<story><title>Same-sex marriage linked to decline in teen suicides</title><url>https://arstechnica.com/science/2017/02/same-sex-marriage-linked-to-decline-in-teen-suicides/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>judah</author><text>&amp;gt;&amp;gt; &amp;quot;I can only conclude that some people have a radically different idea of &amp;quot;freedom&amp;quot; and &amp;quot;smaller government&amp;quot; than I do.&amp;quot;&lt;p&gt;Small government conservative here. It&amp;#x27;s actually pretty simple:&lt;p&gt;Small government: the government should stop meddling in marriage altogether. It&amp;#x27;s a social and often religious institution.&lt;p&gt;Freedom: We take seriously the founders&amp;#x27; belief that government should not infringe on religious liberty.</text></item><item><author>mikeash</author><text>This is a bit of a tangent, but I find it really bizarre that a site which says it&amp;#x27;s &amp;quot;championing freedom, smaller government&amp;quot; is so stridently against same-sex marriage.&lt;p&gt;I can only conclude that some people have a radically different idea of &amp;quot;freedom&amp;quot; and &amp;quot;smaller government&amp;quot; than I do.&lt;p&gt;Bringing it back to the original topic a bit, it&amp;#x27;s sad that people&amp;#x27;s reactions are so predictable. People in favor of same-sex marriage think this study is great. People who oppose it think it sucks. How boring! Show me someone in favor of same-sex marriage who thinks this study is terrible, or someone against who thinks the study is really good.</text></item><item><author>jawns</author><text>When I read studies like this, one of the first things I like to do is look around for critiques.&lt;p&gt;On conservative commentary website Stream.org, statistician William M. Briggs (who, take it for what it&amp;#x27;s worth, opposes same-sex marriage) offers a critique of the study&amp;#x27;s methodology and conclusion, as well as the conclusion that the study expressly does not make, but that the headlines have made:&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;stream.org&amp;#x2F;no-a-study-did-not-show-that-same-sex-marriage-laws-reduce-teen-suicide-rates&amp;#x2F;&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;stream.org&amp;#x2F;no-a-study-did-not-show-that-same-sex-mar...&lt;/a&gt;&lt;p&gt;A few interesting snippets from his critique:&lt;p&gt;&amp;gt; A weighted 8.6% to a weighted 8%, they say. This is a 7% reduction, all right, but a minor tweak in the actual weighted number. The numbers are weighted averages across several states and the result of a statistical model called a linear regression. The 0.6 drop is not observed, but is the output from a model.&lt;p&gt;&amp;gt; The numbers within states is anything but straightforward (the authors provide graphs). For instance, some states show reported suicide attempts increasing after gmarriage (New York, Maine, New Hampshire and Vermont, for example). The graphs also indicate a general decline in rates before gmarriage and continuing afterwards (see their Fig. 3).&lt;p&gt;&amp;gt; putting Ebola in the model works equally well with gmarriage to explain the data. So do the disasters of those crashing Malaysian airliners, or the fighting in Ukraine and Crimea. So does the 2014 Winter Olympics!&lt;p&gt;One other point that Briggs makes only indirectly, but bears mentioning, is that measuring the number of self-reported unsuccessful suicide attempts only provides us with part of the picture; we can&amp;#x27;t make any firm conclusions about what its rise or fall says about suicide prevention unless we also know the number of _successful_ suicide attempts.  For instance, it might be the case that some suicide prevention factor reduces the likelihood that any given suicide attempt is successful.  Maybe hospitals have gotten better at reducing the mortality rate of intentional overdoses.  In such a case, the rate of suicide attempts might remain relatively flat, but the rate of unsuccessful suicide attempts would rise, and the rate of successful suicide attempts would fall.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>pc86</author><text>Small government conservative here, too! And it&amp;#x27;s not nearly that simple.&lt;p&gt;&amp;quot;Religious liberty,&amp;quot; especially in the context of the American founders, is the freedom to practice your faith privately in whatever manner you wish, and to speak about that faith publicly without fear or persecution. It is &lt;i&gt;not&lt;/i&gt; the freedom to impose your religious mores on other people who do not share your religion, or even those who do. To imply otherwise is to bastardize what this country was founded on and does a disservice to the founders.&lt;p&gt;If you want government to stop meddling in marriage, I hope you&amp;#x27;re fighting against tax breaks and other marriage incentives just as hard as you are against allowing two people you&amp;#x27;ll never meet to enjoy the same recognition straight people do.</text></comment>
<story><title>Same-sex marriage linked to decline in teen suicides</title><url>https://arstechnica.com/science/2017/02/same-sex-marriage-linked-to-decline-in-teen-suicides/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>judah</author><text>&amp;gt;&amp;gt; &amp;quot;I can only conclude that some people have a radically different idea of &amp;quot;freedom&amp;quot; and &amp;quot;smaller government&amp;quot; than I do.&amp;quot;&lt;p&gt;Small government conservative here. It&amp;#x27;s actually pretty simple:&lt;p&gt;Small government: the government should stop meddling in marriage altogether. It&amp;#x27;s a social and often religious institution.&lt;p&gt;Freedom: We take seriously the founders&amp;#x27; belief that government should not infringe on religious liberty.</text></item><item><author>mikeash</author><text>This is a bit of a tangent, but I find it really bizarre that a site which says it&amp;#x27;s &amp;quot;championing freedom, smaller government&amp;quot; is so stridently against same-sex marriage.&lt;p&gt;I can only conclude that some people have a radically different idea of &amp;quot;freedom&amp;quot; and &amp;quot;smaller government&amp;quot; than I do.&lt;p&gt;Bringing it back to the original topic a bit, it&amp;#x27;s sad that people&amp;#x27;s reactions are so predictable. People in favor of same-sex marriage think this study is great. People who oppose it think it sucks. How boring! Show me someone in favor of same-sex marriage who thinks this study is terrible, or someone against who thinks the study is really good.</text></item><item><author>jawns</author><text>When I read studies like this, one of the first things I like to do is look around for critiques.&lt;p&gt;On conservative commentary website Stream.org, statistician William M. Briggs (who, take it for what it&amp;#x27;s worth, opposes same-sex marriage) offers a critique of the study&amp;#x27;s methodology and conclusion, as well as the conclusion that the study expressly does not make, but that the headlines have made:&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;stream.org&amp;#x2F;no-a-study-did-not-show-that-same-sex-marriage-laws-reduce-teen-suicide-rates&amp;#x2F;&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;stream.org&amp;#x2F;no-a-study-did-not-show-that-same-sex-mar...&lt;/a&gt;&lt;p&gt;A few interesting snippets from his critique:&lt;p&gt;&amp;gt; A weighted 8.6% to a weighted 8%, they say. This is a 7% reduction, all right, but a minor tweak in the actual weighted number. The numbers are weighted averages across several states and the result of a statistical model called a linear regression. The 0.6 drop is not observed, but is the output from a model.&lt;p&gt;&amp;gt; The numbers within states is anything but straightforward (the authors provide graphs). For instance, some states show reported suicide attempts increasing after gmarriage (New York, Maine, New Hampshire and Vermont, for example). The graphs also indicate a general decline in rates before gmarriage and continuing afterwards (see their Fig. 3).&lt;p&gt;&amp;gt; putting Ebola in the model works equally well with gmarriage to explain the data. So do the disasters of those crashing Malaysian airliners, or the fighting in Ukraine and Crimea. So does the 2014 Winter Olympics!&lt;p&gt;One other point that Briggs makes only indirectly, but bears mentioning, is that measuring the number of self-reported unsuccessful suicide attempts only provides us with part of the picture; we can&amp;#x27;t make any firm conclusions about what its rise or fall says about suicide prevention unless we also know the number of _successful_ suicide attempts.  For instance, it might be the case that some suicide prevention factor reduces the likelihood that any given suicide attempt is successful.  Maybe hospitals have gotten better at reducing the mortality rate of intentional overdoses.  In such a case, the rate of suicide attempts might remain relatively flat, but the rate of unsuccessful suicide attempts would rise, and the rate of successful suicide attempts would fall.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>mikeash</author><text>They&amp;#x27;re not arguing that government should get out of the marriage business. I&amp;#x27;ve seen that sentiment before and it&amp;#x27;s totally consistent. I might even agree with it. But these people here are arguing stridently for government-endorsed traditional marriage, and against same-sex marriage, all while having that tagline at the bottom of every page.</text></comment>