The 21st century is kicking the 20th century's ass

[davisgang90]

I don't want get close to the third rail folks are arguing over, but I think to say the 21st century is kicking the 20th in terms of human rights is ridiculous if your one example is gay marriage.

The 20th saw women finally receive the vote and saw black people finally gain full citizenship under the law.

I say that significantly trumps gay marriage.

[DoubleDown]

This is the part of this that busts your argument for me.  I don't think many women have had an abortion just because they felt like it.  There are a thousand reasons for it, but that's not one, or not in the top 99% of reasons.  That guy might have health problems, can't afford it, doesn't want to pass on a terrible hereditary illness, might have been raped, or many other reasons.  Maybe he would have it if he knew he could care for it well, but he's homeless.  He can't afford childcare.  His family would disown him.  He's about to start college.

He has a tough choice to make.  But it's his choice.  Not the government's, and not mine.  No matter how much I would choose otherwise. 

I'd be working hard to create a country where men would have more support and options not to abort that child. If it was that important to me, I'd be gladly paying a little more in taxes to create the social services to help him and his child. 

Agreed, I definitely am not suggesting most women "choose" an abortion just because they feel like it. I'm sure it's a rare case where a woman gets an abortion as a convenience factor. I was intentionally using an outlandish hypothetical scenario, with a man deciding to abort a 3-year old child just because he felt like it, to see if madgeylou would stick to her position that women should have sole authority to choose, no matter what, even in that extreme case. And she did!

So having an abortion is not like having ice cream.

Note to self...

LOL!

[Russ]

I don't want get close to the third rail folks are arguing over, but I think to say the 21st century is kicking the 20th in terms of human rights is ridiculous if your one example is gay marriage.

The 20th saw women finally receive the vote and saw black people finally gain full citizenship under the law.

I say that significantly trumps gay marriage.

It's not like those things went away as soon as the 21st century rolled around. Women can still vote and having different skin color is not an automatic no-go on citizenship. No longer denying rights based on sexual orientation on top of all that would then make the 21st century better.

Just how I choose to look at it though.

[oldtoyota]

And we don't even have to tell the government how we feel about it, they already know through efficiently monitoring our communications!

I really did just LOL at that.

[davisgang90]

I don't want get close to the third rail folks are arguing over, but I think to say the 21st century is kicking the 20th in terms of human rights is ridiculous if your one example is gay marriage.

The 20th saw women finally receive the vote and saw black people finally gain full citizenship under the law.

I say that significantly trumps gay marriage.

It's not like those things went away as soon as the 21st century rolled around. Women can still vote and having different skin color is not an automatic no-go on citizenship. No longer denying rights based on sexual orientation on top of all that would then make the 21st century better.

Just how I choose to look at it though.

Your logic is impeccable.

[Russ]

Your logic is impeccable.

I'm going to choose to take that as a very terse compliment :)

[Jamesqf]

It's not like those things went away as soon as the 21st century rolled around. Women can still vote and having different skin color is not an automatic no-go on citizenship.

But I thought the issue here was the amount of change, no?  So the 21st century has quite a ways to go to match the 20th.

You also have to remember that WRT sexual orientation, most of the heavy lifting was actually done in the 20th century.  Up to the 1950s, in a lot of places being homosexual could lose you a job, child custody, even get you arrested.  By the end of 1999, it was pretty much socially & legally acceptable.

[Russ]

It's not like those things went away as soon as the 21st century rolled around. Women can still vote and having different skin color is not an automatic no-go on citizenship.

But I thought the issue here was the amount of change, no?  So the 21st century has quite a ways to go to match the 20th.

You also have to remember that WRT sexual orientation, most of the heavy lifting was actually done in the 20th century.  Up to the 1950s, in a lot of places being homosexual could lose you a job, child custody, even get you arrested.  By the end of 1999, it was pretty much socially & legally acceptable.

Of course if we're talking about change you're completely right, although I didn't even think about it in terms of change until davisgang mentioned it. It is of course possible that I missed something earlier.

And yes, I agree most of the heavy lifting was done in the 20th century.

Just sharing a different perspective is all

[wepner]

Yeah but the 18th and 19th century did all the heavy lifting for the 20th centuries advancements as well...

It seems silly to measure the two based on overall change when the 20th century had 100 years and the 21st has only had 13 (or 12? I always forget how that works).

I guess the topic title itself is a little silly (although I'm all about the spirit of the message).

If it's an open competition I'd like to submit that the 6th century BC and China's implementation of a meritocracy as probably the biggest step forward as far as creating a world where humans can thrive.