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 can just read the article and see exactly why some people might not have ID, but I guess that's too difficult for you. Also LOL at whitey not knowing what racism is.[/quote]
Ok, ok. They aren't intelligent enough to get an ID. Got it!
It could be construed as one now that they are issuing them upon birth, but that was not always the case. I did not get a Social Security number until I started working at age 14.
Quote:
Originally Posted by urbanlife78
Well now everyone gets their social security number at birth or when they become citizens of this country. That doesn't seem to violate the Constitution, so not sure why you would think a National ID would do that as well...heck, where in the Constitution does it say that would be a violation?
SS is actually voluntary. If you want the child tax deductions then you will have to enroll your kids and most people enroll their kids when they are still at the hospital or shorty after, but their is no requirement to obtain an SS number.
SS is actually voluntary. If you want the child tax deductions then you will have to enroll your kids and most people enroll their kids when they are still at the hospital or shorty after, but their is no requirement to obtain an SS number.
SCOTUS also already decided blacks don't have human rights, that doesn't mean the discussion is over.
Yes, but it's funny how that only seems to apply when the decision goes against what a person believes. Like with abortion. Liberals challenged the abortion bans in court. However, once they won Roe v Wade, they then turned around and said the issue was decided and pro-life people need to quit.
Quote:
And the SCOTUS decision is, as you quoted, predicated on the idea that the IDs are a way to reduce fraud. It's entirely legitimate to point out that IDs don't actually reduce fraud, and therefore there's a strong case for the SCOTUS reversing its decision. Also, it's been made abundantly clear in recent years that Republicans have used voter ID to supress opposition voters rather than reduce fraud.
I see no instances of Republicans using voter ID to suppress opposition voters. All I've seen is liberals claiming that to be the case. The thing is, those same liberals are the ones who claimed that the Voting Rights Act was gutted when one section of it was recently thrown out - a section that had produced no violations in over 13,000 cases reviewed. So with that kind of a track record, it is very difficult to take their claims seriously.
So, no, it is hardly "abundantly clear". No more clear than it was that the Voting Rights Act was destroyed when a section that had never once been violated in half a century was deemed no longer necessary.
Liberals are the ones that keep talking about the voter suppression, because the low information do not believe in half the nonsense they believe. But the liberals like to tap into people's anger!!!
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.
A racist defining racism... how steriotypical of you.
