American Politics XI: No Moe Roe(Likely, Anyway)

[Ifreann]

Did he become a citizen? He was born in Kyrgyzstan and if he didn’t become a citizen then no. If he is a citizen then yes.

I believe he did become a citizen. I don’t think someone who committed a terrorist act should be casting a ballot.

What about Robert Hanssen a traitor whose actions compromised the names of KGB agents working secretly for the U.S., some of whom were executed for their betrayal. He is now serving a life sentence at ADX Florence.

Here's a thought. Instead of listing infamous criminals and asking if universal rights should include them, why don't you just make an argument in favour of disenfranchising prisoners? Don't bother listing all the bad people you think shouldn't be allowed to vote, just explain why you think that bad people in general should not be allowed to vote.

[Untecna]

Disenfranchising those who we consider to be the scum and the lowly of life, no matter which side you are on, is wrong. Yes, humans do bad things all the time, but shouldn't they at least be able to cast a vote as to who they want, simply, to be President? It's not something that will suddenly make them worse or release them from prison.

[The Jamesian Republic]

Disenfranchising those who we consider to be the scum and the lowly of life, no matter which side you are on, is wrong. Yes, humans do bad things all the time, but shouldn't they at least be able to cast a vote as to who they want, simply, to be President? It's not something that will suddenly make them worse or release them from prison.

This ^

[San Lumen]

I believe he did become a citizen. I don’t think someone who committed a terrorist act should be casting a ballot.

What about Robert Hanssen a traitor whose actions compromised the names of KGB agents working secretly for the U.S., some of whom were executed for their betrayal. He is now serving a life sentence at ADX Florence.

Yes. Though how he isn’t dead because of that I don’t know.

Wow. That is an extreme position. To avoid the death penalty, Hanssen pleaded guilty to 14 counts of espionage and one of conspiracy to commit espionage.

I believe he did become a citizen. I don’t think someone who committed a terrorist act should be casting a ballot.

What about Robert Hanssen a traitor whose actions compromised the names of KGB agents working secretly for the U.S., some of whom were executed for their betrayal. He is now serving a life sentence at ADX Florence.

Here's a thought. Instead of listing infamous criminals and asking if universal rights should include them, why don't you just make an argument in favour of disenfranchising prisoners? Don't bother listing all the bad people you think shouldn't be allowed to vote, just explain why you think that bad people in general should not be allowed to vote.

Part of being sentenced is a loss of some rights. Once your released it gets restored. I see no reason why someone facing a life sentence with zero chance of it ever getting overturned should get any say whatsoever in government.

[Ifreann]

I just said that I know you don't believe in universal suffrage. Do you think that detailing who you want to disenfranchise and when will change something here?

Should the traitor who I mentioned above now serving a life sentence have the right to vote according to you?

I am going to tell you once that I believe in universal suffrage. I believe that people who live under a government and are subject to its laws should get to vote. If you feel the need to ask this question again but in reference to a different criminal, just refer to this post.

---

Here's a thought. Instead of listing infamous criminals and asking if universal rights should include them, why don't you just make an argument in favour of disenfranchising prisoners? Don't bother listing all the bad people you think shouldn't be allowed to vote, just explain why you think that bad people in general should not be allowed to vote.

Part of being sentenced is a loss of some rights. Once your released it gets restored.

Stating that people do lose rights when convicted of a crime is no explanation for why they should lose the right to vote. Why that right? Why only when they are in prison?

I see no reason why someone facing a life sentence with zero chance of it ever getting overturned should get any say whatsoever in government.

That limit on your perception does not seem to me a just reason to limit someone else's rights. Consider that the government directly controls almost everything about the lives of prisoners in their custody. It seems to me perfectly reasonable that a person under the control of a government should, in turn, have control over that government. Otherwise you're just creating an underclass of people who can be abused without recourse.

[Page]

I believe he did become a citizen. I don’t think someone who committed a terrorist act should be casting a ballot.

What about Robert Hanssen a traitor whose actions compromised the names of KGB agents working secretly for the U.S., some of whom were executed for their betrayal. He is now serving a life sentence at ADX Florence.

So if one's crime is bad enough, should they lose their freedom of religion too? What about their right to not be subject to cruel and unusual punishment? You can make a practical argument for not allowing prisoners to bear arms, but that has to do with public safety. Letting prisoners vote, much like letting them practice whatever religion they wish, does not endanger anyone.

And if you are so insistent on traitors and terrorists not being allowed to vote, but perhaps less so about convicted drug dealers and tax dodgers, how do you think we can draw a fair line to determine who gets disenfranchised? Wouldn't it be easier to just allow everyone to vote?

And the whole notion of "this person is so bad they shouldn't get ____" can certainly be extrapolated to any degree. Maybe you will say they don't deserve solid food and should have to eat some nutrient paste. Or that they shouldn't get to read books. Where does it stop?

[Washington Resistance Army]

You can make a practical argument for not allowing prisoners to bear arms, but that has to do with public safety. Letting prisoners vote, much like letting them practice whatever religion they wish, does not endanger anyone.

Do we live in the same universe

People voting and putting insane nutcases like MTG in office is drastically more dangerous than any one person bearing arms

[The Jamesian Republic]

I would also like to relate to this quote I adapted from Marx’s quote about guns:

Under no pretext should votes and the rights to cast them be surrendered; any attempt to disenfranchise the people must be frustrated, by force if necessary.

[Page]

People voting and putting insane nutcases like MTG in office is drastically more dangerous than any one person bearing arms

If there are enough prisoners to sway the results of a national election, it's probably for the best. A decent society should not even approach an extent of incarceration that the prisoner vote is anything more than a rounding error.

[Ifreann]

You can make a practical argument for not allowing prisoners to bear arms, but that has to do with public safety. Letting prisoners vote, much like letting them practice whatever religion they wish, does not endanger anyone.

Do we live in the same universe

People voting and putting insane nutcases like MTG in office is drastically more dangerous than any one person bearing arms

I believe that what Page is getting at is that disarming prisoners is kind of a necessary step in imprisoning them.

[The Alma Mater]

Did he become a citizen? He was born in Kyrgyzstan and if he didn’t become a citizen then no. If he is a citizen then yes.

I believe he did become a citizen. I don’t think someone who committed a terrorist act should be casting a ballot.

What about Robert Hanssen a traitor whose actions compromised the names of KGB agents working secretly for the U.S., some of whom were executed for their betrayal. He is now serving a life sentence at ADX Florence.

What about San Lumen, who actively argued in favour of letting hundreds of thousands of people die just so they could watch Broadway ?
See the problem with these "moral" questions ?

[The Jamesian Republic]

You can make a practical argument for not allowing prisoners to bear arms, but that has to do with public safety. Letting prisoners vote, much like letting them practice whatever religion they wish, does not endanger anyone.

Do we live in the same universe

People voting and putting insane nutcases like MTG in office is drastically more dangerous than any one person bearing arms

Then find another person who is way better and get people to vote for them.

[Washington Resistance Army]

Do we live in the same universe

People voting and putting insane nutcases like MTG in office is drastically more dangerous than any one person bearing arms

I believe that what Page is getting at is that disarming prisoners is kind of a necessary step in imprisoning them.

Sure, and given they're imprisoned they should also have no say on governance. They can have their rights restored when their sentence is done.

[The United Penguin Commonwealth]

Can we talk about the supreme court hearing? In what world is questioning someone on their faith something that should be done here? Lindsay Graham literally asked her whether she could properly judge Catholics because she was Protestant. Somehow, that wasn’t the most ridiculous thing. I’m not sure why more people aren’t talking about this.

[Ifreann]

I believe that what Page is getting at is that disarming prisoners is kind of a necessary step in imprisoning them.

Sure, and given they're imprisoned they should also have no say on governance.

Why not? I don't think that we should be imprisoning people in general, but leaving that aside, I don't see why it's necessary to disenfranchise people who are imprisoned. If prisoners had guns they would shoot the guards. If prisoners had the vote they would...what? Outvote everyone not in prison?

[Ifreann]

Can we talk about the supreme court hearing? In what world is questioning someone on their faith something that should be done here? Lindsay Graham literally asked her whether she could properly judge Catholics because she was Protestant. Somehow, that wasn’t the most ridiculous thing. I’m not sure why more people aren’t talking about this.

I think questions like that are pretty normal.

Well, they're really weird, but they happen all the time.

[The United Penguin Commonwealth]

Can we talk about the supreme court hearing? In what world is questioning someone on their faith something that should be done here? Lindsay Graham literally asked her whether she could properly judge Catholics because she was Protestant. Somehow, that wasn’t the most ridiculous thing. I’m not sure why more people aren’t talking about this.

I think questions like that are pretty normal.

Well, they're really weird, but they happen all the time.

It’s insane that those are normal. The constitution explicitly states that’s not supposed to happen. I wonder what the reaction would be to “If you’re a Catholic, can you fairly judge a Muslim?”

[Nora Xent]

I think questions like that are pretty normal.

Well, they're really weird, but they happen all the time.

It’s insane that those are normal. The constitution explicitly states that’s not supposed to happen. I wonder what the reaction would be to “If you’re a Catholic, can you fairly judge a Muslim?”

Did we ask Chief Justice John Robert 'If you're a catholic, can you fairly judge a protestant?' or really any of the Catholics on the supreme court.

[American Legionaries]

Once someone leaves prison they should be able to vote.



Should the Boston Marathon bomber get to cast a ballot?

Did he become a citizen? He was born in Kyrgyzstan and if he didn’t become a citizen then no. If he is a citizen then yes.

Non citizens living in the U.S. should get to vote too.

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

Disenfranchising those who we consider to be the scum and the lowly of life, no matter which side you are on, is wrong. Yes, humans do bad things all the time, but shouldn't they at least be able to cast a vote as to who they want, simply, to be President? It's not something that will suddenly make them worse or release them from prison.

This ^

I hope you guys will be happy with your principles when the Trumpists hangs America from the gallows in 2025.

[Nora Xent]

This ^

I hope you guys will be happy with your principles when the Trumpists hangs America from the gallows in 2025.

'Better to die with principles than to live as a spineless coward.' -Abraham Lincoln probably.

[American Legionaries]

It’s insane that those are normal. The constitution explicitly states that’s not supposed to happen. I wonder what the reaction would be to “If you’re a Catholic, can you fairly judge a Muslim?”

Did we ask Chief Justice John Robert 'If you're a catholic, can you fairly judge a protestant?' or really any of the Catholics on the supreme court.

"The Dogma lives loudly in you..."

[Ifreann]

I think questions like that are pretty normal.

Well, they're really weird, but they happen all the time.

It’s insane that those are normal. The constitution explicitly states that’s not supposed to happen. I wonder what the reaction would be to “If you’re a Catholic, can you fairly judge a Muslim?”

Every Christian on the Supreme Court is a Catholic, so similar questions probably did happen.

---

This ^

I hope you guys will be happy with your principles when the Trumpists hangs America from the gallows in 2025.

What do you think you would be saving by eroding what little democracy America has?

[Nora Xent]

It’s insane that those are normal. The constitution explicitly states that’s not supposed to happen. I wonder what the reaction would be to “If you’re a Catholic, can you fairly judge a Muslim?”

Every Christian on the Supreme Court is a Catholic, so similar questions probably did happen.

---

I hope you guys will be happy with your principles when the Trumpists hangs America from the gallows in 2025.

What do you think you would be saving by eroding what little democracy America has?

[Citation needed for the 'every Christian on the supreme court is a catholic']

[The United Penguin Commonwealth]

It’s insane that those are normal. The constitution explicitly states that’s not supposed to happen. I wonder what the reaction would be to “If you’re a Catholic, can you fairly judge a Muslim?”

Every Christian on the Supreme Court is a Catholic, so similar questions probably did happen.

I doubt it. Especially that they were asked by anyone in the government.