Published on January 5, 2008 By danielost In Current Events
that they cannot vote because they don't measure up to our standards.

but where does it stop.

in england it used to be that they only ones with any rights were the royals and the nobles

then they decided that anyone who was a member of the church of england had rights.

then along came 13 colonies who gave everyone rights except for the slaves.

then there was a so called civil war that finally gave these rights to the slaves(read ex).




now we are going all the way back to telling people that if you don't know something you can't vote.

using this criteria that means the only ones who can vote will be those with phd's.


so tell me where does it end. there are more people voting and have always voted who don't know the issues.


go ahead little whip keep making fun at me. it only shows how stupid you are.
Comments (Page 1)
on Jan 06, 2008
Gah, you really are uninformed.
on Jan 06, 2008
Gah, you really are uninformed.

Dharma, he's now going to think you think he wears a uniform.   
on Jan 07, 2008
Gah, you really are uninformed.


look i know it is important to know the issues if your going to vote.


but i still say it is slightly more important to get people to want to vote in the first place. knowing the issues will not help you get into the voting booth.
on Jan 07, 2008
Learn a little history Daniel. In the 13 Original Colonies (before the U.S.), there were more than just slaves who couldn't vote. In most colonies women couldn't vote (although it's a little known fact that a few of the colonies allowed them to), if you didn't own property you couldn't vote, if you were endentured you couldn't vote.

No one is calling for a return to voting tests so complicated that even those writing the test couldn't pass, or imposing a "grandfather claus".

What many get frustrated with are the total ignoramouses whose random and arbitrary vote may cancel out our vote.

MTV says, "Just get out and vote".. but if the person's vote is based on absolutely nothing, it did more harm than good.
on Jan 07, 2008
Learn a little history Daniel. In the 13 Original Colonies (before the U.S.),


on Jan 07, 2008
What many get frustrated with are the total ignoramouses whose random and arbitrary vote may cancel out our vote.




this is going to happen any ways because the people who vote for the other person will always be ignoramouses whose random and arbitrary vote will cancel out our vote.


it does not matter who we are or who they are or how much they now about the issues.
on Jan 07, 2008
I can live with someone else's vote cancelling mine out because they simply disagree with me, so they voted for the other guy... but there is absolutely NO difference between the uniformed voters and just throwing a dart at a board with pictures of all the candidates.

If that is what you are defending, I pity you.
on Jan 07, 2008
Yes we sure are. Isn't freedom of speech a wonderful thing?


but you want to kill their freedom not to care to learn.
on Jan 07, 2008
but you want to kill their freedom not to care to learn.


No, it is people who vote out of ignorance that are killing freedom. In fact our founding fathers said that freedom is wasted on the ignorant.
on Jan 07, 2008
No, it is people who vote out of ignorance that are killing freedom. In fact our founding fathers said that freedom is wasted on the ignorant.


and yet they didn't say they couldn't vote or shouldn't vote.
on Jan 07, 2008

Learn a little history Daniel. In the 13 Original Colonies (before the U.S.),

Oh, my....

Dani, you need to learn a bit of history.  "Ex-slaves" (as you put it) gained the right to vote with the 15th Amendment, which was passed in 1870 (we had 37 states at the time).

Women didn't have the right to vote until the 19th Amendment, which was in frikkin' 1920.  There were all of the continental 48 states by that time!

BTW, there were only 13 colonies BEFORE THE U.S.  After that, they were the 13 STATES.

gah.....Cornflakes

on Jan 07, 2008
then along came 13 colonies who gave everyone rights except for the slaves.




sorry to both of you. but when the 13 colonies were still 13 colonies they were allowing all non slave males to vote. that was a long time before there was 13 states.


the only thing that the 13 colonies didn't have was self determination. meaning that the English crown could over turn any laws, trade treaties, and tax cuts or what ever. which is what the crown was doing. in fact the crown and Parliament were making the colonies pay for most of the empires expenses.


which is where no taxation without representation came from.


and your right i should have said all non-slave males. not everyone.
on Jan 07, 2008
oh and not all 13 colonies gave all non-slave males the right to vote but some of them did. which is where that right came from in the constitution.
on Jan 07, 2008
if the person's vote is based on absolutely nothing, it did more harm than good.


True. But the solution is not to prevent them from voting. Teach them even if you have to drag them to classes. it is difficult, i dont need anyone to tell me that. it is even very difficult. But who ever said that real democracy is cheap or easy or even not messy. that is its price. and it is still better than anyother way of picking a government.

PS: this is a perfect example that the problems those people have actually cause "more harm" to all of us. that is why we HAVE to teach them. so they dont do harm to the rest of us. not only out of morality but also out of pure self-interest.
on Jan 08, 2008
True. But the solution is not to prevent them from voting. Teach them even if you have to drag them to classes. it is difficult, i dont need anyone to tell me that. it is even very difficult. But who ever said that real democracy is cheap or easy or even not messy. that is its price. and it is still better than anyother way of picking a government.

PS: this is a perfect example that the problems those people have actually cause "more harm" to all of us. that is why we HAVE to teach them. so they dont do harm to the rest of us. not only out of morality but also out of pure self-interest.




this is what i have been saying. i just didn't use the nice words.
Meta
Views
» 550
Comments
» 20
Category
Sponsored Links