undefined | Better HN

0 pointslapcat2y ago0 comments

> If over a quarter of states or representatives don't want to codify something in the constitution, that is not a small minority.

I'd say that 25% of states is a small minority of states, but in any case that's ignoring the population of states, which vary dramatically (California 39M, Wyoming 580K). 25% of the states is not necessarily 25% of the US population; it's possibly much smaller than 25%.

> Every single person in the US today has the benefit of freedom of speech, for instance

Except that our beloved Supreme Court (which has been revealed to be blatantly corrupt) has decided that money is speech, thereby allowing the wealthy to simply purchase our elected representatives.

0 comments

lockhouse2y ago

Just because a state’s population is lower doesn’t mean their needs are less important.

Would you apply a similar standard to the LGBT community? They are approximately 7% of the population.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_demographics_of_the_Unite...

lapcatOP2y ago

> Just because a state’s population is lower doesn’t mean their needs are less important.

> Would you apply a similar standard to the LGBT community? They are approximately 7% of the population.

You're mixing up rights and voting. The LGBT community doesn't get to pass or veto any laws.

A person has rights. A state is not a person. Corporations are not people, my friend. I don't believe in the concept of state's rights, so I don't accept the analogy. A state is just an arbitrary set of lines on a map. It doesn't have needs.

In the case of voting, I think the majority should decide rather than the minority, otherwise it's not really democratic. If the 7% LGBT community ruled the country, that would also be a tyranny, not a democracy.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse