3 ms·

> "wow, 60% of North Carolina is literally horrible, terrible people." The worst thing here is the suggestion that there was 100% turnout, instead it was close

> "wow, 60% of North Carolina is literally horrible, terrible people." The worst thing here is the suggestion that there was 100% turnout, instead it was closer to 30%, so only about 20% voted for it. The amendment was found unconstitutional a short time afterwards anyway, finding that marriage is a fundamental right for everyone.

votepaunchy 9y ago
Equality is a fundamental right. There is nothing stopping a state from eliminating marriage under the 10th amendment.
fennecfoxen 9y ago
> The worst thing here The worst thing? Suppose there is a referendum in, I don't know, Venezuela or something; that's adequately hypothetical. Imagine they put a referendum banning gay marriage on the ballots in Venezuela, and it passes with similar levels of turnout and support. There's a guy in your office from Venezuela who's reading about it, a little bit troubled by the news, and you say, "wow, I guess 60% of Venezuelans are literally horrible terrible people." Do you think that he is going to be most upset with the precision and accuracy present in the percentage you used, and not, say, the idea that you just casually pass judgement on what might easily be 60% of his family, extended family, friends, former co-workers, schoolmates, acquaintances, and the like? Not with the way you dismiss entirely their value as moral actors, without any further attempts to seek understanding of them as human beings, pre-emptively closing the door on learning about their culture and their values, not even pretending that you've an interest in understanding their lives as flawed, imperfect human beings, implicitly disclaiming all need to sympathize with their troubles? Not with the way that you, hailing from a background of substantial privilege in the San Francisco Bay Area, college-educated, and now happily earning six figures in a software job, feel that it's right and just to look down on these people, some of whom are fighting to live somewhere better than a shack in the woods?
- deebeeoh 9y ago
  Fighting their way out of their shack in the woods while, in their spare time taking a moment to vote against gay marriage? What a misunderstood nobility... People are going to a lot of trouble to defend having lousy values. It doesn't mean that's all you are, that one opinion, but having other aspects to your life doesn't let you off the hook. We all have troubles.
  - heartbreak 9y ago
    Yeah, and no one is going to let you off the hook for your intolerance of other cultures. You’re not going to change anyone’s mind with this attitude. If you really want progress, and not just to look down on people, why not take a more constructive approach?
michaelmrose 9y ago
30% is a statistically significant portion. It seems to me very likely that just as many hold the same views in the population.
- anonymouskimmer 9y ago
  It's not a statistically random selection though. See the 1936 Literary Digest presidential election poll. (They polled 1/4th of the total number of eligible voters, and of that number almost 1/4th responded. They were off by a 19% absolute polling error.) https://www.math.upenn.edu/~deturck/m170/wk4/lecture/case1.html https://www.math.upenn.edu/~deturck/m170/wk4/lecture/case1.h...

votepaunchy 9y ago

Equality is a fundamental right. There is nothing stopping a state from eliminating marriage under the 10th amendment.

fennecfoxen 9y ago

> The worst thing here The worst thing? Suppose there is a referendum in, I don't know, Venezuela or something; that's adequately hypothetical. Imagine they put a referendum banning gay marriage on the ballots in Venezuela, and it passes with similar levels of turnout and support. There's a guy in your office from Venezuela who's reading about it, a little bit troubled by the news, and you say, "wow, I guess 60% of Venezuelans are literally horrible terrible people." Do you think that he is going to be most upset with the precision and accuracy present in the percentage you used, and not, say, the idea that you just casually pass judgement on what might easily be 60% of his family, extended family, friends, former co-workers, schoolmates, acquaintances, and the like? Not with the way you dismiss entirely their value as moral actors, without any further attempts to seek understanding of them as human beings, pre-emptively closing the door on learning about their culture and their values, not even pretending that you've an interest in understanding their lives as flawed, imperfect human beings, implicitly disclaiming all need to sympathize with their troubles? Not with the way that you, hailing from a background of substantial privilege in the San Francisco Bay Area, college-educated, and now happily earning six figures in a software job, feel that it's right and just to look down on these people, some of whom are fighting to live somewhere better than a shack in the woods?

deebeeoh 9y ago
Fighting their way out of their shack in the woods while, in their spare time taking a moment to vote against gay marriage? What a misunderstood nobility... People are going to a lot of trouble to defend having lousy values. It doesn't mean that's all you are, that one opinion, but having other aspects to your life doesn't let you off the hook. We all have troubles.
- heartbreak 9y ago
  Yeah, and no one is going to let you off the hook for your intolerance of other cultures. You’re not going to change anyone’s mind with this attitude. If you really want progress, and not just to look down on people, why not take a more constructive approach?

michaelmrose 9y ago

30% is a statistically significant portion. It seems to me very likely that just as many hold the same views in the population.

anonymouskimmer 9y ago
It's not a statistically random selection though. See the 1936 Literary Digest presidential election poll. (They polled 1/4th of the total number of eligible voters, and of that number almost 1/4th responded. They were off by a 19% absolute polling error.) https://www.math.upenn.edu/~deturck/m170/wk4/lecture/case1.html https://www.math.upenn.edu/~deturck/m170/wk4/lecture/case1.h...