You have a very compartmentalized mind.
If you bar voting for those without home ownership (or anything greater in equity to late 18th century voting practices), you inevitably run into your argument. Your argument stated that we value human rights (we don't, unless explicitly forced to do so) and that anyone who wants to can gain home ownership (again, I offer a class of people who are overwhelmingly prohibited from doing so), thus prohibiting voting on that basis is reasonable. You suffer from an idealistic liberalism which presupposes that mankind is rationale and good. Your liberalism further believes that mankind itself can be intrinsically improved. But conservatives rightly understood that mankind is brutish, ignorant, and needing of brute force to be corrected. I'm stating that you would not only disbar the poor from voting, but would also prohibit most persons with disabilities from voting. You believe that the poor are poor from matters less systemic and more personal. Even though social scientific data for the past 3 quarters of a century places you at a significant intellectual disadvantage, we can give you the benefit of the doubt, because of my trump card. The disabled are systematically prevented from climbing the social ladder because society purposefully designed it that way.
Or as Nilly put it a couple of hours ago:
He who is less learned suffers from argumental disadvantage, but as you have no less been pampered on your certainties, I am guessing I cannot sway you on how utterly incorrect you are. The ignorant wallow in their ignorance. C'est la vie.