Even though English is the official Language in Colorado:Sixteen counties wait for election materials in Spanish (Hispanic, waiver)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Your interpretation of the constitution is your interpretation and not de facto.
Heh. It's not MY interpretation...
Quote:
Personally, I take it as meaning people can't be refused the right to vote due to their country of orgin. If they can't read it that THEIR problem, they can learn English just like everyone else can.
I have no sympathy for those that make no effort to learn the language, but you cannot throw out the baby with the bathwater. NEW citizens have rights too. Not everyone can just become fluent in a language overnight.
Again, I'm talking about providing copies in other MAJOR international languages (French, Spanish, etc.). Denying them the opportunity to read what they are voting on effectively denies them the right to vote.
Quote:
If I go into a voting booth and I am too stupid to comprehend what the issues are it's my own fault for not putting in the time and effort to care.
That already happens all the time and hasn't a thing to do with language.
There are a lot of circumstances under which I think it just fine to expect people to speak or understand English. Voting and access to the court system are not among them.
You still have the right to vote, whether or not materials are provided in the language of your choice. Nobody is denying that right. "Reasonable accommodation" is way too broad. It should be revised.
That right is abrogated if you cannot understand the ballot. It is effectively denied. Cloaking it in some excuse of administrative inconvenience is not an explanation that ever has or ever will fly in court when you are talking about a right as fundamental as voting.
Quote:
So it's okay to deny those Finnish people their rights (by your definition) as long as they are a small minority?
In my example, I have three people in Kansas who speak Finnish but not English. Accomodating them would likely not be "reasonable."
Again, this is Spanish we are talking about. It would be the same with French or some other major international language.
You are talking about disenfranchizing thousands of voters at least. Perhaps that is what the OP really wants, eh?
I sure the hell have been to Sweeden my Father in law is SWEEDISH. And they all speak English pretty well, of course with a sweedish accent.
Infact my inalws have lived in Sweeden for over 15 years? Mother in law is American. He has passed away, and she now lives out here again, hates it, but the realitives and friends, all spoke English pretty well.
Although English is spoken by so many in European Countries, not everyone knows English or knows english well. I respected the Countrys enough to at least try and attempt the basics. It is just something you do. When i went to Italy, the home of my Ancestors, yes so many Italians know English, but there are just as many who barely spoke English, or don't speak it at all. I learned and taught myself Italian, and did pretty well, because i was able to converse with so many Italians.
E ci Sono i pigri, che vivono qui' e non puo' parlare Inglese?
Last edited by california-jewel; 08-08-2011 at 01:04 PM..
In many countries, you can't do more than visit unless you meet their basic qualifications for residency. I really don't understand why the United States also doesn't implement regulations for people wanting to live here, such as language and the ability to pay for their own health care since they didn't pay into our system. Many voting groups have their own agendas but should be to benefit the United States not to make endless demands on the American taxpayer.
That right is abrogated if you cannot understand the ballot. It is effectively denied. Cloaking it in some excuse of administrative inconvenience is not an explanation that ever has or ever will fly in court when you are talking about a right as fundamental as voting.
You can understand the ballot if you learn some very basic language. Your inconvenience argument can go both ways.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Strel
In my example, I have three people in Kansas who speak Finnish but not English. Accomodating them would likely not be "reasonable."
Again, this is Spanish we are talking about. It would be the same with French or some other major international language.
You are talking about disenfranchizing thousands of voters at least. Perhaps that is what the OP really wants, eh?
Voting materials in foreign languages are either a right, or they are not a right. If they ARE a right, which is what you are saying, how can they be denied to anyone based on reasonableness?
You can understand the ballot if you learn some very basic language. Your inconvenience argument can go both ways.
Not really. The voter is the one with the right, not the government.
It really is not that expensive or difficult to produce copies of documents (which you don't even have to print out these days until needed) translated into the major international languages.
Courts do it all the time, because for the same reason you cannot abrogate someone's voting rights on this prejudical whim, you can't disadvantage them in court either.
Quote:
Voting materials in foreign languages are either a right, or they are not a right. If they ARE a right, which is what you are saying, how can they be denied to anyone based on reasonableness?
At some point it would become so cost prohibitive that it just would not practically work. That point is FAR beyond the effort it would take to translate a few documents into a well-known, widely spoken language like Spanish.
No court is going to force a voting district in central Georiga to print it's stuff in Inuit. But Spanish???
Not really. The voter is the one with the right, not the government.
This I know. My point is that it's not a violation of their rights. They are not forced to not learn English and then denied the right to vote based on their inability to speak it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Strel
It really is not that expensive or difficult to produce copies of documents (which you don't even have to print out these days until needed) translated into the major international languages.
Irrelevant.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Strel
At some point it would become so cost prohibitive that it just would not practically work. That point is FAR beyond the effort it would take to translate a few documents into a well-known, widely spoken language like Spanish.
No court is going to force a voting district in central Georiga to print it's stuff in Inuit. But Spanish???
Since when are rights evaluated based on cost? It's either a right or it's not a right. Rights are absolute, period.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Strel
Stop making excuses for prejudice.
Stop making excuses for people who choose to remain segregated and then complain when their segregation is not subsidized.
This I know. My point is that it's not a violation of their rights. They are not forced to not learn English and then denied the right to vote based on their inability to speak it.
Irrelevant.
Since when are rights evaluated based on cost? It's either a right or it's not a right. Rights are absolute, period.
Stop making excuses for people who choose to remain segregated and then complain when their segregation is not subsidized.
And what percentage of the people whose rights would be violated by this clearly prejudicial policy would that be?
Why would you vote for someone you didn't understand in English?
They obviously must know English
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.