Having the opinion that there should be restaurants, stores, and bathrooms only for white people was an acceptable, mainstream political view during my father's lifetime. Expressing that opinion now would make you a social pariah. If you donated money in support of that cause today you'd probably be fair game for being openly called an "absolute scumbag" almost universally.

How that analogy compares to being against same-sex marriage is going to vary from person to person, but times change, as does what is considered just political views vs a civil rights issue.

▲

graemep an hour ago | parent | next [-]

> Having the opinion that there should be restaurants, stores, and bathrooms only for white people was an acceptable, mainstream political view during my father's lifetime.

Only in the US, South Africa and Rhodesia.

Same sex marriage did not exist anywhere in the world until very recently, and still does not exist in most of the world.

▲

ImJamal 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

The majority of the voters was on his side. 52.24% voted yes and there was a 79.42% voter turn out. A huge number of Californians agreed with him at the time. This is quite a bit different than segregation today since acceptance of gay marriage was quite a bit lower and it was a newer issue than segregation.

	▲	glitch13 4 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Racial integration was wildly unpopular in the south when it became a hot political issue of the day, yet that fact doesn't make the opposition to it any more palatable to modern sensibilities. The only point I was trying to make was that you can't hand-wave away something you don't want to pick a side on by saying it's just a political view when a large portion of the society you exist in see it as a civil rights issue. Well, I guess that too has its caveats. Hilary Clinton and Barack Obama were both vocally against same-sex marriage during run up to the 2008 election, I believe roughly the same time that the Prop 8 fight was happening. They didn't switch sides until public opinion started swaying in favor of it and I've never seen anyone hold their feet to the fire or call them "absolute scumbags" over it. Well, no one that wasn't already calling them that at least.

▲

gdulli 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

It always surprises me that people can't take a step back and understand that objecting to today's progress is like objecting to women voting, or interracial marriage. You're just signing up to be mad your whole life and to be seen as a historical curiosity.

	▲	phainopepla2 35 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		Eugenics was also considered "today's progress" at some point, and the people who opposed it were mostly coming from a religious perspective. I am not opposed to any of the things your examples of progress, just felt the need to mention that your argument is begging the question.

▲

throw9383930 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

[flagged]