New link in the top of page "IRC Chat".
|Register | Login|
| Active users
| Last Posts
| IRC Chat
| Online users
Ranks | FAQ | XPW | Stats | Color Chart | Photo album
|0 users currently in Debate Shrine.|
|The spirit of Locke lives.|
|*The opinions in this post may change overtime. If I got any facts wrong. Please let me know!*
That is definitely taking rights away. Whatever happed to "Everyone was created equal"?
So does this mean that low class / no class folks living in America have no right to vote? That is horse shit! Horse. Shit.
Eventually the balance of votes will end up having those classes against them. I mean think about this for a moment. Say the high class citizens were to vote on having higher taxes on the low class people in this nation. Let's go deeper: Low class were also involved in an act to give higher taxes to middle to low class citizens.
Now, if I recall correctly. Most of the middle to low class property owners have lost their homes. The high class kept their homes because it was in a very high grade residential area. Meaning the property value would only go up. Meanwhile the mid-low class groups may have had a gas station being built nearby. Or maybe this neighborhood was built next to a power plant. This means that their property value went down. Are higher taxes for this class fair for this? Hell no! They are living in a property value that is only going down in price!
Now think of people living out of these homes! They have absolutely no means in voting! They can't! I feel that everyone has a right to vote.
|To be honest, Thex, I completely agree with you.
The Tea Party, while making the occasional valid point, cooks up some absurd ideas based on classist and racist notions.
The article was the one referring to the 17th amendment, but I think this is more an issue of the 14th, which is pretty much states that the government cannot take away rights and privileges that have been given.
It was also the 14th amendment which the Tea Party-ers (sp?) want to do away with, in that it gives citizenship to those born in the United States. It is their belief that you are not a citizen if you have a parent who is not (or wasn't when you were born). Their main argument in this are "anchor babies," but I can't help but wonder if this is feeding into the birthers' conspiracy theories and trying to have Obama removed.
|Yeah, that will get us back on track. Strip the rights of 40% of the idiots to vote so the rich have a proportionally larger voice than the one their money already gives them.
I don't like to be unreasonable about politics, but fuck the Tea Party. Scalia needs to go fuck a landmine anyway.
See, this is why I try to stay out of political discussion anymore. It pisses me off.
Every citizen of legal age should have the right to vote, even - as much as it pains me to say this - the remarkably stupid ones.
|The Tea Party party is arguing that those who own property in the U.S. have a greater vested interest in what goes on in this country, and that "non-property owners" should be stripped of their right to vote.
In this instance property pretty much refers to land. If you live in an apartment, your voice in government would be silenced.
Several big name conservatives are backing this idea including Supreme Court justice Anthony Scalia, Georgia congressman Paul Broun, and Texas governor Rick Perry.
Now the question remains ... Should the United States repeal the 17th amendment?
Is it true that property-owners should be the only ones with political say?
For those on this board who aren't American, what are the conditions for being able to vote in your country and is property ownership a factor?
Page rendered in 0.267 seconds.