1. the percentile of voters who favored gay marriage at the time
2. adding 1% per year for future years, based on what I regarded as a slow but inexorable shift towards acceptance.
I arrived at the 1% calculation by comparing election results at the time. For example:
“in March 2000, Proposition 22 wanted to amend the Family Code to say “only marriage between a man and a woman” would be recognized in the state [California]. The measure passed, 61.4% to 38.6%. In November 2008, Proposition 8 also rejected gay marriage, but in a much closer election, 52.24% to 47.76%. Elementary math reveals that gay marriage gained 9.16% more supporters in just 8.5 years.”
My 2035 calculation was wildly erroneous, because the rise of gay-marriage acceptance accelerated quickly past 1% per year. Polls indicate that public opinion shifted from about 33% approval in 2006, to the present day estimate of 60%. That’s a 27% shift in 9 years, 3% per annum.
Gay marriage still isn’t a popular idea in Mississippi and other states, but it was legalized already in 36 states before today’s Supreme Court decision.
What have I learned from my mistake?
This:
Cultural changes can happen far quicker than we realize, due to proliferation and rapidity of information exchange via new technology. New memes can go viral on Facebook, twitter, reddit, youtube, or other sites, blazing their way into reader’s consciousness.
People can bicker and trade opinions on chat sites and comment sections (like IEET’s), introducing each other to new ways of thinking, persuading each other that new ideas are superior and easily possible.
Gay Marriage is now legal in the United States - we’re the 21st nation to adopt this reform.
What’s next? What seen-today-as-impossible changes will occur in the near future?
Can we decide to improve our lives increasingly quicker? Can we actually overcome obstacles, like global warming? Endless war in the Middle East?
Will death and disease - acceptable to the majority today - be viewed as horrible in the very near future, with trillions poured into research?
Will poverty and economic inequality be regarded as morally wrong, with successful attempts made to reform it?
Today, anything seems possible.