quote:

---

Banning voting for those who have the mental capacity of a child would be a very good idea.

It has been suggested that for a person to get the right to vote they have to pass a test (it would be hard to make said test) which demostrates that they can reason well.

---

quote:

---

Perhaps there should be a law which would prevent the severely intellectually handicapped folks (whose brains operate at the level of children when it comes to confronting certain difficult scientific principles) from voting because they are *underage*! This should include all creationists, anti-Darwinists, and similar scientifically-deprived individuals who are unable to *get it all together* in one head.

---

Forgive me if I offend anyone, but I must respond very forcefully and negatively to this opinion (and those that follow it), even if these opinions were written in jest.

I heard a lot of pundits denigrating the old folks who screwed up their butterfly ballots in Palm Beach County, insisting that we need some kind of "intelligence" test or age test other discrimination barrier at the polls to keep the morons at bay. I, too, wish that more people were well-informed in all sorts of ideas and subjects, including science and politics (not to mention how to use a ballot). However, I absolutely MUST disagree with this line of thinking, for the reasons listed below:

1) "Intelligence" tests, poll taxes and/or property ownership requirements were standards that were used for decades to keep African Americans and other minorities from voting across much of the South (and in other parts of this country). Similar or the same discriminators were used against women.
2) Any standard that restricts persons who do not understand and support science from voting could just as easily be reversed to require a religious test before you can enter any polling place. [I once heard a conservative politician (name escapes me at the moment) who could actually think use this rationale for why he would never vote to outlaw abortions - he correctly surmised that a government that completely outlaws abortion could just as easily turn around and implement different laws that directed mandatory abortions.]
3. If I flame someone with this comment, I beg your pardon, but this demand for exclusivity in the voting booth reeks of fascism (or most other brands of totalitarianism). Who decides who gets to vote? If your way of thinking wins the day, then bully for you, but you've disenfranchised millions of others. If a radical religious-right group of young-earth creationists establishes the standards and bars you from the polls, then you are now among the voiceless (and probably on your way to a concentration camp). Once again, I ask this question from those who would eagerly set up a discriminatory system of suffrage: WHO DECIDES? WHO WRITES THE TEST? Someone may decide that all of our social problems are due to the fact that women vote and remove that choice for us! (There are large factions of social cranks who actually believe this and I'm sure there are a few who frequent this board who would love to silence the voices of women, considering some of the posts I've seen).

As much as I hate seeing the religious right flock to the polls and vote in their favorite idiots, I know that I still have the right to negate one of their votes with mine. I would never dream of taking away their right to vote, because someone could very easily do the same thing to me. This system of checks and balances tilts in wide directions and variations at times, but I believe it works just fine.

Of course, the price of freedom is eternal vigilance. Another cost of freedom is embedded in our willingness to let the common citizen, regardless of opinions or beliefs, decide the direction of our government.

Who decides? Hopefully not some of the fine folks who post these types of opinions on this board, because I may not pass your test and I don't want my rights in your hands.

Bring on the flames...







rubysue

If your head is wax, don't walk in the sun.



Edited by - rubysue on 06/25/2001 22:37:20

quote:

---

3> If my red brake lights appear blue to you, you're going
too fast.

---

You can bet this will get printed up and put on my Jeep! Hmmm, on the other bumper should I put an explanation? Might save time in the long run.
Lisa

Chaos...Confusion...Destruction...My Work Here Is Done

quote:

---

You can bet this will get printed up and put on my Jeep! Hmmm, on the other bumper should I put an explanation? Might save time in the long run.

---

quote:

---

When it comes to laws being reversed, don't you already worry that the law giving you freedom of speech could be reversed to take it away.

Or that the law requireing a fair trial become a law that requires you to have an unfair trial?

How do you know they wont shift the burden of proof towards the defandant?

---

(Jeez, I feel strongly about this topic and can feel that I'm heading into dangerous rant territory - please bear with me again if I offend anyone (or bore them to death), but this advocacy of voter "privilege" through arbitrary "intelligence" exams is an amazingly immature and naive proposition, IMHO).

Anything is possible, of course, as far as our rights are concerned, but I'll explain in a moment some of those rights and how difficult it would be to reverse them given the structure of government in the United States. Your comments, by the way, do absolutely nothing, to justify in any way, shape or form why a discriminatory voting screen or test is desirable. Would you like me to personally make the decision for you regarding your eligibility to vote? Forgive me for saying this (and I'm not certainly not intending this as a personal insult; I'm merely using it as an example of arbitrary judgement), but if I base your voting eligibility strictly on your spelling and grammar skills, you would likely not pass my test! A similar test was used in many southern counties after the Civil War to keep undereducated African-Americans from voting. If I imposed a standard based on other posts I've seen from several visitors to this board and the BABB, I would restrict their voting rights because of their tempers or their advocacy of childish insults as a solution to those with opposing viewpoints or their allegiance to rap music or their insistence on the theory of a steady-state universe. Now, doesn't that make you feel better, to know that I have arbitrarily barred you from exercising a basic human right to decide the fate of a government simply because because you spelled a few words wrong? Now, tell me again who should decide the eligibility of a voter and who will write the test?

Now, here's a summary of voting rights in the USA(American historians and students of constitutional law are excused from further reading; everyone else should take the time on occasion to refamiliarize themselves with the Constitution and its very important amendments or articles, as they are more correctly known):
From Article X1V, ratified in 1866 -
"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." Believe it or not, prior to this amendment, the eligibility of the electorate was strictly at the discretion of the larger of the state legislatures. In some states, only primary property owners were allowed to vote.

From Article XV, ratified in 1870: "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."

From Article XIX, ratified in 1920: "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." Full suffrage, at last!

From Article XXIV, ratified in 1964: 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." This amendment eliminated a loophole that southern states and districts used to deny voting rights to poor African Americans.

From Article XXVI, ratified in 1971: "The right of citizens of the United States, who are eighteen years of age or older, to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of age."

Now, to repeal these articles you need a two-thirds approval in both the House and the Senate AND the approval of the legislatures in 3/4 (38) of the states (simply stated). Only one article to the Constitution has ever been repealed (XVIII - Prohibition of the making, selling and transporting of intoxicating beverages - thank goodness! - a really dumb idea, as we have found out in this country, is trying to legislate morality!).

Now, as to my other rights, I am most grateful to the framers of the Constitution, who shortly after this document's approval in 1787 recognized some serious deficiencies in the immunities granted to individual citizens and articles 1-10 (more popularly known as the Bill of Rights) were ratified in 1789. Here's a link to those rights.

http://www.nara.gov/exhall/charters/billrights/billmain.html

So, am I worried about losing my rights? Not really. I'll begin to worry if enough people get the wrong-headed notions that their values or opinions or beliefs or strategies are the only right ones or the "blessed" ones or the "reasonable" ones. Obviously, in any country where government is made up of people that are capable of ignorance and zealotry (most folks, in other words), vigilance and knowledge of your rights are the keys to freedom!



Sorry this is so long - I hope someone reads it and comes away with a better sense of the historical perspective of our fundamental individual rights. Things are not perfect in the good ol' USA and there are a lot of things that need fixing or changing in our government, but I get a chill up my spine every time I read the Bill of Rights.






rubysue

If your head is wax, don't walk in the sun.



Edited by - rubysue on 06/27/2001 22:26:58

Edited by - rubysue on 06/27/2001 22:28:49

quote:

---

... The issue of who will write the test is a valid one.

To do such a task would be very hard, as there would be so many factors that would have to be taken into consideration, in fact we don't even know if its possible.

---