• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Kansas and Arizona win voter proof-of-citizenship ruling

ernst barkmann said:
slaves were not considered citizens, they had no rights at all, 13th freed them ,the 14th amendment, ...which was originaly intended only for slaves, stated if they were born here or naturalized here, they are u.s. citizens and citizens of the state they are in.

since they are considered free citizens, all rights now apply to them....no amendment to the constitution can grant a right, only the court can recognize a right, and that is what they did, the amendments to the constitution, state that the right to vote cannot be denied, because of race, sex.

no where in the constitution do you see a granting or giving of rights...government can give a privilege...but not a right.

the constitution grants powers to the federal government, it does not grant rights to people, it recognizes rights.......the bill of rights are not rights.......they are restrictions on government.
Click to expand...

Why do you believe the right of the people to not be infringed is not a right?
 
TheDemSocialist said:
Video @: [/FONT][/COLOR]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-mr5t8K-uvQ

Damnit :doh This is going to open the door for voter suppression. Here in KS we have over 15,000 people having their right to vote held up by the Secretary of State now this is just going to spread. Essentially its trying to solve a problem, where there is no problem. Its being used as a political tool by the GOP.
Click to expand...

Relax. I'm sure your fellow socialist running the DNC will find other ways to rig the system. Why, I bet they are even consulting with experts from Venezuela and North Korea already.
 
danielpalos said:
Why do you believe the right of the people to not be infringed is not a right?
Click to expand...

i stated the rights recognized by the constitution, including those which fall under the 9th....are not to be infringed, because a restriction has been placed on government by the constitution to prevent them from doing so.

"congress shall make no law"
 
DVSentinel said:
Relax. I'm sure your fellow socialist running the DNC will find other ways to rig the system. Why, I bet they are even consulting with experts from Venezuela and North Korea already.
Click to expand...

:lamo
Your ignorance of political theory is hilarious and also scary.
 
TheDemSocialist said:
:lamo
Your ignorance of political theory is hilarious and also scary.
Click to expand...

I'm ignorant because I don't believe the same as you? And what is the record of success for socialism? Not too long ago you were praising Venezuela for being such a paragon of socialism, how's that working out today? You preach and support a change to socialism here, but stay here instead of moving to a socialist country because you like our standard of living and the opportunities it affords. Not much an example for living what you preach, are you?
 
1750Texan said:
do you mean the right to vote today..in 2014?
Click to expand...

The Right to vote is not explicitly stated in the Constitution only that it cannot be denied on account of race or gender. This would imply that the determination of the Right to vote is up to the States and is shown where they determine when people living in the State can actually vote some require a residence of a few weeks others require up to six months.
 
DVSentinel said:
I'm ignorant because I don't believe the same as you?
Click to expand...
No its because you just called the DNC socialist..
hv135w.jpg
 
Shadow Serious said:
The Right to vote is not explicitly stated in the Constitution only that it cannot be denied on account of race or gender. This would imply that the determination of the Right to vote is up to the States and is shown where they determine when people living in the State can actually vote some require a residence of a few weeks others require up to six months.
Click to expand...

It is true that the right to vote existed in forms determined by the states prior to the signing of the US Constitution. The right to vote predates the constitution like the right to self defense and marriage. Both of which are not enumerated in the constitution, but are accepted as rights.

The 14th,15th and the 19th amendments are more that voting rights based on race and gender. The 15th established the right to vote for former african slaves and the 14th established that all the equal protection of the law...

The 14th amendment should have been sufficient to afford women the right to vote, and would today, but it took the 19th to do so.

Today the states can pass restrictions on voting, but can not deny anyone the right to vote without due process of the law. 5th amendment.

So even though the right to vote is not enumerated in the constitution...the 9th, 14th, 15th, 19th, and 5th confirm that right today.









it aslo affords all right voting included to All citizens under the jurisdiction of the US.
 
TheDemSocialist said:
No its because you just called the DNC socialist..
hv135w.jpg
Click to expand...

Same answer you have given before and just as wrong. The traitor rats (or should it be Demonrats) are socialist because they act like socialist. They place the importance of "society" above the importance of individual rights and freedoms, that alone would by any definition, but a very narrow-minded individuals, be socialism. They seek wealth distribution, taking away from the earners and creators and giving to the lazy and stupid. Through taxes, regulation and wage mandates, they seek to control the economy and to "equalize" distribution. Again, by any definition but a very narrow-minded one, is socialism. They claim individuals have a "right" to the production and earnings of others, thus claiming slave rights over the productive. Again, except by a very narrow-minded definition, socialism.

What kind of person would act on and believe in such a narrow-minded definition? True, my definitions and classification are not within the scope of what you believe, but then again, other self-proclaimed socialist wouldn't fit into your very narrow definition either.

Were you not the one that once claimed that Marx had nothing to do with socialism?
 
DVSentinel said:
Same answer you have given before and just as wrong. The traitor rats (or should it be Demonrats) are socialist because they act like socialist. They place the importance of "society" above the importance of individual rights and freedoms, that alone would by any definition, but a very narrow-minded individuals, be socialism. They seek wealth distribution, taking away from the earners and creators and giving to the lazy and stupid. Through taxes, regulation and wage mandates, they seek to control the economy and to "equalize" distribution. Again, by any definition but a very narrow-minded one, is socialism. They claim individuals have a "right" to the production and earnings of others, thus claiming slave rights over the productive. Again, except by a very narrow-minded definition, socialism.

What kind of person would act on and believe in such a narrow-minded definition? True, my definitions and classification are not within the scope of what you believe, but then again, other self-proclaimed socialist wouldn't fit into your very narrow definition either.
Click to expand...
:yawn:
And yet you give the same answer every time. Not having this pointless debate again when you cannot fundamentally understand a basic political philosophy definition
 
TheDemSocialist said:
:yawn:
And yet you give the same answer every time. Not having this pointless debate again when you cannot fundamentally understand a basic political philosophy definition
Click to expand...

Where do you get the concept that "fox news" told me so? Has fox news ever called the traitor rats socialist? If so, I am unaware of it. Of course I don't get fox news on TV and never read the opinion pieces, just basic news, so I wouldn't know.

Basic political philosophy huh? Pro-society, socialist (notice the very distinct similarity and base root of the names), Pro-Individual, Individualist. How much more basic can you get?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom