There should be an elegibility test for voting

[Dphins4me]

You said that, after clarification. You originally said "We do not have the right to vote."

 
 If someone said Phishfan, show me where the right to vote is given.

Where would you go to show them?

[Phishfan]

Show me where ANY right is given in the Constitution. It is written to explain what rights cannot be taken away. You cannot take away rights unless you already have them.

Why does it not make sense to you? The Constituion does not state any rights, but does state what rights cannot be taken away. So in short you are correct in saying the Constituion does not specifically SAY there is a right to vote. We do have the right to vote though because the Constituion spells out circumstances that do not allow the right to vote to be taken away (and it does say right to vote in the language while spelling that out).

[Dphins4me]

Show me where ANY right is given in the Constitution. It is written to explain what rights cannot be taken away. You cannot take away rights unless you already have them.

Why does it not make sense to you? The Constituion does not state any rights, but does state what rights cannot be taken away. So in short you are correct in saying the Constituion does not specifically SAY there is a right to vote. We do have the right to vote though because the Constituion spells out circumstances that do not allow the right to vote to be taken away (and it does say right to vote in the language while spelling that out).

   Why does it not make sense to you?   

I know the Constitution does not give you any right.  The "Bill of Rights" does that & even that does not give us the "Right to Vote"

Majority of people that you talk to believe that the US Constitution gives them the "Right to Vote"   It doesn't.  That was all I was saying.  We are not given the right to vote.    So go tell someone they do not have the right to vote & watch them tell you that they do & that the US Constitution provides them that right.

It addresses how you cannot deny someone that right, but no where is that right given.

Watch them talk about Amendments that say you cannot deny someone that right, but the simple fact is.  The right is never given.  We have the right of freedom of speech,  freedom of religion, the right to keep and bear arms, the freedom of assembly,  freedom to petition Etc... However, there is nothing saying " we have the right to vote"


That is all I was saying.

[Phishfan]

I got you a long time ago, and have said so. I am just now thinking that you got my point.

By they way my example of pissing isn't lame. We of course have societal rules. I cannot piss wherever I like, but I definitely have the right to piss. Just like I cannot go into Wal-Mart to cast a legal vote, but I do have the right to vote.

[MyGodWearsAHoodie]

 
 If someone said Phishfan, show me where the right to vote is given.

Where would you go to show them?

Article I

Section 2. The House of Representatives shall be composed of members chosen every second year by the people of the several states, and the electors in each state shall have the qualifications requisite for electors of the most numerous branch of the state legislature.

Amendment XVII

The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each state, elected by the people thereof, for six years; and each Senator shall have one vote. The electors in each state shall have the qualifications requisite for electors of the most numerous branch of the state legislatures. (Prior to this amendment state legislators; not the people elected senators)


Amendment 14 Section 2. Representatives shall be apportioned among the several states according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each state, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the executive and judicial officers of a state, or the members of the legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such state, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such state.

Amendment XV

Section 1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.

Amendment XIX

The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of sex.

Amendment XXIII

Section 1. The District constituting the seat of government of the United States shall appoint in such manner as the Congress may direct:

A number of electors of President and Vice President equal to the whole number of Senators and Representatives in Congress to which the District would be entitled if it were a state, but in no event more than the least populous state; they shall be in addition to those appointed by the states, but they shall be considered, for the purposes of the election of President and Vice President, to be electors appointed by a state; and they shall meet in the District and perform such duties as provided by the twelfth article of amendment.

Amendment XXIV

Section 1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote in any primary or other election for President or Vice President, for electors for President or Vice President, or for Senator or Representative in Congress, shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any state by reason of failure to pay any poll tax or other tax.

Amendment XXVI

Section 1. The right of citizens of the United States, who are 18 years of age or older, to vote, shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any state on account of age.

[Dphins4me]

Article I

Section 2. The House of Representatives shall be composed of members chosen every second year by the people of the several states, and the electors in each state shall have the qualifications requisite for electors of the most numerous branch of the state legislature.

Amendment XVII

The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each state, elected by the people thereof, for six years; and each Senator shall have one vote. The electors in each state shall have the qualifications requisite for electors of the most numerous branch of the state legislatures. (Prior to this amendment state legislators; not the people elected senators)


Amendment 14 Section 2. Representatives shall be apportioned among the several states according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each state, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the executive and judicial officers of a state, or the members of the legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such state, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such state.

Amendment XV

Section 1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.

Amendment XIX

The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of sex.

Amendment XXIII

Section 1. The District constituting the seat of government of the United States shall appoint in such manner as the Congress may direct:

A number of electors of President and Vice President equal to the whole number of Senators and Representatives in Congress to which the District would be entitled if it were a state, but in no event more than the least populous state; they shall be in addition to those appointed by the states, but they shall be considered, for the purposes of the election of President and Vice President, to be electors appointed by a state; and they shall meet in the District and perform such duties as provided by the twelfth article of amendment.

Amendment XXIV

Section 1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote in any primary or other election for President or Vice President, for electors for President or Vice President, or for Senator or Representative in Congress, shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any state by reason of failure to pay any poll tax or other tax.

Amendment XXVI

Section 1. The right of citizens of the United States, who are 18 years of age or older, to vote, shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any state on account of age.

Same thing as before.  No right to vote.

Talks about how you cannot deny someone the right to vote based on race, sex etc..., but there is nothing in any of those that says we have a right to vote.

In the BOR it lays out our rights are citizens of the US & there is not right to vote in it.

[MyGodWearsAHoodie]

Same thing as before.  No right to vote.

Talks about how you cannot deny someone the right to vote based on race, sex etc..., but there is nothing in any of those that says we have a right to vote.

In the BOR it lays out our rights are citizens of the US & there is not right to vote in it.

reread the first section that says "choosen by the people"  that is voting. 

[Dphins4me]

reread the first section that says "choosen by the people"  that is voting. 

  I know, but who are the people? 

   When the Constitution was written, only white male property owners had the vote.   Back then that was who the people were.     Today, its everyone over 18 & a US citizen.  Tomorrow it could(should) be something else.

Try as you might, the Constitution does not give us the right to vote.   No where will you find that it says "You have the Right to vote"

It will say, you cannot deny someone the right to vote based on whatever.  The BOR lays out our rights as citizens & voting is not one of them.

[MyGodWearsAHoodie]

  I know, but who are the people? 

   When the Constitution was written, only white male property owners had the vote.   Back then that was who the people were.     Today, its everyone over 18 & a US citizen.  Tomorrow it could(should) be something else.

Try as you might, the Constitution does not give us the right to vote.   No where will you find that it says "You have the Right to vote"

It will say, you cannot deny someone the right to vote based on whatever.  The BOR lays out our rights as citizens & voting is not one of them.

Have you ever taken a class on the Constitution?  Did you pass?

The constitution clearly states the only reason you can deny someone the right to vote is if you commit a felony.  If the right can only be denied under one specific situation than it is a right. 

[run_to_win]

Well since our schools are not turning out masses of "more educated" people,

It's not in their long term interest.   Schools are funded by the number of students they house, not the quality of education they provide.

"Leave no child behind" is just another way of saying "hold them all back to the pace of the least motivated/lowest achieving."  That's just the latest example.  Google "A Nation at Risk: if you're not already familiar with it.

especially in poor areas which just happen to have a higher percentage of minorities, you would see less of them being able to vote.

I'm not sure exactly what Frimp meant by "eligibility test" but I don't see it having much to do with public education.  I think you'd have to do a lot more than fix public education to help the people in the video that he was specifically referring to. 

I guess this appeals to you. You have a serious problem with anything involving race, since it is one of the fastest issues you consistently bring up. It seems to always be on your mind.

You're right.  I have a serious problem assuming people are different solely based on skin color. 

[bsmooth]

It's not in their long term interest.   Schools are funded by the number of students they house, not the quality of education they provide.

"Leave no child behind" is just another way of saying "hold them all back to the pace of the least motivated/lowest achieving."  That's just the latest example.  Google "A Nation at Risk: if you're not already familiar with it.

I'm not sure exactly what Frimp meant by "eligibility test" but I don't see it having much to do with public education.  I think you'd have to do a lot more than fix public education to help the people in the video that he was specifically referring to. 

You're right.  I have a serious problem assuming people are different solely based on skin color. 

I am familiar with No Child and the fact it started in Houston while Bush was govenor. Also it has come out that they schools were lying to make the program seem more effective, but it is too late as it has become entrenched into our schools like a leech.

[Frimp]

I am familiar with No Child and the fact it started in Houston while Bush was govenor. Also it has come out that they schools were lying to make the program seem more effective, but it is too late as it has become entrenched into our schools like a leech.

While the No Child left behind act failed big time, I'm surprised that you of all people were against it. Was it just because a Republican put it out? Most conservatives hated it. But, it goes well with the new deal, and the great society. Bush did that hoping that he could appeal to the entitlement mind set of liberals.

[bsmooth]

While the No Child left behind act failed big time, I'm surprised that you of all people were against it. Was it just because a Republican put it out? Most conservatives hated it. But, it goes well with the new deal, and the great society. Bush did that hoping that he could appeal to the entitlement mind set of liberals.

The teachers union was against it from day one and they are about as liberal as you get.

[Frimp]

The teachers union was against it from day one and they are about as liberal as you get.

I'll take your word on that, as I don't know much about unions. But, we agree that it was a bad bill. Why do we agree on that?

[bsmooth]

I'll take your word on that, as I don't know much about unions. But, we agree that it was a bad bill. Why do we agree on that?

Because it took our underachieving schools and actually made them worse. YEAH US.