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.
You're missing the point. Would you accept a system where the primary form of American identification was issued by Catholic churches (upon Confirmation, say), who issued cards to their members which allowed them to use a vast nationwide infrastructure, and that this was not discriminatory because non-Catholics could also visit the churches and obtain Non-Believer Cards and carry them?
How about if a white supremacist organization's membership card was the main ID in the USA, and that they also issued Non-White Cards to people unlucky enough to be born non-Caucasian? They'd be asked "Caucasian Card, please?" every time they went to vote, and they would have to say "I have a Non-White Card; that's OK, right?", and it would still be accepted. No discrimination at all, right?
.
Are you seriously trying to suggest that people will discriminate against those with non DL ID? That's one the most absurd arguments I have ever heard especially as it applies to voter ID. One of the major arguments against voter ID is people lacking them, eliminating the most abundant form would just be stupidity.
Last edited by Oldhag1; 04-08-2015 at 05:32 PM..
Reason: Edited quote
again, at the SAME PLACE where you can get your driver license, you can get a non-driver ID.
This is precisely what is so discriminatory about it. We are basically allowing an organization to issue "Non-Membership Cards" to people whom the organization refuses to accept as members because of something they cannot control, and claiming that this represents equality.
Perhaps it's time to leave your bubble? The ID issue is actually hugely difficult for a lot of people. To get a birth certificate can be a real hassle if you don't have any money or transportation, and god help you if you live far away from where you were born.
There are whole swathes of people at the lowest rungs of the socioeconomic scale who have never eaten in a sitdown restaurant and don't even know how to write a check. Do you really think they have the resources to sort through the rigamarole you have to go through to get an birth certificate and then an actual ID?
And sorry, but voter fraud is pretty rare. It's even more rare for it to actually have any affect on an election.
Perhaps the reason the people on the socioeconomic scale are where they are is because they lack the motivation to get proper identification which could allow them to get a decent job. Now of course if the same ID was required to obtain welfare they would have no problem going out to get one.
I need to show my id at least once a day, whether it be at work to gain access or at the store to show proof that I am in fact the correct credit card holder. To say that poor people cannot obtain the proper identification needed for everyday life is just ridiculous. Also, if some don't even know how to write a check I can almost guarantee they are not following the candidates and probably shouldn't be voting in the first place.
To succeed in life one must show motivation to do so
This is precisely what is so discriminatory about it. We are basically allowing an organization to issue "Non-Membership Cards" to people whom the organization refuses to accept as members because of something they cannot control, and claiming that this represents equality.
The organization you are referring to is the STATE. Have you ceased accepting all services from the State because of their discriminatory practices against non-drivers? No? How hypocritical!
Don't want anything issued by the state that refused to give a drivers license to a blind person? Fine. Go to the FEDERAL government and get a Passport. The Passport agency has nothing to do with drivers licenses.
There are other id resources besides the state government if you REALLY have problem with them. Just be honest and stop accepting all other state provided services and programs if you feel they are so outrageously discriminatory.
This is precisely what is so discriminatory about it. We are basically allowing an organization to issue "Non-Membership Cards" to people whom the organization refuses to accept as members because of something they cannot control, and claiming that this represents equality.
You've got to be kidding me. If they DIDN'T offer a non-driver alternative, you'd be crying discrimination... but you're saying they discriminate because they DO offer an alternative? I seriously don't get it.
Moderator cut: against forum guidelines The majority of the population drives. That's just the way it is. I'm sorry you're not a part of the "cool club".
I can't figure out if you want to take away driver licenses for everyone or just give them to anyone.
It's a shame that the driver's license has become the most prominent form of identification in the USA. This is a document that a portion of the population -- full citizens! -- will never be able to legally possess. We would never make something accessible only to white people, or only to Christians, or only to any other majority, so central to American life. How have we allowed this to happen?
You have made it abundantly clear that you don't think that driver's licenses should be the primary form of ID used in this country. So, what should? Passports? Phone bills? Voter guides? Birth certificates? A "National Identification Card"? What?
You have identified what you see as a problem. What is your solution?
Don't want anything issued by the state that refused to give a drivers license to a blind person? Fine. Go to the FEDERAL government and get a Passport. The Passport agency has nothing to do with drivers licenses.
There are other id resources besides the state government if you REALLY have problem with them. Just be honest and stop accepting all other state provided services and programs if you feel they are so outrageously discriminatory.
I have a passport, and I would love to see it become the most common form of identification, because it is equally available to every US citizen and confers no special privileges on some citizens and not others. And there are, as far as I know, no "anti-passports" that say "this is the person in the photograph, but this person may not travel on airplanes or cross borders like Real Passport holders can", which is what a Non-Driver ID essentially does for driving.
If there were no fee associated with having a passport (so it wouldn't be a poll tax), I wouldn't mind having to bring it to the polling place to vote.
Your idea that someone who finds one aspect of state government discriminatory should stop accepting any and all state services is illogical and not worthy of debate here, but just for the record, I do not accept any such state-provided services because I live abroad. I vote by absentee ballot.
I have a passport, and I would love to see it become the most common form of identification, because it is equally available to every US citizen and confers no special privileges on some citizens and not others.
Aside from the small fact that it costs $135ish and takes up to 8 weeks to receive. I make decent money and I barely want to spend that much on a passport. One of the biggest arguments against voter ID is that is disenfranchises poor people, because it costs $10 to get a birth certificate. Paying $135+ for a passport would be much more difficult.
I have a passport, and I would love to see it become the most common form of identification, because it is equally available to every US citizen and confers no special privileges on some citizens and not others. And there are, as far as I know, no "anti-passports" that say "this is the person in the photograph, but this person may not travel on airplanes or cross borders like Real Passport holders can", which is what a Non-Driver ID essentially does for driving.
Again the major argument against voter ID is that people don't have them, you're going to eliminate drivers licenses because of this belief you feel it's discriminatory? That is just an absurd argument. FYI most of the states already accept a passport as ID for voting, I don't recall seeing one that didn't.
Quote:
If there were no fee associated with having a passport (so it wouldn't be a poll tax), I wouldn't mind having to bring it to the polling place to vote.
The states are already issuing ID for free if you need them for voting purposes and it appears the passport has the same BC requirements PLUS there is a fee involved.
It seems to me you wish to complicate things for people that already taken the steps to procure an acceptable ID.
I have a passport, and I would love to see it become the most common form of identification, because it is equally available to every US citizen and confers no special privileges on some citizens and not others. And there are, as far as I know, no "anti-passports" that say "this is the person in the photograph, but this person may not travel on airplanes or cross borders like Real Passport holders can", which is what a Non-Driver ID essentially does for driving.
If there were no fee associated with having a passport (so it wouldn't be a poll tax), I wouldn't mind having to bring it to the polling place to vote.
Your idea that someone who finds one aspect of state government discriminatory should stop accepting any and all state services is illogical and not worthy of debate here, but just for the record, I do not accept any such state-provided services because I live abroad. I vote by absentee ballot.
Your idea that someone who finds one id issued by a state government that you cannot obtain means the agency is discriminatory is also illogical and should never have been introduced into this debate on the merits of voter ID. The fact that you are so vehement on the issue when you live abroad and have no vested interest in a state issued drivers license is even more ludicrous. I am happy you have your passport and even more pleased you find the energy to vote despite not being required to show id to obtain your absentee ballot.
By the way, the drivers license confers no special privileges on anyone. Driving is a privilege that anyone can obtain once they demonstrate the necessary skills and abilities to do so safely. The license is simply proof that they have adequately demonstrated that to an official whose job it is to validate those skills and abilities. The privilege is conferred upon that demonstration and the license is the confirmation to law enforcement. The commonality of the issuance and the spread to other uses is merely secondary. The use of an already commonly existing form of Identification for the purposes of voter id is economical and efficient. The availability of other forms of id for this purpose for those without access to the drivers license is a bonus in my mind.
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.
