Only the  voters need to decide, but there is more to come......


  1. https://www.nytimes.com/2005/04/19/health/divorce-rate-its-not-as-high-as-you-think.html
  2. https://www.goldbergjones-or.com/divorce/50-divorce-rate-lie/
  3. https://www.insider.com/what-is-the-divorce-rate-2017-2
  4. https://www.wf-lawyers.com/divorce-statistics-and-facts



Nyxified's avatar
Nyxified
Con
#6
I appreciate pro's handling of this debate in light of the fact that it was configured in a way that created a clash far too advantageous for con. Nonetheless, I will continue to debate the resolution as it was written in the title and defined by the description.

Does pro concede this debate is not regarding if the divorce rate is, as is commonly said, 50%? If pro does not concede this, there are several reasons to see that the resolution implies as much:
  1. Were the resolution to be regarding both if the divorce rate is 50% and if the divorce rate is below 10%, the resolution would be asking two questions, both of which are effectively the same. This would make it impossible to judge. If I could prove the divorce rate is greater than 10% and my opponent proves the divorce rate is below 50%, who wins? Nobody. A debate resolution has to have one goal-post, not two.
  2. Pro goes out of their way to specify exactly what pro is contending (The divorce rate is below 10%). Logically, con is contending the exact opposite (The divorce rate is above 10%). They did not say "Pro is contending the divorce rate is below 10% and the commonly stated belief that half of marriages end in divorce is false." They mentioned the common saying and then completely separately asserted the primary contention of this debate.

    Take the following example: If I say "It is usually hot this time of year. Today it is cold, wouldn't you agree?" It is contextually obvious that I am beginning with a fact to justify why I bothered asking the question, and then the actual question that I want to discuss follows. The question is not if you agree that it is usually hot this time of year.
  3. The debate description states: "The divorce rate in the USA is NOT 50%. It is actually much much lower." The argument is very clearly surrounding if it is, in fact, much, much lower (lower than 10%). Not if it is merely just not 50%.
  4. If the resolution were to be regarding if half of all marriages do end in divorce, the wording of the resolution is unavoidably misleading due to needless specificity. Take the example of Lead-free cereal. If you saw a box of cereal that said "Lead-free," the implication is that previous/other cereals do, in fact, contain lead. For this reason, calling your cereal 'lead-free', while true, is misleading.

    Similarly, you cannot say "The divorce rate is not 50%. It's below 10%." If you only want to have a debate on if the divorce rate is 50%. Needlessly specifying that it is, in your opinion, below 10% if that is irrelevant to the debate is, in this case, unavoidably misleading.
All of the above points serve to prove that the wording of the resolution makes it contextually obvious that the debate is regarding if and only if the divorce rate is below 10%.

I am not saying this to accuse pro of deliberately misleading me or any potential voters, but simply to say that any way to argue that this resolution is both about if the divorce rate is 50% and if it is below 10% inherently requires you argue the resolution is also hopelessly misleading. If a resolution says one thing and you attempt to argue another thing, the resolution itself is solely what dictates the debate.

Thereby, if the resolution is misleading (in the sense it says one thing and the instigator wants to debate another thing), the resolution must be judged based on what it says (if the divorce rate is below 10%) and not what the instigator wants to debate (if the divorce rate is 50% or not).

Again, not saying pro is deliberately being misleading, just saying that the resolution cannot be referring to if the divorce rate is 50% or not without the resolution simultaneously being misleading.

My previous sources and arguments already unavoidably demonstrate that the divorce rate is above 10%.
  1. The divorce rate in the USA (Number of couples married / number of couples divorced) is above 10% as my previous sources have proven.
  2. The divorce rate worldwide (same formula as previous point) is above 10% as my previous sources have proven.
  3. The median divorce rate country-by-country is above 10% (The number of countries with divorce rates below 10% does not constitute anywhere near a majority of the number of countries on Earth) as my previous sources have proven.
Pro's arguments do nothing to prove any of my evidence nor my claims to be faulty. Here's a list of all occupations with a divorce rate greater than 50%[source]:
  1. Gaming Manager - 52.9%
  2. Bartender - 52.7%
  3. Flight Attendant - 50.5%
  4. Gaming Service Workers - 50.3%
  5. Rolling Machine Setters, Operators, and Tenders - 50.1%
Con's case is indisputably proven. Pro can not, in any convincing fashion, bring the debate to their side of the house.

Round 4
Not published yet
Not published yet
Round 5
Not published yet
Not published yet