Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Leaderboards
Games
Our Blog
Blogs
New entries
New comments
Blog list
Search blogs
Credits
Transactions
Shop
Blessings: ✟0.00
Tickets
Open new ticket
Watched
Donate
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Politics
American Politics
New York will allow non-citizens to vote under controversial law
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="ThatRobGuy" data-source="post: 76475389" data-attributes="member: 123415"><p>They are different, for the reasons I mentioned in my reply to the other poster.</p><p></p><p>One was a case for a group of citizens to rightfully have their voice heard and have a say in their government.</p><p></p><p>The other is an attempt by a political faction to "pad their stats" so to speak.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Right, but this isn't that time...and as noted, the motivations were different as were the dynamics.</p><p></p><p>The historical situation you're describing involves a group fighting for their right to have their voice heard.</p><p></p><p>This involves a political faction (that already has quite a bit of stroke) trying to bolster their own influence.</p><p></p><p>To make it an adequate comparison, this would be like if during that historical period, a group said "hey, we know women are typically in line with ideologically, so let's try to get the law changed so they can vote and help us beat our rivals"</p><p></p><p>But that wasn't the core of the women's suffrage movement.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Ah yes, because wanting to keep voting confined to citizens is exactly the same as being an 1800's male chauvinist.</p><p></p><p>C'mon, you can do better than that.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Nothing if you're a citizen.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I didn't say that what they're doing is "worse" than what the GOP does. I've been very vocal about those issues surrounding both voter id laws as well as some other common GOP practices like gerrymandering to gain an advantage...I don't like those "rigging" attempts either.</p><p></p><p>Furthermore, simply "giving more freedoms to more people" doesn't, by default, make it the more ethical position.</p><p></p><p>The arguments you're making for this could just as easily be applied to 14-16 year olds (who can work in most states), they live there, they get taxes taken out of their check. Should 14 year olds be able to influence public policy?</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="ThatRobGuy, post: 76475389, member: 123415"] They are different, for the reasons I mentioned in my reply to the other poster. One was a case for a group of citizens to rightfully have their voice heard and have a say in their government. The other is an attempt by a political faction to "pad their stats" so to speak. Right, but this isn't that time...and as noted, the motivations were different as were the dynamics. The historical situation you're describing involves a group fighting for their right to have their voice heard. This involves a political faction (that already has quite a bit of stroke) trying to bolster their own influence. To make it an adequate comparison, this would be like if during that historical period, a group said "hey, we know women are typically in line with ideologically, so let's try to get the law changed so they can vote and help us beat our rivals" But that wasn't the core of the women's suffrage movement. Ah yes, because wanting to keep voting confined to citizens is exactly the same as being an 1800's male chauvinist. C'mon, you can do better than that. Nothing if you're a citizen. I didn't say that what they're doing is "worse" than what the GOP does. I've been very vocal about those issues surrounding both voter id laws as well as some other common GOP practices like gerrymandering to gain an advantage...I don't like those "rigging" attempts either. Furthermore, simply "giving more freedoms to more people" doesn't, by default, make it the more ethical position. The arguments you're making for this could just as easily be applied to 14-16 year olds (who can work in most states), they live there, they get taxes taken out of their check. Should 14 year olds be able to influence public policy? [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Politics
American Politics
New York will allow non-citizens to vote under controversial law
Top
Bottom