Would you agree that mandatory voting is compelled speech?

[jonny5]

Hello

I haven’t read the whole thread. I am going to give my opinion on the thread title.

No, I do not agree as long as we are taking about here in the United States. Compelled speech requires a person to make a statement that they disagree with.

Once a citizen is in the voting booth, how they vote is their choice. They can vote for Mickey Mouse should they choose.

So while I can see how mandatory voting may seem like compelled speech, I am of the opinion that it is not.

What if they refused to vote? Would that not be a expression of a thought, ie. speech? How then could the reverse, choosing to vote, not also be an expression?

 

[Vidi]

That's totally wrong. Totally. Right wingers are for the elimination of all ILLEGAL immigration. Legal immigration is fine. The left claim they are not for open borders while at the same time calling for the elimination of ICE, forming sanctuary cities and sanctuary states which refuse to cooperate with ICE, allowing illegals to vote in local elections, and alerting employers when ICE raids are coming. The left doesn't want a wall because they don't want to stop illegal immigration. When we have hundreds of thousands of illegals flooding across the border every year, the left says there is no problem. The left have absolutely zero plans to stop illegals from coming here. The left only have plans for apprehending illegals after they cross the border, which is exactly what the illegals want.

I did not mischaracterize the Lefts view of the Rights position.

You however have doubled down on the Rights view of the Lefts position.

So again, it may be different on this forum but...please refer to my previous statement

 

[Vidi]

It certainly is, and worse, its forced behavior. But I assume Australia doesnt have such strong protections of liberty as we do in the US?

No more forced than speed limits, taxes or drug testing for assistance qualifications.

 

[Vidi]

What if they refused to vote? Would that not be a expression of a thought, ie. speech? How then could the reverse, choosing to vote, not also be an expression?

They can choose to not vote. As this is a hypothetical that will never fly here in the US, we can put an imaginary fine on them.

Personally, I think people who choose not to vite should consider moving elsewhere. Democracy isn’t a spectator sport. It’s my opinion that if you’re not educating yourself to vote and then voting, then you’re a welfare queen, expecting the rest of us to take responsibility for keeping everything running smoothly. I have no patience for leeches

 

[Moderate Right]

I did not mischaracterize the Lefts view of the Rights position.

You however have doubled down on the Rights view of the Lefts position.

So again, it may be different on this forum but...please refer to my previous statement

It is the same on both this forum and in real life. The left claim they are not for open borders while all the time wanting policies that create open borders, such as the ones I mentioned. Everything the left wants to fight illegal immigration with are policies and laws which apprehend illegals after they have already crossed the border, exactly what the illegals want. Once across the border they want to put up their arms and be arrested, housed, fed, and given free medical care and claim asylum. The right want to cut them off at the pass so they don't get here in the first place.

 

[Vidi]

It is the same on both this forum and in real life. The left claim they are not for open borders while all the time wanting policies that create open borders, such as the ones I mentioned. Everything the left wants to fight illegal immigration with are policies and laws which apprehend illegals after they have already crossed the border, exactly what the illegals want. Once across the border they want to put up their arms and be arrested, housed, fed, and given free medical care and claim asylum. The right want to cut them off at the pass so they don't get here in the first place.

Illegal immigration will not stop so long as there’s a better life on this side on the border.

I think there is a really simple solution. Start prosecuting people who employ illegals.

Put a few rich white guys in jail and watch those jobs for illegals dry right up. Then, when word gets back to their home countries that there’s no work here, no money to be made, they’ll stop coming.

Sure we are going to have to build a system by which employees can verify employment eligibility but we can get the funds for that by skipping the wall.

Lastly, I am in favor of amnesty for kids who were brought here years ago. Im never in favor of punishing children for their parents crime.

 

[jonny5]

No more forced than speed limits, taxes or drug testing for assistance qualifications.

You are not forced to drive, earn income (and thus pay taxes) or seek assistance. Those are regulations you follow if you choose to engage in an activity. Taxes is a tricky one, because paying taxes certainly should be required of all citizens. Everyone who chooses to live in a governed society should be expected to contribute to the running of it.

 

[jonny5]

They can choose to not vote. As this is a hypothetical that will never fly here in the US, we can put an imaginary fine on them.

Personally, I think people who choose not to vite should consider moving elsewhere. Democracy isn’t a spectator sport. It’s my opinion that if you’re not educating yourself to vote and then voting, then you’re a welfare queen, expecting the rest of us to take responsibility for keeping everything running smoothly. I have no patience for leeches

And if they refused to vote in a mandatory voting system, that would be an expression of speech. The same as choosing to vote is. The topic is whether its speech. Im saying voting is an expression of an idea, and thus speech.

And while participating in the system is certain desirable of all citizens, we're talking about forcing people to.

 

[Moderate Right]

Illegal immigration will not stop so long as there’s a better life on this side on the border.

I think there is a really simple solution. Start prosecuting people who employ illegals.

Put a few rich white guys in jail and watch those jobs for illegals dry right up. Then, when word gets back to their home countries that there’s no work here, no money to be made, they’ll stop coming.

Sure we are going to have to build a system by which employees can verify employment eligibility but we can get the funds for that by skipping the wall.

Lastly, I am in favor of amnesty for kids who were brought here years ago. Im never in favor of punishing children for their parents crime.

Prosecuting employers is nothing but a left wing talking point for those who seem to have no clue. It's a simplistic idiotic solution that is not a solution at all. It wouldn't work. Californians themselves won't prosecute employers because they want illegals for their economy. They even protect illegals with sanctuary cities and a sanctuary state which allows them to vote in local elections. California also needs these illegals to pad their population so that they have more representation. And, they warn employers when ICE is coming. How do you expect to prosecute employers with all of this going on? Your simple solution is akin to prosecuting employers for paying employees under the table. Catching them is pretty much downright impossible, same as if they hire illegals and many Democrats have called for the elimination of ICE.

As a further perspective I'll tell you how it works on the large farms in my area, of which we have several. The farms don't hire their own employees to work in the fields. They hire a management company from Texas to provide the labor. Therefore, you can't prosecute the farms because they are not hiring illegals, they are hiring a management company so the farm is free and clear of prosecution. Now the management company in Texas is kind of like a shell of a business, with maybe one office and one person working in the office. And the owners, who the hell knows where they are? Certainly the government doesn't because I'm sure there are phony addresses involved. Now every year the management company goes out of business and opens up under a new name the following season so that they can always be one step ahead of the law. Now if the farm should be raided by ICE (extremely unlikely) and illegals are found to be working there, the farm is legally in the clear because they hired a management company to provide the labor and the management company is staffed by a secretary who is tipped off of the ICE raid and locks up and flees and the owners are no where to be found. It probably works the same for other industries such as lawncare and landscaping and I'm sure it works like this clear across the country, not just in my area. And, as I said before, California itself tips off employers about ICE raids they know of.

The left want everyone to think there is this simple solution because they don't want to talk about the realities of the situation. It's just a stall tactic and smokescreen to avoid the issue, and imply that it is those big bad rich Republican employers who want the illegals working for them.

 

[Vidi]

And if they refused to vote in a mandatory voting system, that would be an expression of speech. The same as choosing to vote is. The topic is whether its speech. Im saying voting is an expression of an idea, and thus speech.

And while participating in the system is certain desirable of all citizens, we're talking about forcing people to.

The phrase “compelled speech” has a specific definition. I’m of the opinion that mandatory voting does not fall into the definition

 

[Vidi]

Prosecuting employers is nothing but a left wing talking point for those who seem to have no clue. It's a simplistic idiotic solution that is not a solution at all. It wouldn't work. Californians themselves won't prosecute employers because they want illegals for their economy. They even protect illegals with sanctuary cities and a sanctuary state which allows them to vote in local elections. California also needs these illegals to pad their population so that they have more representation. And, they warn employers when ICE is coming. How do you expect to prosecute employers with all of this going on? Your simple solution is akin to prosecuting employers for paying employees under the table. Catching them is pretty much downright impossible, same as if they hire illegals and many Democrats have called for the elimination of ICE.

As a further perspective I'll tell you how it works on the large farms in my area, of which we have several. The farms don't hire their own employees to work in the fields. They hire a management company from Texas to provide the labor. Therefore, you can't prosecute the farms because they are not hiring illegals, they are hiring a management company so the farm is free and clear of prosecution. Now the management company in Texas is kind of like a shell of a business, with maybe one office and one person working in the office. And the owners, who the hell knows where they are? Certainly the government doesn't because I'm sure there are phony addresses involved. Now every year the management company goes out of business and opens up under a new name the following season so that they can always be one step ahead of the law. Now if the farm should be raided by ICE (extremely unlikely) and illegals are found to be working there, the farm is legally in the clear because they hired a management company to provide the labor and the management company is staffed by a secretary who is tipped off of the ICE raid and locks up and flees and the owners are no where to be found. It probably works the same for other industries such as lawncare and landscaping and I'm sure it works like this clear across the country, not just in my area. And, as I said before, California itself tips off employers about ICE raids they know of.

The left want everyone to think there is this simple solution because they don't want to talk about the realities of the situation. It's just a stall tactic and smokescreen to avoid the issue, and imply that it is those big bad rich Republican employers who want the illegals working for them.

You spent a lot of time and words to blame liberals for letting illegals in and forgiving employers who give them the jobs that attracted them here in the first place.

If you’re going to hate on liberal talking points, let’s jump on some of the conservative ones as well, shall we? Like “Sanctuary Cities”

The right doesn’t want to actually fix illegal immigration because it won’t give them a wedge issue in elections.They no longer have gay marriage to attack so this is their new hill to die on,

Problem is...Illegal Immigration is NOT a victimless crime. Once these people cross the border, they are using resources that could be spent entering our own lives here. They come here because they know they can get jobs here and live better than they could at home.

End that and they’ll stop coming.

Don’t believe me?

Illegal Immigration Drops in Recession - TheStreet

During the recession, illegal immigration plummeted.

Why? No opportunity for them.

Go after the employers and the problem gets fixed without spending TRILLIONS on a wall.


( Yes, trillions. Anyone who tells you it’s only going to cost 5 billion is a liar )

 

[Moderate Right]

You spent a lot of time and words to blame liberals for letting illegals in and forgiving employers who give them the jobs that attracted them here in the first place.

If you’re going to hate on liberal talking points, let’s jump on some of the conservative ones as well, shall we? Like “Sanctuary Cities”

The right doesn’t want to actually fix illegal immigration because it won’t give them a wedge issue in elections.They no longer have gay marriage to attack so this is their new hill to die on,

Problem is...Illegal Immigration is NOT a victimless crime. Once these people cross the border, they are using resources that could be spent entering our own lives here. They come here because they know they can get jobs here and live better than they could at home.

End that and they’ll stop coming.

Don’t believe me?

Illegal Immigration Drops in Recession - TheStreet

During the recession, illegal immigration plummeted.

Why? No opportunity for them.

Go after the employers and the problem gets fixed without spending TRILLIONS on a wall.


( Yes, trillions. Anyone who tells you it’s only going to cost 5 billion is a liar )

You are naive if you think cracking down on employers is going to solve the problem. I already explained that to you. You can't crack down on employers for hiring illegals any more than you can crack down on them for paying people under the table. And, it is LIBERALS who institute policies making illegal immigration easier. Cracking down on employers is nothing but a left wing talking point to avoid doing things that will actually work.

 

[Vidi]

You are naive if you think cracking down on employers is going to solve the problem. I already explained that to you. You can't crack down on employers for hiring illegals any more than you can crack down on them for paying people under the table. And, it is LIBERALS who institute policies making illegal immigration easier. Cracking down on employers is nothing but a left wing talking point to avoid doing things that will actually work.

Why? It worked before

http://www.ilikecharts.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/Screen-Shot-2017-03-28-at-9.33.53-AM-1024x637.png

Illegal immigration became the problem it is today after we STOPPED prosecuting employers.

 

[Moderate Right]

Why? It worked before

http://www.ilikecharts.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/Screen-Shot-2017-03-28-at-9.33.53-AM-1024x637.png

Illegal immigration became the problem it is today after we STOPPED prosecuting employers.

Why on Earth do you lefties think you can post facts that prove your point that don't actually prove your point? It is California that doesn't want to prosecute employers. How about forcing California to prosecute employers, get rid of their sanctuary cites and being a sanctuary state, and force California to not allow illegals to vote in local elections? How about throwing all illegals out the door as soon as they arrive and not give them any housing or food or medical care? And, I already explained to you how you can't realistically stop employers from hiring illegals anymore than you can stop employers from paying employees under the table. You're just tone deaf. You can't hear anything but the liberal drums banging in your head.

 

[Vidi]

Why on Earth do you lefties think you can post facts that prove your point that don't actually prove your point? It is California that doesn't want to prosecute employers. How about forcing California to prosecute employers, get rid of their sanctuary cites and being a sanctuary state, and force California to not allow illegals to vote in local elections? How about throwing all illegals out the door as soon as they arrive and not give them any housing or food or medical care? And, I already explained to you how you can't realistically stop employers from hiring illegals anymore than you can stop employers from paying employees under the table. You're just tone deaf. You can't hear anything but the liberal drums banging in your head.

Civics my friend.

The states do not have the power nor the right to set immigration policy. That power is strictly in the Federal government.

Sanctuary cities are a joke. All the means is they’re not going to jump up to use state resources to do the work of the federal government.

And you will find very few “lefties” as opposed to illegal immigration as I am.

Not because of some abstract nonsense but because an illegal stole my SSN and used it to work under my name. Then the IRS came to me looking for back taxes. They even froze my bank account. I had to track down the company that I was supposedly employed by and when they found out they had an illegal working for them, they let him go, then suddenly lost his home address for the cops to go get him on identity theft.

Though I was legally out of trouble in under a month. The IRS kept a lien on my home and my bank account frozen for 18 months. My wife and I were just about to move two hours away for a promotion she got. Of course, we couldn’t sell our house until the IRS took off the lien and all my money was frozen so I couldn’t access it to put a down payment on a new house.

So we had to rent and pay a mortgage for over a year. And two months before it all cleared up, the housing crisis hit and our house was worth half of what we owed.

All because some illegal.

So I’m of the opinion that it’s NOT a victimless crime, we need to deport them all and prevent them from coming here in the first place. And what worked in the past was prosecuting those who employed illegals.

Im willing to give it a shot again.

So stop making partisan accusations. You don’t know me. And you don’t have ESP ;p

 

[Crusader13]

They can choose to not vote. As this is a hypothetical that will never fly here in the US, we can put an imaginary fine on them.

Personally, I think people who choose not to vite should consider moving elsewhere. Democracy isn’t a spectator sport. It’s my opinion that if you’re not educating yourself to vote and then voting, then you’re a welfare queen, expecting the rest of us to take responsibility for keeping everything running smoothly. I have no patience for leeches

LOL...clearly you don't see the bigger issue here. By your rules we would expel many Muslims from the West since a lot of them believe voting is against their scripture (there are passages or dogma to support it - and I can tell you first hand myself and others have used the excuse of being Muslim for not voting and the State immediately stops asking questions and closes the matter).

So no, we ain't the business of expelling significant parts of the population who may have countless personal reasons for not wanting to take part in elections. So long as someone is paying their taxes and following laws they have just as much of a right to be here as you do, even if they chose not to tick a piece of paper on election day.

 

[Vidi]

LOL...clearly you don't see the bigger issue here. By your rules we would expel many Muslims from the West since a lot of them believe voting is against their scripture (there are passages or dogma to support it - and I can tell you first hand myself and others have used the excuse of being Muslim for not voting and the State immediately stops asking questions and closes the matter).

So no, we ain't the business of expelling significant parts of the population who may have countless personal reasons for not wanting to take part in elections. So long as someone is paying their taxes and following laws they have just as much of a right to be here as you do, even if they chose not to tick a piece of paper on election day.

There’s a bigger picture where we actually want people to be lazy? To let others do all the work?

Sorry, that’s not for me.

I take Jordan Peterson’s approach. Individual responsibility , family responsibility, community responsibility. In that order.

Also, please don’t put words in my mouth. I never said anyone should be expelled. I said they should consider moving elsewhere. They should consider is not force expulsion

 

[Moderate Right]

Civics my friend.

The states do not have the power nor the right to set immigration policy. That power is strictly in the Federal government.

Sanctuary cities are a joke. All the means is they’re not going to jump up to use state resources to do the work of the federal government.

And you will find very few “lefties” as opposed to illegal immigration as I am.

Not because of some abstract nonsense but because an illegal stole my SSN and used it to work under my name. Then the IRS came to me looking for back taxes. They even froze my bank account. I had to track down the company that I was supposedly employed by and when they found out they had an illegal working for them, they let him go, then suddenly lost his home address for the cops to go get him on identity theft.

Though I was legally out of trouble in under a month. The IRS kept a lien on my home and my bank account frozen for 18 months. My wife and I were just about to move two hours away for a promotion she got. Of course, we couldn’t sell our house until the IRS took off the lien and all my money was frozen so I couldn’t access it to put a down payment on a new house.

So we had to rent and pay a mortgage for over a year. And two months before it all cleared up, the housing crisis hit and our house was worth half of what we owed.

All because some illegal.

So I’m of the opinion that it’s NOT a victimless crime, we need to deport them all and prevent them from coming here in the first place. And what worked in the past was prosecuting those who employed illegals.

Im willing to give it a shot again.

So stop making partisan accusations. You don’t know me. And you don’t have ESP ;p

I'd have to say that your personal experience has given you a prejudice toward the employer angle. Hey, if I actually thought that going after employers would actually work I'd be all for it. I'm not against it because of some blind partisanship where I buy what the right feeds me. But, I know from over 60 years of living that that is a fool's errand, just as cracking down on paying under the table is a fool's errand. But, I'd have to say that part of your post proves my point in that when that employer found out they had an illegal working for them using your identity (I'm sure it wasn't Earth shattering news to them) the employee just disappeared and so did the employee's address. Even if they had given out the address to the feds, the address would have been either nonexistent or the place would be found empty. And, all the employer had to do was show that they had no idea that their employee was using a fake identity and it would have been up to law enforcement to prove that the employer actually knew. That's just one example of why going after employers is a fool's errand and won't work. I already explained to you how the large farms out here work.

 

[Vidi]

I'd have to say that your personal experience has given you a prejudice toward the employer angle. Hey, if I actually thought that going after employers would actually work I'd be all for it. I'm not against it because of some blind partisanship where I buy what the right feeds me. But, I know from over 60 years of living that that is a fool's errand, just as cracking down on paying under the table is a fool's errand. But, I'd have to say that part of your post proves my point in that when that employer found out they had an illegal working for them using your identity (I'm sure it wasn't Earth shattering news to them) the employee just disappeared and so did the employee's address. Even if they had given out the address to the feds, the address would have been either nonexistent or the place would be found empty. And, all the employer had to do was show that they had no idea that their employee was using a fake identity and it would have been up to law enforcement to prove that the employer actually knew. That's just one example of why going after employers is a fool's errand and won't work. I already explained to you how the large farms out here work.

You’re not wrong about large farms but that could be fixed with a proper migrant worker visa program.

Im still of the opinion that if we had a fully funded proper verification system, with the threat of fines or prosecution behind it, employers wouldn’t hire illegals unless the illegal is committing fraud ( further fraud, as far as I am concerned they commit fraud every day they remain here without permission. They don’t just break our laws when they cross the border, they break our laws daily by remaining ) personally, I think that’s a far better expense than a wall.

I guess we will have to agree to disagree on that one.

 

[Crusader13]

There’s a bigger picture where we actually want people to be lazy? To let others do all the work?

Sorry, that’s not for me.

I take Jordan Peterson’s approach. Individual responsibility , family responsibility, community responsibility. In that order.

Also, please don’t put words in my mouth. I never said anyone should be expelled. I said they should consider moving elsewhere. They should consider is not force expulsion

I'm all for personal personibility as well, but then again I also think we need things like welfare, police, and other general services to accommodate for every possible scenario. A system that doesn't serve everyone equally serves no-one. If people don't want to vote they should still be accommodated for, just like we accommodate people who choose not to live healthy or get off their ass and work.

Also, I agree with your order of responsibility too. Individual responsibility comes first. That means living up to your own personal values and morals first. You have a responsibility to ensure your actions live up to your own standards and make you happy. Voting when you dont personally agree with the system or any of the candidates goes against that - like I said there are many cases where one might feel voting is against their religious beliefs. It is not feasible to force them to take part. The State sees that as well, which is why the laws and fines around failing to vote are hardly ever enforced and can be avoided with little to no effort. But that doesn't make it OK. The State knows laws like this have the potential to impede on other people's personal expressions. It needs to be abolished before it gets abused.

 

[Vidi]

I'm all for personal personibility as well, but then again I also think we need things like welfare, police, and other general services to accommodate for every possible scenario. A system that doesn't serve everyone equally serves no-one. If people don't want to vote they should still be accommodated for, just like we accommodate people who choose not to live healthy or get off their ass and work.

Also, I agree with your order of responsibility too. Individual responsibility comes first. That means living up to your own personal values and morals first. You have a responsibility to ensure your actions live up to your own standards and make you happy. Voting when you dont personally agree with the system or any of the candidates goes against that - like I said there are many cases where one might feel voting is against their religious beliefs. It is not feasible to force them to take part. The State sees that as well, which is why the laws and fines around failing to vote are hardly ever enforced and can be avoided with little to no effort. But that doesn't make it OK. The State knows laws like this have the potential to impede on other people's personal expressions. It needs to be abolished before it gets abused.

I am a big fan of Jordan Peterson. I strongly urge people to look at his videos on YouTube and check out his book.

He have been vilified as an alt-right spokesman but ignore all that crap. Just a bunch of SJWs who don’t like it when people don’t just bow their heads and agree.

Peterson came to be known for his opposition to compelled speech. I agree with him, but I don’t believe that mandatory voting IS compelled speech.

I understand why some would think it is, I just disagree.

 

[augustus]

It sounds like the most unAmerican thing I've heard since Obama tried to fine us for not buying into his Obamacare. We do what we want. We are free Americans. I would never tolerate being told that I must do something. Of course you want to dance you pay the fiddler but we are born free and as long as I live I will fight to keep it that way.

 

[Casper]

That problem could be fixed by including "none of the above" for each ballot position.

Agree, I could have used that choice in 2016.

 

[Vidi]

It sounds like the most unAmerican thing I've heard since Obama tried to fine us for not buying into his Obamacare. We do what we want. We are free Americans. I would never tolerate being told that I must do something. Of course you want to dance you pay the fiddler but we are born free and as long as I live I will fight to keep it that way.

I would argue that every law is in some way a restriction of individual freedom. We trade bits and pieces of our freedom in order to preserve society.

But, you made a great statement. If you want to dance, you pay the fiddler. I love this statement!

What if instead of looking at mandatory voting as a forced act, we looked at it as a civic duty, a kind of non monetary tax. One of the ways we pay the fiddler.

 

[Moderate Right]

You’re not wrong about large farms but that could be fixed with a proper migrant worker visa program.

Im still of the opinion that if we had a fully funded proper verification system, with the threat of fines or prosecution behind it, employers wouldn’t hire illegals unless the illegal is committing fraud ( further fraud, as far as I am concerned they commit fraud every day they remain here without permission. They don’t just break our laws when they cross the border, they break our laws daily by remaining ) personally, I think that’s a far better expense than a wall.

I guess we will have to agree to disagree on that one.

Your solution is to just make everyone legal.