Secular Right | Reality & Reason

Apr/09

6

Biblical literalism correlates with thinking extramarital sex is wrong

Share on FacebookTweet about this on TwitterShare on RedditShare on StumbleUponEmail this to someoneShare on TumblrShare on Google+

The Audacious Epigone has a post up where the title says it all, Extramarital sex wrong? Gays and supporters of same sex marriage less likely to think so. But I was curious how MARHOMO, attitudes toward gay marriage, stacked up against other independent variables in relation to XMARSEX, attitudes toward extramarital sex. Here is what XMARSEX is representing:

What is your opinion about a married person having sexual relations with someone other than the marriage partner?

1 – ALWAYS WRONG
2 – ALMOST ALWAYS WRONG
3 – SOMETIMES WRONG
4 – NOT WRONG AT ALL

Here’s the logit regression from the GSS:

Logit Coefficients Test That Each Coefficient = 0
B SE(B) T-statistic Probability
MARHOMO -.166 .035 -4.706 .000
SEX -.371 .095 -3.905 .000
RACE .046 .074 .626 .531
INCOME -.079 .021 -3.764 .000
DEGREE .246 .039 6.358 .000
POLVIEWS -.111 .036 -3.105 .002
GOD -.131 .036 -3.643 .000
RELIG -.024 .026 -.918 .359
BIBLE .587 .075 7.821 .000
CHILDS -.098 .033 -2.941 .003
REGION -.072 .018 -3.978 .000
AGE .006 .003 1.882 .060
Constant .204 .457 .447 .655

Like my previous posts you can see attitudes about the Bible have a huge effect. Let’s look at how BIBLE and XMARSEX relate specifically:

Cells contain:
-Column percent
-Weighted N
BIBLE
1
WORD OF GOD
2
INSPIRED WORD
3
BOOK OF FABLES
4
OTHER
ROW
TOTAL
XMARSEX 1: ALWAYS WRONG 90.1
4,689
80.3
6,096
59.8
1,447
71.4
118
80.3
12,350
2: ALMOST ALWAYS WRONG 5.2
272
13.3
1,009
23.0
556
17.4
29
12.1
1,865
3: SOMETIMES WRONG 3.2
169
5.2
396
12.8
309
8.3
14
5.8
888
4: NOT WRONG AT ALL 1.4
73
1.2
94
4.5
109
2.8
5
1.8
280
COL TOTAL 100.0
5,202
100.0
7,595
100.0
2,421
100.0
166
100.0
15,383

· · · ·

2 comments

  • Gabriel · April 8, 2009 at 8:45 pm

    your logit regression includes a lot of variables that are coded as multi-value categorical (eg REGION) or ordinal (eg DEGREE). the categorical one is a big no-no and the ordinal one is debatable. to do it right the categorical ones need to be broken into dummy sets or at least collapsed into a dummy (eg REGION could be “south” vs. else). likewise the ordinal variables should be broken into dummy sets or recoded as continuous (eg DEGREE could be approximate years of education).

  • Author comment by David Hume · April 12, 2009 at 3:04 pm

    thanks. i’ll try not to be so sloppy in the future!

<<

>>

Theme Design by devolux.nh2.me