I made a bad joke about the DNC requiring proper ID to enter and wadded some panties.
The Pa. Voter ID law was sent down from the Supreme Court and a discussion was started that since voting is a Constitutional right you shouldn't have to show proper ID to participate.
I contend that leaving the country is also a Constitutional right that DOES require showing proper/photo ID.
Since that is an accurate statement and the "false equivilency" argument that serves so many well here can't be used it's been reduced to green unicorns.
I have the constitutional right to free speech but I don't need to present ID in order to make a blog post; to wit, the creator of that inflammatory anti-Islam "movie" was operating under a fake name. This is his constitutional right (although it violated his probation)
Voter ID acts have as their basis a long history of Jim Crow racism such as poll taxes and literacy tests
Not the kind of company I keep.
HarveyCanal"a distraction from my main thesis." 13,234 Posts
I have the constitutional right to free speech but I don't need to present ID in order to make a blog post; to wit, the creator of that inflammatory anti-Islam "movie" was operating under a fake name. This is his constitutional right (although it violated his probation)
Voter ID acts have as their basis a long history of Jim Crow racism such as poll taxes and literacy tests
Not the kind of company I keep.
From that angle I agree with you....but..are there ANY constitutional rights that require ID is where I'm coming from.
HarveyCanal"a distraction from my main thesis." 13,234 Posts
You have effectively helped me kill a slow day at the office......49 more days until we find out where we're at.......enjoying the tribal banter in the meantime.
Thanks,
I have the constitutional right to free speech but I don't need to present ID in order to make a blog post; to wit, the creator of that inflammatory anti-Islam "movie" was operating under a fake name. This is his constitutional right (although it violated his probation)
Voter ID acts have as their basis a long history of Jim Crow racism such as poll taxes and literacy tests
Not the kind of company I keep.
From that angle I agree with you....but..are there ANY constitutional rights that require ID is where I'm coming from.
You have the right to bear arms, but need ID to do so.
You have the right to trial (to put it simply), but you must be positively identified to receive that right.
I made a bad joke about the DNC requiring proper ID to enter and wadded some panties.
The Pa. Voter ID law was sent down from the Supreme Court and a discussion was started that since voting is a Constitutional right you shouldn't have to show proper ID to participate.
I contend that leaving the country is also a Constitutional right that DOES require showing proper/photo ID.
Since that is an accurate statement and the "false equivilency" argument that serves so many well here can't be used it's been reduced to green unicorns.
b/w
Tribes
This pretty well sums it up, except the part about it being an accurate statement. Couldn't have said it any better.
I have the constitutional right to free speech but I don't need to present ID in order to make a blog post; to wit, the creator of that inflammatory anti-Islam "movie" was operating under a fake name. This is his constitutional right (although it violated his probation)
Voter ID acts have as their basis a long history of Jim Crow racism such as poll taxes and literacy tests
Not the kind of company I keep.
From that angle I agree with you....but..are there ANY constitutional rights that require ID is where I'm coming from.
You have the right to bear arms, but need ID to do so.
You have the right to trial (to put it simply), but you must be positively identified to receive that right.
The right to bear arms is a qualified right under the Constitution, not an absolute right.
And courts have no problem putting people on trial without proper ID.
The Constitution contains many phrases, clauses, and amendments detailing ways people cannot be denied the right to vote. You cannot deny the right to vote because of race or gender. Citizens of Washington DC can vote for President; 18-year-olds can vote; you can vote even if you fail to pay a poll tax. The Constitution also requires that anyone who can vote for the "most numerous branch" of their state legislature can vote for House members and Senate members.
Note that in all of this, though, the Constitution never explicitly ensures the right to vote, as it does the right to speech, for example. It does require that Representatives be chosen and Senators be elected by "the People," and who comprises "the People" has been expanded by the aforementioned amendments several times. Aside from these requirements, though, the qualifications for voters are left to the states. And as long as the qualifications do not conflict with anything in the Constitution, that right can be withheld. For example, in Texas, persons declared mentally incompetent and felons currently in prison or on probation are denied the right to vote. It is interesting to note that though the 26th Amendment requires that 18-year-olds must be able to vote, states can allow persons younger than 18 to vote, if they chose to.
INAL but that passage is not relevant to voter ID laws because court precedent has found that they restrict otherwise legal voters' ability to exercise their constitutional rights.
I have the constitutional right to free speech but I don't need to present ID in order to make a blog post; to wit, the creator of that inflammatory anti-Islam "movie" was operating under a fake name. This is his constitutional right (although it violated his probation)
Voter ID acts have as their basis a long history of Jim Crow racism such as poll taxes and literacy tests
Not the kind of company I keep.
From that angle I agree with you....but..are there ANY constitutional rights that require ID is where I'm coming from.
You have the right to bear arms, but need ID to do so.
You have the right to trial (to put it simply), but you must be positively identified to receive that right.
The right to bear arms is a qualified right under the Constitution, not an absolute right.
And courts have no problem putting people on trial without proper ID.
The Constitution contains many phrases, clauses, and amendments detailing ways people cannot be denied the right to vote. You cannot deny the right to vote because of race or gender. Citizens of Washington DC can vote for President; 18-year-olds can vote; you can vote even if you fail to pay a poll tax. The Constitution also requires that anyone who can vote for the "most numerous branch" of their state legislature can vote for House members and Senate members.
Note that in all of this, though, the Constitution never explicitly ensures the right to vote, as it does the right to speech, for example. It does require that Representatives be chosen and Senators be elected by "the People," and who comprises "the People" has been expanded by the aforementioned amendments several times. Aside from these requirements, though, the qualifications for voters are left to the states. And as long as the qualifications do not conflict with anything in the Constitution, that right can be withheld. For example, in Texas, persons declared mentally incompetent and felons currently in prison or on probation are denied the right to vote. It is interesting to note that though the 26th Amendment requires that 18-year-olds must be able to vote, states can allow persons younger than 18 to vote, if they chose to.
Read the 9th Amendment
b/w
Point out where the Constitution mentions leaving the country?
bonus beat: The 15th Amendment clearly mentions "the right to vote". Your link is dead wrong.
bonus beat: The 15th Amendment clearly mentions "the right to vote". Your link is dead wrong.
Thank goodness INAL....there are people in the U.S. over the age of 18 that are NOT ALLOWED to vote by law. Their so-called guaranteed constitutional right has been taken away, and while I'm sure you oppose that, it is a fact.
The 15th protects the right of citizens of the United States that their right to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.
bonus beat: The 15th Amendment clearly mentions "the right to vote". Your link is dead wrong.
Thank goodness INAL....there are people in the U.S. over the age of 18 that are NOT ALLOWED to vote by law. Their so-called guaranteed constitutional right has been taken away, and while I'm sure you oppose that, it is a fact.
The 15th protects the right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.
Sorry, Rock, your link is wrong. It says "the Constitution never explicitly ensures the right to vote". That's 100% false. Sure, there some limitations, but that's true of nearly (if not) all Constitutional rights. The 15th Amendment enumerates clearly that we HAVE a right to vote. In other words, it explicity ensures the right to vote. Period. So does the 19th Amendment, the 23rd Amendment, the 24th Amendment, the Voting RIghts Act (held to be Constitutional), and the 26th Amendment.
Are you're going to now try to claim that since the right to free speech is not absolute that we don't actually have a Constitutional right to free speech?
bonus beat: The 15th Amendment clearly mentions "the right to vote". Your link is dead wrong.
Thank goodness INAL....there are people in the U.S. over the age of 18 that are NOT ALLOWED to vote by law. Their so-called guaranteed constitutional right has been taken away, and while I'm sure you oppose that, it is a fact.
The 15th protects the right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.
Sorry, Rock, your link is wrong. It says "the Constitution never explicitly ensures the right to vote". That's 100% false. Sure, there some limitations, but that's true of nearly (if not) all Constitutional rights. The 15th Amendment enumerates clearly that we HAVE a right to vote. In other words, it explicity ensures the right to vote. Period. So does the 19th Amendment, the 23rd Amendment, the 24th Amendment, the Voting RIghts Act (held to be Constitutional), and the 26th Amendment.
Are you're going to now try to claim that since the right to free speech is not absolute that we don't actually have a Constitutional right to free speech?
OK.....I'll bite...what is the difference between guaranteed and absolute?
b/w
If the right to vote is ensured by the Constitution is taking away that right unconstitutional?
Tell me what magic card he is going to draw on the river.
Oh yeah, having a dude in office after Obama who is known for applied financial theory would be just terrible...
NOT
My question has nothing to do with whether Romney is a good guy, a smart guy, or his qualifications for the office. My question cuts to the heart of the matter, can he get elected.
As a longtime democrat I don't get hung up on whether my candidate is better at X, Y, or Z than his or her opponent. That is a road to heartbreak. The only questions I have to answer is my candidate qualified, can I live with this guy or gal in office (because there is no perfect candidate) and can he or she win (because everything I want in a candidate would most likely preclude them getting elected).
So, Romney is in an electoral bind. Where do you see your candidate breaking out and winning this thing? 49 days and counting and he hasn't been able to put Obama on the ropes.
He should be walking away with this election with unemployment at 8+ percent, the recovery sluggish, and Obama's shinny exterior has lost some of its luster. How in the hell did the Republicans lose the "strong on national defense card?"
This is quickly becoming a base election where the enthusiasm on the right is strong but demographic destiny is cutting against them (i.e. there are more registered democrats than republicans). There is maybe 3-5% of the undecided voters to claim. Everything Mitt needs is predicated on the democrats not turning out in numbers.
So again, what magic card on the river is going to lift Mitt Romney to the office of the President? Because if your answer is Obama sucks and a lot of folks want to vote him out, there aren't enough of those folks to do it by themselves. They are all accounted for.
I have the constitutional right to free speech but I don't need to present ID in order to make a blog post; to wit, the creator of that inflammatory anti-Islam "movie" was operating under a fake name. This is his constitutional right (although it violated his probation)
Voter ID acts have as their basis a long history of Jim Crow racism such as poll taxes and literacy tests
Not the kind of company I keep.
From that angle I agree with you....but..are there ANY constitutional rights that require ID is where I'm coming from.
You have the right to bear arms, but need ID to do so.
You have the right to trial (to put it simply), but you must be positively identified to receive that right.
The right to bear arms is a qualified right under the Constitution, not an absolute right.
So? Rock's question doesn't mention this distinction.
Thymebomb13 said:
And courts have no problem putting people on trial without proper ID.
Comments
I'll give you the Cliff Notes.
I made a bad joke about the DNC requiring proper ID to enter and wadded some panties.
The Pa. Voter ID law was sent down from the Supreme Court and a discussion was started that since voting is a Constitutional right you shouldn't have to show proper ID to participate.
I contend that leaving the country is also a Constitutional right that DOES require showing proper/photo ID.
Since that is an accurate statement and the "false equivilency" argument that serves so many well here can't be used it's been reduced to green unicorns.
b/w
Tribes
I'm not sure why Rock you keep hounding on this. Because it is false and has been answered many times already.
The only answers I saw was "Swim into International Water"s...and "I don't have to I'm Canadian"
I have the constitutional right to free speech but I don't need to present ID in order to make a blog post; to wit, the creator of that inflammatory anti-Islam "movie" was operating under a fake name. This is his constitutional right (although it violated his probation)
Voter ID acts have as their basis a long history of Jim Crow racism such as poll taxes and literacy tests
Not the kind of company I keep.
You're missing a decimal
From that angle I agree with you....but..are there ANY constitutional rights that require ID is where I'm coming from.
Thymebomb13 answered above again.
You do not get asked to show ID leaving the country. You get asked entering the next. It is only on entry do you get asked for your ID.
I've even walked across the border once. It's only on entry do you get asked.
Not Mitt Romney.
You have effectively helped me kill a slow day at the office......49 more days until we find out where we're at.......enjoying the tribal banter in the meantime.
Thanks,
Rockadelic
You have the right to bear arms, but need ID to do so.
You have the right to trial (to put it simply), but you must be positively identified to receive that right.
This pretty well sums it up, except the part about it being an accurate statement. Couldn't have said it any better.
And I don't get paid OT...
http://www.usconstitution.net/constnot.html#vote
The Right To Vote
The Constitution contains many phrases, clauses, and amendments detailing ways people cannot be denied the right to vote. You cannot deny the right to vote because of race or gender. Citizens of Washington DC can vote for President; 18-year-olds can vote; you can vote even if you fail to pay a poll tax. The Constitution also requires that anyone who can vote for the "most numerous branch" of their state legislature can vote for House members and Senate members.
Note that in all of this, though, the Constitution never explicitly ensures the right to vote, as it does the right to speech, for example. It does require that Representatives be chosen and Senators be elected by "the People," and who comprises "the People" has been expanded by the aforementioned amendments several times. Aside from these requirements, though, the qualifications for voters are left to the states. And as long as the qualifications do not conflict with anything in the Constitution, that right can be withheld. For example, in Texas, persons declared mentally incompetent and felons currently in prison or on probation are denied the right to vote. It is interesting to note that though the 26th Amendment requires that 18-year-olds must be able to vote, states can allow persons younger than 18 to vote, if they chose to.
Read the 9th Amendment
b/w
Point out where the Constitution mentions leaving the country?
bonus beat: The 15th Amendment clearly mentions "the right to vote". Your link is dead wrong.
Thank goodness INAL....there are people in the U.S. over the age of 18 that are NOT ALLOWED to vote by law. Their so-called guaranteed constitutional right has been taken away, and while I'm sure you oppose that, it is a fact.
The 15th protects the right of citizens of the United States that their right to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.
Oh yeah, having a dude in office after Obama who is known for applied financial theory would be just terrible...
NOT
Sorry, Rock, your link is wrong. It says "the Constitution never explicitly ensures the right to vote". That's 100% false. Sure, there some limitations, but that's true of nearly (if not) all Constitutional rights. The 15th Amendment enumerates clearly that we HAVE a right to vote. In other words, it explicity ensures the right to vote. Period. So does the 19th Amendment, the 23rd Amendment, the 24th Amendment, the Voting RIghts Act (held to be Constitutional), and the 26th Amendment.
Are you're going to now try to claim that since the right to free speech is not absolute that we don't actually have a Constitutional right to free speech?
OK.....I'll bite...what is the difference between guaranteed and absolute?
b/w
If the right to vote is ensured by the Constitution is taking away that right unconstitutional?
My question has nothing to do with whether Romney is a good guy, a smart guy, or his qualifications for the office. My question cuts to the heart of the matter, can he get elected.
As a longtime democrat I don't get hung up on whether my candidate is better at X, Y, or Z than his or her opponent. That is a road to heartbreak. The only questions I have to answer is my candidate qualified, can I live with this guy or gal in office (because there is no perfect candidate) and can he or she win (because everything I want in a candidate would most likely preclude them getting elected).
So, Romney is in an electoral bind. Where do you see your candidate breaking out and winning this thing? 49 days and counting and he hasn't been able to put Obama on the ropes.
He should be walking away with this election with unemployment at 8+ percent, the recovery sluggish, and Obama's shinny exterior has lost some of its luster. How in the hell did the Republicans lose the "strong on national defense card?"
This is quickly becoming a base election where the enthusiasm on the right is strong but demographic destiny is cutting against them (i.e. there are more registered democrats than republicans). There is maybe 3-5% of the undecided voters to claim. Everything Mitt needs is predicated on the democrats not turning out in numbers.
So again, what magic card on the river is going to lift Mitt Romney to the office of the President? Because if your answer is Obama sucks and a lot of folks want to vote him out, there aren't enough of those folks to do it by themselves. They are all accounted for.
So? Rock's question doesn't mention this distinction.
Actually, it's a huge problem and is very seldom done. And again, Rock's question did not specify absolute rights.
^^^ This ^^^
Neither candidate is changing anyone's mind.
The only difference is people hearing Romney say he's not even trying to change anyone's mind
A good education
Volunteer work abroad
His work on the winter Olympics
A fine family (nothing wrong with being a Mormon)
And on the river isn't Obama's weaknesses. I think many people would like to see him in the White House for Thanksgiving.
This is adorable. It's like the voting guide from a Nickelodeon magazine.
b/w
FALSE EQUIVALENCE!!!!!
edit: dude, i just deleted that pm you sent me without even reading it. if you have something to say, say it here, otherwise fuck off.