LogFAQs > #944335319

Probably because social issues are typically harder to defend given that they're largely based on feelings and opinions? Take for example the question whether it's wrong for a society to eat meat. Obviously meat consumption leads to harming animals, but feelings there range from "it's okay to harvest animals for our consumption" to "it's okay to humanely harvest animals for our consumption" to "it's not okay at all to harvest animals for consumption." None of the stances are based on anything truly objective. You can't point to any facts or figures on that ground. However, you *can* make side arguments -- the anti-vegetarian side will claim that it's an important part of the human diet and pleasurable while vegetarians will claim that you can get the same nutrition from non-animal products, animal substitutes taste just as good, and it's a far more efficient use of resources (that last point is indisputable -- raising animals is undeniably less efficient... although that brings us to the question of *why* any such efficiency matters)

For something that pretends to use statistics, we have BLM. The BLM movement is built upon not just outrage and indignation surrounding officer-involved incidents (which is the feelings side), but also a large number of outright falsehoods and spin (part of which, as we later learned from the FBI, was orchestrated by Russia -- which shouldn't surprise anybody since Russia, the US, and European nations have used similar tactics in an attempt to undermine countries). Many of the incidents STILL invoked by the group have been definitely debunked, such as the Mike Brown shooting where even Obama's justice department finally conceded that he had gone for the officer's gun. However, some people who feel that any deaths are unwarranted -- even when an officer kills a suspect in self-defense -- so it's an irreconcilable difference in opinion since it's based on feelings. (There's also the issue of BLM's overt racism where it *only* cares about officer-involved deaths regarding one minority group and protestors have gone out of their way to shout, "Do all lives matter? Just black lives!", even when -- hilariously enough -- the entire fucking group doesn't have a single black person there.)

When it comes to most social issues, statistics are just window dressing. There are core underlying feelings and opinions which people hold -- based largely on their subjective experiences -- and then they tend to look for facts that support those feelings while finding reasons to reject the facts that contradict it. And on the vast majority of issues, people on opposing sides are generally closer on many issues than they assume.

---

(\/)(\/)|-|
There are precious few at ease / With moral ambiguities / So we act as though they don't exist.