The Instigator
silverhyruler
Con (against)
The Contender
Capitalistslave
Pro (for)

Non-citizens should be allowed to vote if they are trying to be permanent residents

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Debate Round Forfeited
silverhyruler has forfeited round #2.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
Time Remaining
00days00hours00minutes00seconds
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/4/2017 Category: Politics
Updated: 9 months ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 186 times Debate No: 101691
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (5)
Votes (0)

 

silverhyruler

Con

Non-citizens should not be allowed to vote.



It is unfair to the citizens if non-citizens are allowed to vote. They are not legally permanent residents so they should have no say in such matters as politics that can impact the lives of permanent residents in a way they do not like. Even if they are trying to become permanent residents, it still shouldn't be up to them. What if they don't end up becoming citizens?
Capitalistslave

Pro

1) I believe the idea behind voting is to have a say over what the decisions of the government are which affect us. Non-citizens who are living in the United States are affected by the decisions of our government, and yet are often not represented in that decision making process. I consider this an injustice: they get ruled over by the united states, but don't get the privilege of voting. They also get taxed without representation, considering they have to abide by the US tax law before they're even allowed to vote. Why are we putting up with what the founders despised: taxation without representation? Either they should be exempt from taxes, or we need to allow them to vote. Considering some taxes are automatic, like the sales tax, it seems the only option is to allow them to vote, since it would be impossible to exempt non-citizens from the excise taxes like sales tax. Additionally, they are held liable for our laws yet don't get a say in the laws even though they are bound to follow them. They have all of the responsibilities of a citizen essentially(paying taxes, following the law etc), but we don't give them the benefits of citizens. We should.
2) There is precedent in the United States history to allowing non-citizens to vote. The supreme court once stated, in the supreme court case Minor vs Happersett in 1874, that "citizenship has not in all cases been made a condition precedent to the enjoyment of the right of suffrage. Thus, in Missouri, persons of foreign birth, who have declared their intention to become citizens of the United States, may under certain circumstances vote", despite this, federal law currently prevents non-citizens from voting[1]


I'll leave it at this for now


Sources:
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org...
Debate Round No. 1
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 2
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 3
5 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Posted by Capitalistslave 9 months ago
Capitalistslave
I'll assume you're okay with what you put down in the first round since you've not said anything and I've given you plenty of time to say something.
Posted by Capitalistslave 9 months ago
Capitalistslave
Ok, do you plan on adding more to your first round or are you happy with how it is?

It's just short as it is now, so I want to make sure you are satisfied with it.
Posted by silverhyruler 9 months ago
silverhyruler
Oh and I want to do the second way btw
Posted by silverhyruler 9 months ago
silverhyruler
Sounds good. Good luck!
Posted by Capitalistslave 9 months ago
Capitalistslave
Oh, I see you must have saw my other post showing what topics I would be willing to debate. I'll accept this, and propose a couple of rules and an outline for the debate. Before I do accept this debate though, I would like to see if you find the below rules and outline acceptable. We should agree to this before we do the debate.

Outline:
Round 1: List main arguments and opening statements(this seems to have been what you did in round 1, so I will do the same). If you have more arguments you plan on using, I would suggest editing the debate(which you can do as long as I haven't accepted yet) and putting them into round 1.
Round 2: Expand on main arguments with facts and logic.
Round 3: Rebuttals to main arguments of your opponent and make conclusions.

I am willing to also have the main arguments supported by facts and logic in the first round, if you'd rather have that. In which case, I would suggest adding more to your first round. In which case, if you do that, this would be the outline:
Round 1: Main arguments
Round 2: Rebuttals to opponent's main arguments and/or possibly more main arguments.
Round 3: Defense against opponent's rebuttals to your arguments and conclusions.

Rules:
1) No ad hominem, personal attacks, insults
2) The last round should not have any new arguments, and should only be a defense or rebuttal. New facts and information can be brought up, but only in rebuttal/defense.
This debate has 2 more rounds before the voting begins. If you want to receive email updates for this debate, click the Add to My Favorites link at the top of the page.