Systematic Disenfranchisment, Good or Bad?

[Cort Haus]

There are probably plenty of educated and propertied people that feel that redneck trolls should not be allowed to vote.

[Zkribbler]

Originally posted by Wiglaf

I think the property thing is interesting. Maybe, in order to vote you need to be intelligent and own land for 5 years in the country.

Intelligent landowners ran the country back in 1775.

[Kuciwalker]

And today we venerate them as national heroes. So...

[snoopy369]

Originally posted by Cort Haus
There are probably plenty of educated and propertied people that feel that redneck trolls should not be allowed to post.

Corrected

[snoopy369]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker
And today we venerate them as national heroes. So...

His point was that those people had the guts to enfranchise everyone, so we should stick with their honorable intent

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by snoopy369
His point was that those people had the guts to enfranchise everyone, so we should stick with their honorable intent

Then he should reread his history (as should you), since that's not remotely true.

[Flubber]

Why not go whole hog and abolish democracy altogether.

Perhaps those theorists that went on and on about "philosopher kings" had a point

[Q Classic]

Originally posted by Wiglaf
It ruins kids' lives.

At the moment, there are more straight families ruining kids' lives.

Which is why I should be in favor of banning marriage outright, using your specious logic.

[Zkribbler]

Originally posted by snoopy369


His point was that those people had the guts to enfranchise everyone, so we should stick with their honorable intent

My point was we kicked their limey butts back to Britain

Listen: The intelligent and the property owners will NOT act in the best interest of the nation; they will act in the best interest of the intelligencia and the property owners. That's why EVERYONE gets to vote, but everyone, when added together, makes up the nation.

[Q Classic]

I honestly think that Wiglaf would think this is a good idea until a point in time comes when he realizes he's not part of the voting class because of one reason or another.

I can only imagine that day will be when the fags run everything.

[Wiglaf]

What is this, some sort of gang operation. I know that systematic disenfranchisement is winning in my poll so therefore all these people disagreeing with me are clearly doing so only for attention and because they want to hit a pinata like when they were 6 at their mexican friend's birthday party. Wake up and wise up, the balls have dropped and you're in the big leagues now

Originally posted by Spec


Clam down there sunshine.

And why do you NEED to get married to have kids?

Spec.

Most married couples want kids. Sure gays can have kids without marriage, but it is less likely since they aren't institutionally bound to one another.

YEAH, THOSE SODOMITES WILL TURN THEIR KIDS INTO SEX CRAZED SERIAL MURDERING ANTISOCIALITES WHO WHY DESTROY SOCIETY!

Same sex marriage often produces kids who are bullied at school and lack manly intuition, like aggression and the desire to work outside of the house. More to the point, why should society legalize something it finds gross? Should we make it illegal to squish cockroaches too?

HELLO! YOU CAN'T JUST COME TO THE US AND VOTE. IT'S CALLED CITIZENSHIP REQUIREMENTS, MOTHATRUCKA!

Typically Mexicans and Canadians come here and get citizenship while living in someone else's home or cabinet or they might get an apartment. Requiring them to own property for 5 years makes sure they don't get to vote until they bleed red white and blue, and aren't still loyal to anyone else.

It was illegal at the time in Virginia to free slaves. Why? Because which slaves would a slave owner want to free -- the old and the sick. Moreover, almost all the work at the time was on plantations, so there's weren't a lot of places hiring freeman. Free slaves would have to turn to crime to survive.

Are you on drugs? Our founding fathers were racist and some still are. You are trying to rewrite history here.

Flubber, you are right that deciding who gets to vote is tricky but eventually I'll think of a way to make sure people aren't voting for their own interests. Maybe, get rid of private voting and require voters to state a reason for their vote publicly. That way we can expose all of the Rose o Donalds in the workplace and have them fired, so that only the rational show up to vote.

At the moment, there are more straight families ruining kids' lives.

Yes but think proportionally. Besides, we're trying to minimize damage without crapping on thousands of years of history and marriage culture.

[Cort Haus]

This thread needs Asher.

[Wiglaf]

I think Asher needs this thread, what with his penis avatar and incessant defense of his holy operating system. He is begging for systematic disenfranchisement

[Elok]

This troll worked surprisingly well. Assuming it is a troll; maybe Wiggy is really that dumb. Don't know, probably don't want to know either.

[Whoha]

Re: Systematic Disenfranchisment, Good or Bad?

voting should have to be a pain in the ass,no absentee ballots, no early voting, you must show ID,and so on,but other then that I don't see any point to further disenfranchising people.

Basically I favor disenfranchising lazy people, which we already do to some degree here.

Literacy Tests

Are inherently subjective, and as such will be ruthlessly exploited by whoever happens to be in charge.