- Joined
- Mar 8, 2013
- Messages
- 16,339
- Reaction score
- 13,844
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Moderate
So, a practice which tends to drive black American voting has been deliberately cut, after research showing it boost black turnout.I saw that part. So what?
That's what.
...I mean, this is a joke right?Since when is it appropriate for churches to involve themselves so openly in politics like this.
A single day of voting is asinine and disproportionately affects, in a negative fashion, those who are poor. We could quibble over how many days voting should be, but a single day is unfair and biased, regardless of which party it affects more.Why don't we make voting a year long experience? 10 days is plenty. In fact its too much. for 200 years we survived with voting taking place on a single day. Now we need 3 weeks because blacks cant find their way to the polls? Not buying it.
Ignore for a moment the political side. Do you think it's okay for a legislature to conduct racial research and then alter existing legislation based on this research, all against one side of the research?That's what I figured. I will dismiss this ruling the same way the left would dismiss an opposite ruling had it been made by three Bush appointees.
Do you think that's okay?
That's not what the court said. I've provided what the court said. Please read it.So requiring someone to show identification is somehow disenfranchising them from voting?
Ahh, that's cute.I find it enormously impolite to think African Americans cannot handle getting proper identification. Of course, we could do it like they do in the third world and color the fingers of those that have voted purple. But that seems rather sad, if this is true.
They aren't even bothering to acknowledge what happened. That's why I can't help but think race is an issue here.I'm starting to notice a pattern here: every single post that ridicules the ruling was clearly typed up in complete ignorance of what portions of the law the court actually struck down.
Says the person who won't read or address what actually happened, just so they can post boilerplate arguments.It seems hardly credible that the people cannot handle that level of complexity.
Read what I posted earlier in the thread.How are voting rights being restricted?