U.S. Politics- This Is Us, Basically Fascists

[DMC]

2 minutes ago, SweetPea said:

Let's go with race, sex, age, but it doesn't matter, really. The point is that in one instance you are generally forbidding the denial of rights, for any reason, while in the other instance you are forbidding the denial of rights, but only if it happens based on the three specified reasons. This is just semantics, really, but from what I hear, interpreting the words of the Constitution correctly is a big deal in the US.

Please cite when I did anything of the sort.

[OldGimletEye]

Just now, SweetPea said:

First of all, what I said is not even close to "trying to prove how crazy the left is".

Second, I wasn't even talking about this instance, I was referring to how people have thrown 'whataboutism!' at me whenever I criticized the left, but now they did not seemed bothered at all when someone else was doing it.

Probably because your criticisms were nonsense.

Just now, SweetPea said:

So yeah, strawman.

Nope.

[Frog Eater]

The right to vote is certainly limited to citizens. To prove this citizenship, requiring an ID card is not a limitation on the citizen's right to vote. 

Requiring an ID is not considered a limitation on the purchase of a firearm. 

[mormont]

42 minutes ago, Frog Eater said:

The right to vote is certainly limited to citizens. To prove this citizenship, requiring an ID card is not a limitation on the citizen's right to vote. 

Yes, it is.

42 minutes ago, Frog Eater said:

 Requiring an ID is not considered a limitation on the purchase of a firearm. 

Yes, it is.

Here's the clue: 'requiring' something is by definition a limitation. Without that thing, your access is limited.

Words mean things, and the meanings of 'requiring' and 'limitation' are such that the above statements are essentially nonsensical. 

[Frog Eater]

Its the constitution that limits voting to citizens, its the ID that proves the citizenship, and thus the right to vote

Words do mean things, and the right to vote is limited to citizens

[LongRider]

Not required to have an ID to be a citizen though.

[Frog Eater]

Of course you dont need an ID to BE a citizen, the ID is to prove citizenship, since voting is limited to citizens, requiring an ID to vote is not unreasonable. 

 

[aceluby]

11 hours ago, SweetPea said:

Oh my, is this even possible?

You're arguing a strawman... 

Where did you get it from that I'm trying to prove how crazy the left is? I didn't even mention the left vs. right thing until others dragged  it into the conversation.

Stop being so dishonest, please.

You may want to review what a strawman argument is, because you keep using the term incorrectly.

[aceluby]

10 minutes ago, Frog Eater said:

Of course you dont need an ID to BE a citizen, the ID is to prove citizenship, since voting is limited to citizens, requiring an ID to vote is not unreasonable. 

 

It is if you have to buy that ID, or drive to get it, or have to take a day off of work to get it.  Then it's a voter tax, which is strictly prohibited.

[Frog Eater]

13 minutes ago, aceluby said:

It is if you have to buy that ID, or drive to get it, or have to take a day off of work to get it.  Then it's a voter tax, which is strictly prohibited.

Here in South Carolina, there is no fee for an ID card for those over 17, and the DMV is open on Saturday. 

[Fragile Bird]

More on the War on Trade.

Rwanda is one of the poorest nations on earth. It gets flooded with used clothing from the US (all those charity donations have to go somewhere). The used clothing tariff of .20 cents a pound was increased to $2.50 a pound because the amount of used clothing was killing their textile industry.

The US exporters of American used clothing demanded that the US government do something about this scandalous situation, so the US just imposed 25% tariffs on clothing manufactured in Rwanda. ETA: correction, they lifted the tariff-free status of Rwanda on clothing imports. Tariffs vary, but are about 18%.

This story demonstrates the attitude of the US under Trump. Every country in the world has to buy whatever the US has an excess supply of or you will be punished. Trump boasted he’d like to see no tariffs on anything traded between the US and the EU. In your dreams, baby, in your dreams.

[Kalbear]

1 hour ago, Frog Eater said:

The right to vote is certainly limited to citizens. To prove this citizenship, requiring an ID card is not a limitation on the citizen's right to vote. 

Requiring an ID is not considered a limitation on the purchase of a firearm. 

Requiring an ID card is fine. Requiring a very specific card that is a hassle to obtain and can cost a lot of money relative to the income level of the person is not, actually fine. 

[mormont]

34 minutes ago, Frog Eater said:

Of course you dont need an ID to BE a citizen, the ID is to prove citizenship, since voting is limited to citizens, requiring an ID to vote is not unreasonable. 

OK, but that's not your original position. You said it wasn't a limitation, not that it wasn't an unreasonable limitation. 

Now, the question of whether it's a reasonable limitation is decided on the basis of evidence, and unfortunately all of the available evidence suggests that it is. It decreases voter turnout, particularly among voter groups who already have low turnout: it puts barriers in the way of those least able to overcome them. The number of legitimate voters disenfranchised by voter ID requirements outstrips the number of fraudulent in-person votes prevented by huge margins: on the order of thousands of the former for every one of the latter, though nobody can be sure because in-person voter fraud is so vanishingly rare to start with that it's difficult to even measure. It is the textbook example of using a sledgehammer to crack a nut. 

The universal franchise is a fundamental plank of any genuine democracy. The evidence is that voter ID requirements are a bigger threat to it than in-person voter fraud is. 

[Kalbear]

12 minutes ago, Frog Eater said:

Here in South Carolina, there is no fee for an ID card for those over 17, and the DMV is open on Saturday. 

Whereas in Alabama, there is precisely one place that is available to a wide area within 200 miles, they are open for new IDs something like Wednesday and Thursday from 10 to 3, and they have a 2 hour line. 

Oh, and sometimes - like from September to October - they oddly close entirely. 

If you want to make it a Federal law that every citizen is provided with free ID that is easily obtainable, sweet. Do that. Until then, the argument that ID is a reasonable thing is obviously wrong.

[davos]

43 minutes ago, Frog Eater said:

Of course you dont need an ID to BE a citizen, the ID is to prove citizenship, since voting is limited to citizens, requiring an ID to vote is not unreasonable. 

 

It is a limitation.   If an ID is required to vote, it limits voting to not just citizens, but citizens with an ID.  If an ID was issued to all citizens free of charge, then you might in fact be correct.  As it is, requiring an ID limits voting to citizens with the financial means to pay the fees for an ID and the ability to take the steps to acquire one.  The primary ID used in the US is a driver's license, which implies an ability to drive and access to a motor vehicle.  State issued photo ID's are also available but in every state of which I am aware, they are issued by the same entity that issues driver's licenses.  Offices that provide this service are relatively remote from some areas, usually are only open during business hours, and often require long waits in line.   Current student ID's can also be used, though there are restrictions in some states, but this requires enrollment in some form of post-secondary education.  So to require an id to vote effectively limits this right to citizens who drive,  who are students, or who have the ability to acquire an id.   This is a serious impediment to the elderly, the disabled, and the poor (especially poor minorities as offices that provide ID services are often far from regions of low income housing).    In reality an ID requirement is actually a significant limitation on the right to vote, at least as things currently stand in the US.  

ETA:  The post about the ready availablity of an alternative ID in SC was made after I started writing the above post.  While I acknowledge this maybe the case in that state, it is far from true for many other states as an another poster already pointed out.  In WI, where I live,  there is a fee and the times and locations to acquire one are limited (in some areas quite severally so.

 

[lokisnow]

45 minutes ago, Frog Eater said:

Of course you dont need an ID to BE a citizen, the ID is to prove citizenship, since voting is limited to citizens, requiring an ID to vote is not unreasonable. 

 

Do you need a birth certificate to get an id? What if you are of a race who was not allowed to be in a hospital and therefore never had access to birth certificate infrastructure because society forced your parents into dangerous alternatives? There are currently millions of citizens with no birth certificate because their race was deliberately and thoroughly excluded from normal functions of society.

in California you need to be able to afford a notary to apply for a birth certificate, you also need to know what a notary is and where to find one. And if you are not part of a culture that uses high caste cultural signifiers like notaries, navigating these unusual to you bureaucratic obstacles can be rather burdensome.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

2 minutes ago, lokisnow said:

Do you need a birth certificate to get an id? What if you are of a race who was not allowed to be in a hospital and therefore never had access to birth certificate infrastructure because society forced your parents into dangerous alternatives? There are currently millions of citizens with no birth certificate because their race was deliberately and thoroughly excluded from normal functions of society.

in California you need to be able to afford a notary to apply for a birth certificate, you also need to know what a notary is and where to find one. And if you are not part of a culture that uses high caste cultural signifiers like notaries, navigating these unusual to you bureaucratic obstacles can be rather burdensome.

Notaries charge for their services in California?  I can go to a bank, library, post office, or court house in SC and have a notary witness a signature without cost.  I'm not saying this isn't a hassle.  I'm saying I'm surprised to find that it isn't easy to find a notary who will notarize for free in a given community.  

Nationwide standards for free and acceptable ID need to be adopted if we are going to require ID to prove citizenship and eligibility to vote.  That seems clear.

[Frog Eater]

1 minute ago, lokisnow said:

Do you need a birth certificate to get an id? What if you are of a race who was not allowed to be in a hospital and therefore never had access to birth certificate infrastructure because society forced your parents into dangerous alternatives? There are currently millions of citizens with no birth certificate because their race was deliberately and thoroughly excluded from normal functions of society.

in California you need to be able to afford a notary to apply for a birth certificate, you also need to know what a notary is and where to find one. And if you are not part of a culture that uses high caste cultural signifiers like notaries, navigating these unusual to you bureaucratic obstacles can be rather burdensome.

And what about this very special case, that no one has ever heard of, until I just made it up of a very special class of persons who arent allowed in a hospital, but somehow is still a citizen of the United States. Who dont understand American society, but somehow still citizens. 

Shouldnt we place the integrity of our elections at risk for the sake of these special persons that I just made up?

Yeah, that's how your post reads

[Frog Eater]

2 minutes ago, Scott de Montevideo! said:

Nationwide standards for free and acceptable ID need to be adopted if we are going to require ID to prove citizenship and eligibility to vote.  That seems clear.

I agree that ID cards should be free. Whatever states are making on ID cards they can spread over the other fees charged to have a drivers license. 

[S John]

I have mixed feelings about voter ID laws. 

I get that most of this is in response to trumped up charges of widespread voter fraud that is not actually widespread.  I also get how it can be used to disenfranchise voters.  But... using my own state of residence as an example, a state that has voter ID laws, I don't find it unreasonable.

The rule is as follows:

Quote

Registered voters may use one of the seven (7) forms of photo ID currently required by Texas voter ID law:

• Texas driver license issued by the Texas Department of Public Safety (DPS)
• Texas Election Identification Certificate issued by DPS
• Texas personal identification card issued by DPS
• Texas license to carry a handgun issued by DPS
• United States military identification card containing the person’s photograph
• United States citizenship certificate containing the person’s photograph
• United States passport

Register voters who do not have one of the above seven (7) IDs:

1) May use one of the following forms of ID:

• Valid voter registration certificate
• Certified birth certificate
• current utility bill
• bank statement
• government check
• paycheck
• any other government document that displays your voter's name and an address

AND

2) MUST complete and sign a simple statement (officially called a "reasonable impediment declaration") that says the person was not able to obtain one of the seven (7) required forms of ID.

NOTE: A voter's reason for not obtaining an ID cannot be questioned by election offficials. After asking a voter if he or she has one of seven (7) IDs, elections officials cannot question or challenge voters about why they coud not obtain an ID.

With the exception of the U.S. Citizenship certificate, the approved photo ID must be current or have expired no more than four (4) years before being presented for voter qualification at the polling site.

The second item on that list, the one in bold, is specifically a voter ID for people who don't have any of the other ID's and it is available free of charge.  That combined with the other forms of acceptable ID up to and including a freakin' utility bill adds up to 14 different acceptable ways to prove who you are and everyone has access to at least one of those things, and according to the last bit there, it can even be expired! 

I do not think that this amounts to placing unreasonable obstacles.  At some point, if you are responsible enough to cast a vote, you should be responsible for figuring out how to do it -and in this case it really is not difficult.  If you're voting, that means you're an adult and expecting some level of personal agency is not unreasonable, imo.  Somewhere in there, I would agree that there's a line where you cross from a reasonable law into unreasonable disenfranchisement but I don't think the statute in Texas approaches that line.  Though I can see where that could easily be the case elsewhere.