Can the government require you to have an ID to exercise your rights?

[LetsGoBrandon]

What is true for the UK, is true for the USA in this respect

No it;'s not. In the US we elect individuals. In the UK they elect political parties, who then form governments.

Tell me, if the UK government can change after a general election, why doesn't the US government change ?

The US is not the UK

What makes the US government so special ?

Take my advice. Learn the differences. You are coming off as ignorant and foolish.

 

[Rich2018]

No it;'s not. In the US we elect individuals.

So does the UK.

In the UK they elect political parties, who then form governments.

Nope, you're just showing your ignorance of British politics and the British electoral process

In a British election, a voter is given an ballot containing the NAMES of the candidates (with their party affiliation below or in brackets)

Hence a British voter casts a vote for an INDIVIDUAL, not a party

You should really learn something about what you're posting about, before embarrassing yourself.

The US is not the UK

And the UK is not the USA

BUT, in elections, they are remarkably similar. As you'd know if you had the slightest experience of the British political process - which obviously you don't.

Take my advice. Learn the differences. You are coming off as ignorant and foolish.

Why should anyone take advice from you when clearly you don't know the slightest thing of what you're trying to talk about ?

 

[LetsGoBrandon]

So does the UK.



Nope, you're just showing your ignorance of British politics and the British electoral process

In a British election, a voter is given an ballot containing the NAMES of the candidates (with their party affiliation below or in brackets)

Hence a British voter casts a vote for an INDIVIDUAL, not a party

You should really learn something about what you're posting about, before embarrassing yourself.



And the UK is not the USA

BUT, in elections, they are remarkably similar. As you'd know if you had the slightest experience of the British political process - which obviously you don't.



Why should anyone take advice from you when clearly you don't know the slightest thing of what you're trying to talk about ?

Since you insist on continuing to look foolish, I'll leave you to it.

 

[Rich2018]

Since you insist on continuing to look foolish, I'll leave you to it.

In other words, you've been shown up as not knowing the slightest thing of what you're taking about

You are completely ignorant about the political processes of the UK and USA and your alleged differences

And you surrender when confronted with a couple of facts.

 

[LetsGoBrandon]

And you surrender when confronted with a couple of facts.

No I don't surrender the issue. I just choose not to waste anymore time trying to educate an individual that is not man enough to admit he's wrong.

 

[Rich2018]

No I don't surrender the issue.

Sorry, you already did with your tacit acceptance that you're completely wrong about UK elections and have no clue what you're talking about.

I just choose not to waste anymore time trying to educate an individual that is not man enough to admit he's wrong.

You've already shown you are wrong with your absurd claim about UK elections, and their similarity to US elections (and governments)
What was that crap your were saying about UK voters voting for a party rather than an individual ?

Face it; you know √SFA about politics and have embarrassed yourself with your lack of knowledge.

 

[Fledermaus]

So does the UK.

Yes and no.

Can I vote for a new Prime Minister?​

You can only vote to elect your local MP in a general election. You cannot vote for a new Prime Minister. If you live in the constituency represented by the current Prime Minister you are still only voting for them as your local MP in the next Parliament. This is the same if you live in the constituency of the leader of another political party. You will only be voting for them as your local MP.

 

[devildavid]

So you reject the notion of inalien (or "god given") rights ?
Interesting, as that was a central tenet of the Revolutionary War

"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."

Ring a bell ?

So according to you, if you can't exercise them, you don't have them


But we're talking about rights that the law grants, but are restricted (illegally) at state level
So yes, any legal challenge to such restrictions, would be the denial of the rights that you DO have.

Unless a right is spoken of or written down in a document we have no rights that everyone “just knows”. And if each state doesn’t have to honor them them you really don’t have them in that particular state. Especially if the state explicitly states that the right does not exist within its borders. So, unless the right is declared a federal right, you don’t have it. Just As slaves had no rights in certain states prior to the civil war, despite some fine words in a document that carried no weight in the founding of the country or the creation of its laws.

 

[Rich2018]

Unless a right is spoken of or written down in a document we have no rights that everyone “just knows”. And if each state doesn’t have to honor them them you really don’t have them in that particular state. Especially if the state explicitly states that the right does not exist within its borders. So, unless the right is declared a federal right, you don’t have it. Just As slaves had no rights in certain states prior to the civil war, despite some fine words in a document that carried no weight in the founding of the country or the creation of its laws.

But in this case, we ***ARE*** talking about rights that are written down in law, just that the ability of people to exercise those rights varies from state to state

You said that you don't have any rights that you can't exercise
And that is WRONG

If a state passes a law (or regulation) that prevents you from exercising a right, you can file a lawsuit (to the SCOTUS if necessary) for a denial of your rights
Now you can hardly file a lawsuit for the denial of a right that you don't have in the first place, can you ?

 

[devildavid]

But in this case, we ***ARE*** talking about rights that are written down in law, just that the ability of people to exercise those rights varies from state to state

You said that you don't have any rights that you can't exercise
And that is WRONG

If a state passes a law (or regulation) that prevents you from exercising a right, you can file a lawsuit (to the SCOTUS if necessary) for a denial of your rights
Now you can hardly file a lawsuit for the denial of a right that you don't have in the first place, can you ?

No, we are talking about states rights as being entirely different from federal rights. You can’t win a law suit within a state unless and until if goes to the Supreme Court of the United States. History has demonstrated this fact about our country. Many years can pass before a state law will be challenged and rise to that level. The Declaration of Independence did not confer the same rights to women and slaves as it did to white property owners. It is a document that holds no legal authority, which is where rights actually originate, not from nature. If a state does not grant a right, you do not have that right within that states borders.

 

[Rich2018]

No, we are talking about states rights as being entirely different from federal rights. You can’t win a law suit within a state unless and until if goes to the Supreme Court of the United States. History has demonstrated this fact about our country. Many years can pass before a state law will be challenged and rise to that level. The Declaration of Independence did not confer the same rights to women and slaves as it did to white property owners. It is a document that holds no legal authority, which is where rights actually originate, not from nature. If a state does not grant a right, you do not have that right within that states borders.

No, we are talking about INDIVIDUAL rights as you yourself admitted when you said:

Not when it comes to rights that all Americans should have. We had a civil war to address this, but obviously some still don’t think that it did.

Post#220
All Americans, not all states

No, because you don’t have a right if you can’t exercise it

Post#221
Because YOU don't have a right...
ie you personally, not your state



Don't lie.

 

[Fledermaus]

No, we are talking about INDIVIDUAL rights as you yourself admitted when you said:



Post#220
All Americans, not all states




Post#221
Because YOU don't have a right...
ie you personally, not your state



Don't lie.

Slinging the L word around rather haphazardly.

 

[Rich2018]

Rights given by law can only be taken away by law.

 

[Fledermaus]

Rights given by law can only be taken away by law.

According to whom?

 

[Rich2018]

No government can just declare a right is revoked.

 

[Fledermaus]

No government can just declare a right is revoked.

The right to be secure in one's possessions -> Slavery.

 

[Rich2018]

Incorrect.

 

[Fledermaus]

Incorrect.

Was or was not the right to own slaves revoked?

 

[Rich2018]

Why lie ?

 

[Fledermaus]

Why lie ?

Quote the lie

I asked a question.

 

[LetsGoBrandon]

Sorry, you already did with your tacit acceptance that you're completely wrong about UK elections and have no clue what you're talking about.

That is a very childish attemt to spin what I said. You do not get to project what I accept.

 

[Rich2018]

That is a very childish attemt to spin what I said. You do not get to project what I accept.

Nope, you made an assertion about British politics that was/is completely wrong, but are not man enough to own it.

You have been made to look foolish and lost every point you've tried to make...and rather than admit you're wrong, you wimp out with some "not wasting my time" BS.

 

[Fledermaus]

Nope, you made an assertion about British politics that was/is completely wrong, but are not man enough to own it.

You have been made to look foolish and lost every point you've tried to make...and rather than admit you're wrong, you wimp out with some "not wasting my time" BS.

The assertion you can't vote for PM?

That is correct.

If not, try quoting the assertion you have issue with.

 

[brianpatrick]

SO, without looking it up, what IS the capital of Canada?

Is it Bejing?

 

[SNOWFLAKE]

Is it Bejing?