Total Posts:32|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Necessary Voting Requirements/Restrictions

Orpheus
Posts: 60
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/24/2013 12:10:18 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
WARNING: This topic is controversial.

That being said, I think there are a few things that need to happen to the voting laws to make America much more functional as a democracy and as a nation.

1. There should be a "political literacy" test of some sort, a test assessing basic knowledge about government and civics that everyone must pass before they are allowed to vote. (Think drivers test for voters.)

2. If you are receiving any sort of government hand out, welfare, scholarships, healthcare etc, you should NOT be able to vote. This presents a clear conflict of interests at the ballot box. Vote with your brain not with your wallet.

These are two CRITICAL things that I think are really hindering America as a whole. The uninformed voter, the welfare slob who votes for his check every month. I can't stand it, things need to be cleaned up.
ConservativePolitico
Posts: 8,210
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/24/2013 12:23:04 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
I agree mostly, you'd have to allow the states to administer the political literacy test and it would (obviously) have to be universally accessible. But I think if it's 100% required and 100% accessible then it would be Constitutional and would help a great deal.

I also dislike the ignorant voter.
Lordknukle
Posts: 12,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/24/2013 12:29:56 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
I've always been fascinated with Plato's idea that democracy is ultimately the tyranny of the uneducated masses, and that intellectuals should make decisions for a country.
"Easy is the descent to Avernus, for the door to the Underworld lies upon both day and night. But to retrace your steps and return to the breezes above- that's the task, that's the toil."
ConservativePolitico
Posts: 8,210
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/24/2013 12:30:53 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/24/2013 12:29:56 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
I've always been fascinated with Plato's idea that democracy is ultimately the tyranny of the uneducated masses, and that intellectuals should make decisions for a country.

Like I'm not arguing for a technocracy, but, I think voters need to be informed at the least, intelligent at the best.

The uneducated masses are a big dumb force that really impact the country at times.
Lordknukle
Posts: 12,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/24/2013 12:33:51 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/24/2013 12:30:53 AM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
At 3/24/2013 12:29:56 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
I've always been fascinated with Plato's idea that democracy is ultimately the tyranny of the uneducated masses, and that intellectuals should make decisions for a country.

Like I'm not arguing for a technocracy, but, I think voters need to be informed at the least, intelligent at the best.

The uneducated masses are a big dumb force that really impact the country at times.

Then again, Plato's idea is pretty much synonymous with classical fascism.
"Easy is the descent to Avernus, for the door to the Underworld lies upon both day and night. But to retrace your steps and return to the breezes above- that's the task, that's the toil."
ConservativePolitico
Posts: 8,210
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/24/2013 12:35:53 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/24/2013 12:33:51 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 3/24/2013 12:30:53 AM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
At 3/24/2013 12:29:56 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
I've always been fascinated with Plato's idea that democracy is ultimately the tyranny of the uneducated masses, and that intellectuals should make decisions for a country.

Like I'm not arguing for a technocracy, but, I think voters need to be informed at the least, intelligent at the best.

The uneducated masses are a big dumb force that really impact the country at times.

Then again, Plato's idea is pretty much synonymous with classical fascism.

Have you read the Republic?
Lordknukle
Posts: 12,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/24/2013 12:36:45 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/24/2013 12:35:53 AM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
At 3/24/2013 12:33:51 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 3/24/2013 12:30:53 AM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
At 3/24/2013 12:29:56 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
I've always been fascinated with Plato's idea that democracy is ultimately the tyranny of the uneducated masses, and that intellectuals should make decisions for a country.

Like I'm not arguing for a technocracy, but, I think voters need to be informed at the least, intelligent at the best.

The uneducated masses are a big dumb force that really impact the country at times.

Then again, Plato's idea is pretty much synonymous with classical fascism.

Have you read the Republic?

Not in full.
"Easy is the descent to Avernus, for the door to the Underworld lies upon both day and night. But to retrace your steps and return to the breezes above- that's the task, that's the toil."
drhead
Posts: 1,475
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/24/2013 12:37:18 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
1. There should be a "political literacy" test of some sort, a test assessing basic knowledge about government and civics that everyone must pass before they are allowed to vote. (Think drivers test for voters.)

Unconstitutional. Why not add a poll tax as well, while we're clearly going on a trend of promoting plutocracy?

2. If you are receiving any sort of government hand out, welfare, scholarships, healthcare etc, you should NOT be able to vote. This presents a clear conflict of interests at the ballot box. Vote with your brain not with your wallet.

Unconstitutional, and the 'scholarships' part would end up screwing over plenty of voters with the capacity to be well-informed. If you do well in school, you get scholarships thrown at you. There is no logic in trying to disenfranchise the least and the most intelligent voters.

These are two CRITICAL things that I think are really hindering America as a whole. The uninformed voter, the welfare slob who votes for his check every month. I can't stand it, things need to be cleaned up.

I'm going to make the safe assumption that you're a Republican (quite possibly Tea Party, given the striking similarity of your argument to a petition created by a colleague of mine, demanding that anyone on any type of government handout have their vote counted as only 3/5 of a vote). If this is the case, you will be glad to know, then, that red states tend to receive more federal aid than they pay in federal taxes, and that stupidity is homogeneous among society, thus if this resolution were to pass, it would benefit the Democratic ticket if anyone, and you would continue to receive your food stamps.
Wall of Fail

"You reject religion... calling it a sickness, to what ends??? Are you a Homosexual??" - Dogknox
"For me, Evolution is a zombie theory. I mean imaginary cartoons and wishful thinking support it?" - Dragonfang
"There are no mental health benefits of atheism. It is devoid of rational thinking and mental protection." - Gabrian
Lordknukle
Posts: 12,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/24/2013 12:39:26 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/24/2013 12:37:18 AM, drhead wrote:
1. There should be a "political literacy" test of some sort, a test assessing basic knowledge about government and civics that everyone must pass before they are allowed to vote. (Think drivers test for voters.)

Unconstitutional. Why not add a poll tax as well, while we're clearly going on a trend of promoting plutocracy?

2. If you are receiving any sort of government hand out, welfare, scholarships, healthcare etc, you should NOT be able to vote. This presents a clear conflict of interests at the ballot box. Vote with your brain not with your wallet.

Unconstitutional, and the 'scholarships' part would end up screwing over plenty of voters with the capacity to be well-informed. If you do well in school, you get scholarships thrown at you. There is no logic in trying to disenfranchise the least and the most intelligent voters.

These are two CRITICAL things that I think are really hindering America as a whole. The uninformed voter, the welfare slob who votes for his check every month. I can't stand it, things need to be cleaned up.

I'm going to make the safe assumption that you're a Republican (quite possibly Tea Party, given the striking similarity of your argument to a petition created by a colleague of mine, demanding that anyone on any type of government handout have their vote counted as only 3/5 of a vote). If this is the case, you will be glad to know, then, that red states tend to receive more federal aid than they pay in federal taxes, and that stupidity is homogeneous among society, thus if this resolution were to pass, it would benefit the Democratic ticket if anyone, and you would continue to receive your food stamps.

Can you please point to me where in the constitution it says that everybody has an inalienable right to vote?
"Easy is the descent to Avernus, for the door to the Underworld lies upon both day and night. But to retrace your steps and return to the breezes above- that's the task, that's the toil."
ConservativePolitico
Posts: 8,210
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/24/2013 12:40:54 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/24/2013 12:37:18 AM, drhead wrote:
1. There should be a "political literacy" test of some sort, a test assessing basic knowledge about government and civics that everyone must pass before they are allowed to vote. (Think drivers test for voters.)

Unconstitutional. Why not add a poll tax as well, while we're clearly going on a trend of promoting plutocracy?

2. If you are receiving any sort of government hand out, welfare, scholarships, healthcare etc, you should NOT be able to vote. This presents a clear conflict of interests at the ballot box. Vote with your brain not with your wallet.

Unconstitutional, and the 'scholarships' part would end up screwing over plenty of voters with the capacity to be well-informed. If you do well in school, you get scholarships thrown at you. There is no logic in trying to disenfranchise the least and the most intelligent voters.

These are two CRITICAL things that I think are really hindering America as a whole. The uninformed voter, the welfare slob who votes for his check every month. I can't stand it, things need to be cleaned up.

I'm going to make the safe assumption that you're a Republican (quite possibly Tea Party, given the striking similarity of your argument to a petition created by a colleague of mine, demanding that anyone on any type of government handout have their vote counted as only 3/5 of a vote). If this is the case, you will be glad to know, then, that red states tend to receive more federal aid than they pay in federal taxes, and that stupidity is homogeneous among society, thus if this resolution were to pass, it would benefit the Democratic ticket if anyone, and you would continue to receive your food stamps.

^ I don't think he's trying to sway votes for a party, he's making a plea for more efficiency in government.

And those things, if implemented correctly, would not be unconstitutional. I love how liberals cling to the Constitution only when they feel like it.

The reason why we can't have people on benefits voting, it is a CONFLICT OF INTERESTS for one that would never hold up in court.

"The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public's money." - Alexis de Tocqueville
drhead
Posts: 1,475
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/24/2013 1:22:13 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/24/2013 12:39:26 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 3/24/2013 12:37:18 AM, drhead wrote:
1. There should be a "political literacy" test of some sort, a test assessing basic knowledge about government and civics that everyone must pass before they are allowed to vote. (Think drivers test for voters.)

Unconstitutional. Why not add a poll tax as well, while we're clearly going on a trend of promoting plutocracy?

2. If you are receiving any sort of government hand out, welfare, scholarships, healthcare etc, you should NOT be able to vote. This presents a clear conflict of interests at the ballot box. Vote with your brain not with your wallet.

Unconstitutional, and the 'scholarships' part would end up screwing over plenty of voters with the capacity to be well-informed. If you do well in school, you get scholarships thrown at you. There is no logic in trying to disenfranchise the least and the most intelligent voters.

These are two CRITICAL things that I think are really hindering America as a whole. The uninformed voter, the welfare slob who votes for his check every month. I can't stand it, things need to be cleaned up.

I'm going to make the safe assumption that you're a Republican (quite possibly Tea Party, given the striking similarity of your argument to a petition created by a colleague of mine, demanding that anyone on any type of government handout have their vote counted as only 3/5 of a vote). If this is the case, you will be glad to know, then, that red states tend to receive more federal aid than they pay in federal taxes, and that stupidity is homogeneous among society, thus if this resolution were to pass, it would benefit the Democratic ticket if anyone, and you would continue to receive your food stamps.

Can you please point to me where in the constitution it says that everybody has an inalienable right to vote?

Actually, I was wrong - it was the Voting Rights Act that covers these two things:
http://en.wikipedia.org...
Anything that makes voting less accessible to minority voters is illegal. There. Still, the point stands that these practices of voter disenfranchisement are for nothing but political gain. If you don't like how uninformed a voter is, inform them. The part about anyone accepting a handout not being able to vote would just be outright moronic, because it pretends that nobody who uses welfare is actually trying to elevate themselves from poverty. There's a reason taxpayers are funding the college education of our smartest students. It's because they'll be a lot more useful to us curing cancer than they would be flipping burgers at McDonalds, or whatever mediocrity life would have had in store for them. Our welfare system is based on the premise of having a guaranteed minimum income for those who are in the work force or are making an honest attempt to get there. It's a bit hard to get a job now - for every open position, there are 3.7 people who need a job. How will disenfranchising the unemployed do any good for us? The unemployed know that they need more jobs, and unemployment clearly isn't always a choice. Why disenfranchise those who are being hurt by current policies?
Wall of Fail

"You reject religion... calling it a sickness, to what ends??? Are you a Homosexual??" - Dogknox
"For me, Evolution is a zombie theory. I mean imaginary cartoons and wishful thinking support it?" - Dragonfang
"There are no mental health benefits of atheism. It is devoid of rational thinking and mental protection." - Gabrian
ConservativePolitico
Posts: 8,210
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/24/2013 2:02:21 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/24/2013 1:22:13 AM, drhead wrote:
At 3/24/2013 12:39:26 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 3/24/2013 12:37:18 AM, drhead wrote:
1. There should be a "political literacy" test of some sort, a test assessing basic knowledge about government and civics that everyone must pass before they are allowed to vote. (Think drivers test for voters.)

Unconstitutional. Why not add a poll tax as well, while we're clearly going on a trend of promoting plutocracy?

2. If you are receiving any sort of government hand out, welfare, scholarships, healthcare etc, you should NOT be able to vote. This presents a clear conflict of interests at the ballot box. Vote with your brain not with your wallet.

Unconstitutional, and the 'scholarships' part would end up screwing over plenty of voters with the capacity to be well-informed. If you do well in school, you get scholarships thrown at you. There is no logic in trying to disenfranchise the least and the most intelligent voters.

These are two CRITICAL things that I think are really hindering America as a whole. The uninformed voter, the welfare slob who votes for his check every month. I can't stand it, things need to be cleaned up.

I'm going to make the safe assumption that you're a Republican (quite possibly Tea Party, given the striking similarity of your argument to a petition created by a colleague of mine, demanding that anyone on any type of government handout have their vote counted as only 3/5 of a vote). If this is the case, you will be glad to know, then, that red states tend to receive more federal aid than they pay in federal taxes, and that stupidity is homogeneous among society, thus if this resolution were to pass, it would benefit the Democratic ticket if anyone, and you would continue to receive your food stamps.

Can you please point to me where in the constitution it says that everybody has an inalienable right to vote?

Actually, I was wrong - it was the Voting Rights Act that covers these two things:
http://en.wikipedia.org...
Anything that makes voting less accessible to minority voters is illegal. There. Still, the point stands that these practices of voter disenfranchisement are for nothing but political gain. If you don't like how uninformed a voter is, inform them. The part about anyone accepting a handout not being able to vote would just be outright moronic, because it pretends that nobody who uses welfare is actually trying to elevate themselves from poverty. There's a reason taxpayers are funding the college education of our smartest students. It's because they'll be a lot more useful to us curing cancer than they would be flipping burgers at McDonalds, or whatever mediocrity life would have had in store for them. Our welfare system is based on the premise of having a guaranteed minimum income for those who are in the work force or are making an honest attempt to get there. It's a bit hard to get a job now - for every open position, there are 3.7 people who need a job. How will disenfranchising the unemployed do any good for us? The unemployed know that they need more jobs, and unemployment clearly isn't always a choice. Why disenfranchise those who are being hurt by current policies?

How does a political literacy test make voting less accessible to minorities? That's idiotic. EVERYONE, minorities and majorities included would have to take the test. Are you calling minorities stupid by saying they would be less likely to pass such a test?

Voting access and requirement for this test would be universal and therefore it disenfranchises no one. I love how liberals always, ALWAYS cry disenfranchisement of minority voters on EVERYTHING even when it is not even related. Liberal talking points for the win I guess.
malcolmxy
Posts: 2,855
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/24/2013 3:12:04 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/24/2013 12:10:18 AM, Orpheus wrote:
WARNING: This topic is controversial.

That being said, I think there are a few things that need to happen to the voting laws to make America much more functional as a democracy and as a nation.

1. There should be a "political literacy" test of some sort, a test assessing basic knowledge about government and civics that everyone must pass before they are allowed to vote. (Think drivers test for voters.)

2. If you are receiving any sort of government hand out, welfare, scholarships, healthcare etc, you should NOT be able to vote. This presents a clear conflict of interests at the ballot box. Vote with your brain not with your wallet.

These are two CRITICAL things that I think are really hindering America as a whole. The uninformed voter, the welfare slob who votes for his check every month. I can't stand it, things need to be cleaned up.

No more elderly voters!!! Hooray!!!

It's about godd@m time we put those @ssholes in their place.

F*ck, I hate old people.

I'm sorry. What were we talking about?
War is over, if you want it.

Meet Dr. Stupid and his assistants - http://www.debate.org...
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/24/2013 5:09:32 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/24/2013 3:12:04 AM, malcolmxy wrote:
At 3/24/2013 12:10:18 AM, Orpheus wrote:
WARNING: This topic is controversial.

That being said, I think there are a few things that need to happen to the voting laws to make America much more functional as a democracy and as a nation.

1. There should be a "political literacy" test of some sort, a test assessing basic knowledge about government and civics that everyone must pass before they are allowed to vote. (Think drivers test for voters.)

2. If you are receiving any sort of government hand out, welfare, scholarships, healthcare etc, you should NOT be able to vote. This presents a clear conflict of interests at the ballot box. Vote with your brain not with your wallet.

These are two CRITICAL things that I think are really hindering America as a whole. The uninformed voter, the welfare slob who votes for his check every month. I can't stand it, things need to be cleaned up.

No more elderly voters!!! Hooray!!!

It's about godd@m time we put those @ssholes in their place.

F*ck, I hate old people.

I'm sorry. What were we talking about?

Don't forget those mooching parents, sending their children to public schools and getting tax deductions for having kids.
My work here is, finally, done.
malcolmxy
Posts: 2,855
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/24/2013 6:38:52 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/24/2013 5:09:32 AM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 3/24/2013 3:12:04 AM, malcolmxy wrote:
At 3/24/2013 12:10:18 AM, Orpheus wrote:
WARNING: This topic is controversial.

That being said, I think there are a few things that need to happen to the voting laws to make America much more functional as a democracy and as a nation.

1. There should be a "political literacy" test of some sort, a test assessing basic knowledge about government and civics that everyone must pass before they are allowed to vote. (Think drivers test for voters.)

2. If you are receiving any sort of government hand out, welfare, scholarships, healthcare etc, you should NOT be able to vote. This presents a clear conflict of interests at the ballot box. Vote with your brain not with your wallet.

These are two CRITICAL things that I think are really hindering America as a whole. The uninformed voter, the welfare slob who votes for his check every month. I can't stand it, things need to be cleaned up.

No more elderly voters!!! Hooray!!!

It's about godd@m time we put those @ssholes in their place.

F*ck, I hate old people.

I'm sorry. What were we talking about?

Don't forget those mooching parents, sending their children to public schools and getting tax deductions for having kids.

So, that pretty much eliminates homeowners as well with their mortgage interest deduction handouts.

I'm liking this idea more and more, the more I think about it. The four people remaining who will be allowed to vote could create some serious excitement around this whole civics thing.

I say we do it, if for no other reason than to curb my boredom.
War is over, if you want it.

Meet Dr. Stupid and his assistants - http://www.debate.org...
Lordknukle
Posts: 12,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/24/2013 11:14:35 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/24/2013 1:22:13 AM, drhead wrote:
At 3/24/2013 12:39:26 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 3/24/2013 12:37:18 AM, drhead wrote:
1. There should be a "political literacy" test of some sort, a test assessing basic knowledge about government and civics that everyone must pass before they are allowed to vote. (Think drivers test for voters.)

Unconstitutional. Why not add a poll tax as well, while we're clearly going on a trend of promoting plutocracy?

2. If you are receiving any sort of government hand out, welfare, scholarships, healthcare etc, you should NOT be able to vote. This presents a clear conflict of interests at the ballot box. Vote with your brain not with your wallet.

Unconstitutional, and the 'scholarships' part would end up screwing over plenty of voters with the capacity to be well-informed. If you do well in school, you get scholarships thrown at you. There is no logic in trying to disenfranchise the least and the most intelligent voters.

These are two CRITICAL things that I think are really hindering America as a whole. The uninformed voter, the welfare slob who votes for his check every month. I can't stand it, things need to be cleaned up.

I'm going to make the safe assumption that you're a Republican (quite possibly Tea Party, given the striking similarity of your argument to a petition created by a colleague of mine, demanding that anyone on any type of government handout have their vote counted as only 3/5 of a vote). If this is the case, you will be glad to know, then, that red states tend to receive more federal aid than they pay in federal taxes, and that stupidity is homogeneous among society, thus if this resolution were to pass, it would benefit the Democratic ticket if anyone, and you would continue to receive your food stamps.

Can you please point to me where in the constitution it says that everybody has an inalienable right to vote?

Actually, I was wrong - it was the Voting Rights Act that covers these two things:
http://en.wikipedia.org...
Anything that makes voting less accessible to minority voters is illegal.

Cause and effect. The actual statute of the act is:

"voting qualification or prerequisite to voting, or standard, practice, or procedure ... to deny or abridge the right of any citizen of the United States to vote on account of race or color."

Therefore, it is illegal to make blacks or asians not be able to vote, but implementing laws that might prevent some of them from voting- along with whites- is perfectly acceptable. A political literacy test is discrimination based on knowledge, not on race or color.
"Easy is the descent to Avernus, for the door to the Underworld lies upon both day and night. But to retrace your steps and return to the breezes above- that's the task, that's the toil."
Double_R
Posts: 4,886
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/24/2013 12:28:09 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/24/2013 12:39:26 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
Can you please point to me where in the constitution it says that everybody has an inalienable right to vote?

The constitution begins with "We the people". Can you please define "the people"?
Double_R
Posts: 4,886
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/24/2013 12:33:04 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/24/2013 12:23:04 AM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
I agree mostly, you'd have to allow the states to administer the political literacy test and it would (obviously) have to be universally accessible. But I think if it's 100% required and 100% accessible then it would be Constitutional and would help a great deal.

I also dislike the ignorant voter.

Ignorance is a relative term. By someone else's standards you are an ignorant voter. So why don't we implement a test which your ignorant self would not pass to stop ignorant people like you from voting? Sounds good to me.
Skepsikyma
Posts: 8,280
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/24/2013 12:34:06 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/24/2013 12:28:09 PM, Double_R wrote:
At 3/24/2013 12:39:26 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
Can you please point to me where in the constitution it says that everybody has an inalienable right to vote?

The constitution begins with "We the people". Can you please define "the people"?

Well, when it was written it apparently referred to white, property-owning men. That's a bit further in.
"The Collectivist experiment is thoroughly suited (in appearance at least) to the Capitalist society which it proposes to replace. It works with the existing machinery of Capitalism, talks and thinks in the existing terms of Capitalism, appeals to just those appetites which Capitalism has aroused, and ridicules as fantastic and unheard-of just those things in society the memory of which Capitalism has killed among men wherever the blight of it has spread."
- Hilaire Belloc -
cybertron1998
Posts: 5,818
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/24/2013 12:49:31 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
hmmm...f*cked up, most of the people in this forum are
Epsilon: There are so many stories where some brave hero decides to give their life to save the day, and because of their sacrifice, the good guys win, the survivors all cheer, and everybody lives happily ever after. But the hero... never gets to see that ending. They'll never know if their sacrifice actually made a difference. They'll never know if the day was really saved. In the end, they just have to have faith.
imabench
Posts: 21,219
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/24/2013 12:53:09 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/24/2013 12:10:18 AM, Orpheus wrote:
WARNING: This topic is controversial.

That being said, I think there are a few things that need to happen to the voting laws to make America much more functional as a democracy and as a nation.

1. There should be a "political literacy" test of some sort, a test assessing basic knowledge about government and civics that everyone must pass before they are allowed to vote. (Think drivers test for voters.)

I personally think that if voters cant pass an immigration test they shouldnt vote, so I can go with this

2. If you are receiving any sort of government hand out, welfare, scholarships, healthcare etc, you should NOT be able to vote. This presents a clear conflict of interests at the ballot box. Vote with your brain not with your wallet.

Oh please, thats just BS to discriminate against those who would lean democratic

These are two CRITICAL things that I think are really hindering America as a whole. The uninformed voter, the welfare slob who votes for his check every month. I can't stand it, things need to be cleaned up.

1) Only a fraction of people are on actual welfare in the first place, and of those people, only another fraction of them even vote in the first place...

2) Saying that people on welfare shouldnt vote because they vote for their checks every month is as arbitrary as saying that gun owners shouldnt vote because they vote for their guns...
Kevin24018 : "He's just so mean it makes me want to ball up my fists and stamp on the ground"
Geogeer: "Nobody is dumb enough to become my protege."

7/14/16 = The Presidency Dies

DDO: THE MOVIE = http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...

VP of DDO from Dec 14th 2014 to Jan 1st 2015
Double_R
Posts: 4,886
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/24/2013 1:00:41 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/24/2013 12:34:06 PM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 3/24/2013 12:28:09 PM, Double_R wrote:
At 3/24/2013 12:39:26 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
Can you please point to me where in the constitution it says that everybody has an inalienable right to vote?

The constitution begins with "We the people". Can you please define "the people"?

Well, when it was written it apparently referred to white, property-owning men. That's a bit further in.

And do you still believe it should refer only to white property owning men? I didn't think so.

Is it your position that we should have tests to determine voting legitimacy? If it is then defend your position or don't bother. So again, can you please define "the people"?
Skepsikyma
Posts: 8,280
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/24/2013 1:07:21 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/24/2013 1:00:41 PM, Double_R wrote:
At 3/24/2013 12:34:06 PM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 3/24/2013 12:28:09 PM, Double_R wrote:
At 3/24/2013 12:39:26 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
Can you please point to me where in the constitution it says that everybody has an inalienable right to vote?

The constitution begins with "We the people". Can you please define "the people"?

Well, when it was written it apparently referred to white, property-owning men. That's a bit further in.

And do you still believe it should refer only to white property owning men? I didn't think so.

Is it your position that we should have tests to determine voting legitimacy? If it is then defend your position or don't bother. So again, can you please define "the people"?

I'm just saying that it's a historical phase which is defunct when we try to apply today's concept of democracy to it. I think that every country needs a democratic aspect to it. I don't support ballot initiatives or other forms of direct democracy. I do support jury nullification as judicial exercise of the will of the people. I think that all ballots should be write-in ballots, because the voter at least ought to know the name of the person for whom the are voting. And I think that and IRV system would allow people to elect the person whom they would most like to run the country, rather than the lesser of two evils. That's my spiel on democracy.
"The Collectivist experiment is thoroughly suited (in appearance at least) to the Capitalist society which it proposes to replace. It works with the existing machinery of Capitalism, talks and thinks in the existing terms of Capitalism, appeals to just those appetites which Capitalism has aroused, and ridicules as fantastic and unheard-of just those things in society the memory of which Capitalism has killed among men wherever the blight of it has spread."
- Hilaire Belloc -
Skepsikyma
Posts: 8,280
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/24/2013 1:47:05 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
I'm just saying that it's a historical phrase which is defunct when we try to apply today's concept of democracy to it. I think that every country needs a democratic aspect to it. I don't support ballot initiatives or other forms of direct democracy. I do support jury nullification as judicial exercise of the will of the people. I think that all ballots should be write-in ballots, because the voter at least ought to know the name of the person for whom they are voting. And I think that an IRV system would allow people to elect the person whom they would most like to run the country, rather than the lesser of two evils. That's my spiel on democracy.
Fixed
"The Collectivist experiment is thoroughly suited (in appearance at least) to the Capitalist society which it proposes to replace. It works with the existing machinery of Capitalism, talks and thinks in the existing terms of Capitalism, appeals to just those appetites which Capitalism has aroused, and ridicules as fantastic and unheard-of just those things in society the memory of which Capitalism has killed among men wherever the blight of it has spread."
- Hilaire Belloc -
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/24/2013 2:50:04 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/24/2013 6:38:52 AM, malcolmxy wrote:
At 3/24/2013 5:09:32 AM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 3/24/2013 3:12:04 AM, malcolmxy wrote:
At 3/24/2013 12:10:18 AM, Orpheus wrote:
2. If you are receiving any sort of government hand out, welfare, scholarships, healthcare etc, you should NOT be able to vote. This presents a clear conflict of interests at the ballot box. Vote with your brain not with your wallet.

No more elderly voters!!! Hooray!!!
Don't forget those mooching parents, sending their children to public schools and getting tax deductions for having kids.

So, that pretty much eliminates homeowners as well with their mortgage interest deduction handouts.

Don't forget public unions, those making minimum wage, or anyone who works for a company that gets subsidies.

All of these people may vote with their wallet.

Malcolmxy, I don't think anyone appreciates our ironic insight on this matter.
My work here is, finally, done.
Wnope
Posts: 6,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/24/2013 2:50:56 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/24/2013 12:10:18 AM, Orpheus wrote:
WARNING: This topic is controversial.

That being said, I think there are a few things that need to happen to the voting laws to make America much more functional as a democracy and as a nation.

1. There should be a "political literacy" test of some sort, a test assessing basic knowledge about government and civics that everyone must pass before they are allowed to vote. (Think drivers test for voters.)

2. If you are receiving any sort of government hand out, welfare, scholarships, healthcare etc, you should NOT be able to vote. This presents a clear conflict of interests at the ballot box. Vote with your brain not with your wallet.

These are two CRITICAL things that I think are really hindering America as a whole. The uninformed voter, the welfare slob who votes for his check every month. I can't stand it, things need to be cleaned up.

Aside from the more blatantly moronic reasons to oppose this, it ignores WHY enfranchisement is important.

Namely, politicians don't give a sh!t about anyone who doesn't effect their bottom line: votes.

Everyone you disenfranchise can be completely and utterly screwed by the government and have no say in it.

Why provide services to neighborhoods where no one can be signed up/coerced/bribed to vote?

The moment you disenfranchise a population they become a dumping point for all political sewage that would otherwise harm constituents interests.

BTW, can I be one of the guys who writes up the test which decides whether you can vote? We'll knock out a good 1/4 of the voting population if we ask what year the American Civil War took place. Another 1/4 if they are asked to differentiate between the Vietnam and Korean Wars. And maybe a question about Victorian table manners.
ConservativePolitico
Posts: 8,210
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/24/2013 10:52:49 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/24/2013 2:50:56 PM, Wnope wrote:
At 3/24/2013 12:10:18 AM, Orpheus wrote:
WARNING: This topic is controversial.

That being said, I think there are a few things that need to happen to the voting laws to make America much more functional as a democracy and as a nation.

1. There should be a "political literacy" test of some sort, a test assessing basic knowledge about government and civics that everyone must pass before they are allowed to vote. (Think drivers test for voters.)

2. If you are receiving any sort of government hand out, welfare, scholarships, healthcare etc, you should NOT be able to vote. This presents a clear conflict of interests at the ballot box. Vote with your brain not with your wallet.

These are two CRITICAL things that I think are really hindering America as a whole. The uninformed voter, the welfare slob who votes for his check every month. I can't stand it, things need to be cleaned up.

Aside from the more blatantly moronic reasons to oppose this, it ignores WHY enfranchisement is important.

Namely, politicians don't give a sh!t about anyone who doesn't effect their bottom line: votes.

Everyone you disenfranchise can be completely and utterly screwed by the government and have no say in it.

Why provide services to neighborhoods where no one can be signed up/coerced/bribed to vote?

The moment you disenfranchise a population they become a dumping point for all political sewage that would otherwise harm constituents interests.

BTW, can I be one of the guys who writes up the test which decides whether you can vote? We'll knock out a good 1/4 of the voting population if we ask what year the American Civil War took place. Another 1/4 if they are asked to differentiate between the Vietnam and Korean Wars. And maybe a question about Victorian table manners.

This is actually a good point.
YYW
Posts: 36,289
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/25/2013 12:11:24 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/24/2013 12:10:18 AM, Orpheus wrote:
WARNING: This topic is controversial.

That being said, I think there are a few things that need to happen to the voting laws to make America much more functional as a democracy and as a nation.

1. There should be a "political literacy" test of some sort, a test assessing basic knowledge about government and civics that everyone must pass before they are allowed to vote. (Think drivers test for voters.)

2. If you are receiving any sort of government hand out, welfare, scholarships, healthcare etc, you should NOT be able to vote. This presents a clear conflict of interests at the ballot box. Vote with your brain not with your wallet.

These are two CRITICAL things that I think are really hindering America as a whole. The uninformed voter, the welfare slob who votes for his check every month. I can't stand it, things need to be cleaned up.

LOL @ this thread. I mean really... roflm[fvcking]ao
Tsar of DDO
ConservativePolitico
Posts: 8,210
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/26/2013 11:12:32 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/24/2013 2:50:04 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 3/24/2013 6:38:52 AM, malcolmxy wrote:
At 3/24/2013 5:09:32 AM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 3/24/2013 3:12:04 AM, malcolmxy wrote:
At 3/24/2013 12:10:18 AM, Orpheus wrote:
2. If you are receiving any sort of government hand out, welfare, scholarships, healthcare etc, you should NOT be able to vote. This presents a clear conflict of interests at the ballot box. Vote with your brain not with your wallet.

No more elderly voters!!! Hooray!!!
Don't forget those mooching parents, sending their children to public schools and getting tax deductions for having kids.

So, that pretty much eliminates homeowners as well with their mortgage interest deduction handouts.

Don't forget public unions, those making minimum wage, or anyone who works for a company that gets subsidies.

All of these people may vote with their wallet.

Malcolmxy, I don't think anyone appreciates our ironic insight on this matter.

But seriously, do you hear yourself? How many Americans are on the government's juicy tit? It's disgusting.
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/26/2013 11:38:44 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/26/2013 11:12:32 AM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
At 3/24/2013 2:50:04 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 3/24/2013 6:38:52 AM, malcolmxy wrote:
At 3/24/2013 5:09:32 AM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 3/24/2013 3:12:04 AM, malcolmxy wrote:
At 3/24/2013 12:10:18 AM, Orpheus wrote:
2. If you are receiving any sort of government hand out, welfare, scholarships, healthcare etc, you should NOT be able to vote. This presents a clear conflict of interests at the ballot box. Vote with your brain not with your wallet.

No more elderly voters!!! Hooray!!!
Don't forget those mooching parents, sending their children to public schools and getting tax deductions for having kids.

So, that pretty much eliminates homeowners as well with their mortgage interest deduction handouts.

Don't forget public unions, those making minimum wage, or anyone who works for a company that gets subsidies.

All of these people may vote with their wallet.

Malcolmxy, I don't think anyone appreciates our ironic insight on this matter.

But seriously, do you hear yourself? How many Americans are on the government's juicy tit? It's disgusting.

I assume I am speaking for Malcolm too, but I am serious. Why are those on welfare to be not allowed to vote because someone might affect their wallet, when any of the people we listed are also dependant on government handouts?

Those in public unions would elect people who will sign their contract. The elderly rely on social security, a government payment. Parents often use public schools and recieve HUGE tax credits (my manager gets about $7,000 from state and federal, plus his withholdings). Those on minimum wage might very well vote people in who will give them a raise.

But, only those on welfare vote with their wallet, hmm? Only those on welfare should not be allowed to vote?
My work here is, finally, done.