This message was self-deleted by its author

[Courtesy Flush]

This message was self-deleted by its author (Courtesy Flush) on Thu Aug 2, 2012, 06:04 PM. When the original post in a discussion thread is self-deleted, the entire discussion thread is automatically locked so new replies cannot be posted.

[sinkingfeeling]

1. I think your're all wet. We no longer have slavery and women can vote.

I'm 100% certain that gay marriage and gay rights will become the law of the land within my lifetime and I'm 64.

[getting old in mke]

2. Assuming these are independent events

Then the previous results have no effect on the next toss. There really isn't a "law of averages" in that sense.

Of course, asserting a coin flip is independent is a lot different than asserting social movements are independent...

[arbusto_baboso]

4. Especially since the "coin flips" on women's suffrage and slavery....

tunred up one way for centuries until they suddenly went the other way.

The basic analysis of the OP is deeply, deeply flawed.

[Courtesy Flush]

19. It's not "analysis." It's fucking satire.

I feel like I've walked into a Portlandia skit. Since when did DUers become so obtuse?

[arbusto_baboso]

20. "Satire" needs to have an actual point....

and "humor" should actually be funny.

As your OP was BOTH pointless and unfunny, it fails as both humor and/or satire.

And yet you blame US for not "getting" your satire.

It's a piss-poor craftsman who blames his tools...

[coalition_unwilling]

11. The OP is a horribly false analogy (of the "coin toss" theory of history), but there is

such a thing as 'reversion to the mean.' To wit, over a large enough sample, the number of heads and tails should be roughly equal. Apologies in advance to professional mathematicians or statisticians if I have unduly bowdlerized a core concept.

[Iggo]

3. It's not a coin-flip.

Wrong is always wrong.

[graywarrior]

5. I think you're confusing our Law of Averages with those on planet Kolob

[Bucky]

14. I'm getting sick and tired of your anti-Kolobism.

Your treatment of Kolobian ducks is well documented.

[DURHAM D]

6. Your post is drivel.

[Posteritatis]

18. Yep. Even by the standards around here this one's extraordinarily inane. (nt)

[badtoworse]

7. Will it happen at the ballot box or in the courtroom?

As a political matter, it makes a difference.

[Lex]

8. Don't Ask Don't Tell is no more. Gay marriages exists already in several states

and more and more companies and universities offer same-sex benefits all the time. The polls suggest that those in favor of full equality in the law for GLBT people is steadily climbing.

You're just plain wrong.

[TrogL]

9. It's not a random occurence

Plus, you're engaging in the gambler's logical fallacy.

[Speck Tater]

10. The simple fact is that...

conservatives are almost always on the wrong side of history. In the long run they are almost always proven wrong. It is in the nature of conservatism to resist the new, and progress of some form is virtually inevitable. So it's more like the situation where you flip the coin and it falls. Then you flip the coin again and it falls again. Does that mean that eventually when you flip the coin it will stay up in the air?

[Bucky]

12. Society is a little more complex than a coin toss.

It'll probably take 50 years, but two generations from now people are gonna look at homophobes' opposition to marriage and insurance equality issues the same way our generation looks at Jim Crow segregation.

Anyway, the example you cite shows a clear trend toward expanding civil rights in America. I think you may be working with a two-tailed quarter.

[TlalocW]

13. No

Progressive ideas almost always win out. It might take a while, but they do. Things that we take for granted now - and that even conservatives agree with or at least HAVE to give lip service to unless they want to reveal themselves as the troglodytes they are - were once fought against as hard as people are fighting against marriage equality today. Women's suffrage, civil rights, even very specific historical moments like whether we had a geocentric or heliocentric solar system - all were fought against by conservatives of their day. All these ideas and ideals are now considered normal. Yes, we may stumble and regress a little, but it's a steady progression forward.

In fact, we take things today so for granted that it's almost impossible for the majority of society to even understand the mindset of the people who were against them, and part of the reasons conservatism survives is because of that disconnect, most people don't make the connection that it was always conservatives standing in the way of change. So even today's conservatives can look back and laugh at what our ancestors did.

Not that there aren't holdouts, of course, but they're in the minority of society and are afraid to speak out for the most part for fear of being seen as idiots.

A perfect example is womens suffrage. No SANE person would say it was a bad idea. Most of us look back and even if we read historical analyses of why people would be against it, the times are so alien to us that we still can't wrap our heads around the anti-suffragettes thinking. The last person I heard taking a stand against women having the right to work was in the documentary made by Nancy Pelosi's daughter during the 2008 election. Some guy who fit (and was probably proud of it) the redneck stereotype exactly talked about how he didn't want his daughter to vote because women couldn't be trusted with the privilege. He also cried when Obama won because he felt like it heralded the end of the white man rule.

Anyway, sorry to babble, but one day, these times will be looked back on with shame and disbelief just like we do at the anti-suffragette movement, anti-civil rights groups, etc.

TlalocW

[bigbrother05]

15. The will of the people is not dictated by chance or the law of averages

If you'll note the recent votes in various state, the "coin" has come up heads. What we're seeing now is the sentient portion of the populace is joining the discussion. Tolerance builds over time with the next generation being generally more understanding than the previous, so bigotry ends up on the losing side. The only statistics that will really count in the long run are voter turn out.

IMO a lot of what we are seeing now from the RW will be viewed in the future as desperate attempts to lock in a biased viewpoint before the demographics change the game. Think of how Lester Maddox and George Wallace are viewed today compared to Rev MLK.

[Courtesy Flush]

16. Okay, here's how I worded it on Facebook...

Can someone help with a history question?

I'm trying to find an example of any movement in American history that supported fewer rights for citizens, and came out on top. By "came out on top" I mean the Constitution supported their views, and they are remembered as being on the right side of history.

All the examples I can think of turned out badly for their participants. History pretty much frowns on the Slaveholders, the Indian killers, the Jim Crow advocates, and the anti-suffrage supporters.

Surely there's ONE anti-rights group that we can look back on proudly.

I'm just trying to figure out how the anti-gay movement plans to turn this into a win.

I did so because I have a fair number of right wing friends, and it would be a waste of time to try to be witty about it.

I gave you guys more credit. Serves me right.

[loyalsister]

17. These issues are not coming before the same population

Many of the people who are working for gay rights were not even born when the civil rights movement was at it height.
An example of that difference.... I was talking to my dad about our family tree and he mentioned a great grandparent who wanted to marry an Native American woman and the rest of the family objected. He said "back then, it was kind of like black and white marriages today." My response was "In what universe??" Most got comfortable with that long ago.

I can remember some people questioning it when I was a kid in the 70s and 80s, but In my 20 adult years I can't remember it being anything to question.