22 hours ago, Brianfive said:

But it’s voter suppression if your required to have one of these to vote....😳 imagine that

 

35 minutes ago, lynched1 said:

I learn new crap everyday. Today I've learned you seem very insecure. Challenging your willingness to shoot unproven chemicals into your body like a heroin junkie seems to threaten you. 😉

No. Anti-masker idiots like you threaten the lives of my fellow Americans. I'm a firm believer in vaccines thanks to growing up before some of the popular ones and getting a disease while in the USAF in a foreign country. A disease that would be extinct in the US if not for people like you.

It's okay if you are scared. I understand.

18 minutes ago, EaglesRocker97 said:

The 15th and 19th Amendments explicitly reference "the right of the citizens of the United States to vote." No rights are absolute, though, and can be regulated or restricted in limited instances.

 

At best, this statement is highly debatable and fraught with Constitutional dilemmas.

There was very little agreement among those drafting the Constitution about who should be able to vote. This wasn't just a concern about slaves and blacks (though it was part of it), but also a question of land-owners vs. non-land-owners, etc. 

So from a Constitutional standpoint, this was a purposeful omission; they didn't have an answer that worked for EVERY state, so it was up to the individual states to decide.

The above references the right to vote, but only within the context of how it cannot be abridged. 

Reading Amendment 14, Section 2: 

Quote

But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State.

Paraphrasing the literal text: But when the right to vote at any [federal] election is denied or in any way abridged, with the exception of rebellion/etc., the basis of representation will be reduced.

The broad phrasing of denying the right to vote makes it pretty clear that states have a lot of latitude. 

To me, it comes down to a semantic argument of what defines a right vs a privilege.

Your right to free speech can never truly be taken away; it may be abridged in certain circumstances, but regardless of your status this right is not one the government can suppress. But who may vote is very much a determination left to the states.

33 minutes ago, DBW said:

The constitution doesn’t give you the right to vote.

JFC, the Constitution explicitly states reasons that you cannot be denied the right to vote. You could've originally considered this an implied right, but later on, we wrote amendments to make it explicit. Now, if you're arguing that the right is not absolute and that it can be regulated/altered, you'll get no argument here, but the repetitive statement that "ThErE iS nO rIgHt to vOtE" is demonstrably false. It looks like the alt-right propaganda is working like a charm and has gotten to so-called CVON libertarians. What a shame

33 minutes ago, DBW said:

The constitution doesn’t give you the right to vote.  What it does do, through the amendments, is make sure if you’re a woman, minority, slave, etc that states can’t deny you the same opportunity to vote based on that, because, our forefathers state in the constitution that ALL men (and women) are created equal...which is where the "that’s unconstitutional” debate comes in.

this is like basic 7th grade world culture class material.  Didnt anyone go to school? 

 

Yeah, but in all fairness, I only spent 6 years of postsecondary education studying history, so maybe we need to get a PhD in here. 

 

Ironically, you are trying to make an argument about Constitutionality by refrencing the Declaration of Independence, which is legally irrelevant to the discussion. Who needs to go to school again?

On 5/7/2021 at 11:48 AM, Toastrel said:

No. Anti-masker idiots like you threaten the lives of my fellow Americans. I'm a firm believer in vaccines thanks to growing up before some of the popular ones and getting a disease while in the USAF in a foreign country. A disease that would be extinct in the US if not for people like you.

It's okay if you are scared. I understand.

You don't even make any sense dumb***. If your train of thought was correct you'd be vaccinated and safe while I'd be dead. 

The reality is my immune system has already beaten it once with minimal effect and no side effects. Your dumb*** doesn't even know how effective that "vaccine" is or how often you have to keep getting shots.

I'm not the one living in fear sweetheart.

 

6 minutes ago, EaglesRocker97 said:

JFC, the Constitution explicitly states reasons that you cannot be denied the right to vote. You could've originally considered this an implied right, but later on, we wrote amendments to make it explicit. Now, if you're arguing that the right is not absolute and that I can be regulated, you'll get no argument here, but the repetitive statement that "ThErE iS nO rIgHt to vOtE" is demonstrably false. It looks like the alt-right propagabda is working well and has gotten to so-called CVON libertarians. What a shame

 

Yeah, but in all fairness, I only spent 6 years lf postsecondary education studying history, so maybe we need to get a PhD in here. 

 

Ironically, you are trying to make an argument about Constitutionality by refrencing the Declaration of Independence, which is legally irrelevant to the discussion. Who needs to go to school again?

Show me where the constitution lists the qualifications for individuals to vote.  It doesn’t.  Like has already been said the amendments make sure that no states can make a list of people who can’t vote like blacks or women.

there’s no far right anything in my response so keep your attempted labeling of me to yourself.  
 

 

50 minutes ago, Paul852 said:

This might be one of the dumbest takes I have ever heard. How do you function on a day-to-day basis?

Just taking a guess, far better than you. 😉

6 minutes ago, lynched1 said:

Just taking a guess, far better than you. 😉

Probably not.

Just now, Paul852 said:

Probably not.

I'm happy for you as long as you're happy with where you're at.😉

32 minutes ago, EaglesRocker97 said:

JFC, the Constitution explicitly states reasons that you cannot be denied the right to vote. You could've originally considered this an implied right, but later on, we wrote amendments to make it explicit. Now, if you're arguing that the right is not absolute and that it can be regulated/altered, you'll get no argument here, but the repetitive statement that "ThErE iS nO rIgHt to vOtE" is demonstrably false. It looks like the alt-right propaganda is working like a charm and has gotten to so-called CVON libertarians. What a shame

 

Yeah, but in all fairness, I only spent 6 years of postsecondary education studying history, so maybe we need to get a PhD in here. 

 

Ironically, you are trying to make an argument about Constitutionality by refrencing the Declaration of Independence, which is legally irrelevant to the discussion. Who needs to go to school again?

There isn't an absolute right to vote. If there were a right for all citizens to vote, then we wouldn't need the 15th, 19th, 24th or 26th amendments. If all citizens had the right to vote, then kids could vote (unless you argue the 24th gave the right to stop kids). If the state of Alabama passed a law that only land owners could vote, it wouldn't be Unconstitutional. You could argue it violated the 14th amendment, or it was akin to a poll tax and violated the 24th, but it isn't on its face an illegal law. 

Hell, most states ban convicted felons from voting. They are CITIZENS that are denied the ability to vote. And why is this Constitutional...BECAUSE THERE IS NO ABSOLUTE RIGHT TO VOTE IN THE CONSTITUTION. 

It's not that friggin hard to understand.

8 minutes ago, vikas83 said:

THERE IS NO ABSOLUTE RIGHT TO VOTE IN THE CONSTITUTION. 

Correct, but that wasn't the original statement. Now you've added the modifier "absolute," so we agree, lol. Like pretty much any right, it can be regulated, so, like I said, I'm fine with the Constitutionality of ID laws in theory, as long as they are fairly implemented.

I don't think the issue of disenfranchising felons is unconstitutional, but it should be. If you've repaid your debt to society, all rights should be restored.

2 minutes ago, EaglesRocker97 said:

Correct, but that wasn't the original statement. Now you've added the modifier "absolute," so we agree, lol. Like pretty much any right, it can be regulated, so, like I said, I'm fine with the Constitutionality of ID laws in theory, as long as they are fairly implemented.

Let me say it another way. You, as a citizen of the United States (assuming you are), do not have a right to vote. You can't be denied the ability to vote based on race, gender, age or ability to pay a poll tax. If your state said you can't vote if you aren't a net tax payer, that is not Unconstitutional. Now, there may be an argument that it violates the 14th or 24th amendment, but that would be subject to interpretation (FWIW, I don't think it does violate either). 

If a state passed a law saying you can't worship the devil, that would violate your right to practice the free exercise of religion is granted as a right in the first amendment. 

The regulation of rights you keep referring to is things like you can't scream fire in a crowded theater, because you infringe on the rights and safety of others. 

This isn't that hard. The founders explicitly excluded a right to vote and left it up to the states. We know this. 

2 minutes ago, EaglesRocker97 said:

I don't think the issue of disenfranchising felons is unconstitutional, but it should be. If you've repaid your debt to society, all rights should be restored.

For the record, I agree. The laws are stupid...but they are not Unconstitutional. 

5 hours ago, JohnSnowsHair said:

Vote by mail was passed by the Republican legislature and signed into law by the Democratic governor in 2019, predating the pandemic.

What Republicans objected to was how the state administered vote by mail for the 2020 election. They challenged various policies put in place by the Democratic led executive branch and won one but lost most challenges when the PA SC mostly sided with the Executive branch. 

Republicans were still salty about it, but the fact of the matter is millions voted in good faith based on the rules that were in place, and even if some ruling came out after the election that some of the policies ran afoul of the law (which hasn't happened, just a hypothetical) the election would stand because it was conducted in good faith based on the interpretation of the law at the time.

Some Republicans are just whiny bishes - worse than ANY triggered lefty after Hillary lost - who didn't want to accept that their guy lost fair and square.

Riot Kitchen does it again! How does he remain so moderate? Truly remarkable!

lmfao  

🤡🌍

24 minutes ago, mr_hunt said:

🤡🌍

"To the lab!"

46 minutes ago, mr_hunt said:

🤡🌍

Wait, to the lab??? I thought these jack holes don’t believe in science?  😂 

3 hours ago, vikas83 said:

There isn't an absolute right to vote. If there were a right for all citizens to vote, then we wouldn't need the 15th, 19th, 24th or 26th amendments. If all citizens had the right to vote, then kids could vote (unless you argue the 24th gave the right to stop kids). If the state of Alabama passed a law that only land owners could vote, it wouldn't be Unconstitutional. You could argue it violated the 14th amendment, or it was akin to a poll tax and violated the 24th, but it isn't on its face an illegal law. 

Hell, most states ban convicted felons from voting. They are CITIZENS that are denied the ability to vote. And why is this Constitutional...BECAUSE THERE IS NO ABSOLUTE RIGHT TO VOTE IN THE CONSTITUTION. 

It's not that friggin hard to understand.

Just catching up.  This should end the argument but I'm sure it will still go in circles.

On 5/6/2021 at 2:07 PM, mr_hunt said:

The real count of global deaths caused by the coronavirus is more than double the number officially reported, according to a new analysis.

 

Here's a little something to help you put thing in perspective

We have no rights, we are all slaves to the government and what they allow

19 minutes ago, EagleVA said:

Here's a little something to help you put thing in perspective

How many people die falling off the edge of the earth every day?

15 minutes ago, Joe Shades 73 said:

How many people die falling off the edge of the earth every day?

As far as I know zero, but if I met you at the edge you'd be one falling jackarse.

23 minutes ago, EagleVA said:

As far as I know zero, but if I met you at the edge you'd be one falling jackarse.

You go wait. I’ll be right there 

1 minute ago, Joe Shades 73 said:

You go wait. I’ll be right there 

You know what's pathetic, you brain dead FE jokers don't even realize that you've been brainwashed to laugh and make fun of where you live.

So tell me, how does it feel to be a brainwshed dumbarse that can't figure out something that a non-brainwashed child could?

4 minutes ago, EagleVA said:

You know what's pathetic, you brain dead FE jokers don't even realize that you've been brainwashed to laugh and make fun of where you live.

So tell me, how does it feel to be a brainwshed dumbarse that can't figure out something that a non-brainwashed child could?

I can’t answer that I have been brainwashed to not have feelings

33 minutes ago, EagleVA said:

As far as I know zero, but if I met you at the edge you'd be one falling jackarse.

Is there a fence?

4 hours ago, DBW said:

Wait, to the lab??? I thought these jack holes don’t believe in science?  😂 

I don't think he understands he probably can't get the answers to what is in that vile at a meth lab