U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S.
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 08-25-2011, 10:31 AM
 
Location: West Michigan
3,120 posts, read 6,118,539 times
Reputation: 4519

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chicago60614 View Post
Yeah but political views are something people choose and debate over. Homosexual is just how you're born and who you are.

You make a personal decision to be a liberal or conservative and then defend your viewpoints. You choose gay as much as you choose to be asian or left handed or a natural redhead or the middle child.

Do straight people sit around when they're young and think "well, I guess it's time to choose if I want to be sexually attracted to girls or boys". If gay people are suppose to just flip and be attracted to the opposite sex, than couldn't a straight person just as easily do that if they wanted? Can you just learn to be as attracted to a guy walking down the street as you are to the girl at work you lust after? It's an instinct.

It's weird how "gay" is such a gray area in this country. It's getting better, but you always hear so many different ideas and views on the topic. Like this whole pray the gay away thing. My family and I just laugh and roll our eyes.
I'm not really sure what this has to do with my post. I was pointing out that all people, liberal and conservative, can be exclusionary and intolerant in their own special way. Conservatives do not have a monopoly on this type of behavior. It really is a joke that the OP tried to use that in his/her index. I actually laughed a little inside when I saw that. It was definitely more of an underhanded jab at conservatives than an honest attempt to come up with a legitimate index.
Rate this post positively

 
Old 08-25-2011, 11:33 AM
 
1,299 posts, read 3,331,253 times
Reputation: 1962
I wasn't really talking about obesity and religion as having to do with religious beliefs. Simply that, in the Deep South, church is an important social hub, and eating is often involved at church functions, and if you are around other people who eat all the time, you will tend to eat a lot, yourself. Church of course is not the only social institution where people socialize and eat, of course. Eating and socializing is big everywhere, but particularly so in the South and then when you add fattening traditional foods in, it becomes a bigger problem.

Not judging... just noting.

Frankly, I blame air conditioning for quite a lot. In the South people used to work hard every day and it was hot and they probably needed to replenish those lost calories with hearty food. Now they have A/C and probably aren't sweating so much!
Rate this post positively
 
Old 08-25-2011, 12:33 PM
 
Location: Bellingham, WA
9,744 posts, read 15,726,438 times
Reputation: 14864
I think there are some problems with this, unless I'm misunderstanding the intent. The obvious has already been pointed out: That being conservative doesn't necessarily mean one is socially exclusive toward homosexuals. It also doesn't address the myriad other ways we humans can be socially exclusive. What about racial exclusion? What states might an African-America/Asian/Caucasian/etc man/woman reside in where he/she would be more likely to be socially excluded due to race? (and how do you even determine that?) Religious exclusion? Which states are more likely to be accepting of atheists/Wiccans/Jews/Catholics/Pentecostals/etc? What about rates of clinical depression per state? Diversity of social circles/friends? Diversity among church groups? It just seems like there are many other variables to consider besides obesity, suicide rates, and intolerance of homosexuals.
Rate this post positively
 
Old 08-25-2011, 04:48 PM
 
9 posts, read 27,702 times
Reputation: 20
Using conservatism was a controversial choice for sure. Thomas R.'s link with acceptance of same sex marriage was definitely more what I was looking for, and I have put this into the index, instead of conservatism. The ranking of states isn't changed greatly, especially at the less socially exclusive end.
Rate this post positively
 
Old 08-25-2011, 05:19 PM
 
28,899 posts, read 51,012,799 times
Reputation: 46409
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keeno View Post
The Social Exclusion Index is an idea I've had inspired by the Human Development Index, but with three different variables instead representing some manifestations of social exclusion in society.

a) Obesity rate %.
b) Suicide rate per 100,000 per annum.
c) Intended to include a variable of intolerance of homosexuality by state but couldn't find this. As this correlates with conservatism I included instead the percentage by state conservative, divided by 3, from Gallup poll.

As in the international list on the World forum, the above variables were all meant to fit into a scale from 0 to 33.3, except that the states with highest obesity slightly exceed that, and as in the HDI the Social Exclusion Index is the geometric mean of the three.

What's below is just a rough start of an idea, maybe people think there are other variables that should be included instead of or in addition to the above?

Mississippi 18.9
Wyoming 18.6
Alaska 18.5
West Virginia 18.3
New Mexico 18.2
Oklahoma 18.1
Kentucky 18.0
Montana 17.7
Arkansas 17.7
North Dakota 17.7
Tennessee 17.6
Alabama 17.6
Louisiana 17.5
Nevada 17.4
South Dakota 17.1
Missouri 17.1
Idaho 17.1
Kansas 16.8
Arizona 16.6
South Carolina 16.6
Utah 16.5
Wisconsin 16.4
Indiana 16.3
North Carolina 16.0
Florida 15.9
Maine 15.6
Texas 15.4
Iowa 15.4
Ohio 15.4
Oregon 15.3
Michigan 15.1
Georgia 15.1
Pennsylvania 15.1
Washington 14.9
Nebraska 14.9
New Hampshire 14.9
Colorado 14.8
Virginia 14.6
Minnesota 14.3
Vermont 14.2
Delaware 14.1
Illinois 13.3
California 13.2
Maryland 13.0
Rhode Island 12.4
Hawaii 12.3
New Jersey 11.7
New York 11.5
Massachusetts 11.3
Connecticut 11.3
District of Columbia 8.5

Striking right away are the correlations between high SEI and low population density and vice versa, and (before anyone says it) high SEI = red states and low SEI = blue states.
Wow. Let's gin up a bogus ranking system based on wholly arbitrary criteria based on nothing at all. You put a lot of work into something that made absolutely zero sense.
Rate this post positively
 
Old 08-25-2011, 05:49 PM
 
Location: 30-40°N 90-100°W
13,840 posts, read 25,077,569 times
Reputation: 6740
The idea of a social exclusion index is potentially interesting though. Possibly different factors would be better.

Although flawed the "openness" element of the "Personality Map of the US" could be useful in a way. The lower the more "socially exclusive" perhaps. '

The United States of Mind - WSJ.com

North Dakota, Wyoming, Alaska, Alabama, Wisconsin, Hawaii, Kentucky, Nebraska, Iowa, Delaware, Mississippi, Minnesota, South Dakota, Kansas, Oklahoma, Michigan, Maine, Indiana, North Carolina, Missouri, Arizona, Idaho, Louisiana, Rhode Island, Arkansas, and South Carolina are in their "bottom half" for openness.

Of those Alabama, Arkansas, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Maine, Mississippi, Missouri, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Wisconsin, and Wyoming were listed as in the bottom-half for mental health by "Mental Health America."

Mental Health America: Ranking America's Mental Health: An Analysis of Depression Across the States

Of those Alabama, Mississippi, North Carolina, Rhode Island, and South Carolina looked to have double-digit unemployment in July, 2011. Unemployed people are sometimes cut off from social life.

Unemployment Rates for States

So by that those five are the most "socially excluded states." Interestingly there's a fair amount of overlap, although Rhode Island comes out among the best by his/her factors and among the five worse by ones I selected.
Rate this post positively
 
Old 08-26-2011, 06:59 AM
 
Location: Washington, DC NoVA
1,105 posts, read 2,128,194 times
Reputation: 777
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chicago60614 View Post
Well it's hard to get a solid picture because a lot of agencies don't post their stats, they aren't classified as hate crimes or not reported. I mean in 2009 Mississippi reported TWO hate crimes in the state, Alabama 11, Georgia had 9 ....out of around 7,500 for the country. Yeah right.
you only brought up 3 red states there out of the many others whose rates of hate crimes rank lower than blue states.

the south is just so integrated. there are towns that are 50% black and 50% white and they're quite harmonious communities these days.
Rate this post positively
 
Old 08-26-2011, 12:24 PM
 
Location: Mexico City, formerly Columbus, Ohio
16,157 posts, read 16,355,729 times
Reputation: 7562
Quote:
Originally Posted by blkgiraffe View Post
I agree with Thomas. Using conservative as a negative or something to downplay the homosexual population isn't correct. Conservatives can be just as open as liberals when it comes to homosexuality and gay marriage.
Can be... sure. Normally? No way. The only conservatives who tend to be okay with it are those old-school who don't like government involvement in social matters. However, that seems to be a dying breed as conservatives these days seemingly involve themselves in every type of social matter out there, usually with the intent of government intervention. These are not small-government conservatives.
Rate this post positively
 
Old 08-26-2011, 12:55 PM
 
Location: Franklin, TN
6,665 posts, read 12,347,192 times
Reputation: 7562
Quote:
Originally Posted by jbcmh81 View Post
Can be... sure. Normally? No way. The only conservatives who tend to be okay with it are those old-school who don't like government involvement in social matters. However, that seems to be a dying breed as conservatives these days seemingly involve themselves in every type of social matter out there, usually with the intent of government intervention. These are not small-government conservatives.
I think there is a growing portion of young conservatives who identify less with the "religious right" and more with libertarian ideals.

I wouldn't say it's a dying breed. National politicians have skewed our view of what is normal in this country.
Rate this post positively
 
Old 08-26-2011, 03:21 PM
 
12,957 posts, read 36,783,288 times
Reputation: 10225
Threads that are political in nature belong in the Politics forum. This thread is closed.
__________________


IMPORTANT READING:
Terms of Service

---
its - possession
it's - contraction of it is
your - possession
you're - contraction of you are
their - possession
they're - contraction of they are
there - referring to a place
loose - opposite of tight
lose - opposite of win
who's - contraction of who is
whose - possession
alot - NOT A WORD
Rate this post positively
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Closed Thread
>
Powered by Foreclosure.com


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S.
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2022, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top