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.
Everytime someone comes out against voting rights, they get jumped on. Answer these two questions:
1. Why if the prefrontal cortex (reasoning, rationality) is not fully developed until age 25 should anyone under that age be allowed to make big decisions like voting?
2. Why should someone who pays no taxes have any say whatsoever in voting and consequently how other people's money will be spent?
I'm with you. In my mind it should require a license to vote - test, age requirements and maybe a couple of other things, too.
Dems fight hard to "get out the vote" and then they go round up a bunch of people who have no idea what is going on. That's why they hate voter ID requirements; actually they just love people who are unable to plan ahead. Those people are easily manipulated.
In my mind it should require a license to vote - test, age requirements and maybe a couple of other things, too.
The last thing we need is more government telling its citizens what we can and can not do. And I'm curious to know what your couple of other things would involve.
Perhaps you were just considered mentally developed enough to follow orders, and physically developed enough to be the proverbial cannon fodder.
We don't have cannon fodder in the modern military.
That was world war 1 and 2 and before type stuff.
We don't have pitched battles with huge standing armies anymore.
Modern military jobs are very technical and usually involve abilities like operating a stealth vehicle, piloting a drone, conducting land warfare as part of a smaller special ops team, etc.
If at 18, folk are deemed to have the mental capacity to join the military (as I did), then we're have the mental capacity to vote as well.
Voters need more intelligence than soldiers.
I support both a literacy test and a poll tax. The literacy test is common sense. The poll tax prevents both the dregs and the uninterested from voting. It needn't be high. One hundred dollars for presidential elections and fifty for off-year elections would be adequate.
I support both a literacy test and a poll tax. The literacy test is common sense. The poll tax prevents both the dregs and the uninterested from voting. It needn't be high. One hundred dollars for presidential elections and fifty for off-year elections would be adequate.
It is funny how the D's assume those voting R are all uneducated hicks, and R's assume those voting D are a bunch of uneducated homeless urban dwellers. The common assumption is that neither side can believe educated people could possibly vote for the opposite ideology, thus they must be mentally deficient in some way.
Needless to say you have people with college degrees that are dumb as dirt with no common sense, and you can have some people with limited schooling, but know reality from fantasy, and pragmatism vs. nonsense. Yet which side possess the most worthy people who should be entitled to vote on how our republic should be run?
We obviously want all parts of society to believe they have a collective interest in our republic, so limiting certain peoples right to vote seems counter-intuitive. We actually fought our war of independence over taxation without representation.
I don't think we want to go down that road again.
A poll tax is a non starter, as those who might even have the little money you suggest, are not going to use it to vote, rather put gas in the car to work, or put food on the table. Plus the poor have just as much right to vote as American citizens as do the rich.
As to a literacy test, why not just make it the same test you need to become an American citizen. If people wish to vote, they should have a basic understanding of our history, culture, and language.
That is about as far as I'd say we dare go in limiting anyone's ability to vote.
The truth is that once the right to vote is given, it’s not taken away.
Not to non-property owners
Not to blacks
Not to women
Not to Puerto Rican’s who relocate stateside
Not to 18 year olds
To b*tch about who has the right to vote is a waste of time. It would be more useful to think how you can broaden your side’s appeal to other groups than to fantasize that it's 1800 once again.
I support both a literacy test and a poll tax. The literacy test is common sense. The poll tax prevents both the dregs and the uninterested from voting. It needn't be high. One hundred dollars for presidential elections and fifty for off-year elections would be adequate.
And there it is again. The Republican desire to suppress the vote as much as possible.
You know that if you let the democratic process function then you most likely lose.
I support both a literacy test and a poll tax. The literacy test is common sense. The poll tax prevents both the dregs and the uninterested from voting. It needn't be high. One hundred dollars for presidential elections and fifty for off-year elections would be adequate.
These have been found unconstitutional.
And do you know that these sordid practices have been historically associated with Jim Crow practices disenfranchising African Americans. That certainly says a lot about you if you are openly advocating a revival for such actions.
Last edited by Happy in Wyoming; 12-04-2018 at 03:27 PM..
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.
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.
