Remix.run Logo
scandox 13 hours ago

I think the reality of what has gone on has several faces which are all worth thinking about:

1. A group of people that want to be different without harming anyone and be left alone

2. A group of people demanding certain specific and new legal rights with respect to how they are different

3. A group of people advocating for new social and linguistic norms around said difference

3. A group of people socially shaming people who failed to respect said norms

4. A group of people socially shaming those who opposed new specific legal rights

5. A group of people vocally opposing said legal and social changes

6. A group of people advocating legal restrictions to prevent or punish said different life choices

7. A group of people fighting said restrictions

JoBrad 12 hours ago | parent [-]

Given the overall rancor around topics like this, I feel it’s necessary to say I’m approaching this as a discussion, and am open to evidence that I’m wrong.

In my opinion your item 2 is mostly a conflation of “people want to enjoy the same rights that others have enjoyed” and a recognition that “separate but equal” doesn’t actually work. A prime example is gay marriage, where we went from “don’t ask don’t tell” to a brief national discussion of “civil marriages” to simply recognizing that a marriage is a marriage, and anyone who is married should get access to the same rights as others who are married.

scandox 11 hours ago | parent [-]

I don't see a contradiction. I'm happy for people to seek changes to the law that makes their lives better. But it is still seeking change to the law. I don't know the American system well but didn't gay marriage require legal change? Or at least legal challenge leading to precedent?

nkrisc 9 hours ago | parent [-]

It was more an equalization of the law so that it applies equally to all people. Absolutely nothing changed, legally, for the vast, vast majority of Americans.