Does having the right to (x) mean that you have the right to have others provide you the means to exercise your right to (x)?
Please be sure to explain your answer.
You mean like....... when African Americans began having the right to vote? Although they had the right to vote, they didn't have the means to vote because of poll taxes, "voter qualification" exams, literacy tests (grandfather clause), etc, etc.
I have never understood why having a test to make sure someone can read was ever a problem.
If you can't be bothered to learn to read you should not be voting, you are most likely a moron.
(not you specifically, but you in the general sense)
Unless of course, you're an immigrant who can speak 8 different languages but does not speak English, of which the literacy test is based on...
Illiteracy in English =/= Stupid
I was thinking more along the lines of the right to property, etc.You mean like....... when African Americans began having the right to vote? Although they had the right to vote, they didn't have the means to vote because of poll taxes, "voter qualification" exams, literacy tests (grandfather clause), etc, etc.
I have a lot of respect for immigrants in the U.S., to the extent that they are more American than the natives are.
I was thinking more along the lines of the right to property, etc.
BUT, in the case you present -- if someone needs to pay a poll tax to vote, deos he then have the right to have other people pay it for him?
Unless of course, you're an immigrant who can speak 8 different languages but does not speak English, of which the literacy test is based on...
Illiteracy in English =/= Stupid
I often see this as well, though not all the time.
About the literacy tests, I was speaking more to the slaves who were recently released of their servitude, of which did not provide writing/reading lessons. The mass majority of freed slaves, having the right to vote, at the same time unable to exercise their right to vote because an obstruction set up by the State Government. This was directed at Former Slaves because of the addition of the Grandfather clause, which exempted the white folks from having to take the literacy test (which itself is almost impossible to pass for the average person at the time because of the illiteracy rates, regardless of skin color).
It's like the government is giving you a right, but then adding all sorts of requirements to them that were not there before. The government is essentially giving a right to nothing.
We are an English-speaking nation and if you want to participate in our governing process you should be socially integrated.
Can't read? Shouldn't be able to vote.
Don't speak English? Shouldn't be able to vote.
I was thinking more along the lines of the right to property, etc.
BUT, in the case you present -- if someone needs to pay a poll tax to vote, deos he then have the right to have other people pay it for him?
Does having the right to (x) mean that you have the right to have others provide you the means to exercise your right to (x)?
Please be sure to explain your answer.
Do you know what social enclaves are? Speaking the language or not, does not determine whether you are socially integrated.
This does not mean that they do not understand how the government works. Furthermore, if they are allowed time to translate it themselves, or for them, this would be irrelevant.
Of course not, no one owes anyone anything in this world unless they have been legally wronged.
I have never understood why having a test to make sure someone can read was ever a problem.
If you can't be bothered to learn to read you should not be voting, you are most likely a moron.
(not you specifically, but you in the general sense)
Yessir, we do.
The short word you're looking for that provides the emotional impact all those syllables mask is "ghetto".
If they're too self-important to learn the language my government is run in, they're just too damn special to be voting for people in my government.
Speaking the language or not, does not determine whether you are socially integrated.
This does not mean that they do not understand how the government works. Furthermore, if they are allowed time to translate it themselves, or for them, this would be irrelevant.
How can a person be considered socially integrated when they're incapable of communicating with the vast majority of society?
Or they could just learn to speak the language which defines American culture.
Who ever said universal suffrage was a good idea? Look what got elected last November, if you want to see what's wrong with that idea.
At a minimum, people should be literate in the language of the government before they should be allowed to participate in the selection of that government.
Better, people should be paying taxes before they get a vote on who decides how that tax money is spent.
Ideally, the people should be literate, taxpayers, and military veterans, since vets have demonstrated a willingness to sacrifice their one and only body for the benefit of the republic.
Does having the right to (x) mean that you have the right to have others provide you the means to exercise your right to (x)?
Please be sure to explain your answer.
Does having the right to (x) mean that you have the right to have others provide you the means to exercise your right to (x)?
Please be sure to explain your answer.
You mean its killing you.:roll: Please tell us what you are getting at Goobieman. The suspense is killing us.