A
Arkansan
Guest
It’s generally expected that when one challenges something said by another person, that one has some sort of counter-argument to what they’ve said.Arkansan:
The point is I do not have to.
Black voter registration effort launched at ‘Black Panther’ screenings
- Status
H
Hereiam
Guest
And this threatens your political paradigm, why?
N
niceatheist
Guest
I’ve given my counterargument. The exercising of one’s liberties in a lawful and peaceful manner requires no justification at all.
T
Theo520
Guest
No it doesn’t. The opposition should just employ similar tactics to increase their votes, that’s the appropriate response.
However, I do find it disconcerting that the Dem constituency cares so little that they must be herded into participating in the political process. The opposition wishes it was of their own volition.
Last edited:
N
niceatheist
Guest
Well, I guess first one would have to assume that these voters are naturally Democrats. That would be an error, I think. In general, there’s a pretty vast sea of eligible voters who don’t vote at all, and while the reasons may be varied, my reading on it suggests apathy is the bigger part.niceatheist:
No it doesn’t. The opposition should just employ similar tactics to increase their votes, that’s the appropriate response.
However, I do find it disconcerting that the Dem constituency cares so little that they must be herded into participating in the political process. The opposition wishes it was of their own volition.
Now, I think apathy in minority communities is probably a bit more complex than “A bunch of white guys always get elected, so our vote doesn’t count”, but I suspect that some degree of apathy and disinterest is probably at play, and considering nearly 40% of eligible voters didn’t even vote in the last election, that suggests a mighty big prize for whichever party can motivate any significant portion of these non-voters to show up on election day.
I’ve never understood apathy myself, and I grew up in a religious community that was vehemently anti-voting. I remember my first time voting as being one of the most empowered moments of my life, as I stuck it to my family’s silly religious beliefs, and made my voice heard. Yes, I just one of millions of votes, but as you can see from the tight margins Trump won by in some states, well, I think if you can see the value to Democrats of vote registration drives. And maybe it’s time the Republicans thought the same, because if they don’t start convincing more minority voters to vote for their candidates, then maybe not in 2020 or even 2024, but after that, they’re going to find themselves at an electoral disadvantage.
T
Theo520
Guest
Apathy is a valid concern for the democratic process, it’s far to easy to influence their votes.
N
niceatheist
Guest
If you can get the apathetic voter off the couch at all. There’s a stubborn 35% of US voters who just won’t vote. A lot of them are minorities, but there are plenty of white non-voters in that group as well.
And the US isn’t alone. Many of the more stable democracies have seen voter turnouts drop, so it isn’t just an American problem. It’s a democracy problem.
J
JulianN
Guest
A lot of white people voted irresponsibly in the last election—I’m not sure what your point is.
E
exnihilo
Guest
Yep. By law the DMV has to ask you to register. You have to go out of your way to not be registered. Heck plenty of illegals are registered.
J
JetteZ
Guest
You keep using the term racist in a way that is not the actual definition of the word.
Even if I said it, which I didn’t, “only whites can be racist” isn’t racist unless I am non-white and am putting down the white race or I am white and think that racism is a superior trait of being white.
Racism is defined by superiority. If the race isn’t claiming superiority, it’s not racism. It might be some other ism, it might be inequitable treatment, but it is not, per the definition of the word, racism.
Even if I said it, which I didn’t, “only whites can be racist” isn’t racist unless I am non-white and am putting down the white race or I am white and think that racism is a superior trait of being white.
Racism is defined by superiority. If the race isn’t claiming superiority, it’s not racism. It might be some other ism, it might be inequitable treatment, but it is not, per the definition of the word, racism.
J
JetteZ
Guest
Plenty of people don’t drive.
E
exnihilo
Guest
Do they not get IDs either? Hard to be a productive and informed member of society without an ID.
B
billsherman
Guest
The 15th, 19th, 23rd, 24th, and 26th Amendments respectfully disagree with you.
Believe it or not, there is no right more heavily protected in the Constitution than voting. Even speech and gun ownership just got one lousy Amendment. Voting gets five specific Amendments, and several others have been extended to voting by law or courts.
ANY argument to prevent someone from voting for ANY reason should be immediately seen as suspicious.
A
Arkansan
Guest
You have failed to make any argument for why this set up is a good thing.
N
niceatheist
Guest
And nobody has to. Voting is a guaranteed right. Nobody has to justify they’re encouraging of getting more people registered to vote to you or anyone else. It is a constitutionally guaranteed right in the United States. No one has to offer a positive justification for it any more than they have to offer a positive justification for speaking their mind in the public square. These are guaranteed liberties, and as another pointed out, in the US, voting is probably the single most heavily defended civil liberty (largely because of a long history of trying to limit certain groups from voting).
So explain why anyone has to explain to you why it’s a good idea. Do you think I need some sort of justification for speaking my mind, or expecting equal protection before the law, or having the freedom to worship at whatever church or temple I choose?
J
JulianN
Guest
For those who are questioning the morality of targeted drives:
http://www.usccb.org/issues-and-act...ip/voter-education-and-voter-registration.cfm
http://www.usccb.org/issues-and-act...ip/voter-education-and-voter-registration.cfm
A
Arkansan
Guest
No one is obliged to discuss this at all. It’s just generally good form to provide reasons when one specifically expresses one’s disagreement with another. Obviously, you’re free to continue expressing the fact that you disagree with me for reasons you can’t or won’t rationally justify, but such expressions will continue to be non-arguments.
You also have failed to make any argument for why this set up is a good thing.
J
JulianN
Guest
I think the bishops did it nicely. No need for me to improve on that.
D
dixieagle
Guest
How about: voting is a civic duty, and anything that can help eligible citizens register so that they can participate in elections is a good thing. Period.
N
niceatheist
Guest
I don’t think it’s good form at all to try to have to justify the use or encouragement of the use of a guaranteed civil liberty. That’s the whole point of a liberty, that it can be used, within the reasonable and minimal limits of the law. Clearly you have some problem with encouraging groups who have traditionally been unrepresented at the polls being encouraged to vote, and that, frankly, raises more questions than trying to assert that somehow voter registration drives need some sort of justification.niceatheist:
No one is obliged to discuss this at all. It’s just generally good form to provide reasons when one specifically expresses one’s disagreement with another. Obviously, you’re free to continue expressing the fact that you disagree with me for reasons you can’t or won’t rationally justify, but such expressions will continue to be non-arguments.
So why is it you don’t like the idea of traditionally underrepresented groups in elections being encouraged to vote? What is it precisely you’re afraid they’ll do?
- Status