Asymmetrical Warfare

[_SteelHead]

Any one arguing that a group fighting to continue the practice of human chattel slavery held the moral high ground - well their moral compass points south.

[_Gunnar]

Ajax, would you support a constitutional amendment making slavery legal again?

How about an amendment restricting the right to vote to white males only?

[_canpakes]

Ajax, would you support a constitutional amendment making slavery legal again?

How about an amendment restricting the right to vote to white males only?

Remember, might makes right.

[_ajax18]

Ajax, would you support a constitutional amendment making slavery legal again?

No, I just think according to the constitution this should have been a decision left to the states not the federal government. Slavery would have been gone before the 21st century anyway. Illegal immigrant labor has proven to be cheaper and more attractive to employers.

How about an amendment restricting the right to vote to white males only?

No but I would stipulate that the right to vote belongs only to taxpaying citizens. That was the original purpose of only allowing land owners to vote in the past.

[_Chap]

Slavery would have been gone before the 21st century anyway. Illegal immigrant labor has proven to be cheaper and more attractive to employers.

Um, remind me when it was that US employers had a choice between the costs and benefits of simultaneously available slave labour and 'illegal immigrant labour'? If they didn't ever have that choice, your confident statement seems to be based on no more than imagination.

the right to vote belongs only to taxpaying citizens

OK. Because EVERYBODY pays taxes whenever they make a purchase in a store, don't they? Oh, you meant income tax. So what is your justification for that limitation, exactly?

[_SteelHead]

After the last 3 years of social media, while I am not in favor of taxes qualifying someone for franchise, I do think ignorance should disqualify voters.

I propose that all voters should face 20 questions about "news" articles before qualifying to vote. 10 are left leaning, and 10 right leaning. Of the 10 per slant, five are fake news and five real. Anyone that fails to discern fake news from real news more than 50% of the time looses their franchise for the year. You have 30 minute to take the test, and are allowed to use search engines to help in the determination of fake vs real.

[_Chap]

I would stipulate that the right to vote belongs only to taxpaying citizens.

Another point. The writers of the Declaration of Independence said:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed ...

My emphasis. Notice that it is the consent of the governed, not of the tax-payers that is specified here. Not just those of the governed who pay taxes.

[_subgenius]

...

No but I would stipulate that the right to vote belongs only to taxpaying citizens. That was the original purpose of only allowing land owners to vote in the past.

I do not think you are using the word "stipulate" correctly in this sentence and sentiment.
But many 16 year olds pay taxes..as do most people shopping...but maybe I misunderstand what you mean by "citizen" since I tend to use literal sources, like the US Constitution, for such defintions.
But if tax payer is a qualification, does that mean using exmeptions and deuctions to zero our your tax bill means "no vote"? and what if you get a refund, do you have to give your vote to someone who actually paid taxes?
Forgive me, but I often get confused when a person puts forth a Ross Perot-esque governmental policy.

[_Gunnar]

I do not think you are using the word "stipulate" correctly in this sentence and sentiment.
But many 16 year olds pay taxes..as do most people shopping...but maybe I misunderstand what you mean by "citizen" since I tend to use literal sources, like the US Constitution, for such defintions.
But if tax payer is a qualification, does that mean using exmeptions and deuctions to zero our your tax bill means "no vote"? and what if you get a refund, do you have to give your vote to someone who actually paid taxes?
Forgive me, but I often get confused when a person puts forth a Ross Perot-esque governmental policy.

I don't often agree with you, subby, but on this issue you are certainly correct, and ajax is ludicrously wrong. Kudus!

[_canpakes]

I don't often agree with you, subby, but on this issue you are certainly correct, and ajax is ludicrously wrong. Kudus!

Yep. Imma gonna give subs the thumbs up for pointing out that the issue is a bit more complex than the ‘solution’ accounts for.